txsvicki said:
Per DOI pg.39
"Then it was John's turn. He recently purchased a beautiful silk scarf,and he tucked it around JonBenet as if surrounding her with a final blanket of love."
txsvicki
It wasn't around the neck.
Why A Scarf?
- Thread starter capps
- Start date
Welcome to Websleuths!
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread
Click to learn how to make a missing person's thread
New Posts
-
Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #197- Latest: girlhasnoname
Per DOI pg.39
"Then it was John's turn. He recently purchased a beautiful silk scarf,and he tucked it around JonBenet as if surrounding her with a final blanket of love."
txsvicki
It wasn't around the neck.
midwest mama
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2012
- Messages
- 1,303
- Reaction score
- 46
With recent posts on a couple of other threads about the possibility of something accounting for the lower set of marks, blanche mark, and odd-shaped abrasion on JB's lower left neck, I came across this thread and reread back through it. Throughout my interest in the JB case, I have wondered how any normal parents could have done it. And knew it had to be a very, very sick attacker(s). My mistake all along was tying into the thought the Ramseys were 'normal', except for their inordinate wealth and prominence.
VERY interesting speculation on how a scarf could tie into JB's death. I am now feeling justified in considering the R's were involved in some stinking thing going on with their daughter, and I believe her death on Christmas night was because there was some final 'fun' ordered up before going off to Michigan, and something went wrong which culminated in her death. Due to the nature of the crime, wouldn't it still be a homicide, maybe not first degree?
As has also been said on a couple of other threads, the DNA evidence which is being given so much consideration in nabbing the perp should not be considered due to the nature of it's credibility. It is not clearly established with enough strong markers, except for the DNA that is clearly identified as JB's. Any other DNA mixed with JB's could simply be artifact DNA.
Neither can the conclusions of several handwriting evidence be used to help determine the author of the ransom note. Yes, there is supposition, but without handwriting examination being a concise science, it simply cannot be considered conclusive enough for a jury to consider as factual evidence, and in most court cases it goes nowhere.
When you look at all the real evidence: injuries, place and time of death, forensic truths, lack of forensic proofs (intruders), it seems absurd to consider that anyone other than someone with grave psycho-sexual tendencies could have committed this crime.
And there was forensic evidence of prior sexual abuse to JB, and those most likely responsible would have had routine exposure to JB either as a family member or very close family friend. Yet, there was also opportunity for JB to have been assaulted while she was out on the pageant trail, and this would have only been if one of the attending adults during her trip had made the arrangements or let her out of their sight for too long a period of time. I would believe the arrangements would have been made, assuring JB it was OK, since if she'd have 'disappeared', she'd have had some explaining to do. Though she might not have told all, as some victims do not.
So, IMHO, I see the death of JB being a homicide at the hands of at least two perpetrators, at least one parent with possibly a friend or special invited guest, which was intended to be another, more 'private' Christmas party celebration event. If DNA can be dismissed as PROOF POSITIVE, as Kolar seems to agree, then re-enter JR, John Mark Karr, and a couple of the other dismissed suspects, such as Chris Wolf, Helgoth, Simons, and the list goes on. Not ALL of them would have had to be the 'invited guest' or maybe none of those, but someone else instead. JR traveled a lot and had quite a few contacts in some of the biggest kiddie *advertiser censored* cities in the world.
I think Burke was definitely involved, but as a bystander, perhaps a "trainee", and he knows the truth. And I think he is psychologically as damaged still, as he has been from the time he was a young child, but has put what he experienced earlier in life into a justifiable cocoon of mental security that he has buried away in his conscious behaviors. There is a good amount of reason to believe he suffered greatly as a youth, but as he grew into adulthood, he was probably given great medical help - and would have been convinced he was not responsible for anything in his youthful past, and would be carefully protected by his family, who would expect his full cooperation and loyalty.
