Happenings of December 26

[Nom de plume]

Nom - Right on about the scream. The coroner said she would have died from the head blow alone, so in the JR trying to hide the chronic molestation scenario, there either was NO SCREAM, or, he could have "rescued" JB from the brawl, but in getting her settled back down, found it necessary to pamper her a while - which might have included actions which ended up with him starting something with JB in her bed, leading to him taking her to the basement?

He could have promised her a special gift (maybe the new Barbie Doll which was possibly going to Charlevoix for the next R Christmas?) in order to help calm and settle her?

Chrishope - The only way I can see Patsy involved in helping with the note and falling victim to JR's persuasion is knowing she was using medications, and that she thought Burke would be taken from them, possibly end up in a hospital, given his psychiatric records. Her insistence and reactions a couple of times during later interviews the minute Burke was mentioned, Mother Bear Extreme, shows that she was deluded about Burke's anger capability and prepared to protect him at any cost.

I will say, I really do not see Burke involved past one of the parents - JR, IMO, breaking up a fight, and getting angrily managed into bed for the night. (JR was still angry with him the next morning if we consider the enhanced call). I can believe Burke would have caused the track abrasions and maybe even some of the other scrapes on JB, since it is on record about him harming her previously.

So, my actual reaction in this scenario is that JR may have became JB's loving daddy - in more ways than one, and it went from bad to worse. I also am not convinced PR was involved with anything that night, but because of the bias of her writing the note, I have to consider that as the only loophole. She would have been out of her mind (I think she was a bit anyway) and wouldn't have known up from down.

But, after learning what I have about JR, I would believe him capable of the complete crime - start to finish, no BDI, no Patsy, just him wanting to love his daughter his way, but having to silence her because she was not able to comply without expressing pain, and in fact, maybe had begun to let him know previously in other ways, that she might tell someone about them. There is no doubt in my mind that he would have been prepared to protect himself, though I am not sure he realized it might have been that night.

I've always found it strange that she was adamant about the scream initially, then changed her story later. I highly suspect that she was "coached" into recanting, and later telling the story of the "energy" whatever. I've heard many times that other neighbors heard the scream as well, particularly the next door neighbor as he said in an interview for the Boulder paper, IIRC.

I agree BR may have had a scuffle with JB, and JR broke it up. Daddy comforting her, then trying to cheer her up with another gift, which just happened to be in the basement. How convienent.... I do believe there was a scream, and that she was probably very close to that open vent when it happened. (Seems like a lot happened in that area.) Head blow probably followed the scream. I'm sure he thought at that point that he was busted for sure, but when no one came down to check (?), he knew he would have to finish her off.

As for Patsy, well, it's hard to say. Her stories kept changing, she gave crazy answers in interviews, bizarre behavior the morning of the 26th, etc. She definitely knew something happened, at some point, other than what the RN said. What she knew, and when she knew it is anyone's guess.

I think it's possible that she called 911 while JR was upstairs showering and at that point she may have been completely in the dark. When he found her making the call he might have told her it was BR and she'd have to tell LE what he wanted her to tell. Either that or she did hear the scream, found JR with a dead JB, he blamed BR & she wrote the note while he dictated. I'm still sure it was in JR's head to dump JB elsewhere and PR may not have been able to stand that thought, and called 911 against JR's orders not to.

I could believe PR would go along thinking she was covering for BR, when in reality she was covering for JR. I can't see her covering for JR unless she caught him with JB and she was the one that delivered the head blow.

 

[UKGuy]

Chrishope,

They do not have lots of options because their version of events is constrained by the forensic evidence in the wine-cellar, it has to include any exceptions, i.e. longjohns, but not the size-12's, what happened there?

Why not size 6s? If PR is in on it, what prevents size 6s? How does the forensic evidence "constrain" them from putting size 6 on her?

Exactly, and if it's a family wide conspiracy, there is absolutely no constraint on doing just that. They could say JB needed to change before bed. No. It's obvious that the Rs - in your scenario, where PR is co-conspirator- are largely in charge of the forensic evidence. They don't need the story to conform to the longjohns, or the missing panties, because they don't need the longjohns, or the size 12s IOWs, they are in control of both what she wears, and the overall story they are going to tell the police.

What is obvious is that not all the Ramsey's participated, otherwise there'd be no Wed size 12 panties. There also would be no need for the LJs. It's obvious that one parent was constrained, precisely because the other was innocent. The innocent parent knew what JB had on at bed time.



