Evidence Against Patsy That Most People Have Never Read Before

[SleuthingSleuth]

Yes I am familiar with all this info SS. I just didn't know what you meant by the word "automatically".

Ah, gotcha.

Here is also an interesting snippet from Steve Thomas' book:

"Detective Arndt could not account for John Ramsey until about noon.
She found him reading some correspondence, and she incorrectly assumed
he had stepped out to get his mail. She was unaware that the house did
not have an exterior mail box and that the mail, came in through a front
door slot. Ramsey had been out of contact for over an hour. In coming
months, we realized that the time lapse would have allowed Ramsey plenty
of time to roam his house.
Arndt noted a marked change in Ramsey's attitude when she saw him
again. Whereas he had been calm and collected earlier, he now sat alone
in the dining room, preoccupied in thought, his leg bouncing nervously."

One wonders what he'd been up to while on his own, and what exactly changed his disposition...

 

[rashomon]

Originally Posted by rashomon
But how many people would use this condescending phrase when questioned by a police officer? Would innocent parents desperately wanting to find the killer of their daughter have called the detective 'buddy'? I can imagine Patsy being shocked or outraged when Haney implied the Ramseys' involvement in JB's killings, but it is her too callously sounding "you're going down the wrong path, buddy" which is bothering me.
The same goes for Patsy's "Pal, you don't want to go there" when Haney told her that JB had been the victim of prior sexual abuse.
Calling a police officer 'pal' is very snotty and condescending too, and imo when saying "Pal, you don't want to go there" in the context of this interview, Patsy wanted to threaten Haney.

[JBean]As I say, I would have used that phrase in the same context and think it was used appropriately

I'm no native speaker, and I'd like to get some more info on that: do you other posters too think it appropriate to call a member of law enforcement 'buddy' and 'pal' like Patsy did? To me it sounds awfully snotty and condescending for her to talk like that to Haney. For this was not a situation where you are together with your family or friends - it was a questioning by the police.
Patsy was an arrogant woman used to having her own way; she wanted to keep Haney at arm's length when he started asking dangerous questions.

"Cut to the chase" she barked. "Oh no, Haney replied smoothly. "That woud spoil the ride". "Then spoil my ride", Patsy said, her eyes riveting him. (ITRMI, p. 327).
Inwardly she probably was thinking "Catch me if you can, you idiots - I'm smarter than you all!"

Totally messy case!

This could be a stretch, and it may have been already discussed, but John took the tape off her mouth, right? Not disputed. Prior to finding JonBenets body, if John & Patsy were, in their grief, hugging and holding each other throughout that time, wouldn't it be possible for John to have her sweater fibers ALL over him, including his hand? Especially if he had been sitting next to her, rubbing his hand over her back, back and forth, as in a comforting way? So, if he goes to pull the tape off her mouth, wouldn't there be fiber transference there? Especially since I am sure he didn't RIP the tape off, he probably would've tried to be as gentle as possible, which means he grabs an end of the tape, pulls slightly, grabs it again closer to where it is sticking to her skin, pulls slightly, grabs it again closer...well, just picture trying to gently pull tape off skin. That way fiber transference could happen on many places on the tape, as opposed to just the corner.

I'll be the first to admit that this may be a stretch, but isn't it also plausible? What do you guys think???

No fibers from Patsy's sweater could have gotten on John the way you suggested. And that is why:
The hard facts are that John and Patsy Ramsey, while waiting in their own home together with the police for the kidnappers to call, did not once hug and hold each other, or comfort each other in any way. Instead, they were staying in separate rooms.
This behavior shown by the Ramseys struck the the police as very odd.

 

[s_finch]

This is what I was originally responding to:
I have also read that her friends held her back from going into the room until they knew what she was going to see. But lord knows where that account is.
I guess what i mean is a slight change of words can completely alter the intent and meaning of all the players actions. That is one of the things that makes it hard to separate out the real story, because even though the statements may be very very close to the truth, just being off by a little bit changes the whole flavor sometimes.

The account that her friends held her back, is the account Patsy gave. Makes her look a little better than the LE report.

