IDIs On This Forum?

[BOESP]

Not hardly.

The bowl leaves the dishwasher via PR's hands, collecting her fingerprints on the way to the cupboard. A criminal wearing gloves (I know, a lot like the movies) removes the bowl from the cupboard and puts pineapple into it.

Fingerprints on the bowl hardly places PR with an alive and awake JBR. You're assuming that the fingerprints were left at the same time pineapple was fed to JBR.

An Intruder could also have worn orange sneakers, a red sweatshirt and a diaper. However, I don't have any proof for any of that, just like there is no proof an Intruder was in the house wearing gloves. Your speculation doesn't prove or disprove anything and neither does mine.

The facts are Patsy and Burke's prints were on the bowl and glass of tea and that the bowl had pineapple in it that matched the chemistry of the pineapple found in JonBenet's upper digestive tract.

 

[BOESP]

I am obviously wasting my typing skills on replying to your posts..not to mention my time. I do like you though...so I will respond...yet again.
The lady that bashed in her three sons heads....snapped...therefore...she had no evidence of mental illness. JUST LIKE PATSY. Degraded DNA is OLD DNA...meaning not new....it wasn't deposited that night. It was deposited at some other time in the past. WAY, WAY too many experts agreed that Patsy DID write that RN. I tend to lean toward their opinions..since THEY are the experts afterall.

OH YEAH...you haven't answered my question as to WHY an intruder would wipe down the batteries that were INSIDE of a flashlight..when his prints wouldn't have been on them in the first place?

Ames, maybe we should call it Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. :innocent:

Maybe the PTSD victim's assistant helped wipe down the flashlight. :slap:

DISCLAIMER: the above is my speculation only.

 

[Ames]

Ames, maybe we should call it Post Traumatic Stress Disorder. :innocent:

Maybe the PTSD victim's assistant helped wipe down the flashlight. :slap:

DISCLAIMER: the above is my speculation only.

I was thinking, maybe the toothfairy...OR the Easter Bunny, or maybe both. The Easter Bunny held the flashlight, and took out the batteries, while the Toothfairy flew around and wiped them down, she used her wand, so it didn't take them long.

 

[BOESP]

I was thinking, maybe the toothfairy...OR the Easter Bunny, or maybe both. The Easter Bunny held the flashlight, and took out the batteries, while the Toothfairy flew around and wiped them down, she used her wand, so it didn't take them long.

Ames, how would you explain the iced tea glass sitting there with Burke's prints on it? I doubt an Intruder did that.

 

[Ames]

Ames, how would you explain the iced tea glass sitting there with Burke's prints on it? I doubt an Intruder did that.

Simple...Burke had tea, while JB ate Pineapple, both were made and served by Patsy, their devoted mother.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Simple...Burke had tea, while JB ate Pineapple, both were made and served by Patsy, their devoted mother.

Thats like saying that because a person's fingerprints were found on the steering wheel, they were necessarily the driver in the accident. All you know is that person drove at some point.

Household items will have household members fingerprints on it. PR or BR fingerprints are not significant and don't allow any conclusions to be drawn.

Wiping down does seem criminal, so the intruders probably wiped down the flashlight and batteries. Gloves aren't glued on to intruders hands. Some things, like tieing ligature knots, would require the intruder to remove their gloves.

 

[Ames]

Thats like saying that because a person's fingerprints were found on the steering wheel, they were necessarily the driver in the accident. All you know is that person drove at some point.

Household items will have household members fingerprints on it. PR or BR fingerprints are not significant and don't allow any conclusions to be drawn.

Wiping down does seem criminal, so the intruders probably wiped down the flashlight and batteries. Gloves aren't glued on to intruders hands. Some things, like tieing ligature knots, would require the intruder to remove their gloves.

