CASCU Analysis of Crime

[UKGuy]

IDIs often bring up the argument that surely the police would have discovered the remaining duct tape and cord in their thorough search of the house. No remaining duct tape and cord found in the household = the 'intruder' brought and took these items with him, they argue.
But as it seems, the police didn't even find the package of size 12-underwear in the Ramsey home. So much for 'thorough' search ...

rashomon,

But does the argument stand up to scrutiny? I think not, first the assumption that any remaining duct tape or cord exists falls down immediately, since both items may have been sourced in the house, then again because if the police missed the size-12's, they may have also missed any cord or duct tape ... so much for their argument!

.

 

[JMO8778]

IDIs often bring up the argument that surely the police would have discovered the remaining duct tape and cord in their thorough search of the house. No remaining duct tape and cord found in the household = the 'intruder' brought and took these items with him, they argue.
But as it seems, the police didn't even find the package of size 12-underwear in the Ramsey home. So much for 'thorough' search ...

I think they were in his golf bag.

 

[UKGuy]

But what should JB have done at a pageant with size 12-underwear far too large for her?

rashomon,

Maybe they were intended for someone else?


.

 

[JMO8778]

JMO8778,

Apparently so, else why go to such extreme lengths to hide it? Any sexual injury fake or not could have been left in-situ but still hidden by her size-12's or size-6's her longjohns and blankets, result : just the same, on autopsy injury discovered?

This represents another staging mistake, since there was no compelling reason to hide any sexual assault since it could be blamed upon the intruder.

but a one time intruder couldn't have chronically molested her...and JR likely knew something would be found upon autopsy...so he staged the assault to be a 'convincing' one,at least acutely...it bled.It was the only thing he could do.Even if he put her outside,anything chronic could have come back on him..it had to appear acute,and thus the Wed. underwear was important; it could have been the size 6,too.

All the facts suggest JonBenet was being chronically molested, and that the night of her death was one of those occassions, these circumstances were hidden and removed from view by relocating and cleaning up JonBenet to make it appear she had simply been abducted from her bed, the forensic evidence tells you otherwise.


.

I agree,only I think in panic mode...someone felt that had to get her out of the house.But that was changed b/c it was too risky...along was the staying home and 'resting' the next day,and not talking to so much as a stray dog,as per the note said.(thus giving themselves time to carry out the plan).
only now with an acute injury as well,JB's body being found inside the home presented a problem...he didn't want to get the blame for that,at least not right off the bat.He needed time to make a clean getaway (which is just what he tried to do),and so covering the abuse until autopsy would hopefully give him time to do so,as the excuse would be that the SFF could still be after the rest of his family !

 

[UKGuy]

but a one time intruder couldn't have chronically molested her...and JR likely knew something would be found upon autopsy...so he staged the assault to be a 'convincing' one,at least acutely...it bled.It was the only thing he could do.Even if he put her outside,anything chronic could have come back on him..it had to appear acute,and thus the Wed. underwear was important; it could have been the size 6,too.




I agree,only I think in panic mode...someone felt that had to get her out of the house.But that was changed b/c it was too risky...along was the staying home and 'resting' the next day,and not talking to so much as a stray dog,as per the note said.(thus giving themselves time to carry out the plan).
only now with an acute injury as well,JB's body being found inside the home presented a problem...he didn't want to get the blame for that,at least not right off the bat.He needed time to make a clean getaway (which is just what he tried to do),and so covering the abuse until autopsy would hopefully give him time to do so,as the excuse would be that the SFF could still be after the rest of his family !

JMO8778,

but a one time intruder couldn't have chronically molested her...and JR likely knew something would be found upon autopsy...so he staged the assault to be a 'convincing' one,at least acutely...it bled.It was the only thing he could do.Even if he put her outside,anything chronic could have come back on him..it had to appear acute,and thus the Wed. underwear was important; it could have been the size 6,too.

Who can show that the intruder and her chronic molester are not one and the same, once JonBenet is dead, the molesters identity was possibly lost. The important point was that a sexual assault was cleaned up and hidden, no intruder need bother doing that.


.