Patsy Ramsey: "Yes, I did then see her. My friends were -- I was in the TV room and they were -- I said what is it? What is it? And they kept, you know, holding me, wait, I don't know what it is. One of our friends ran into the room and said, we need an ambulance, tried to dial 911, and I kept screaming, what is it? What is it? And, you know, then in just a couple of minutes, then I walked into the living room.




Do two things about this not jump out at anyone else?? First, that it took her a "couple of minute",,,in such a situation a "couple of minutes" is a rather long time. Also, she says she "walked into the living room". If I were recounting this and wanting to make myself appear to be a loving concerned parent, I would have spun it as such: "I kept screaming and within a few seconds I rushed into the living room".

 

[s_finch]

Totally messy case!

This could be a stretch, and it may have been already discussed, but John took the tape off her mouth, right? Not disputed. Prior to finding JonBenets body, if John & Patsy were, in their grief, hugging and holding each other throughout that time, wouldn't it be possible for John to have her sweater fibers ALL over him, including his hand? Especially if he had been sitting next to her, rubbing his hand over her back, back and forth, as in a comforting way? So, if he goes to pull the tape off her mouth, wouldn't there be fiber transference there? Especially since I am sure he didn't RIP the tape off, he probably would've tried to be as gentle as possible, which means he grabs an end of the tape, pulls slightly, grabs it again closer to where it is sticking to her skin, pulls slightly, grabs it again closer...well, just picture trying to gently pull tape off skin. That way fiber transference could happen on many places on the tape, as opposed to just the corner.

I'll be the first to admit that this may be a stretch, but isn't it also plausible? What do you guys think???

JBR was blue and yet he took the time to gently pull the tape off her mouth? Don't think so. If I thought there was a chance in heck of saving my child (with mouth to mouth) or that she was still alive, I'd yank that tape off faster than you can blink. Oh, and LE states that JR and PR were not comforting each other, were not together, were not consoling each other. They were in different rooms and stayed apart.

 

[julianne]

Can anyone provide a link that supports the statement that JR & PR stayed in separate rooms the entire time, and never once hugged, embraced, or comforted each other???

 

[RiverRat]

I am sure that it is in Steve's book and Thank Goodness - there were more people in the house that day that he interviewed since you are not open to Arndt's word.

 

[Pharlap]

Well everyone is different in how they would react.
However I would either split up or stay with hubby, searching every inch of the house.
From what has been said Patsy didn't do either?

For taking the tape off I would to, but scream for ppl to come down, also saying call 911...I wouldn't move her, for fear something might be broken and make it worse....

 

[Maybe So]

It's a messy case for sure...but as I recall, Patsy claimed she never wore the sweater in question in the basement...and I don't think the Ramsey team has ever had a real explanation for the fibers being where they all were (aside from a weak "innocent tranferrence" bit).

Patsy falling over Jonbenet doesn't explain the fibers in the basement...especially on the sticky side of the tape that was on Jonbenet's mouth.

Before she was found in the basement she lived in that house and was all over in it...JBR may even have been sitting in a chair or on the sofa or some other place her mother had sat in that red sweater or jacket whichever it is. She most likely was hugged by and had been held by and fussed over by her mother numerous times that Christmas day and had Patsy's red fibers all over her. If PR helped her get dressed for the party then she may have gotten red fibers all over JBR, on her clothes...under her clothes...in her hair...etc. That would explain them being entangled in the knot and under the tape.

If the cord came from the house then the fibers could have been on it before the knot was made.

Fibers from people who lived in the house are pretty meaningless if you ask me....could mean something.... but too many ways the fibers could have travelled around to put a lot of weight on it. As for fibers in the paint box...they could have been on one of the kids who went to the basement and got them on other things, could have been on Fleet or John if either had hugged or comforted Patsy (I would need to hear it from everyone there before I believed no one embraced anyone else in such a situation as arriving at a house where distraught parents of a missing child are). Either could have sat somewhere Patsy sat and carried fibers around....

And I want to ask again .....didn't Patsy want JBR to wear a red turtleneck to the Christmas party? do we know if JBR had that red top over her head at some point? Maybe put it on and then didn't want to wear it...or Patsy may have tried to put it on her....sooooo.... have fibers from the red top JBR didn't want to wear that day been excluded? I have never read anything about this in all my reading.