How can you compare a person's fingerprints being found on a steering wheel...to Patsy's fingerprints being found on that bowl of pineapple? And of course, if the persons fingerprints on the wheel, were the same as the person that OWNED the car....that person would automatically become a suspect, right? Well, the same thing appies here...except we ALSO have a Ransom note that ten different experts agreed on...that Patsy wrote it. We have a sharpie pen, and a writing tablet that the RN was written with and on....in the Ramsey home. We have the bowl of pineapple with Patsy's fingerprints...and a tea glass with Burkes fingerprints, on the TABLE...and Patsy denying any knowledge of how either one got there..in the Ramsey home, and last but certainly not least...we have a child's dead body...found in the Ramsey home. SOOO...the intruder wore gloves to get out a bowl, pick up a can of pineapple, use a can opener, and rummage through drawers trying to find a spoon? And then took them off while he was walking around holding the flashlight? Fat chance of that happening. And WHY ....in YOUR opinion...would an intruder serve JB pineapple, how did he know that she liked it?? Why would he take precious time to do this...and WHY would he do this in the first place, it makes NO SENSE. And you still have not explained to me WHY an intruder that supposedly wiped the flashlight clean....would ALSO take out the batteries and wipe them clean also...they were INSIDE OF THE FLASHLIGHT!! Explain away THAT one....

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

How can you compare a person's fingerprints being found on a steering wheel...to Patsy's fingerprints being found on that bowl of pineapple? And of course, if the persons fingerprints on the wheel, were the same as the person that OWNED the car....that person would automatically become a suspect, right? Well, the same thing appies here...except we ALSO have a Ransom note that ten different experts agreed on...that Patsy wrote it. We have a sharpie pen, and a writing tablet that the RN was written with and on....in the Ramsey home. We have the bowl of pineapple with Patsy's fingerprints...and a tea glass with Burkes fingerprints, on the TABLE...and Patsy denying any knowledge of how either one got there..in the Ramsey home, and last but certainly not least...we have a child's dead body...found in the Ramsey home. SOOO...the intruder wore gloves to get out a bowl, pick up a can of pineapple, use a can opener, and rummage through drawers trying to find a spoon? And then took them off while he was walking around holding the flashlight? Fat chance of that happening. And WHY ....in YOUR opinion...would an intruder serve JB pineapple, how did he know that she liked it?? Why would he take precious time to do this...and WHY would he do this in the first place, it makes NO SENSE. And you still have not explained to me WHY an intruder that supposedly wiped the flashlight clean....would ALSO take out the batteries and wipe them clean also...they were INSIDE OF THE FLASHLIGHT!! Explain away THAT one....

Of course PR's a suspect, just not a very good one (not criminal enough, sorry).

An intruder, fumbling replacing batteries, could remove their gloves. That is consistent with the intruder being in the basement for hours and hours. They needed to replace batteries. Why would an R need to replace batteries?

You have a couple of hours to account for, between the pineapple and JBR's murder, right?

 

[Ames]

Thats like saying that because a person's fingerprints were found on the steering wheel, they were necessarily the driver in the accident. All you know is that person drove at some point.

Household items will have household members fingerprints on it. PR or BR fingerprints are not significant and don't allow any conclusions to be drawn.

Wiping down does seem criminal, so the intruders probably wiped down the flashlight and batteries. Gloves aren't glued on to intruders hands. Some things, like tieing ligature knots, would require the intruder to remove their gloves.

I have to add....IF that person's prints on the wheel were the ONLY prints found...then, it sure would be a little bit suspicious...don't you think? If YOUR car had been in an accident...and YOUR prints..and ONLY YOUR prints were found on the wheel....it would be safe to say, that YOU were the one driving, not to mention...if you had alot of other circumstancial evidence involved.

If the intruder did wear gloves and they were thick...then it would have been impossible for him to have used a can opener, opened cabinets...dug out a spoon...etc...while wearing them. If it was a pair of latex gloves...they fit to your hand...so why would he have had to take them off to tie the ligature knot, or for anything? Why would he risk leaving a print?? And why would he wear them for one thing...but not for something else...and WHY...did he feel the need to remove the batteries and clean THEM too, when they were not touched by him??

 

[Ames]

Of course PR's a suspect, just not a very good one (not criminal enough, sorry).

An intruder, fumbling replacing batteries, could remove their gloves. That is consistent with the intruder being in the basement for hours and hours. They needed to replace batteries. Why would an R need to replace batteries?

You have a couple of hours to account for, between the pineapple and JBR's murder, right?