She'd ignorant of the 12s, a further indication that she didn't participate. If she were co-conspirator, there's certainly no reason she'd put 12s on JB herself, and no reason for JR to do so. The 12s are taken from the package in the basement because the stager can't go upstairs for size 6s.

The former results in the possibility that Patsy was informed about an already staged JonBenet, and the latter that she is implicated in the staging.

Hide them from whom? No reason to have used 12s to begin with if PR is involved. Even if JR is redressing, if PR is aware of the redressing (even if it's just in general, and not the specific clothing items) there is no reason JR can't retrieve proper fitting panties from JB's room.

So what do you think came first the redressed JonBenet or the Ransom Note?


I suspect the RN came after the redressing, but not because of what she's wearing. Dealing with the dead body would be the natural thing to do, then a plan needs to be formulated to stay out of prison - or keep from going to the chair.



Again, a 3 way conspiracy puts the Rs in charge of both the redressing and the version of events. As far as how she is clothed, there are no constraints on a 3 party conspiracy.[/QUOTE]

Chrishope,

What is obvious is that not all the Ramsey's participated, otherwise there'd be no Wed size 12 panties. There also would be no need for the LJs. It's obvious that one parent was constrained, precisely because the other was innocent. The innocent parent knew what JB had on at bed time.

That is a generalisation, all the R's might have participated, but nothing mandates they must all participate synchronistically. The R who sexually assaulted JonBenet might not be the same R who whacked her on the head, and the latter R might not be the R who ligature asphyxiated JonBenet. Those roles, not in any specific order could be allocated to BR, JR and PR. Similar remarks can apply to the forensic staging.

This would explain why Patsy lacks information about prior steps in the death of JonBenet. This outcome might have been the result of a sequence of random events, or it might have been a planned outcome.

If you consider it a planned outcome then you must provide irrefutable evidence of predetermination, otherwise an unplanned outcome is just as likely.

The staging of JonBenet was not a one off event, it evolved and at each stage different R's were involved, so each R was not privy to all the information at each preceding event. This allows for an asymmetry of information to develop, resulting in Ramnesia further down the line.

How come you know there was an innocent parent, you offer no evidence to warrant such a claim? I cannot tell who was guilty never mind innocent!

That all three R's contributed towards the staging, is almost a racing certainty, Kolars book almost makes this a foregone conclusion, except for his lack of detail.


.

 

[UKGuy]

re:dust&lint on JBR's feet - could it have been dryer lint?

In one of the interviews of PR, I sorta remember a Q: regarding the high capacity washer & dryer in the basement and PR's A: was something about how she and the housekeeper used those machines to launder rugs, bed spreads, etc.

Have we seen pics of the washer&dryer in the basement?
Anyone know the exact location? WRT the wine cellar?

just curious :dunno:

CorallaroC,
You bet it could. I think there was also a dryer upstairs. So the lint could be forensically examined to decide what might be the source?

So you could link JonBenet with the basement on the basis of the lint.


.

 

[Nom de plume]

[/B]Why not size 6s? If PR is in on it, what prevents size 6s? How does the forensic evidence "constrain" them from putting size 6 on her?

Exactly, and if it's a family wide conspiracy, there is absolutely no constraint on doing just that. They could say JB needed to change before bed. No. It's obvious that the Rs - in your scenario, where PR is co-conspirator- are largely in charge of the forensic evidence. They don't need the story to conform to the longjohns, or the missing panties, because they don't need the longjohns, or the size 12s IOWs, they are in control of both what she wears, and the overall story they are going to tell the police.

What is obvious is that not all the Ramsey's participated, otherwise there'd be no Wed size 12 panties. There also would be no need for the LJs. It's obvious that one parent was constrained, precisely because the other was innocent. The innocent parent knew what JB had on at bed time.



She'd ignorant of the 12s, a further indication that she didn't participate. If she were co-conspirator, there's certainly no reason she'd put 12s on JB herself, and no reason for JR to do so. The 12s are taken from the package in the basement because the stager can't go upstairs for size 6s.

The former results in the possibility that Patsy was informed about an already staged JonBenet, and the latter that she is implicated in the staging.

Hide them from whom? No reason to have used 12s to begin with if PR is involved. Even if JR is redressing, if PR is aware of the redressing (even if it's just in general, and not the specific clothing items) there is no reason JR can't retrieve proper fitting panties from JB's room.

So what do you think came first the redressed JonBenet or the Ransom Note?