Are pictures of the fiber comparisons available anywhere?

Are the fibers known to be from Patsy's clothing for an absolute cerainty or just "consistent with" Patsy's clothing?

Just playing Devil's Advocate. I don't know who killed JBR but think it just as possible an intruder did it as it is possible that the Ramseys did it...I see too much reasonable doubt anyway.

 

[Jolynna]

Even if the scientific expert or lawyer believes to an absolute certainty that there is a fiber match, he can *in a legal proceding* only say *consistant with".

That the lawyer conducting Patsy's interview used language as strong as he did is telling.

He flat out says in the interview that the fibers found on JonBenet's body and imbedded into her neck are from Patsy's jacket/sweater.

 

[Jolynna]

Even Ramsey spokespeople do not dispute that the fibers are from Patsy.

They have instead tried to come up with reasons other than that Patsy was involved with the murder for the fibers being there.

But, not denied the fiber source.

 

[aussiesheila]

Stealing my post from FFJ. Here goes....

Some of you may not know that we have the transcript of the Ramsey Atlanta interviews with the Boulder Police Department and members of the D.A.'s office.

I am going to post a paragraph from the Atlanta interviews made by a lawyer named Mr. Levin.

It is my understanding that lawyers interviewing a suspect CAN"T LIE TO THE SUSPECT. The law prevents lawyers from lying to suspects when they are being questioned. In other words, Mr. Levin is not making what I am about to post up. It's the truth.

During an interrogation cops can lie all they want but in this situation the lawyers were required to speak the truth.

A quote from the Atlanta 2000 interviews talking about Patsy's jacket and the fibers from the jacket.

MR. LEVIN: I think that is probably fair. Based on the state of the art scientific testing, we believe the fibers from her jacket were found in the paint tray, were found tied into the ligature found on JonBenet's neck, were found on the blanket that she is wrapped in, were found on the duct tape that is found on the mouth, and the question is, can she explain to us how those fibers appeared in those places that are associated with her daughter's death. And I understand you are not going to answer those.

Do you EVER hear this evidence brought up? Of course not. Only because people, talking heads, have bought into the Ramsey Spin Team's lies.

Wendy Murphy, Marc Klaas, and a few others are the exception.

This statement by Mr. Levin should have been front page news.

I would suggest you read all of the Ramsey Atlanta interviews from 2000. You can do so right here.

http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/showthread.php?t=4773

It is my experience that people believe what they want to believe. If Levin and the other prosecutors believed they were fibres from Patsy's jacket it was because they wanted to believe that IMO. They weren't lying. But they didn't say "we know for a fact that fibres from Patsy's jacket were found tied into the ligature found on JonBenet's neck", did they? That is because the most they could say without lying was "we believe". If the evidence was strong enough for them to be able to say "we know" then Patsy could and would have been charged with murder, IMO.

 

[angelwngs]

Even if the scientific expert or lawyer believes to an absolute certainty that there is a fiber match, he can *in a legal proceding* only say *consistant with".

That the lawyer conducting Patsy's interview used language as strong as he did is telling.

He flat out says in the interview that the fibers found on JonBenet's body and imbedded into her neck are from Patsy's jacket/sweater.

~~~~~

Excellent catch, Jolynna!

Please refresh my riddled 'oldtimers' brain... Who was the Lawyer who said "are" from Patsy's jacket/sweater?

"are" one little, tiny 3 letter word! Very telling, if it was indeed a lawyer who made that statement and if he did not use that word in error.

Was this a mistaken word usage on the part of a Lawyer who should have known better than to use such a definitive term or was it a 'direct hit, no ricochet' absolute, intended to back the Ramsey Camp up a few steps with the realization that the prosecution had more on the ball than the R's had realized?

In the interviews w/ Patsy, I read them so quickly that the bouncing back and forth between various interviewers restating questions or offering rebuttal kept me spinning to try to remember which division was speaking when, (LE, lawyers for LE, or Ramsey lawyer...) Was I way off base? Weren't their three groups represented and speaking in the interviews other than Patsy?

Was there not also LE involved in making coments and in asking some of the questions of Patsy Ramsey in these interviews? 'Law Enforcement can lie through their teeth when interviewing, but Lawyers can not.' Correct?