 

[JMO8778]

JMO8778,

Who can show that the intruder and her chronic molester are not one and the same, once JonBenet is dead, the molesters identity was possibly lost.

sure,that was just JR's desperate attempt at concealment.

The important point was that a sexual assault was cleaned up and hidden, no intruder need bother doing that.


.

absolutely,no IDI theory evens comes close.Esp. not to that stupid RN..that says it all.Not to even mention the pineapple,fiber evidence,the R's lies and weird behavior,etc.The R's did it,no doubt.And Smit wasn't smart at all to ignore the RN and pineapple..he acknowledged those didn't fit,but went straight to the staging and played on that..just as the R's wanted..he fell right into their trap.But no intruder could have fed her pineapple,and no one outside the family could have written that note.Just no way.

 

[Ames]

Like for what? The only think I can think of is if she was going to use them over a pull-up on JB.It's not necessary though,and that size would likely still be too big,even over a pull up.
I don't think it's so unusual a gift,not everyone can shop at Bloomingdale's,and if they said Bloomies on the back,it would be a cute gift.(But maybe that's just me,lol).I don't think JB had asked to keep them though.That sounds like just another one of Patsy's excuses...so maybe they were in a box to be given away?But she denies this,excuse being 'JB wanted them'(?)

I believe that maybe Patsy bought them for her niece (or whoever)...but wasn't going to give them to her as a Christmas or birthday present. She was just going to hand them to her...and say...I bought these for you. I don't believe that JB would have wanted them, either...even though this is what Patsy says...(Patsy lies). I believe that she had them stored somewhere, in a drawer for example..and was probably going to give them to the other girl when she saw her again.

 

[Ames]

rashomon,

I guess so, otherwise we would have heard about it by now, also not much point in handing back an unopened pack of seven is there?

So were these the originals or another purchase from bloomingdales?

The real question is why size-12's and not size-6's, what made the killer risk messing their staging up with a household item only the residents knew existed?

Just to reiterate:

The size-12's represent a hole in the staging because not only was their existence known more or less to some residents, but the Ramsey's returned a pack at a later date, demonstrating they knew how relevant they were. e.g. In court the riposte would be What pedophile brings clean oversized size-12 underwear to redress his victim?


Since John's fibers are on those size-12's I would suggest it was John who redressed JonBenet in them, only a man would reckon the size-12's were the same as the size-6's, assuming they both had Wednesday stamped on them?

.

But, you said in an earlier post that you did not think that the size 12's were kept in JB's panty drawer. SO, John wouldn't have known where to find them, unless Patsy told him where they were. And, if they were in another drawer, then that means that they weren't in the same drawer as the size 6's, so John couldn't have grabbed them by mistake. Does this makes sense??

 

[rashomon]

rashomon,

But does the argument stand up to scrutiny? I think not, first the assumption that any remaining duct tape or cord exists falls down immediately, since both items may have been sourced in the house, then again because if the police missed the size-12's, they may have also missed any cord or duct tape ... so much for their argument!

UkGuy,

that was my point - that the IDI argument does not stand up to scrutiny, for if the police did not find the size 12 bloomies on their search of the house, they may as well have overlooked remaining duct tape and cord.
You are a right that we don't know if remaining tape and cord even existed.
But suppose there was no tape left, then at least the object around which the tape had been wrapped would have been around somewhere (I don't know the English word - roll? spool?).
Regarding the ligature: if it is true that the $2.29 item which Patsy bought at McGuckin's on Dec 2 was the Stansport cord which was later used for the ligatures, chances are some cord may have been left since it was originally fifty foot long.

I ask myself how thoroughly such house searches are done. Are they "leave no stone unturned" searches? If yes, then why wasn't the package with the size 12 underwear found?

 

[Ames]

what would she do w/ the underwear in the pageants? I'm confused...

This is pretty funny....when my mom got ready for church, before putting on her dress, she would put rollers in her hair, and her makeup on. To keep from accidently snagging a roller on her dress, while she was putting it on....and to keep her makeup from getting on her dress.....she put panties over her head...LOL Yes, this was quite a sight...but, one that I will always remember. My mom passed away 10 years ago, this coming July 10th....but, everytime I think about those panties on her head...it makes me laugh.