If this crime is ever to see a resolve, the only adult who could have possibly known the truth about JB's death is John Ramsey, and with the added aspect of him "tucking" a scarf around his daughter, doesn't this follow with what others have formerly posted on this thread about the need for an exhumation to study the scarf? Unless there is someone out there who can give better, believable testimony - someone who saw the scarf in the coffin on JB, that it surely had NOTHING to do with JB's guilty conscience or need to hide evidence.
IMHO, it's time to bring in JR! Poop on you, Lin Wood!
VERY interesting speculation on how a scarf could tie into JB's death. I am now feeling justified in considering the R's were involved in some stinking thing going on with their daughter, and I believe her death on Christmas night was because there was some final 'fun' ordered up before going off to Michigan, and something went wrong which culminated in her death. Due to the nature of the crime, wouldn't it still be a homicide, maybe not first degree?
As has also been said on a couple of other threads, the DNA evidence which is being given so much consideration in nabbing the perp should not be considered due to the nature of it's credibility. It is not clearly established with enough strong markers, except for the DNA that is clearly identified as JB's. Any other DNA mixed with JB's could simply be artifact DNA.
Neither can the conclusions of several handwriting evidence be used to help determine the author of the ransom note. Yes, there is supposition, but without handwriting examination being a concise science, it simply cannot be considered conclusive enough for a jury to consider as factual evidence, and in most court cases it goes nowhere.
When you look at all the real evidence: injuries, place and time of death, forensic truths, lack of forensic proofs (intruders), it seems absurd to consider that anyone other than someone with grave psycho-sexual tendencies could have committed this crime.
And there was forensic evidence of prior sexual abuse to JB, and those most likely responsible would have had routine exposure to JB either as a family member or very close family friend. Yet, there was also opportunity for JB to have been assaulted while she was out on the pageant trail, and this would have only been if one of the attending adults during her trip had made the arrangements or let her out of their sight for too long a period of time. I would believe the arrangements would have been made, assuring JB it was OK, since if she'd have 'disappeared', she'd have had some explaining to do. Though she might not have told all, as some victims do not.
So, IMHO, I see the death of JB being a homicide at the hands of at least two perpetrators, at least one parent with possibly a friend or special invited guest, which was intended to be another, more 'private' Christmas party celebration event. If DNA can be dismissed as PROOF POSITIVE, as Kolar seems to agree, then re-enter JR, John Mark Karr, and a couple of the other dismissed suspects, such as Chris Wolf, Helgoth, Simons, and the list goes on. Not ALL of them would have had to be the 'invited guest' or maybe none of those, but someone else instead. JR traveled a lot and had quite a few contacts in some of the biggest kiddie *advertiser censored* cities in the world.
I think Burke was definitely involved, but as a bystander, perhaps a "trainee", and he knows the truth. And I think he is psychologically as damaged still, as he has been from the time he was a young child, but has put what he experienced earlier in life into a justifiable cocoon of mental security that he has buried away in his conscious behaviors. There is a good amount of reason to believe he suffered greatly as a youth, but as he grew into adulthood, he was probably given great medical help - and would have been convinced he was not responsible for anything in his youthful past, and would be carefully protected by his family, who would expect his full cooperation and loyalty.
If this crime is ever to see a resolve, the only adult who could have possibly known the truth about JB's death is John Ramsey, and with the added aspect of him "tucking" a scarf around his daughter, doesn't this follow with what others have formerly posted on this thread about the need for an exhumation to study the scarf? Unless there is someone out there who can give better, believable testimony - someone who saw the scarf in the coffin on JB, that it surely had NOTHING to do with JB's guilty conscience or need to hide evidence.
IMHO, it's time to bring in JR! Poop on you, Lin Wood!
txsvicki
Active Member
Good grief, someone answered my question seven long years ago, and it was said to be a scarf purchased by John. I just posted on another thread that it was one his daughter gave him, and don't know where that came from. Whichever, it's still an odd thing to do. A child is strangled supposedly by an intruder and a scarf is put into the casket.
midwest mama
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2012
- Messages
- 1,303
- Reaction score
- 46
This a copy/paste of a post I put on another thread, 'cause I think it's more appropriate here:
CNN timeline says Ramseys flew to Atlanta on the 29th for JB's funeral.