I suspect the RN came after the redressing, but not because of what she's wearing. Dealing with the dead body would be the natural thing to do, then a plan needs to be formulated to stay out of prison - or keep from going to the chair.



Again, a 3 way conspiracy puts the Rs in charge of both the redressing and the version of events. As far as how she is clothed, there are no constraints on a 3 party conspiracy.

Chrishope,

That is a generalisation, all the R's might have participated, but nothing mandates they must all participate synchronistically. The R who sexually assaulted JonBenet might not be the same R who whacked her on the head, and the latter R might not be the R who ligature asphyxiated JonBenet. Those roles, not in any specific order could be allocated to BR, JR and PR. Similar remarks can apply to the forensic staging. This would explain why Patsy lacks information about prior steps in the death of JonBenet. This outcome might have been the result of a sequence of random events, or it might have been a planned outcome.

If you consider it a planned outcome then you must provide irrefutable evidence of predetermination, otherwise an unplanned outcome is just as likely.

The staging of JonBenet was not a one off event, it evolved and at each stage different R's were involved, so each R was not privy to all the information at each preceding event. This allows for an asymmetry of information to develop, resulting in Ramnesia further down the line.

How come you know there was an innocent parent, you offer no evidence to warrant such a claim? I cannot tell who was guilty never mind innocent!

That all three R's contributed towards the staging, is almost a racing certainty, Kolars book almost makes this a foregone conclusion, except for his lack of detail.


.[/QUOTE]

BBM Seriously UKGuy? One of them assaults her. One of them whacks her on the head. And one of them strangles her with the garotte? That's a pretty incredible theory. It's far more likely that only one, and at most two were responsible for all of the different aspects of the crime. :moo:

 

[Chrishope]

I've always found it strange that she was adamant about the scream initially, then changed her story later. I highly suspect that she was "coached" into recanting, and later telling the story of the "energy" whatever. I've heard many times that other neighbors heard the scream as well, particularly the next door neighbor as he said in an interview for the Boulder paper, IIRC.

I agree BR may have had a scuffle with JB, and JR broke it up. Daddy comforting her, then trying to cheer her up with another gift, which just happened to be in the basement. How convienent.... I do believe there was a scream, and that she was probably very close to that open vent when it happened. (Seems like a lot happened in that area.) Head blow probably followed the scream. I'm sure he thought at that point that he was busted for sure, but when no one came down to check (?), he knew he would have to finish her off.

As for Patsy, well, it's hard to say. Her stories kept changing, she gave crazy answers in interviews, bizarre behavior the morning of the 26th, etc. She definitely knew something happened, at some point, other than what the RN said. What she knew, and when she knew it is anyone's guess.

I think it's possible that she called 911 while JR was upstairs showering and at that point she may have been completely in the dark. When he found her making the call he might have told her it was BR and she'd have to tell LE what he wanted her to tell. Either that or she did hear the scream, found JR with a dead JB, he blamed BR & she wrote the note while he dictated. I'm still sure it was in JR's head to dump JB elsewhere and PR may not have been able to stand that thought, and called 911 against JR's orders not to.

I could believe PR would go along thinking she was covering for BR, when in reality she was covering for JR. I can't see her covering for JR unless she caught him with JB and she was the one that delivered the head blow.

I'll try to look it up this weekend. There's a story about the scream, and I'm pretty sure it's in Shiller's book. As I recall (and I may not recall correctly, so again I'll look it up) She started by saying it was a scream then said it may have been "negative energy". The police coached her, by asking her to keep restating and asking if she was sure. They coached her until they got her to settle on an audible scream as opposed to "negative energy". IOWs they coached her until she seemed credible rather than seeming like a flake.

As for the neighbors hearing a scream, ok. But in a college town, and not far from campus, can we really be sure it was JB and not some half drunk student?

To me the main thing about the scream is not whether it happened, but rather that hitting her on the head as a response is such an implausible idea.

 

[eileenhawkeye]

I'll try to look it up this weekend. There's a story about the scream, and I'm pretty sure it's in Shiller's book. As I recall (and I may not recall correctly, so again I'll look it up) She started by saying it was a scream then said it may have been "negative energy". The police coached her, by asking her to keep restating and asking if she was sure. They coached her until they got her to settle on an audible scream as opposed to "negative energy". IOWs they coached her until she seemed credible rather than seeming like a flake.

As for the neighbors hearing a scream, ok. But in a college town, and not far from campus, can we really be sure it was JB and not some half drunk student?

To me the main thing about the scream is not whether it happened, but rather that hitting her on the head as a response is such an implausible idea.

On Christmas night? Wouldn't they all be home for break?

 

[Chrishope]

[/b]

Chrishope,

That is a generalisation, all the R's might have participated, but nothing mandates they must all participate synchronistically. The R who sexually assaulted JonBenet might not be the same R who whacked her on the head, and the latter R might not be the R who ligature asphyxiated JonBenet. Those roles, not in any specific order could be allocated to BR, JR and PR. Similar remarks can apply to the forensic staging.

This would explain why Patsy lacks information about prior steps in the death of JonBenet. This outcome might have been the result of a sequence of random events, or it might have been a planned outcome.

If you consider it a planned outcome then you must provide irrefutable evidence of predetermination, otherwise an unplanned outcome is just as likely.

The staging of JonBenet was not a one off event, it evolved and at each stage different R's were involved, so each R was not privy to all the information at each preceding event. This allows for an asymmetry of information to develop, resulting in Ramnesia further down the line.

How come you know there was an innocent parent, you offer no evidence to warrant such a claim? I cannot tell who was guilty never mind innocent!

That all three R's contributed towards the staging, is almost a racing certainty, Kolars book almost makes this a foregone conclusion, except for his lack of detail.


.

Let's try again.

You have presented a scenario in which JR/PR/BR are all joined in a conspiracy to stage the crime scene.

In this scenario, PR knows that JB is redressed. e.g. she knows about the acute assault and knows (or thinks she does) who did it.

It's understood that each may have had a separate role, w/o anyone checking on anyone else so that each may not know the full extent of the staging. (As unlikely as that is, we'll run with it)

It's a further part of your notion of the case that the Rs actually intended the police to see the body that morning, despite the fact that the presence of the body destroys the plausibility of the kidnap scenario.

Now- The Rs cook up a story that they put JB bed, woke up the next morning, found the RN, and so on. IOWs the boogeyman took her from her bed, did his nasty deeds, and put her in the WC, after redressing her.

Since it's already hard enough to believe that the intruder redressed his victim, the Rs decide that they will say she was put to bed wearing exactly what she was wearing when the body was "found".

Since the Rs are in control of the staging, and dressing, the only requirement is that IF they dress her in longjohns, they say she was put to bed in longjohns. Had they decided to redress her in a white cotton nightie, then they would say she was put to bed in a white cotton nightie. Likewise for the dozen or more other wardrobe choices they could have made.

It's understood that JR could have done the redressing, while PR was attending to other staging elements. The question, no matter who did the redressing, and no matter how many other family members knew how she was dressed is this - why size 12 bloomies and longjohns ?

If JR redressed her, and PR knew that JR was redressing her, and even if PR is content to leave it completely to JR's discretion how to dress her, why does he choose size 12 bloomies and longjohns?

I would assume that part of making such a choice is plausibility. Is it more plausible that she went to bed wearing size 12s and longjohns? Or size 6s and a nightie? JR (or PR) could have made either choice, or several other choices.

It should be apparent that if all 3 were in a conspiracy, even with the staging being divided, size 12 Wed. bloomies and longjohns is a strange choice. Actually the longjohns, in and of themselves aren't strange, but it would be easier to put a dead body in a nightie than in longjohns. The size 12 bloomies are a very very strange choice. Why would one R -whichever one you want to choose - decide to use size 12s?

The plausible answer of course is that in your scenario, no one would have made such a choice. There is no problem with JR (or PR, or even BR) running upstairs and getting size 6s from JB's drawer.

So, yet again, the longjohns are not selected because of any constraint, in your scenario, because any wardrobe choice was permissible, the more plausible the better, as long as they said she was put to bed in the clothes the police see on the 26th.

How come you know there was an innocent parent, you offer no evidence to warrant such a claim? I cannot tell who was guilty never mind innocent!

It should be apparent from the above, but I'll spell it out. I know one parent was innocent because there would be no reason to select size 12s, or really even longjohns, if they were working together, even if one parent were left in charge of redressing with no interference from the other.

The longjohns could have been selected because they were in the dryer, and handy. The longjohns, in themselves, are plausible. She could have gone to bed in them.

The size 12s are not plausible. She did not go to bed in size 12s. Why then select these? The police do not know what she wore to bed. They must accept anything the Rs say in this regard. Why then not get size 6s from her drawer. Nothing suspicious about her being in size 6 panties. Size 12s were very suspicious.

The answer, I believe, is that "The Ramseys" were not in on the staging together. The stager must have been constrained by the reality of what she actually wore to bed.

The 12s must have been selected for a reason, and Wed. must have been selected for a reason, though these may be interrelated. IOWs the panties may have been selected for Wed., despite size. Otherwise why not pull form the beginning of the package - Sunday, or Monday?

Again, if there is a co-conspiracy, even with a divison of labor, there is no reason not to put her in plausible clothing - size 6s, and easy to use clothing - a nightie instead of longjohns.

That all three R's contributed towards the staging, is almost a racing certainty, Kolars book almost makes this a foregone conclusion, except for his lack of detail.

Because of his lack of detail this amounts to appeal by reason of authority. Kolar has his opinion, Thomas another opinion, and LS (who you have to agree has a much greater reputation as a detective than Kolar) has yet a third opinion. At least two of these authorities are wrong. It's not much of a stretch to imagine all 3 might be wrong.

 

[CorallaroC]

CorallaroC,
You bet it could. I think there was also a dryer upstairs. So the lint could be forensically examined to decide what might be the source?

So you could link JonBenet with the basement on the basis of the lint.


.

Hi UKGuy,
Yes, especially with it being a high-capacity dryer + used for rugs & blankets. I would expect to find a lot of lint on the floors in the basement. Let's hope CSI gathered samples from the clothes dryers, because micro fibre analysis is pretty sophisticated these days.

FYI, found an interesting article about a lab in Elgin, Illinois called Microtrace, that was in possession of evidence from the JBR case for a decade, but was given back to Boulder police (per their request) prior to the Karr arrest.

http://www.microtracescientific.com/news/htmlarticles/08_25_06_cbs/ramsey.htm

~~~
side note: just try scattering even a tiny bit of dryer lint on a cold concrete basement floor and then walk over it barefoot, it's almost uncanny how it will stick fast - almost glue-like to your feet. kinda weird actually.

just my opinion, of course

 

[CorallaroC]

P.S. here's another article about Skip Palenik from Microtrace - his nickname is "The Dust Detective"
http://www.uiaa.org/uic/news/uicalumni/1003a.html

 

[UKGuy]

Hi UKGuy,
Yes, especially with it being a high-capacity dryer + used for rugs & blankets. I would expect to find a lot of lint on the floors in the basement. Let's hope CSI gathered samples from the clothes dryers, because micro fibre analysis is pretty sophisticated these days.

FYI, found an interesting article about a lab in Elgin, Illinois called Microtrace, that was in possession of evidence from the JBR case for a decade, but was given back to Boulder police (per their request) prior to the Karr arrest.

http://www.microtracescientific.com/news/htmlarticles/08_25_06_cbs/ramsey.htm

~~~
side note: just try scattering even a tiny bit of dryer lint on a cold concrete basement floor and then walk over it barefoot, it's almost uncanny how it will stick fast - almost glue-like to your feet. kinda weird actually.

just my opinion, of course

CorallaroC,
You make an invaluable point. I agree it looks like the lint might have originated in the basement. I find it difficult to offer an alternative explanation.


.

.

 

[otg]

P.S. here's another article about Skip Palenik from Microtrace - his nickname is "The Dust Detective"
http://www.uiaa.org/uic/news/uicalumni/1003a.html

Thanks, CorallaroC for the information. Very interesting reads. This guy (Palenik) has an entire thread about him, and his work, at FFJ:
[ame="http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/showthread.php?t=9975"]The Dust Detective and the JBR case - Forums For Justice[/ame]

 

[CorallaroC]

Let's hope lint samples were also taken from the laundry room upstairs near JBR's bedroom. IIRC, PR was questioned about that too. So who knows?

It makes me want to cry though, when I think about her giving Santa Bill a vial of star dust, and all her hopes and dreams about Christmas being so magical... and now to be wondering if the dust found on her feet could someday help solve this crime.

 

[UKGuy]

Let's try again.

You have presented a scenario in which JR/PR/BR are all joined in a conspiracy to stage the crime scene.

In this scenario, PR knows that JB is redressed. e.g. she knows about the acute assault and knows (or thinks she does) who did it.

It's understood that each may have had a separate role, w/o anyone checking on anyone else so that each may not know the full extent of the staging. (As unlikely as that is, we'll run with it)

It's a further part of your notion of the case that the Rs actually intended the police to see the body that morning, despite the fact that the presence of the body destroys the plausibility of the kidnap scenario.

Now- The Rs cook up a story that they put JB bed, woke up the next morning, found the RN, and so on. IOWs the boogeyman took her from her bed, did his nasty deeds, and put her in the WC, after redressing her.

Since it's already hard enough to believe that the intruder redressed his victim, the Rs decide that they will say she was put to bed wearing exactly what she was wearing when the body was "found".

Since the Rs are in control of the staging, and dressing, the only requirement is that IF they dress her in longjohns, they say she was put to bed in longjohns. Had they decided to redress her in a white cotton nightie, then they would say she was put to bed in a white cotton nightie. Likewise for the dozen or more other wardrobe choices they could have made.

It's understood that JR could have done the redressing, while PR was attending to other staging elements. The question, no matter who did the redressing, and no matter how many other family members knew how she was dressed is this - why size 12 bloomies and longjohns ?

If JR redressed her, and PR knew that JR was redressing her, and even if PR is content to leave it completely to JR's discretion how to dress her, why does he choose size 12 bloomies and longjohns?

I would assume that part of making such a choice is plausibility. Is it more plausible that she went to bed wearing size 12s and longjohns? Or size 6s and a nightie? JR (or PR) could have made either choice, or several other choices.

It should be apparent that if all 3 were in a conspiracy, even with the staging being divided, size 12 Wed. bloomies and longjohns is a strange choice. Actually the longjohns, in and of themselves aren't strange, but it would be easier to put a dead body in a nightie than in longjohns. The size 12 bloomies are a very very strange choice. Why would one R -whichever one you want to choose - decide to use size 12s?

The plausible answer of course is that in your scenario, no one would have made such a choice. There is no problem with JR (or PR, or even BR) running upstairs and getting size 6s from JB's drawer.

So, yet again, the longjohns are not selected because of any constraint, in your scenario, because any wardrobe choice was permissible, the more plausible the better, as long as they said she was put to bed in the clothes the police see on the 26th.



It should be apparent from the above, but I'll spell it out. I know one parent was innocent because there would be no reason to select size 12s, or really even longjohns, if they were working together, even if one parent were left in charge of redressing with no interference from the other.

The longjohns could have been selected because they were in the dryer, and handy. The longjohns, in themselves, are plausible. She could have gone to bed in them.

The size 12s are not plausible. She did not go to bed in size 12s. Why then select these? The police do not know what she wore to bed. They must accept anything the Rs say in this regard. Why then not get size 6s from her drawer. Nothing suspicious about her being in size 6 panties. Size 12s were very suspicious.

The answer, I believe, is that "The Ramseys" were not in on the staging together. The stager must have been constrained by the reality of what she actually wore to bed.

The 12s must have been selected for a reason, and Wed. must have been selected for a reason, though these may be interrelated. IOWs the panties may have been selected for Wed., despite size. Otherwise why not pull form the beginning of the package - Sunday, or Monday?

Again, if there is a co-conspiracy, even with a divison of labor, there is no reason not to put her in plausible clothing - size 6s, and easy to use clothing - a nightie instead of longjohns.




Because of his lack of detail this amounts to appeal by reason of authority. Kolar has his opinion, Thomas another opinion, and LS (who you have to agree has a much greater reputation as a detective than Kolar) has yet a third opinion. At least two of these authorities are wrong. It's not much of a stretch to imagine all 3 might be wrong.

Chrishope,
I have followed this case for many years and have read all the theories from zero to BlueCrab to SuperDave. I was here from the start although under another name, but had to rejoin when email restrictions were imposed due to trolls etc.

Kolars theory, in parts, but not in whole, does appeal to an argument from authority. As does that of LS and ST, neither of whom offer conclusive evidence for their proposals.

LS is evidentially wrong, ST might be proven correct as might JK. Your prevarication regarding the forensic evidence, ie. size-12's is precisely my point

Your selection of permissable reasons as to why the longjohns or size-12's were chosen appears reasonable, but to anyone versed in reason it looks like a laundry list of ad hoc oppostion, disagreement and an attempt at contradiction.

Again, if there is a co-conspiracy, even with a divison of labor, there is no reason not to put her in plausible clothing - size 6s, and easy to use clothing - a nightie instead of longjohns.

Why do you cite a co-conspiracy? Who used such language. If you agree a Nightgown and size-6's are patently more appropriate, then that is your estimation.

Other people, i.e. those involved might have had different motives from those you ascribe to them, so could have arrived at forensic outcomes that are different from the medley of options outlined above.


.

 

[Nom de plume]

I'll try to look it up this weekend. There's a story about the scream, and I'm pretty sure it's in Shiller's book. As I recall (and I may not recall correctly, so again I'll look it up) She started by saying it was a scream then said it may have been "negative energy". The police coached her, by asking her to keep restating and asking if she was sure. They coached her until they got her to settle on an audible scream as opposed to "negative energy". IOWs they coached her until she seemed credible rather than seeming like a flake.

As for the neighbors hearing a scream, ok. But in a college town, and not far from campus, can we really be sure it was JB and not some half drunk student?

To me the main thing about the scream is not whether it happened, but rather that hitting her on the head as a response is such an implausible idea.

I was referring to her being coached that she didn't hear anything by the RST, not BPD. She said it woke her up. She then woke her husband who heard the metal noise. When other neighbors heard it to, her story seems much more credible.

To me, the scream (or no scream) is important. If there was no scream then the head bash was a deliberate attempt to kill her. If the head bash was an instinctive, split second response to a scream, then the murder didn't start out as a premeditated murder, but as an over reaction. Later of course it was obviously intentional murder.

Why is it implausible? If I'm not mistaken, you're pretty much JDI. Think about it....JR has her in the basement sexually assaulting her. She lets out a blood curdling scream. (Whatever he was doing to her to cause her to bleed like she did must have hurt pretty bad.) Sure there are other ways to shut her up, but can you imagine how shocked and scared he must have been? It was probably the first time she had ever screamed like that. The head bash was probably done out of shock, anger and fear, and was a "gut" reaction.

If of course you believe that the injury that caused the bleeding was done after the head bash, then that changes everything. I don't know which scenario is the correct one, but screaming in pain from the abuse seems totally plausible to me. And hitting her to shut her up is totally plausible to me too.

:moo:

 

[Chrishope]

I was referring to her being coached that she didn't hear anything by the RST, not BPD. She said it woke her up. She then woke her husband who heard the metal noise. When other neighbors heard it to, her story seems much more credible.

To me, the scream (or no scream) is important. If there was no scream then the head bash was a deliberate attempt to kill her. If the head bash was an instinctive, split second response to a scream, then the murder didn't start out as a premeditated murder, but as an over reaction. Later of course it was obviously intentional murder.

Why is it implausible? If I'm not mistaken, you're pretty much JDI. Think about it....JR has her in the basement sexually assaulting her. She lets out a blood curdling scream. (Whatever he was doing to her to cause her to bleed like she did must have hurt pretty bad.) Sure there are other ways to shut her up, but can you imagine how shocked and scared he must have been? It was probably the first time she had ever screamed like that. The head bash was probably done out of shock, anger and fear, and was a "gut" reaction.

If of course you believe that the injury that caused the bleeding was done after the head bash, then that changes everything. I don't know which scenario is the correct one, but screaming in pain from the abuse seems totally plausible to me. And hitting her to shut her up is totally plausible to me too.

:moo:

Well then, we'll have to agree to disagree. Hitting her seems to me a very strange way to respond to a scream. But of course people are different, and that leads to different reactions, and different ideas of what is plausible.

 

[Darlene733510]

The "Dust Detective" wrote a 40 page report about the particles found on JB. I wonder what happened to the report, and what was in it. Was there something in the report that AH chose not to use and probably that the GJ never even heard of?

 

[Chrishope]

Chrishope,
I have followed this case for many years and have read all the theories from zero to BlueCrab to SuperDave. I was here from the start although under another name, but had to rejoin when email restrictions were imposed due to trolls etc.

Irrelevant.

Kolars theory, in parts, but not in whole, does appeal to an argument from authority. As does that of LS and ST, neither of whom offer conclusive evidence for their proposals.

Good, then we are agreed that any of us may challenge the opinion of these authorities.

LS is evidentially wrong, ST might be proven correct as might JK. ...

You and I agree that LS is wrong (though of course we could be wrong about that). I doubt ST will be proven correct, but then I place a lot of stock in the idea that one does not stage a kidnapping and leave the body where it can easily be found. PR made the 911 call, so she is not involved (imo).

.... Your prevarication regarding the forensic evidence, ie. size-12's is precisely my point

Your selection of permissable reasons as to why the longjohns or size-12's were chosen appears reasonable, but to anyone versed in reason it looks like a laundry list of ad hoc oppostion, disagreement and an attempt at contradiction.

There has been no evasion of truth on my part. I see the forensic evidence differently than you do, that's all.

Why do you cite a co-conspiracy? Who used such language. If you agree a Nightgown and size-6's are patently more appropriate, then that is your estimation.

Who used such language? What do you want to call a scenario where JR/BR/PR are all involved in staging?

Other people, i.e. those involved might have had different motives from those you ascribe to them, so could have arrived at forensic outcomes that are different from the medley of options outlined above.
.

That's quite possible. People are different and may not react in ways that strike another as "normal". There might indeed be motives that cannot (at least by me) be discerned from the evidence we have available.

 

[otg]

The "Dust Detective" wrote a 40 page report about the particles found on JB. I wonder what happened to the report, and what was in it. Was there something in the report that AH chose not to use and probably that the GJ never even heard of?

Palenik completed his report in 1997. The GJ began work on September 15, 1998. So the report was available by the time they began hearing evidence. Since Michael Kane was presenting evidence, I can't imagine the report not being part of what was presented.

Too bad we don't know what was in the report -- I can only imagine how it might end the constant debate here about the implications of how the dust got there, where it came from, and when it got there in relation to the dressing/redressing of JonBenet.

 

[otg]

Well then, we'll have to agree to disagree. Hitting her seems to me a very strange way to respond to a scream. But of course people are different, and that leads to different reactions, and different ideas of what is plausible.

"Very strange"? Almost a "juvenile" way to respond, perhaps?

Just sayin'.........

 

[questfortrue]

It seems a little difficult to say definitively what the R’s intent was in “staging” JB that night. There were so many decisions, but I agree that PR probably didn’t want JB’s body “dumped” somewhere. It was a semi- believable scenario to say she was kidnapped and then after LE left, conveniently “find” her body,

But, they were under great pressure when LE wouldn’t leave, so that they could play out the rest of the scene. The “searches” of the basement alone would have given JR an ulcer.

If you believe that JR was an innocent lamb until he finds JB’s body, when did he find it?. According to poster Bluecrab and poster Amber, JR is caught in a lie when he tells Michael Kane that he was down in the basement between 7 and 8. He has told them that there was a chair and some boxes in front of the train room when he searched and found the open or broken window. However, he doesn’t know or recall at that time that both Detective French and FW had been in the basement, both had been in the train room and neither state that they had had to move a chair and some boxes to enter, or that they had placed the chair back in place after their search. FW had searched between 6 and 6:15 am. French had looked in the train room right after arriving at 6:59, he looking for a point of entry or escape.

IOW, it is likely that JR had been in the basement before the 911 call and before FW and French searched
.
He was down there again around 10 or so, after the time a kidnapper was supposed to call and JR was missing for about an hour.

And then of course, he was on the last search at about 1:00 pm. Reports are that he hurried directly to the basement with FW and he had gone into the train room, and they moved a grate in front of a closet to look inside. That was a closet that FW did not search originally because of the grate, and FW was searching for an alive JB who was simply hiding.

The denouement: JB is found by JR, who according to FW, sees JB even before he turns on the light to the WC and JR screams.

There is probably no answer as to where JB was hidden that night, but I think it’s quite likely she was moved twice or three times. Initially, moved from the bedroom, the kitchen, or the train room or within the boiler room to where she died outside the WC. Then was her next move (the WC?, the closet?) Then perhaps moved yet again to be more visible in the WC. IDK, but it seems like JR would be the probable first or second “Mover”. By his actions he did seem to know where she was, after all.

IF BDI, BR perhaps did the hiding from where she was assaulted and knocked unconscious in the basement, to a closet or the WC. If he not only assaulted her, bashed her head and then (30 to 90 minutes later, if we believe some of the autopsy experts) strangled her that BR then calmed down from his rage and gently cleans her up before hiding her? Nah, JB was cleaned up by one of the adult R’s. One has to at least consider that “some” of the experts were correct in their timeline, that she passed away from strangulation at least 30-90 minutes after the head bash, and then was cleaned up and redressed to hide a sexual assault and then placed somewhere hidden in the basement.

The statement from PR in one of her interviews was: “I can’t see how someone could have done this to another child.” She either knows it was BR or assumes it was BR. Put that statement together with her statement in the other nationally played interview when she says, at least 2 people know who killed JB, the person who did it and the person they confided in. JR gives her an incredulous look. Interesting