I don't believe that Patsy bought panties at Bloomies for this purpose, though...when she could have bought them at Wal-mart. Unless of course...she just wanted everybody associated with the pageant, to see JB with a pair of Bloomies on her head. Which....with Patsy..that just might be the case.

 

[rashomon]

[Ames' reply to UKGuy]:
But, you said in an earlier post that you did not think that the size 12's were kept in JB's panty drawer. SO, John wouldn't have known where to find them, unless Patsy told him where they were. And, if they were in another drawer, then that means that they weren't in the same drawer as the size 6's, so John couldn't have grabbed them by mistake. Does this makes sense??

Makes perfect sense to me from the point of logic. Good point, Ames.

 

[Ames]

I think they were in his golf bag.

Me too!

 

[rashomon]

I think they were in his golf bag.

Was it Pam Paugh who removed the golf bag from the Ramsey home in her 'one woman raid'?
Does anyone know if the items which Pam removed were officially listed by the police? Do you think it possible that the golf bag wasn't even looked into by the police? Considering all their other blunders, this wouldn't be surprising ...

 

[Ames]

Was it Pam Paugh who removed the golf bag from the Ramsey home in her 'one woman raid'?
Does anyone know if the items which Pam removed were officially listed by the police? Do you think it possible that the golf bag wasn't even looked into by the police? Considering all their other blunders, this wouldn't be surprising ...

Yes, it was PP that removed his golf clubs, when she was taking..."funeral clothes.." He was sure in a hurry to get them back, though....funny thing is...Patsy said in her interview that John was NOT an avid golfer, and that she couldn't even remember the last time that he played....so, WHY would he need his golf clubs?? What made him even THINK of his golf clubs at a time like that...his daughter was found murdered...in HIS home!!! Who would even been thinking about golf clubs at this time?? NOBODY...unless they have something that they are hiding in the bag. I guarantee you that the police did NOT take the time to check that golf bag.

 

[UKGuy]

But, you said in an earlier post that you did not think that the size 12's were kept in JB's panty drawer. SO, John wouldn't have known where to find them, unless Patsy told him where they were. And, if they were in another drawer, then that means that they weren't in the same drawer as the size 6's, so John couldn't have grabbed them by mistake. Does this makes sense??

Ames,

No , no, no, nooo;

There were no size-12's kept in JonBenet's bathroom underwear drawer, the contents of which were bagged and taken away by the police.

Does this makes sense??

no because you are misreading what I wrote.

I inferred John placed the size-12's on Jonbenet:

1. Because he is a guy and he was looking for similar underwear to the size-6's.

2. The size-12's could be anywhere, even in his bedroom, where JonBenet may have been molested, we do have a sex crime.

3. Fibers from his woolen shirt were allegedly discovered on what we assume are a fresh clean pair of size-12's, how come? e.g. If Patsy was present she would have said, no, no John, wrong size etc?

So putting it all together, John is linked to the size-12's by forensic evidence, Patsy is not, using the size-12's was a big mistake, something a guy might do?


.

 

[Albert18]

For fresh blood to be on the size 12's, they had to be changed before the ransom note was written.

The ransom note is John's alibi.

 

[JMO8778]

Ames,

No , no, no, nooo;

There were no size-12's kept in JonBenet's bathroom underwear drawer, the contents of which were bagged and taken away by the police.


no because you are misreading what I wrote.

I inferred John placed the size-12's on Jonbenet:

1. Because he is a guy and he was looking for similar underwear to the size-6's.

2. The size-12's could be anywhere, even in his bedroom, where JonBenet may have been molested, we do have a sex crime.

3. Fibers from his woolen shirt were allegedly discovered on what we assume are a fresh clean pair of size-12's, how come? e.g. If Patsy was present she would have said, no, no John, wrong size etc?

So putting it all together, John is linked to the size-12's by forensic evidence, Patsy is not, using the size-12's was a big mistake, something a guy might do?