There were 300 guests and family at a visitation on the 30th, and the funeral itself was the 31st.
It seems nearly impossible that JR would have been able to shop for a scarf anytime from the 29th. So, if he bought it himself, he had to bring it with him from Boulder, and would have had to shop for it himself in Boulder also, probably at least before Christmas. So, maybe it was one of the personal items that Pam Paugh retrieved to give to them.
If he had wanted to give it to JB as a gift, and didn't and then felt bad, I can't believe he would have tucked it around her like a blanket, circumventing Patsy's lovely display of her in her pageant finery, with 2 crowns in the coffin.
That even begs more consideration, with a 2nd crown in her hands, might the scarf have been tucked around her neck, as some others surmise, to help cover up the neck wounds? Maybe they just couldn't stand looking at them. But Patsy said it was like a "blanket of love".
Now, If I were burying my child, and wanted to send something along with them, other than one of their special toys, I just can't see myself sending a gift they had just given me for Christmas, or an article of clothing that has NO correlation to anything related in her life's activities.
Weird - a scarf. And if it was evidence that might have been gotten rid of in another easier way, we have to remember how bizarre this whole crime was, and if that scarf was used in what one of those parents thought was a 'love connection' during the crime, then maybe, just maybe they had a hard time parting with it until they absolutely had to, and then thought it a final act of love to put it with the object of their affection, especially since it would also be a riddance of evidence!
No matter how heinous or innocent putting that scarf in the coffin was, it is totally as bizarre as anything else related to the JB crime.
I wish she had been exhumed long ago, horrible as the thought is. It's not the scarf so much; I just wanted that ridiculous stun gun theory to be shown to be completely false and not any evidence of an intruder.
That might have gone a long way toward debunking Lou Schmidt's other wacky scenarios.
As always, my opinion only.
That might have gone a long way toward debunking Lou Schmidt's other wacky scenarios.
As always, my opinion only.
Yes. Boulder has very few murders every year, and this was a complicated case. I have my doubts as to whether Dr. Meyer was up to the task of unraveling what happened. Experienced MEs from large urban areas should have been allowed to examine JB's body...for all kinds of reasons.
One thing we DO know- he was a sloppy practitioner. He violated some VERY common and VERY important rules for conducting an autopsy. Boulder probably had very few murders, and so evidence of this sloppy work would not really be known, as it wouldn't be used as evidence. But in this case, using not only the same nail clippers for all 10 fingernails was bad enough, but using the same clippers on OTHER BODIES without sterilizing them was pure laziness. Add this to his failure to perform two simple and regulation tests on JB's body when he first examined her calls his entire professional integrity into question. The liver stab to test internal core body temperature and withdrawal of the eye's vitreous fluid to test potassium levels are two common, standard procedures used to determine time of death and they were not done on a MURDER victim- when TOD is very important to determine. More sloppy practice- or was he possibly TOLD not to do them?
Absolutely agree, he was very sloppy...whether he was just plain ignorant of proper procedures, or complicit in a slam-bam investigation, he contaminated evidence left and right. We have no way of knowing what he missed or failed to do altogether, since the only other people present at the autopsy were non-medical personnel.
Meyer was an MD, but I do not know if he was actually a trained medical examiner - he might have been brought in to perform autopsies on occasion, but only as a function of jurisdiction. In Colorado, the law is very loose about such things. For example, a citizen without any medical training whatsoever can become coroner in Colorado; it is an elected office, and usually only one person is running during any election year. In the two Colorado hospitals where I worked, autopsies were performed by the pathologist - he had a good understanding of anatomy, but I'm sure that subtleties about cause of death eluded him on many occasions, simply because there weren't many local murders or mysterious deaths (that we knew of!).