~~~~Who said "are" from Patsy's jacket?~~~~~~~~ I don't remember.

Thanks, Jolynna! Great post!

 

[capps]

The question you have to ask is how unique were the red fibers in Patsy's sweater. It was Christimas,many,many people wear red sweaters.If there was a known/unknown intruder was he/she wearing a red sweater with fibers consistant with the fibers they found at the crime scene,or the same kind of fibers of the sweater Patsy had on?

No one knows.

 

[SleuthingSleuth]

Before she was found in the basement she lived in that house and was all over in it...JBR may even have been sitting in a chair or on the sofa or some other place her mother had sat in that red sweater or jacket whichever it is. She most likely was hugged by and had been held by and fussed over by her mother numerous times that Christmas day and had Patsy's red fibers all over her. If PR helped her get dressed for the party then she may have gotten red fibers all over JBR, on her clothes...under her clothes...in her hair...etc. That would explain them being entangled in the knot and under the tape.

If the cord came from the house then the fibers could have been on it before the knot was made.

Fibers from people who lived in the house are pretty meaningless if you ask me....could mean something.... but too many ways the fibers could have travelled around to put a lot of weight on it. As for fibers in the paint box...they could have been on one of the kids who went to the basement and got them on other things, could have been on Fleet or John if either had hugged or comforted Patsy (I would need to hear it from everyone there before I believed no one embraced anyone else in such a situation as arriving at a house where distraught parents of a missing child are). Either could have sat somewhere Patsy sat and carried fibers around....

And I want to ask again .....didn't Patsy want JBR to wear a red turtleneck to the Christmas party? do we know if JBR had that red top over her head at some point? Maybe put it on and then didn't want to wear it...or Patsy may have tried to put it on her....sooooo.... have fibers from the red top JBR didn't want to wear that day been excluded? I have never read anything about this in all my reading.

Are pictures of the fiber comparisons available anywhere?

Are the fibers known to be from Patsy's clothing for an absolute cerainty or just "consistent with" Patsy's clothing?

Just playing Devil's Advocate. I don't know who killed JBR but think it just as possible an intruder did it as it is possible that the Ramseys did it...I see too much reasonable doubt anyway.

Well...Patsy claimed she never wore that sweater down in the basement...so, if she was never down there wearing it, the fibers would have had to have been "innocently transferred"...and by both Jonbenet and John.
Personally I wonder why Patsy was insistent she never wore that sweater down there. She could have easily simply said that yes she did wear that sweater down before...and chalk it all up as the fibers should be expected to down in the basement and even on her daughter, etc.
Instead...she insists on denial. Did something about hearing about those fibers spook her to the point that rather than giving a well-though answer, she simply denies everything to try to distance herself from something?

 

[JBean]

I'm no native speaker, and I'd like to get some more info on that: do you other posters too think it appropriate to call a member of law enforcement 'buddy' and 'pal' like Patsy did? To me it sounds awfully snotty and condescending for her to talk like that to Haney. For this was not a situation where you are together with your family or friends - it was a questioning by the police.

.

We use the term "buddy" quite freely around here.
I know that if LE were insinuating that I killed my daughter, I would probably have used bolder words than "buddy" and "pal" . Not saying it is right, just saying I know myself well enough to know that I would.

 

[BBB167893]

"Interesting indeed...really, I believe Patsy's fibers are probably the most damning piece of evidence in the case.

They're that close to a smoking gun."

They're as close to a smoking gun as you can get in a case like this.

"I have always thought that both of these phrases sounded like threats."

They WERE!

"Can anyone provide a link that supports the statement that JR & PR stayed in separate rooms the entire time, and never once hugged, embraced, or comforted each other???"

PMPT and Thomas's book.

"Before she was found in the basement she lived in that house and was all over in it...JBR may even have been sitting in a chair or on the sofa or some other place her mother had sat in that red sweater or jacket whichever it is. She most likely was hugged by and had been held by and fussed over by her mother numerous times that Christmas day and had Patsy's red fibers all over her. If PR helped her get dressed for the party then she may have gotten red fibers all over JBR, on her clothes...under her clothes...in her hair...etc. That would explain them being entangled in the knot and under the tape."

No way! She did not have fibers "all over her." They were in the box, the knots, the tape and the blanket. Patsy claimed she never went near those places and her story about the transfer would require flat-out magic.

"If the cord came from the house then the fibers could have been on it before the knot was made."

They claimed they never saw it beofre.

"Fibers from people who lived in the house are pretty meaningless if you ask me....could mean something.... but too many ways the fibers could have travelled around to put a lot of weight on it."

Not so. The leap of imagination required to believe these fibers transfered innocently is far too great.

"Are the fibers known to be from Patsy's clothing for an absolute cerainty or just 'consistent with' Patsy's clothing?"

When they say consistent, it's a match.

"It is my experience that people believe what they want to believe. If Levin and the other prosecutors believed they were fibres from Patsy's jacket it was because they wanted to believe that IMO. They weren't lying. But they didn't say "we know for a fact that fibres from Patsy's jacket were found tied into the ligature found on JonBenet's neck", did they?"

They DID, aussiesheila. I'll find the exact quote for you if you like.

"If the evidence was strong enough for them to be able to say 'we know' then Patsy could and would have been charged with murder, IMO."

I think you'll find they TRIED to charge her. The DA just wouldn't go for it, as I've explained many times.

"Who was the Lawyer who said 'are' from Patsy's jacket/sweater?"

That would be Mr. Kane!

 

[julianne]

Is the concensus of RDI's that everything contained in Steve Thomas's book gospel as far as what occurred on that morning? This is a serious question--I don't know.

And no, I do not take Linda Arndt's word as gospel. Geez, the woman herself picked up and moved JonBenet's body. Some detective.

Were Linda Arndt's clothing fibers ever found on JonBenet??

 

[BBB167893]

"Is the concensus of RDI's that everything contained in Steve Thomas's book gospel as far as what occurred on that morning? This is a serious question--I don't know."

Not THIS RDI! But what else is there?

 

[RiverRat]

"Is the concensus of RDI's that everything contained in Steve Thomas's book gospel as far as what occurred on that morning? This is a serious question--I don't know."

Not THIS RDI! But what else is there?

There's me.

I am just going off of the fact that no one mentioned in Steve's book has demanded a retraction - minus the Suspects. His word stands.

 

[rashomon]

She most likely was hugged by and had been held by and fussed over by her mother numerous times that Christmas day and had Patsy's red fibers all over her.

But then why were those fibers not all over JB's body but only in incriminating locations (on the sticky side of the duct tape and in the knot)?
And don't forget that these same fibers were also found in the paint tray: Do you think Patsy used to paint in a jacket she was going to wear to a Christmas party?
All this just screams that Pasty Ramsey never changed clothes on that fatal night and was involved in the staging of the scene.

Are the fibers known to be from Patsy's clothing for an absolute cerainty or just "consistent with" Patsy's clothing?

Lab techs always put it like that: they say 'consistent with' if they have found a fiber match.

Just playing Devil's Advocate. I don't know who killed JBR but think it just as possible an intruder did it as it is possible that the Ramseys did it...I see too much reasonable doubt anyway.

I like discussing with devil's advocates because it keeps me on my toes.
If you look at the evidence in its totality, (not just at isolated items, which the RST seems to prefer, and for good reason), this evidence just screams that the Ramseys are involved in their daughter's death. Try to put it all together as a devil's advocate and you'll run into difficulties immediately. Why for example would a sexual predator write a ransom note for money and the molest the child in the parents' own home and not even take the body away? This all doesn't make sense, which is why I'm not of the opinion that 'everything is possible'. Some things are definitely less possible - they are simply absurd. Any 'intruder did it' theory is totally absurd.
For if it was an intruder, then why on earth did the Ramseys refuse to talk to the police and behave so suspisiously that it struck many people as odd?

Try to construct a time line of events and you'll run into the same difficulties. For example, the pineapple blew the Ramseys' own time line apart and exposed their story that JB was asleep when they got home as a lie.

And I have another thing for the Devil's advocate: fibers consistent with John Ramsey's shirt were found inside JB's genitals. She probably was wiped with this shirt. Pretty damning evidence, don't you think so?