.

could be,but suppose he overruled her on that...and said..I don't care what size they are...they MUST say WED. on them ! (Or,how about..they MUST be new!) ..I mean,someone was in panic mode.
And yes,they were NEW.Was that somehow important to the stager?? As in....new=none of their dna in her crotch area.IF indeed it is a sex crime...that would be important to the stager !! correct???

 

[Ames]

Ames,

No , no, no, nooo;

There were no size-12's kept in JonBenet's bathroom underwear drawer, the contents of which were bagged and taken away by the police.


no because you are misreading what I wrote.

I inferred John placed the size-12's on Jonbenet:

1. Because he is a guy and he was looking for similar underwear to the size-6's.

2. The size-12's could be anywhere, even in his bedroom, where JonBenet may have been molested, we do have a sex crime.

3. Fibers from his woolen shirt were allegedly discovered on what we assume are a fresh clean pair of size-12's, how come? e.g. If Patsy was present she would have said, no, no John, wrong size etc?

So putting it all together, John is linked to the size-12's by forensic evidence, Patsy is not, using the size-12's was a big mistake, something a guy might do?


.

Or Patsy could have said..."John go and grab a pair of panties out of that size 12 pack, that's kept in our bedroom....they are the only ones that aren't stained".


And when I misunderstood what you had written..this is the quote by you that I was referring to..

POSTED BY UKGUY

"Since John's fibers are on those size-12's I would suggest it was John who redressed JonBenet in them, only a man would reckon the size-12's were the same as the size-6's, assuming they both had Wednesday stamped on them?"

That sounded like to me, that you were suggesting here, that the size 6's and size 12's were kept in the same place...and that John grabbed the 12's, because, being a man, he didn't know the difference.

 

[Ames]

could be,but suppose he overruled her on that...and said..I don't care what size they are...they MUST say WED. on them ! (Or,how about..they MUST be new!) ..I mean,someone was in panic mode.
And yes,they were NEW.Was that somehow important to the stager?? As in....new=none of their dna in her crotch area.IF indeed it is a sex crime...that would be important to the stager !! correct???

ITA....I believe that those panties were chosen for two reasons....number one, just in case someone had wiped her at the White's party and SAW the Weds. panties on her...and number 2....they were NEW...no DNA...no stains....no nothing. I don't believe that Patsy put them on her, but I do believe that Patsy told John where to find them. (My husband wouldn't have a clue as to where my five year old...or 15 year old....keeps her panties.). If I were to say, "go and grab some clean panties for my five year old"...he would say..."What drawer are they in?" Why would ANY father know where his daughter's panties are kept...unless he does the laundry (how many men do you know that actually does laundry...and I have a feeling that John never did it, either), and puts them away.

 

[JMO8778]

ITA....I believe that those panties were chosen for two reasons....number one, just in case someone had wiped her at the White's party and SAW the Weds. panties on her...and number 2....they were NEW...no DNA...no stains....no nothing. I don't believe that Patsy put them on her, but I do believe that Patsy told John where to find them.

right on,brand new,Wed.,and their dna would not be on it.And since she was wiped down,I suspect no dna was the most important issue..which again leads back to a sex crime commited against JB,IMO.
yes,I think Patsy got them,I think she gathered all the items,and that's why her fibers are on the ligature and tape.I suspect the panties were still in the package when she handed them to JR,and thus,her lack of fibers on them.And I think JR put them on her,as his fiber evidence shows.And he hid the rest of the package in his bag of golf clubs,IMO,along with perhaps a few other items.
I suspect JR was a lot more involved in it anyone might have ever imagined.Esp. given the fact he took a shower and changed clothes,and Patsy didn't.

(My husband wouldn't have a clue as to where my five year old...or 15 year old....keeps her panties.). If I were to say, "go and grab some clean panties for my five year old"...he would say..."What drawer are they in?" Why would ANY father know where his daughter's panties are kept...unless he does the laundry (how many men do you know that actually does laundry...and I have a feeling that John never did it, either), and puts them away.

lol,really ! I suspect JR told her what all to get...inc. NEW,wednesday panties....and that was all she could find.Esp. NEW ones.It had to do.