OHHHH okay....so now we have the intruder REPLACING the batteries in the flashlight. And I suppose that his crystal ball told him exactly where to find the batteries, right?? The same crystal ball that told him where to find the bowl, where to find the pineapple, where to find the can opener, where to find the spoons, where to find the flashlight, etc. I will see if I can find the link to where Patsy or John....or both, stated that they had recently used that flashlight...so, if that's the case, then WHY would the "intruder" NEED to replace the batteries?? INTRUDER: "OH NO this flashlight that I just HAPPENED to stumble across in this drawer, doesn't work...oh shucky darn...what to do, what to do. HMMM....I KNOW (light bulb goes off in his head)...I will search and search....and take EVEN MORE PRECIOUS TIME....until I find some batteries. This flashlight COULD possibly just be broken, but maybe, it just needs batteries. I will just take my chances and see if I can find them. Heck..I found the flashlight....so it shouldn't be a problem for me to find some batteries for it. I will just consult my crystal ball, here....." SORRY HOTYH....no offense...but, it totally doesn't make sense. I feel that you are just grasping at straws here. There is NO EVIDENCE of an intruder....there has been NO ARREST of an intruder.....the ONLY PEOPLE KNOWN to have been in that house at the time of JB's death...are John, Patsy, and Burke.

 

[IrishMist]

I see the point you guys are making, and I even agree with a lot of it, but I must throw in one thing...

It was FRESH pinapple, hence, no can opener involved!

I have no problem believing the pineapple was all ready cut up, maybe even in the fridge. I do have a problem figuring out how an unknown (to JB) intruder could entice her to eat it.

I wouldn't be surprised if the perp wore gloves, though. There were brown fibers found on and around the body. In my mind, I picture those thin brown work gloves that so many people have laying around their house/garage.

 

[Ames]

I see the point you guys are making, and I even agree with a lot of it, but I must throw in one thing...

It was FRESH pinapple, hence, no can opener involved!

I have no problem believing the pineapple was all ready cut up, maybe even in the fridge. I do have a problem figuring out how an unknown (to JB) intruder could entice her to eat it.

I wouldn't be surprised if the perp wore gloves, though. There were brown fibers found on and around the body. In my mind, I picture those thin brown work gloves that so many people have laying around their house/garage.

Yep, you are right...I had forgotten about it being fresh. And yes, it probably was already in the fridge. But as you say...WHY would an intruder take the time to feed that to her? How did he know that it was IN the fridge, did he find it while looking for a snack to eat as he was writing the RN??

 

[BOESP]

Thats like saying that because a person's fingerprints were found on the steering wheel, they were necessarily the driver in the accident. All you know is that person drove at some point.

Household items will have household members fingerprints on it. PR or BR fingerprints are not significant and don't allow any conclusions to be drawn.

Wiping down does seem criminal, so the intruders probably wiped down the flashlight and batteries. Gloves aren't glued on to intruders hands. Some things, like tieing ligature knots, would require the intruder to remove their gloves.

So why would an Intruder who's smart enough to wear gloves leave a three-page ransom note, which is a very incriminating piece of evidence? Why would an Intruder remove gloves and risk leaving DNA on rope used in ligature strangulation?

 

[UKGuy]

So why would an Intruder who's smart enough to wear gloves leave a three-page ransom note, which is a very incriminating piece of evidence? Why would an Intruder remove gloves and risk leaving DNA on rope used in ligature strangulation?

BOESP,

Or inserting a finger inside JonBenet , or was that the paintbrush handle to avoid dna.


Oh I forgot there is zero evidence linking an intruder to the basement crime-scene.

.

 

[BOESP]

I see the point you guys are making, and I even agree with a lot of it, but I must throw in one thing...

It was FRESH pinapple, hence, no can opener involved!

I have no problem believing the pineapple was all ready cut up, maybe even in the fridge. I do have a problem figuring out how an unknown (to JB) intruder could entice her to eat it.

I wouldn't be surprised if the perp wore gloves, though. There were brown fibers found on and around the body. In my mind, I picture those thin brown work gloves that so many people have laying around their house/garage.

Hi IrishMist (waving to you from the Northeast corner) - didn't Lou Smit find the brown fibers? I believe he suggested they could be from gloves but he never proved it. Also, didn't John have on brown trousers that night at the Whites? Maybe they were khaki instead of dark brown. I tried to find something definitive on the trouser fabric and glove fibers (exact color) but had no luck.

Do you remember where Smit said he found the brown fibers? Regardless, if the fiber were from gloves, and if they were used in the crime, I don't see how it could include or exclude anyone in particular. Brown work gloves are common and I don't recall them being found in an especially incriminating location, such as under the tape on JonBenet's mouth or in the garotte, or in JonBenet's underwear. An Intruder or a Ramsey could easily have disposed of the gloves (and probably did, if they wore gloves). I just can't see speculating about gloves being of much use unless the gloves can be found.

I'll do some more looking and report back.

Back already:

"Light brown, cotton fibers: These fibers were found on wood shards of the broken paintbrush, the duct tape, the nylon cord and on JonBenet's body. Smit wonders if the killer wore gloves." See link at http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/news/article/0,1299,DRMN_3_4921727,00.html

So, possibly light brown gloves with possibly light brown pants??? Smit wonders but does not know the fibers came from gloves, or at least doesn't make a definitive statement about that. Regardless, it is a leap to say the fibers belonged to an Intruder. I'm sure the Ramseys had plenty of light brown fibers around as well, wouldn't you think? This data is only useful if they can be linked to whatever shed them.

 

[IrishMist]

Hi IrishMist (waving to you from the Northeast corner) - didn't Lou Smit find the brown fibers? I believe he suggested they could be from gloves but he never proved it. Also, didn't John have on brown trousers that night at the Whites? Maybe they were khaki instead of dark brown. I tried to find something definitive on the trouser fabric and glove fibers (exact color) but had no luck.

Do you remember where Smit said he found the brown fibers? Regardless, if the fiber were from gloves, and if they were used in the crime, I don't see how it could include or exclude anyone in particular. Brown work gloves are common and I don't recall them being found in an especially incriminating location, such as under the tape on JonBenet's mouth or in the garotte, or in JonBenet's underwear. An Intruder or a Ramsey could easily have disposed of the gloves (and probably did, if they wore gloves). I just can't see speculating about gloves being of much use unless the gloves can be found.

I'll do some more looking and report back.

Back already:

"Light brown, cotton fibers: These fibers were found on wood shards of the broken paintbrush, the duct tape, the nylon cord and on JonBenet's body. Smit wonders if the killer wore gloves." See link at http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/news/article/0,1299,DRMN_3_4921727,00.html

So, possibly light brown gloves with possibly light brown pants??? Smit wonders but does not know the fibers came from gloves, or at least doesn't make a definitive statement about that. Regardless, it is a leap to say the fibers belonged to an Intruder. I'm sure the Ramseys had plenty of light brown fibers around as well, wouldn't you think? This data is only useful if they can be linked to whatever shed them.

I'll look into it, too. (I should know by now to have my sources backed up BEFORE posting! )

Yes, LS had his theory about the brown fibers coming from work gloves, but that doesn't mean the fibers weren't there. And, like so many other pieces of evidence in this case, doesn't directly point to either the Ram's OR an intruder. :doh:

I'll look through my bookmarks.

Wow, did you beat me to it, or what?? Thanks.
Oh, and I'm waving back atcha!

 

[BOESP]

I'll look into it, too. (I should know by now to have my sources backed up BEFORE posting! )

Yes, LS had his theory about the brown fibers coming from work gloves, but that doesn't mean the fibers weren't there. And, like so many other pieces of evidence in this case, doesn't directly point to either the Ram's OR an intruder. :doh:

I'll look through my bookmarks.

Wow, did you beat me to it, or what?? Thanks.
Oh, and I'm waving back atcha!

Mist, I'm going to move this conversation to another topic (new thread - Fiber Evidence Discussion) so we don't get in trouble for highjacking the IDI thread.

 

[Ames]

So why would an Intruder who's smart enough to wear gloves leave a three-page ransom note, which is a very incriminating piece of evidence? Why would an Intruder remove gloves and risk leaving DNA on rope used in ligature strangulation?

That was my question too.

 

[icedtea4me]

An Intruder could also have worn orange sneakers, a red sweatshirt and a diaper.

A diaper? Oh, great. Now we have Lisa Nowels as a suspect.

-Tea

 

[IrishMist]

:laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

A diaper? Oh, great. Now we have Lisa Nowels as a suspect.

-Tea

Hmmm... wonder if we can tie her to the Boulder area December, 1996?