Medical examiners should of course be held to a higher standard than coroners (whose job is basically to pronounce people dead and kick the investigation higher up if he/she deems it necessary); but given Boulder's complacent attitude when it comes to crime, who knows what the standard was in 1996!
Very true. I doubt Boulder's standards have improved much, either. Not many people know that a coroner and a Medical Examiner are not always the same. A Medical Examiner is a doctor. A coroner need not be, but sometimes is. In a crime, the person conducting the autopsy should always be a medical examiner, but that is not always the case.
I had read that Mayer WAS a medical examiner, which, if true, makes his omissions and errors in procedure even more egregious. There was also supposedly ANOTHER Medical Examiner in attendance at the autopsy.
Oh, dear. What an unconscionable MESS this was.
OpenMind4U
New Member
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2008
- Messages
- 733
- Reaction score
- 12
What an unconscionable LUCKY Ramsey's are!!!:what:...BPD has screwed-up first, ME next and DA from the beginning without end...:banghead: ...
midwest mama
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2012
- Messages
- 1,303
- Reaction score
- 46
Don't forget the powerful, early addition of the Ramsey Spin Team! They (lawyers) helped them avoid confrontation with law enforcement, beyond initial routine questions and required tests. Some of the BPD unwittingly assisted the RST, telling investigators the R's were to be treated as 'victims' rather than be considered as suspects, going against the initial recommendation of the FBI, according to their immediate examination of the crime scene.
Doesn't this all sink in as to how much cover-up was being done regarding JBR's death? IMHO, the power of the Ramseys not only took care of keeping the case unsolved then, it is still doing just exactly that. We, the concerned public desiring to believe our justice system will and can prevail, are the real victims being 'strangled' into inactive submission by sadistic perpetrators!
ILikeToBendPages
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2010
- Messages
- 29,146
- Reaction score
- 75,383
I thought I had read that Beth had given John a scarf and that was the one he put in Jonbenet's casket. When the Ramsey's left Boulder, John flew a corporate jet with JonBenet in her coffin back to Georgia. They had a memorial service the evening before that so would that of been when John would of placed it in her casket?
midwest mama
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2012
- Messages
- 1,303
- Reaction score
- 46
Here's what I found about the above:
From the interview on Apr, 1997, about the scarf in the photos on the roll of film given to LE by JR:
TT: Let me show you some pictures here and make sure, see if this is one of the scarves that Patsy is given out or this is the scarves that you have here? This is a picture . . .
JR: No the scarf was given to me by, uh my daughter Beth.
TT: Okay. Thats not one of the scarves then, that Patsy given out
JR: I dont think so, it, I mean it looks (pause) not to my knowledge, I mean this looks like the scarf that Beth gave me. She got this scarf in Scotland.
TT: Okay. Whats on the tag there?
JR: I mean thats what it says, but it says Targart Shops, I, it looks like the scarf that Beth gave me . . .
TT: Okay. Ill describe for the tape here, because of the tape doesnt see the picture; uh, this is a picture of your sink area, right at the bottom of the spiral staircase, sinks and drawers, there is a looks like a black colored scarf, plaid colored scarf, sitting on the top of that counter there. Thanks John. But, that wasnt one of the scarves that was give out to your knowledge.
JR: Well I say it looks like the one that Beth gave me, I would have to see it in hand; but I think most of the stuff she gave out were uh, what she gave me, I think a plain red one, I dont know, I dont remember. She can tell you because she bought them.
Then, from NE JonBenet, the Police Files, pg 246-247:
The photo showed a black and red scarf left on the sink counter there. Patsy couldn't say whether it was John's scarf or one she had given out as gifts to the men who attended the Ramsey Christmas party on December 23rd.
From PMPT by Lawrence Schiller
"In the late afternoon of Sunday December 29, a Lockhead Martin corporate jet left Jefferson County Airport, just douth of Boulder with the Ramsey family. JonBenet's body left on a Delta Airlines flight from Denver International Aiport."
