Forensic evidence

[icedtea4me]

Hi JMO...sorry that I just got around to reading your post. Thanks for the compliment about me reviewing the interviews. Solace beat me to the answer, and you are both correct...Patsy did say that..."since JonBenet had to go there". Very suspicious....HAD to go??? Thanks to Tea for posting that portion of the interview....

Yes, that "had to go" bit is, indeed, very suspicious. Wouldn't a more natural response be "And now, I am not afraid, because JonBenet is there now, in Heaven"? The "had to go" makes it sound mandatory.


-Tea

 

[JMO8778]

I recently re-read an interview with the Rs that took place many months (maybe it was a few years, I don't recall) with R attorney LW present. The condition of the interview was that NO SUBJECT that had already been discussed could be brought up again. Only "new" information. Each and every time the interviewer asked a meaningful question, LW broke in with a forceful comment about his clients will not answer because that subject had been previously known information. When he was accused by the interviewer of hindering the investigation he vigorously denied it. The interview was such a farce. This is what happens when allies in the DA's office give out copies of previous interviews to the suspects lawyers.
I said this at the time- you can tell more about a suspect's guilt by the questions their attorney will NOT let them answer than by all the evasive answers in the world.

yes,and in regards to JR's fiber evidence,it was said..'and I understand you are not going to answer those questions..'.Well that says it all.
And Patsy's interviews...I'm surprised they weren't patting her on the head,holding her hand or giving her crayons to color with during breaks...she was babied,for sure.
"There, there now Patsy..you don't have to answer that if you don't want to....".Lord knows it was all about her anyway.

 

[BBB167893]

Here's a novel idea for the DA: let the cops do their jobs!

 

[JMO8778]

Yes, that "had to go" bit is, indeed, very suspicious. Wouldn't a more natural response be "And now, I am not afraid, because JonBenet is there now, in Heaven"? The "had to go" makes it sound mandatory.


-Tea

it sure does..like she had to be killed for a reason,but it wasn't a bad thing b/c they were simply sending her to heaven.

 

[Toltec]

Remember Johns statement that he opened the wine cellar door, spotted JonBenet's white blanket and immediately knew he had found her.

Why didn't LE ask him..."How did you know it was JonBenet's blanket?"

 

[UKGuy]

Remember Johns statement that he opened the wine cellar door, spotted JonBenet's white blanket and immediately knew he had found her.

Why didn't LE ask him..."How did you know it was JonBenet's blanket?"

Toltec,

Sounds dumb, but probably because they knew what we know, that John already knew too.


.

 

[Ames]

Yes, that "had to go" bit is, indeed, very suspicious. Wouldn't a more natural response be "And now, I am not afraid, because JonBenet is there now, in Heaven"? The "had to go" makes it sound mandatory.


-Tea

Yep, like there was NO choice at all. She "had to go". Why did she have to go?? You are totally right...a more natural reponse would have been "I am not afraid, because JonBenet is there now, in Heaven". "JonBenet had to go there"...was not a normal response from the mother of a child that had been "murdered".

 

[Ames]

Remember Johns statement that he opened the wine cellar door, spotted JonBenet's white blanket and immediately knew he had found her.

Why didn't LE ask him..."How did you know it was JonBenet's blanket?"

OR..."How did you know when you saw the blanket on the floor that it was HER". I was thinking that the light was off at that point....if so, two things are weird here....John being able to determine that it was JB's blanket, in the DARK...and John being able to determine that a blanket on the floor actually had his daughter wrapped inside of it.

 

[JMO8778]

OR..."How did you know when you saw the blanket on the floor that it was HER". I was thinking that the light was off at that point....if so, two things are weird here....John being able to determine that it was JB's blanket, in the DARK...and John being able to determine that a blanket on the floor actually had his daughter wrapped inside of it.

and FW's comment that he couldn't see a thing in the dark when he opened the door earlier.

 

[DeeDee249]

Excellent points. Let's face it- there was SO much that should have been asked and wasn't.

 

[Ames]

and FW's comment that he couldn't see a thing in the dark when he opened the door earlier.

No, but apparently John can....he must be SOOOO talented. The very last sentence, John says that as SOON as he OPENED THE DOOR, he saw the white blanket. Gee, what if one of the kids had gotten in there earlier, and left it there? Why would John just assumed, as soon as he opened the door to a very dark room, and saw something on the floor, that it was a blanket, and that the blanket had JB under it?? I mean, remember....they were just looking for things that were out of place...it was a "kidnapping"....so, it makes no sense that John would open the door to a dark room, and immediately spot a blanket lying on the floor, and KNOW that it was JB. How could he? What would make him think that??


[FONT='Courier New', monospace]ST: And when you moved to that cellar room door to open the door, did you move the tag on the top of the door?[/FONT]
[FONT='Courier New', monospace]JR: Yeah.[/FONT]
[FONT='Courier New', monospace]ST: And did you open the door?[/FONT]
[FONT='Courier New', monospace]JR: Yeah.[/FONT]
[FONT='Courier New', monospace]ST: And did you open the door?[/FONT]
[FONT='Courier New', monospace]JR: Uh-huh.[/FONT]
[FONT='Courier New', monospace]ST: And was the light on or off?[/FONT]
[FONT='Courier New', monospace]JR: I think it was off.[/FONT]
[FONT='Courier New', monospace]ST: And did you turn the light on?[/FONT]
[FONT='Courier New', monospace]JR: Probably, I don’t remember specifically turning it on, but probably would have, it’s a dark room.[/FONT]
[FONT='Courier New', monospace]ST: From the time you opened the door of the cellar room, when did you discovered your daughter, was this a fraction of a second or a matter of seconds, give me an idea.[/FONT]
[FONT='Courier New', monospace]JR: Instant. I mean, as soon as I opened the door I saw the white blanket. And I knew, I just saw a blanket, and I knew that was our, you know.[/FONT]

 

[BBB167893]

Why didn't LE ask him..."How did you know it was JonBenet's blanket?"

Sheesh. F***ers!

 

[DeeDee249]

LE blew a lot of opportunities to ask questions like that. And before you knew it, the Rs lawyers stepped in and that was it as far as questioning the Rs for quite a while, and questioning was restricted from then on.

 

[DeDee]

Possible Motive

25 thomas haney: What changes have

0157

1 you seen in yourself since the death, outside of

2 taking away the tv and the newspaper?

3 patsy ramsey: I think the biggest

4 change that i have had personally, um, when i

5 had cancer, i was afraid to die because i had

6 two children and a husband and i didn't want to

7 leave them. And now, i am not afraid, because

8 jonbenet had to go there. If i get cancer

9 again, and you know, i can see her on that side.

10 and then god willing, if i stay healthy, i have

11 my son to enjoy here. And (inaudible).

12 so i am not -- i am just not afraid

13 anymore.


-tea

 

[Frigga]

Possible Motive

OMG

She was essentially hedging her bets- one child here if she lives and beats the cancer and one child in heaven (waiting for her apparently) if things don't turn out so well with the cancer.

I have never seen that statement before.

Unbelievable. I am flabbergasted.

 

[Frigga]

I am extremely interested in this statement.

Patsy, by my guess, chose the child who was being molested to be the one there for her on the other side- NOT BURKE.

I believe that is exactly how she convinced herself it was okay.

Freak. She was more disordered then I ever could have previously imagined.

Oh, and choosing JonBenet made her famous- Patsy, I mean. I don't think the coverage would have been the same had it been Burke "kidnapped" but not really, then murdered.

 

[The Night Owl]

:notgood::twocents:

OMG

She was essentially hedging her bets- one child here if she lives and beats the cancer and one child in heaven (waiting for her apparently) if things don't turn out so well with the cancer.

I have never seen that statement before.

Unbelievable. I am flabbergasted.

I agree. Also the part where she says she has her son to "enjoy" rubs me the wrong way.

 

[THE BUNK]

Originally Posted by Frigga View Post
OMG

She was essentially hedging her bets- one child here if she lives and beats the cancer and one child in heaven (waiting for her apparently) if things don't turn out so well with the cancer.

I have never seen that statement before.

Unbelievable. I am flabbergasted.
I agree. Also the part where she says she has her son to "enjoy" rubs me the wrong way.

-A child who will forever be a child. Like a doll waiting for her in heaven
-JonBenet will never become a teenager who despises Patsy or marries someone she hates as much as her own husband.
-She will still have a son to carry on the name and the family blood.

There is a sick perverse logic to this, isn't there?

 

[The Night Owl]

Exactly. This woman's thought process and the way she justifies things is just amazing. Smh. I should have said EVERYTHING she says rubs me the wrong way. At least in my opinion.

 

[bettybaby00]

Some of her spontaneous comments are like wow :lol: