Is there a reason...

[Ames]

JMO8778,

So what is the point of buying JonBenet day-of-the-week underwear?

Good question. I think that she could read alot better than the Ramsey's would have people believe. From everything that I have read, she was a smart little girl.

 

[Ames]

Thanks for posting that newsletter. I see now that she was in Kindergarten, but first grade math; I new I remembered seeing "first grade", so that's what confused me.

Okay, now I am confused..I thought that the picture that they showed of her, during their interview....was a FIRST GRADE picture. But according to their Christmas letter...it had to have been her kindergarten picture. If it was as "fast paced" as Patsy says...then I am quite sure that JB and her classmates were already reading. My six year old daughter is in Kindergarten..and reads all the time...AND she has already learned the days of the week, and months of the year..and how to spell them.

 

[JMO8778]

Okay, now I am confused..I thought that the picture that they showed of her, during their interview....was a FIRST GRADE picture. But according to their Christmas letter...it had to have been her kindergarten picture. If it was as "fast paced" as Patsy says...then I am quite sure that JB and her classmates were already reading. My six year old daughter is in Kindergarten..and reads all the time...AND she has already learned the days of the week, and months of the year..and how to spell them.

right,she never made it past the first few months of kindergarten.I was just wondering why she wasn't already in first grade by then,seeing as she'd turned 5 in early Aug,'05 (and at least where I used to live,would have been eligible for K)..was it the toileting issues? it doesn't seem to be lack of intelligence.

 

[Ames]

right,she never made it past the first few months of kindergarten.I was just wondering why she wasn't already in first grade by then,seeing as she'd turned 5 in early Aug,'05 (and at least where I used to live,would have been eligible for K)..was it the toileting issues? it doesn't seem to be lack of intelligence.

I thought that her birthday was in July...I may be mistaken though. Even so...June, July, August....I imagine, would have been way before the cutoff date. In Montana, it is Sept. 1st, but in SC, it is...or at least it used to be...Oct. 1st. The earliest cutoff that I have heard of was Aug. 1st. So, I don't know...unless they felt that she wasn't ready for kindergarten, until the following year...after she had turned 6. Some kids are held back by their parents...for whatever reason. Like, they are just not ready..or as you said..haven't been potty trained, for example. But, I have no clue why they held JB back. That's a good question.

 

[UKGuy]

I thought that her birthday was in July...I may be mistaken though. Even so...June, July, August....I imagine, would have been way before the cutoff date. In Montana, it is Sept. 1st, but in SC, it is...or at least it used to be...Oct. 1st. The earliest cutoff that I have heard of was Aug. 1st. So, I don't know...unless they felt that she wasn't ready for kindergarten, until the following year...after she had turned 6. Some kids are held back by their parents...for whatever reason. Like, they are just not ready..or as you said..haven't been potty trained, for example. But, I have no clue why they held JB back. That's a good question.

Ames,
It may have been her toileting issues, these started and stopped, with regularity, she was said to have regressed in the month before xmas 1996, and visited Dr. Beuf many times.

JonBenet's pageant appearances began when she was aged only 4, but was being coached earlier than this, in 1995, she won Little Miss Colorado Sunburst, she was attending expensive talent lessons, throughout this period, learning to project herself and model accordingly. It would seem any toileting issues, did not prevent her attending pageants and taking dance lessons etc. She sang and waved in the 1995 Boulder Xmas Parade, standing on float custom built just for her, so although her toileting issues may have been evident, they did not prevent her pageant tutoring to continue, so it seems during a period she could have been enrolled at school, she was busy, travelling, in training, and attending pageants.

.

 

[JMO8778]

I thought that her birthday was in July...

I'm pretty sure it's Aug 6th;I remember b/c my daughter was born a month later,same yr.

 

[JMO8778]

Ames,
It may have been her toileting issues, these started and stopped, with regularity, she was said to have regressed in the month before xmas 1996, and visited Dr. Beuf many times.

JonBenet's pageant appearances began when she was aged only 4, but was being coached earlier than this, in 1995, she won Little Miss Colorado Sunburst, she was attending expensive talent lessons, throughout this period, learning to project herself and model accordingly. It would seem any toileting issues, did not prevent her attending pageants and taking dance lessons etc. She sang and waved in the 1995 Boulder Xmas Parade, standing on float custom built just for her, so although her toileting issues may have been evident, they did not prevent her pageant tutoring to continue, so it seems during a period she could have been enrolled at school, she was busy, travelling, in training, and attending pageants.