Earlier in this thread there is comment that Patsy said in DOE, that JR himself purchased a 'silk' scarf and tucked it around JB in her coffin. No description of color, etc.
What is this scarf thing with the Ramsey's? Gift from daughter, gift for Christmas party, tucked around daughter?? :doh:
ILikeToBendPages
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2010
- Messages
- 29,146
- Reaction score
- 75,383
The Bonita Papers;
The next morning, the family and close friends flew to Marietta, Georgia.
John's Cessna, flown by Mike Archuletta, family friend and personal pilot, carried friends Priscilla, Barbara, Jay Elowsky, Pinque Barber, and the mother of Burke's closest school friend. The immediate family and Burke's schoolmate rode in a corporate jet, piloted by John and carrying the casket with JonBenet for her final trip home to Georgia.
ILikeToBendPages
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2010
- Messages
- 29,146
- Reaction score
- 75,383
Why two attorneys for Pasty? John hired one for him and two for Pasty? Why? What would two do better than one?
midwest mama
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2012
- Messages
- 1,303
- Reaction score
- 46
So, just above are two different accounts regarding the transportation for JB's body to Georgia. Which sources should we be able to believe are the most accurate regarding info on this case?
I've run across several discrepancies on information about this case, and usually just keep looking until I find more references to support one report than the other.
Here's a 'for instance' regarding information about JR and the ransom note:
From: jonbenetramsey.pbworks.com
French himself stated in a Vanity Fair interview that after being greeted by Patsy on arrival, "John Ramsey directed me through the house and pointed out a three-page handwritten note which was laid on the wooden floor just west of the kitchen area" (Bardach 1997).
From: Larry King Live interview March 2000: (response from John Ramsey)
J. RAMSEY: They -- a uniformed police officer arrived relatively quickly, and I said -- I handed him the note. I said, "My daughter's been taken." He said, "Gee, you don't think she just ran away?" And I said: "For heaven's sake, she's 6 years old. No, she didn't just run away."
Anyone have an opinion on sources that are NOT very credible?
I've run across several discrepancies on information about this case, and usually just keep looking until I find more references to support one report than the other.
Here's a 'for instance' regarding information about JR and the ransom note:
From: jonbenetramsey.pbworks.com
French himself stated in a Vanity Fair interview that after being greeted by Patsy on arrival, "John Ramsey directed me through the house and pointed out a three-page handwritten note which was laid on the wooden floor just west of the kitchen area" (Bardach 1997).
From: Larry King Live interview March 2000: (response from John Ramsey)
J. RAMSEY: They -- a uniformed police officer arrived relatively quickly, and I said -- I handed him the note. I said, "My daughter's been taken." He said, "Gee, you don't think she just ran away?" And I said: "For heaven's sake, she's 6 years old. No, she didn't just run away."
Anyone have an opinion on sources that are NOT very credible?
ILikeToBendPages
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2010
- Messages
- 29,146
- Reaction score
- 75,383
I'm not sure myself, but Trica posted the Bonita Papers on Forum For Justice and I guess I'm giving more weight to them because of that. I know PMPT is a source also.
ILikeToBendPages
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2010
- Messages
- 29,146
- Reaction score
- 75,383
Hmm a police officer that was there or John and Pasty who gave interviews and wrote books full of mis truths ,half truths and outright lies.
I know many mistakes were made at the first and all though this case, but I'm going with Officer French observations of both John and Pasty that morning. He knew something wasn't right from the time he got there.
Of course this is just my own opinion.
midwest mama
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2012
- Messages
- 1,303
- Reaction score
- 46
Have to agree with ya ILTBP - so should we go with the police version the morning of the crime that reported Patsy told the officer JB was put to bed in the red turtleneck sweater? That's what I want to believe. Of course, since her stories are conflicting about what she put JB to bed in, maybe she didn't put JB down to bed at all. Maybe JB was awake and walked up those stairs like Burke said, and Patsy got her changed into that red turtleneck, but JB then was awake enough to want to go downstairs for a pineapple snack. :moo: