Forensic evidence

[JMO8778]

rashomon,

Since the wine-cellar and the ransom note are imo staging its simply not productive to analyse all the possible interpretations.


Wiped Down:
Depending on your favorite WDI theory, JonBenet may have had blood, semen, or urine or some combination thereof cleaned from her body. e.g. Semen favors a sexual assault, urine a Toilet Rage assault, and blood a possible staging.

But the forensic evidence strongly suggests she was wiped down, possibly by John's woolen shirt? That this occurred after the sexual assault/staging is indicated by the remains of blood stains on her underwear that have no matching stains on her genitalia.

JonBenet may have been alive when she lay on the floor outside the wine-cellar, she may have been garroted here, or this was done upstairs simply using ligature?


I have never suggested JonBenet was redressed in the sequined shirt, only that the rigor-mortis prevented its removal, thereby allowing the barbie-gown to be placed on her?

If you think that the Ramsey's overlooked JonBenet's post-mortem release fine, possibly like the fresh pineapple its a mistake?

An interpretation I currently favor is that there had been a prior staging which included a sexual asault as staging, when the crime-scene was revised and relocated to the wine-cellar, JonBenet was wiped down, to remove the blood stains, so that initially it would appear she had been abducted from her bed, as per the ransom note, this was a diversionary tactic designed to gain time and imo it succeeded?

That there was no fingerprints on the batteries or casing of the flashlight is contained in the last pages of Steve Thomas' book, chapter: Not So Grand Jury.

There are references to Kimberly Ballard here: http://thewebsafe.tripod.com/11062000kimballardonwebbsleuths.htm


.

UK,are there any other ref. to KB anywhere else?I just do not trust that site,and I think they have professional lying down to an art there..no doubt learned from and encouraged by the R's.(And who knows how much they are involved in with keeping that site and the lies afloat.)
I'm not saying they're wrong about KB,just that I would like to read it from another source.

 

[JMO8778]

Yup



Possible.



Except that they don't. Not with any sort of scientific basis, anyway.



He was a lone sex predator...no, he was a kidnapper for money...no, he was an Islamic terrorist...no, he was an environmentalist whack-job, and on and on.



Hair ties, sequinned blouse, long johns, a bracelet.



We don't know. They couldn't keep it straight!

Yea,at first,PR reported to police that she put JB to bed in a red turtleneck.
Then she later changed it to just a 'polo shirt',not mentioning the color..a quite general answer.
ST's book says he came to beleive JB was put to bed in the red shirt,as PR previously stated.My guess is he knows for sure which shirt she had on then...but didn't want to let that info be known for sure to the R's.
I would venture to say that I think she wore the red shirt to the party(maybe this is why the pics weren't released?) that night,and was killed in it after returning home,starting with (as ST's book says),manual strangulation, with the shirt collar being twisted around her neck,(and the perp's knuckles causing the abrasions found).JR seemed to be wanting to account really hard for the red shirt being balled up on the counter.I don't think she was strangled with the white seq. shirt..if she was,I think they would have redressed her into something else,as the shirt collar would have been stretched(a big giveaway),and they were trying to cover that fact with ligature strangulation.(IMO).
I could be wrong ,but I think one reason the R's said they put JB straight to bed upon returning, was b/c she was wearing something different(the red shirt) from what she was found in(the white one),and they needed it to appear as tho *they didn't change it themselves(as well as her hair was likely restyled).Any thoughts anyone? The only other way I can see it happening is that PR changed JB into the red shirt b/f bed.But then we have the question..if that's the case,then why didn't she just go ahead and put her nightgown or PJ's on at that time,since it was late by then and they wanted to get up early the next day??????
I'm not so sure PR and JB got into an argument over what to wear...and if they did...did PR win that battle and JB end up wearing the red shirt like PR wanted her to????
I'm also not so sure JB ever made it to bed that night,but could she have had an accident or been cranky,tired and irritable when trying to get her changed for bed,and that started it all??

 

[UKGuy]

UK,are there any other ref. to KB anywhere else?I just do not trust that site,and I think they have professional lying down to an art there..no doubt learned from and encouraged by the R's.(And who knows how much they are involved in with keeping that site and the lies afloat.)
I'm not saying they're wrong about KB,just that I would like to read it from another source.

JMO8778,

Not very many.

There are some references at DOI:http://www.jonbenetindexguide.com/doi-k.htm

Also some more

Source:http://www.mediawhore.com/Wrants/week40.html

I cover the waterfront. For those of you still interested, here's a quick update on the lowdown surrounding the JonBenet Ramsey murder case. What follows is gleaned from the local media over several months. Because I reside in bucolic Boulder, Colorado, I am subjected to a new flood of leaked insider info and innuendo weekly that, I'm discovering, doesn't always filter up to the mainstream media. (And let's face it, a lot of us are two busy to watch Geraldo.)

The murder happened a little over 150 days ago. It is reported by the tabloid newspaper Globe that John Ramsey's highly-paid investigating team are pointing to Patsy, the little girl's mother, as the perpetrator. Patsy was recently asked to submit a fifth handwriting sample to the Boulder Police, who also consider her Suspect #1.

The family's pediatrician, (who happens to be a fellow country club member and golfing buddy of John Ramsey's) has agreed so far to only one public "interview" which was held in the presence of one of John Ramsey's lawyers. Patsy took little JonBenet to see this doctor . This same doctor was asked to leave a practice in Arvada under distrubing circumstances. As reported on Peter Boyle's Denver morning talk show, the nurses working with this physician referred to him as "The Pervert" because of his peculiar practice of catheterizing any and all patients brought to him regardless, even if the visit was for a sore throat or earache. The children were all catheterized.

Look it up. I'm not going into it. It's just another horrible twist to this terrible case. Remember, this is the doctor who assured the public that in all his examinations of JonBenet he hadn't detected any signs of sexual abuse.

Meanwhile, Boulder's police chief Tom Koby (who announced at the beginning of the controversy that his department had investigated the case "by the book,") is the target of a no-confidence vote from within his own ranks. Even the police think he's botched the investigation beyond all hope.

Further evidence of John Ramsey's character burst into public view recently when the tabloids (god luv 'em) revealed the name of one Kimberly Ballard, who allegedly had an affair with family man, father of "Daddy's Little Girl," John Ramsey. While Patsy was undergoing chemotherapy treatments for cancer, John Ramsey was perusing the personal ads in the back of USA Today as I guess discerning millionaires do. After a Tucson tryst with Ms. Ballard (who was pre-qualified by J.R. as petite and blonde) they continued to see and know one another for some three months until Ballard, feeling a little uncomfortable, broke it off.

She later was shocked to discover the similarities between her own appearance and that of the beauty-pageant made-up JonBenet.

The media savvy Ramseys have been placing ads in Boulder's hometown newspaper, The Daily Camera for the past few weeks, offering a $100,000.00 reward for information leading to the arrest, etc. of the killer or killers, blah blah. What the heck, let's throw another red herring on the coals.: the latest ad requests anyone having seen a "well dressed man talking to children" around Christmastime please contact the police.

The police, the mayor and the district attorney's office all issued public statements the next day proclaiming ignorance of any "well dressed man talking to children" around Christmas or any other week. A day after that, the district attorney's office was forced to publicly apologize, as the "mysterious man" tip came from someone in the D.A.'s office directly to the Ramsey investigators, bypassing the Boulder Police.

The whole thing is so out of control that pretty much everyone agrees that even though the prime suspects (the parents) look and act incredibly guilty, there will probably never be an arrest let alone a conviction. Apart from everything else, the JonBenet murder case suggests two disturbing truths that few feel comfortable addressing: child abuse can happen in the nicest of homes; and in America today, if you have tons of money you can get away with murder.

So it may all just be media spin, but it does seem like John Ramsey played around, he had affairs etc, so Kimberly Ballard may be genuine, then again she may be a tabloid employee?


.

 

[JMO8778]

JMO8778,

Not very many.

There are some references at DOI:http://www.jonbenetindexguide.com/doi-k.htm

Also some more

Source:http://www.mediawhore.com/Wrants/week40.html


So it may all just be media spin, but it does seem like John Ramsey played around, he had affairs etc, so Kimberly Ballard may be genuine, then again she may be a tabloid employee?


.

Could be;I'm not calling any of the sites liars,just that in particular,I don't trust the webbsleuths site.

 

[Eagle1]

Could be;I'm not calling any of the sites liars,just that in particular,I don't trust the webbsleuths site.

Some might not notice the two b's, and realize you don't mean this WS. Just thought I'd mention it just in case.

And we now have a WDI? I didn't quite get what that means. Quote here:

"Wiped Down: Depending on your favorite WDI theory, JonBenet may have had blood, semen, or urine or some combination thereof cleaned from her body. e.g. Semen favors a sexual assault, urine a Toilet Rage assault, and blood a possible staging. " That was from either rashomon or UKGuy I think.
Wiper Did It?

And my routine objection goes here, to someone's routine "zero evidence of an intruder". That, like UK Guy, I don't have a firm theory of any kind, but some of the staging can be interpreted as evidence of a possible intruder or two or even several, who could have all checked carefully to make sure they were leaving no evidence. But the dictionary picture seemed to have been put into the evidence folder at BPD after the rest, and ST said he and a colleague gasped, and otherwise gave evidence of surprise. The parents were educated enough not to need to look up the word incest. Could have been a crooked cop. Not saying he was necessarily the killer.

My "late" family just arrived, so, Happy Holidays, everyone.

 

[icedtea4me]

WDI= Who Did It


-Tea

 

[JMO8778]

Some might not notice the two b's, and realize you don't mean this WS. Just thought I'd mention it just in case.

Right,thx.

 

[Eagle1]

WDI= Who Did It
-Tea

Of course. Thanks, Tea.

 

[LionRun]

Okay, maybe I am soooo behind with absorbing and deciphering information from the unbelievable number of words written on this subject, but...


Can someone please explain the discrepancy between the two opposing words on the two links below? One is from an interview where JR says that Kimberly Ballard called, "us several times" and that she said she would go to the media.

The other link is supposedly where Kimberly Ballard herself says that she only met John once in a restaurant in 1993, and that all 6 people went their separate ways after lunch?

I'm just learning this, "link" stuff, and computers for that matter, so sorry if this isn't very well organized.






http://thewebsafe.tripod.com/11062000kimballardonwebbsleuths.htm

http://www.jonbenetindexguide.com/doi-k.htm

 

[BBB167893]

SuperDave, I think you said that the Ramseys couldn't keep straight what they put their daughter to bed in? Did they change stories? I hadn't heard that before. BTW, are there links to actual words spoken in interviews? I recall seeing PR questioned shortly after the murder; but, that was it.

LionRun, you just hit the jackpot!

www.geocities.com/borgtothebone

That's a good place to start.

The note: It seems like the hand that wrote it was shaky. Perhaps because the person was not using his/her dominant hand to write it?

That's what Ted Widmer thinks.

Perhaps because the writer was under the influence of a drug (s) that caused trembling? Or perhaps the writer intentionally tried to write that way (but, it is consistent so I don't lean towards that). Or perhaps the person was so full of adrenalin after the murder?

I personally think it was all four.

 

[UKGuy]

Toilet rage can't be ruled out.
A large part of your theory hinges on JB being wiped down, and you assume that the wiping down occurred for staging purposes.
But JB could have been wiped down way before the staging, i. e. after a (bed)wetting incident.
And of course the missing size 6 panties could have been urine-stained, which is why later the size 12 'Wednesday' panties were put on JB for staging purposes.
But keep in mind that the stager of the scene may not have 'chosen to ignore' her urine-soaked longjohns, but simply may not have noticed the urine shed post-mortem on JB's longjohns (who btw was probably lying face-down as this occurred).

I think you wrongly interpreted what Dr. Wright stated. He spoke about JB releasing urine "at the time of death", and imo he meant "post-mortem release". [although 'post-mortem' - strictly speaking - means "after death"].

Maybe posters with medical knowledge can provide info here.


Of course the Ramseys tried to stage a scene and remove some forensic evidence. They had to, because the wanted to save their hide. But the staging was so poorly done that the people most surprised that they got away with it were probably the Ramseys themselves.


Manually strangled? Highly unlikely, for no damage to the larynx nor to the hyoid bone is mentioned in the autopsy report.
The 'sexual rage scenario' doesn't hold any water either imo.
For in order to inflict the paintbrush injury in the vestibulum area of JB's genitals, the perp would have had to manually separate the labia first (a doctor consulted on the case pointed this out). But this is not consistent with a rage attack at all.

rashomon,

It seems the bed-wetting has not been clarified e.g.

I think you wrongly interpreted what Dr. Wright stated. He spoke about JB releasing urine "at the time of death", and imo he meant "post-mortem release". [although 'post-mortem' - strictly speaking - means "after death"].

I stated:

Lets run over this again, JonBenet wets the bed ok, so she has discharged a sizeable amount of urine, next she is killed, and this head injury may have been concurrent with a manual strangulation, so shortly afterwards she is asphyxiated to death.

Now from your own quote:

Wright was particularly intrigued by the girl's empty bladder. Evacuation of the bladder often occurs at the time of death, he said, but it's usually only partial.
Complete emptying of the bladder, he said, would be consistent with her having done so intentionally while awake, near the time of the crime, or a bed-wetting.July 16, 1997

Wright is arguing two options, one a normal death where there is a partial evacuation, and 2nd a complete emptying would indicate a bedwetting event, since the remainder is released upon death.

This is why I allowed for a third post-mortem evacuation.

So lets follow Dr Wright's description, you tell me where I go wrong?

Ok JonBenet wets the bed, this is the Toilet Rage theory, now according to Dr. Wright

Complete emptying of the bladder, he said, would be consistent with her having done so intentionally while awake, near the time of the crime, or a bed-wetting

so according to Dr. Wright's sequence of events JonBenet's bladder is now empty? e.g. a bed-wetting occurred.

From this theory it follows that the size-12 underwear that JonBenet was discovered wearing, along with the urine-soaked longjohns, were the same items of clothing that she was wearing when she wet the bed, and when she was deposited into the wine-cellar?

Why because her bladder is empty!

Now an inconsistency in the above account is why wipe JonBenet down at any point to remove urine, but then leave her wearing urine-soaked longjohns and size-12 underwear?

Assuming the person who constructed the garrote down in the basement is the same person who digitally sexually assaulted JonBenet, depositing cellulose into her vagina, then at this point the urine-soaked clothing would be impossible to miss.

So according to the above Toilet Rage theory no attempt to hide the assumed fact of bed-wetting was undertaken because JonBenet was left wearing the clothing she was dressed in prior to her death, this despite other attempts at staging e.g. constructing a garrote, wiping her down, applying duct-tape, wrapping her in blankets and depositing her into the wine-cellar.


.

 

[Nuisanceposter]

UK Guy, you always make such good points. I've often thought the Rs must have left JonBenet lying there for some time while they decided what to do and wrote the RN...perhaps they didn't change her below-the-waist clothing because rigor mortis had set in?

But why didn't they change her urine-soaked undies and long johns when they wiped her off? Apparently there were no corresponding urine stains on her skin, and that's part of how we know she was wiped off...but how can she be dressed in urine-soaked clothes without there being corresponding stains on her skin? Just having the wet clothes next to her skin should have left corresponding stains on her skin.

And wtf with the size 12s? Who put those on her, and WHY?

 

[UKGuy]

UK Guy, you always make such good points. I've often thought the Rs must have left JonBenet lying there for some time while they decided what to do and wrote the RN...perhaps they didn't change her below-the-waist clothing because rigor mortis had set in?

But why didn't they change her urine-soaked undies and long johns when they wiped her off? Apparently there were no corresponding urine stains on her skin, and that's part of how we know she was wiped off...but how can she be dressed in urine-soaked clothes without there being corresponding stains on her skin? Just having the wet clothes next to her skin should have left corresponding stains on her skin.

And wtf with the size 12s? Who put those on her, and WHY?

Nuisanceposter,

Thank you for your nice words. Much of what I post follows from the available evidence.

I think that Lou Smit's Intruder Theory and Steve Thomas' Toilet Rage Theory are inconsistent with the current forensic evidence.

These theories and their variants such as Karr et al, make for good media stories, but if you run over the evidence and the Ramsey statements there are unexplained holes.

I've often thought the Rs must have left JonBenet lying there for some time while they decided what to do and wrote the RN...perhaps they didn't change her below-the-waist clothing because rigor mortis had set in?

Possibly there was a prior staging that they thought was sufficient then after talking it over decided to fake a kidnap and ransom, by dumping JonBenet's body outdoors? So the clothing beneath her waist may originate from a prior staging, but because rigor mortis had set in, they were unable to redress JonBenet in her barbie-gown. If the latter had been successful and she had been dumped anywhere outdoors, we would all be looking for an intruder? Assuming the same person who faked her asphyxiation with a garrote also digitally assaulted her leaving cellulose in her vagina? Then the rigor mortis did not prevent this assault. There are other subtle questions here which can confuse matters further.

But why didn't they change her urine-soaked undies and long johns when they wiped her off? Apparently there were no corresponding urine stains on her skin, and that's part of how we know she was wiped off...but how can she be dressed in urine-soaked clothes without there being corresponding stains on her skin? Just having the wet clothes next to her skin should have left corresponding stains on her skin.

From memory it is the absence of corresponding blood stains that suggest she was wiped down.

There is nothing to suggest she was wiped down to remove any urine.

That she was left wearing urine-soaked longjohns and underwear is consistent with this last point.

Assuming the latter points are correct then why bother to stage a homicide to mask a Toilet Rage death, only to leave the causal factor e.g. urine-soaked clothing, on the dead body of JonBenet?

I wonder if Steve Thomas ever speculated upon this?

And wtf with the size 12s? Who put those on her, and WHY?

These were a replacement for whatever she was wearing prior to her death, if anything?

Since she was left wearing urine-soaked longjohns, which Patsy stated, she had been placed in bed wearing, then its safe to assume the size-6 underwear was not removed simply because it was urine-stained, so these were likely to be semen or blood stained, or both. This latter assumption is consistent with the assumption that she was wiped down.

That is the size-12's are simply, like the garrote, staging!



.

 

[Eagle1]

I believe it's been said that the smaller panties are in police custody.

If that hadn't already been said so much I'd venture a guess that the perp wanted them for a souvenir. Not unusual at all.

We haven't been able to come up with any other explanation that I know of.

I'd also guess that the longjohns got wet at the moment of death, unknown to the perp, who just left her there, or, if he moved her, didn't notice her front was all wet.

Just thought of something. Do we have any statistics, a total number of murdered children by parents in a certain time period and a total number by perps who sometimes want to keep something? That would not prove anything in this particular case, of course, but it'd just be interesting to know a thing like that.

 

[coloradokares]

I believe it's been said that the smaller panties are in police custody.

If that hadn't already been said so much I'd venture a guess that the perp wanted them for a souvenir. Not unusual at all.

We haven't been able to come up with any other explanation that I know of.

I'd also guess that the longjohns got wet at the moment of death, unknown to the perp, who just left her there, or, if he moved her, didn't notice her front was all wet.

Just thought of something. Do we have any statistics, a total number of murdered children by parents in a certain time period and a total number by perps who sometimes want to keep something? That would not prove anything in this particular case, of course, but it'd just be interesting to know a thing like that.

Eagle 1 I'd like to see a link on the panties please if you have it . This is the first time I have ever heard they had the smaller sized panties in their possession. This would be I think beyond monumental if they were to have those and not have ever said anything. I am not always right. But I have honestly never heard that.

 

[Ames]

Eagle 1 I'd like to see a link on the panties please if you have it . This is the first time I have ever heard they had the smaller sized panties in their possession. This would be I think beyond monumental if they were to have those and not have ever said anything. I am not always right. But I have honestly never heard that.

I, too....have read that the police took some of the smaller sized panties in as evidence. I will try to find the link....

 

[Ames]

I, too....have read that the police took some of the smaller sized panties in as evidence. I will try to find the link....

This is a partial list of items that were taken for evidence from the Ramsey home. I posted this in a thread on the Courttv boards, so I went back to that site (although I hate those boards, because they are full of IDI's that attack people), and copied and pasted this.


Ramsey Evidence List (partial)

Item type Item Description/location Quantity ID # Initials

Weapon brick 1 12 BAB
Bedding Comforter from victim's bed 1 37 BAB
Bedding sheet top 1 38 BAB
Bedding sheet Bottom 1 39 BAB
Bedding Pillowcase 1 40 BAB
Clothing tights black 1 41 BAB
Linens bath towel 1 42 BAB
Clothing bath robe 1 43 BAB
Clothing underwear 1 45 BAB
Writing implement Marker black 1 46 BAB
Clothing turtleneck velvet 1 47 BAB
Weapon brick Red clay 1 48 BAB
Christmas Christmas ornament w/string 1 49 BAB
Weapon golf club cover 1 50 BAB
Linens towel 1 51 BAB
Toilet tissue 1 52 BAB
Toilet liquid from toilet 1 53 BAB
Toilet liquid from toilet 1 54 BAB
Clothing tights black and white 1 56 BAB
Clothing underwear childs 1 57 BAB
Clothing underwear childs 1 58 BAB
Clothing underwear childs 1 59 BAB
Writing implement Sharpie 1 60 BAB
Clothing tights black 1 62 BAB
Clothing sweater black/red/green christmas 1 63 BAB
Clothing pants black & gray, girls 1 64 BAB
Clothing vest black, velvet 1 65 BAB
Clothing shirt black 1 66 BAB
Clothing trousers black 1 67 BAB
Clothing Shoes 2 68 BAB
Paper samples Notepad 1 69 BAB
Christmas garland 71 BAB
Christmas garland 1 72 BAB
Weapon baseball bat 1 74 BAB
Christmas Bag containing ornaments Santa Claus Swift 1 76 BAB
Christmas Santa Claus suit 1 77 BAB
Records Note 1 78 BAB
Trace evidence Fingerprints of victim 79 BAB
Trace evidence Finger prints -hand drawing 80 BAB
records Birthday card 1 82 BAB
Paper samples Legal pad white lined 1 83 BAB
Christmas bow satin 1 86 BAB
Christmas garland 34 1 through 34 BAB
Bedding comforter Black 1 1 BAH
Bedding sheet black, velvet 1 2 BAH
Bedding bed sheet 1 3 BAH
Bedding sheet bottom 1 4 BAH
Wire Wire tied in knot 1 5 BAH
Weapon hammer 1 6 BAH
Hardware Laptop computer 1 7 BAH
Writing implement markers black 3 8 BAH
Writing implement pens 2 9 BAH
Writing implement marker and pens One marker, two pens 3 10 BAH
Writing implement markers large 3 11 BAH
Writing implement pens 5 12 BAH
Writing implement ball point pen 1 13 BAH
Writing implement fountain pen 1 14 BAH
Video video cassettes 2 15 BAH
Audio audio tape 1 16 BAH
Trace evidence paper brown 1 17 BAH
Video video cassette 1 19 BAH
Software computer discs 2 20 BAH
Records Christmas card 1 21 BAH
Video VHS video tape 1 22 BAH
Software computer disc 1 23 BAH
Video Betamax video tape 1 24 BAH
Video video tape 1 25 BAH
Video VHS tape 1 26 BAH
Software NEC computer disc 1 27 BAH
Software Macintosh computer disc 1 28 BAH
Software Macintosh McWrite computer disc 1 29 BAH
Video Betamax video tape 1 30 BAH
Computer manual Compuserve book 1 31 BAH
Computer manual I didn't know Compuserve book 1 32 BAH
Computer manual Dave Berry Cyberspace book 1 33 BAH
Clothing sweatpants blue 1 34 BAH
Clothing Sweatshirt gray 1 35 BAH
Hardware Computer hard drive 1 35 BAH
Clothing underwear girls 1 36 BAH
Records Notepad w/writing 1 37 BAH
Computer manual Macintosh users guidebook 1 39 BAH
Computer manual Apple Guide CD Roms Titles book 1 40 BAH
Software NEC disc 1 41 BAH
Software Supramodem disc 1 42 BAH
Software hypercard disc 1 43 BAH
Software NEC floppy disc 1 44 BAH
Computer manual Red line users guide and disc 1 45 BAH
Software Macintosh system discs 8 46 BAH
Software Macintosh CD Rom discs 8 47 BAH
Software Dyson discs 10 48 BAH
Software various computer discs 38 49 BAH
Video video cassette 1 50 BAH
Writing implement pen black 1 51 BAH
Computer manual computer book 1 52 BAH
Clothing underwear mens 1 53 BAH
Clothing pants mens 1 54 BAH
Audio cassette tape 1 55 BAH
Clothing underwear girls 1 56 BAH
Writing implement pen black 1 57 BAH
Trace evidence Cigarette butts, leaves & bag 58 BAH
Software CD Rom discs and computer disc (2 discs and 1 disc) 3 59 BAH
Software CD Rom discs and two computer discs 7 60 BAH
Clothing Underwear girls 1 61 BAH
Clothing Underwear girls 1 62 BAH
software computer disc 1 63 BAH
Publication Envelope w/prayer book 1 64 BAH
software misc. floppy discs 8 65 BAH
Software floppy discs 5.25" 3 66 BAH
Video VHS tape 1 67 BAH
Publication magazine articles 2 68 BAH
Software Prodigy Parselwork 1 69 BAH
Video video tapes 22 70 BAH
Video video tapes 10 71 BAH
Paper samples sheet of paper 1 72 BAH
Records paper w/names and phones # 1 72 BAH
Photography Camera with 3 rolls 35 mm film 4 74 BAH
Writing implement black felt pens 2 75 BAH
Clothing underwear Girls 5 76 BAH
Clothing underwear Girls 2 77 BAH
Video video tapes 20 78 BAH
Weapon golf club 1 79 BAH
Photos photo's 6 81 BAH
Trace evidence hair blonde 2 GLI
Weapon baseball bat 1 3 GLI
Weapon golf clubs 2 4 GLI
Misc. Window grate 1 GRV
Clothing Blouse 1 7 JRB
Clothing Underwear 1 8 JRB
Clothing Underwear 1 9 JRB
Video VHS tapes 15 9 JRB
Video VHS tapes 9 10 JRB
Video VHS tapes 17 11 JRB
Video VHS tapes 13 12 JRB
Video VHS tapes “4 (5)” 4 13 JRB
Video VHS tape 1 14 JRB
Publication Newspaper article 1 15 JRB
Writing implement magic marker 1 16 JRB
Christmas gift box w/black velvet 1 17 JRB
Records Phone and address book 1 18 JRB
records Ramsey residence flier 1 19 JRB
Weapon flashlight 1 20 JRB
Video VCR tapes 2 21 JRB
Records note Handwritten 1 1 12-31-96 JRB
Writing implement Sharpie 1 1 1-29-96 JRB
Video VHS videotape 1 2 12-31-96 JRB
Writing implement Sharpie 1 2 1-29-96 JRB
Video VHS videotape 1 3 12-31-96 JRB
Paper samples Notepad 1 3 1-29-96 JRB
Computer manual Outer disc users guide and papers 1 4 12-31-96 JRB
Video VHS video tapes 2 5 12-31-96 JRB
Video VHS videotapes 2 6 12-31-96 JRB
Writing implement Marker 1 6 1-29-96 JRB
Trace evidence Fibers from area by victim 1 KKY
Trace evidence Fibers from wine cellar 2 KKY
Clothing Sweatshirt Avalanche, covering body 1 4 KKY
Bedding Blanket covering body 1 5 KKY
Wire Wire near body 1 7 KKY
Trace evidence Fibers from under body 9 KKY
Bedding blanket White, in wine cellar 1 11 KKY
Clothing Nightgown Pink, Barbie, from wine cellar 1 12 KKY
Trace evidence Glass broken, from wine cellar 1 13 KKY
Trace evidence Hair fibers from floor of wine cellar 14 KKY
Trace evidence Wooden shards wooden, near paint tray 22 KKY
Misc. Paint tray 1 25 KKY
Trace evidence Paper blue, near rear south facing door 1 26 KKY
Ligature Rope from backyard 1 32 KKY
Ligature String white, from sled 1 33 KKY
Clothing Earring found in street 1 34 KKY
Misc. Canvas bag in crawlspace 1 37 KKY
Misc. sheet metal black, in wine cellar 1 39 KKY
Christmas ornament broken, purple, from basement 1 40 KKY
Weapon pocket knife red, w/broken ornament 1 41 KKY
Trace evidence fibers vacuumed 42 KKY
Writing implement Felt tip pen 1 43 KKY
Trace evidence Hair fibers from victim's pillow 44 KKY
Trace evidence Fibers from victim's bed 46 KKY
Trace evidence Fibers From victim's pillow 47 KKY
Trace evidence Fibers vacuumed from victim's bed 48 KKY
Trace evidence fibers Vacuumed from victim's pillow and bedspread 50 KKY
Writing implement Sharpie marker 1 51 KKY
Trace evidence Hair fibers from Mr. & Mrs. Ramsey's bed 52 KKY
Trace evidence Hair found in brush in Mr. Ramsey's bathroom 53 KKY
records Rolodex in Mr. Ramsey's desk 1 54 KKY

Christmas FAO Schwartz Partially wrapped 1 55 KKY
Christmas FAO Schwartz Partially wrapped 1 56 KKY
Christmas FAO Schwartz Partially wrapped 1 57 KKY
Writing implement Marker 1 58 KKY
Writing implement Marker 1 59 KKY
Records Note handwritten 1 61 KKY
Records My Science Project" from Burke's bedroom 1 65 KKY
Records Notepad yellow, w/writing 1 66 KKY
Writing implement Pen 1 67 KKY
Christmas evergreen needles Artificial 68 KKY
Dining Bowl 1 71 KKY
Computer manual Microsoft Word manuals and disc 1 76 KKY
Video video tapes 10 77 KKY
Video VHS tapes 7 78 KKY
Records Letter to Santa 1 86 KKY
Video VHS videotapes 7 88 KKY
Video VHS tape 1 89 KKY
Video VHS tapes 3 90 KKY
photography rolls of film 35 mm 2 91 KKY
records research paper and drawings Victims 3 92 KKY
Photography Pentax camera and film 2 93 KKY
Software CD Roms. floppy discs (2 & 3) 5 94 KKY
Hardware Macintosh keyboard 1 95 KKY
Hardware modem with power cord 1 96 KKY
Hardware computer mouse 1 98 KKY
Hardware Macintosh computer 1 99 KKY
Hardware computer monitor 1 100 KKY
Misc. sleeping mask 1 101 KKY
Photos picture framed, of JonBenet 1 102 KKY
Trace evidence window broken 1 104 KKY
Photos picture framed, of Burke and JonBenet 1 105 KKY
Weapon paint brush Broken 1 PI KKY
Trace evidence Piece of window broken 1 5 KRV
Trace evidence Piece of window broken 1 6 KRV
Trace evidence Piece of window broken 1 7 KRV
Trace evidence Piece of window broken 1 8 KRV
Misc. Door from basement 1 14 KRV
Paper samples legal pad 1 15 KRV
Paper samples legal notepads 2 16 KRV
Video video cassette tape 1 17 KRV
Paper samples legal notepad 1 18 KRV
Software 3 1/2" computer discs 2 19 KRV
Records envelope w/carpet samples 1 9 MTE
Writing implement felt pen 1 11 MTE
records bike registration 1 12 MTE
Video Video from Hallway 1 13 MTE
Writing implement felt tip pen 1 15 MTE
Bedding bed sheet 1 16 MTE
Trace evidence carpet 8 1 through 8 MTE
Dining Spoon 1 5 PP
Trace evidence Glass 1 6 PP
Trace evidence Cotton from cellar room 7 PP
Christmas Angel from Christmas tree 1 8 PP
Toilet toilet tissue 1 10 PP
publication book USN OCS Seachest 801 1 11 PP
Lock Lock 1 12 PP
Toilet Toilet seat lid 1 13 PP
Publication Booklet how to use total one security control 1 14 PP
Publication AD booklet and 2 newspapers 1 15 PP
Software computer discs 2 16 PP
Lock door lock 1 17 PP
Lock door lock 1 18 PP
Bedding Blanket black and gold 1 19 PP
photos photos of victim 3 20 PP
Misc. suitcase blue 1 21 PP
Ligature Rope 1 81 RAH
Paper samples Notepad 1 1 RAW
Paper samples notepad 1 2 RAW




​

 

[UKGuy]

Ames,

Thanks for your evidence list.

There is a thread here on websleuths that covers this topic in exhaustive detail.

If you analyse the underwear items which from memory number more than twenty, a few things to be noted are:

1. No sizes are given.
2. There is a pair missing.

Item 2. assumes JonBenet's underwear was purchased as day of the week packs, or packs of seven?

Most of the underwear was taken from JonBenet's bathroom drawer, I dont know if there was a laundry-basket, or if the floor sufficed?

The size-12 underwear was not retrieved from the Ramsey household.

JonBenet may not have been wearing any underwear at all when she was killed.

The underwear she wore to the White's party may have been washed out after she was killed, or just put into the laundry-basket?

Its assumed that Johns black woolen shirt was used to wipe down JonBenet, then it follows there should be some blood stain residue left on that shirt?



.

 

[rashomon]

2. There is a pair missing.

Item 2. assumes JonBenet's underwear was purchased as day of the week packs, or packs of seven?

...

The size-12 underwear was not retrieved from the Ramsey household.

JonBenet may not have been wearing any underwear at all when she was killed.

The underwear she wore to the White's party may have been washed out after she was killed, or just put into the laundry-basket?

Its assumed that Johns black woolen shirt was used to wipe down JonBenet, then it follows there should be some blood stain residue left on that shirt?

UKGuy,

some points:

1) the evidence lists contains nine items called "clothing underwear childs".

How do you derive from that evidence list that one pair of JB's underwear is missing?

2) And weren't the remaining oversized twelve panties actually retrieved from the Ramsey household? Wasn't there a package containing size twelve panties, which Patsy Ramseys claimed she had bought for her niece?

3) in terms of John Ramsey's shirt (fibers of which were found in the crotch area of JB's underpants): if JB's blood had been found on that shirt, I bet Lawyer Levin would have confronted John Ramsey with that.
Unless specific info comes up, nothing indicates that this shirt was used to wipe blood off JB's body.
As for the fibers found on JB's genital area: if memory serves, it is stated in the Bonita papers that these fibers were blue.

But since the Bonita papers are not official documents, question to all:

Does there exist info in the officially documented record which states that the fibers found in/on JB's genital area were the same fibers which were found in the crotch of JB's underwear (i. e. fibers from John's shirt)?

 

[UKGuy]

UKGuy,

some points:

1) the evidence lists contains nine items called "clothing underwear childs".

How do you derive from that evidence list that one pair of JB's underwear is missing?

2) And weren't the remaining oversized twelve panties actually retrieved from the Rasmey household? Wasn't there a package containing size twelve panties, which Patsy Ramseys claimed she had bought for her niece?

3) in terms of John Ramsey's shirt (fibers of which were found in the crotch area of JB's underpants): if JB's blood had been found on that shirt, I bet Lawyer Levin would have confronted John Ramsey with that.
Unless specific info comes up, nothing indicates that this shirt was used to wipe blood off JB's body.
As for the fibers found on JB's genital area: if memory serves, it is stated in the Bonita papers that these fibers were blue.

But since the Bonita papers are not official documents, question to all:

Does there exist info in the officially documented record which states that the fibers found in/on JB's genital area were the same fibers which were found in the crotch of JB's underwear (i. e. fibers from John's shirt)?

rashomon,

1) the evidence lists contains nine items called "clothing underwear childs".

How do you derive from that evidence list that one pair of JB's underwear is missing?

I dont, not from that list.

but,

Here is a list of itemized underwear as per the search warrant

1996 December 26 at 8:00 P.M. - From the 12-26-1996 Search Warrant - Inventory of Property removed from 755 15th Street

December 26, 1996 Search Warrant Page 9:
1. Panties with floral print

December 26, 1996 Search Warrant Page 13:
Underwear (9JRB)
2. Girls underwear (36BAH)
3. Girls underwear (56BAH)
4. (1) girls underwear (61BAH)
5. (1) girls underwear (62BAH)
6. Blue pair of girls underwear (76BAH)

December 26, 1996 Search Warrant Page 14:
7. Two pair of girls underwear (76BAH)

December 27, 1996 Search Warrant Page 6:
Pair of underwear (45BAB)
8. Childs underwear (57BAB)
9. Childs underwear (58BAB)
10. Childs underwear (59BAB)

December 27, 1996 Search Warrant Page 7:
Underwear (8JRB)
11. Girls underwear (36BAH)
12. Girls underwear-1 (56BAH)
13. Girls underwear-1 (61BAH)
14. Girls underwear-1 (62BAH)

14. Five pair of girls underwear (76BAH)
15. Two pair of girls underwear (77BAH)

My original count of the above was 22 pairs. The underwear counting is a confusing subject, but I think its certain that there were 15 pairs of size-4/6 underwear removed from JonBenet's underwear drawer but no size-12's.

2) And weren't the remaining oversized twelve panties actually retrieved from the Rasmey household? Wasn't there a package containing size twelve panties, which Patsy Ramseys claimed she had bought for her niece?

From memory the remaining size-12 underwear was alleged to have been discovered, years later, whenever the Ramsey's, or it may have been Lou Smit et al, decided to unpack some boxes transported from colorado during the house move. The excuse was along the lines they got lost in moving house?

wrt fibers from Johns shirt.
Yes there is a statement somewhere saying they are consistent with etc, but this may be BPD spin, at the time, to put pressure on John.

.