.

true,but these events don't last all day long like a K class does,or at least not without mom who can be there to help w. any toileting problems.it just seems getting her out of school at age 17,if possible, would be more important than having her start late.

 

[DeeDee249]

Her birthday is August 6th.
As far Kindergarten is concerned- in New Jersey, all-day Kindergarten is not required and is not the rule. Half-day Kindergarten is standard, but there are some districts that offer full-day. How was Boulder in 1996? If it was only a half-day program, that may have been a reason why PR held her back- more time to devote to her after-school pageant preparations.
Also, she could very well have decided to wait an extra year before becoming constrained by the school-year calendar with the pageant activities.

 

[Ames]

Her birthday is August 6th.
As far Kindergarten is concerned- in New Jersey, all-day Kindergarten is not required and is not the rule. Half-day Kindergarten is standard, but there are some districts that offer full-day. How was Boulder in 1996? If it was only a half-day program, that may have been a reason why PR held her back- more time to devote to her after-school pageant preparations.
Also, she could very well have decided to wait an extra year before becoming constrained by the school-year calendar with the pageant activities.

Wasn't the name of her Elem. school, HIGH PEAKS? I looked it up, and found the web page, but it didn't even mention the hours of kindergarten NOW. So, I couldn't even find out what their kindergarten hours are for the kids that go there now. My guess would be that since they have/had the Core Knowledge program, that it was full day. Half day kindergarten only goes for about three hours. I used to teach half day and full day kindergarten, and three hours is not enough time to do anything. By the time you get the kids to all be quiet and in their seats..and have the roll call and snack...you only have about two hours left. Not enough time to teach them hardly anything...much less a specialized program such as Core Knowledge.

 

[Nuisanceposter]

I would expect that it was a mix of things that had JonBenet starting at age 6 instead of 5, such as toileting issues, wanting as much time to spend on training her for pageants as possible, and knowing that she'd have the advantage of being older and maybe smarter or more mature than her classmates.

The last suggestion is the reason my mother gives me for why I began kindergarten at 6 instead of 5. Like JonBenet, I was also the youngest and the only girl, and I suspect that like my mother, perhaps Patsy wanted that little bit of extra time with her daughter...even if she applied that time to training JB to win trophies and sashes and crowns as a sexy little coquette on a child-size runway.

I'd be willing to bet money that JB's incontinence was also a fairly considerable factor behind a later start, though. I can't understand why it was just no big deal to Patsy, other than it wasn't befitting of a beauty queen. Patsy said she had infections from always being wet - how is that no big deal? What child should have to go through that?

 

[JMO8778]

good point,NP,Deedee and Ames.(and all of you,really).
Didn't JB go to preschool? Although since it's not a full day like K is,some of those issues may not have mattered then.

 

[Ames]

good point,NP,Deedee and Ames.(and all of you,really).
Didn't JB go to preschool? Although since it's not a full day like K is,some of those issues may not have mattered then.

At the Pre-school where I worked, and my daughter went...the child had to be potty trained by three years old. We did end up cleaning up quite a few accidents though.

 

[DeeDee249]

I would expect that it was a mix of things that had JonBenet starting at age 6 instead of 5, such as toileting issues, wanting as much time to spend on training her for pageants as possible, and knowing that she'd have the advantage of being older and maybe smarter or more mature than her classmates.

The last suggestion is the reason my mother gives me for why I began kindergarten at 6 instead of 5. Like JonBenet, I was also the youngest and the only girl, and I suspect that like my mother, perhaps Patsy wanted that little bit of extra time with her daughter...even if she applied that time to training JB to win trophies and sashes and crowns as a sexy little coquette on a child-size runway.

I'd be willing to bet money that JB's incontinence was also a fairly considerable factor behind a later start, though. I can't understand why it was just no big deal to Patsy, other than it wasn't befitting of a beauty queen. Patsy said she had infections from always being wet - how is that no big deal? What child should have to go through that?

I totally agree. Makes sense, especially about PR wanting that time with JBR her her pageant activities. AND the toilet issues would certainly have raised issues for the school nurse to discuss with the family.

Interesting- as you consider JBR's toileting problems over time- if she was fully potty trained by age 3 (as most girls are) and then began to regress because of PR's chemo and all of that situation (as Nedra told LE) then that makes a total of about THREE years that PR dealt with soiling and wetting, pull-ups and the daily laundering of wet sheets. As well as the frustration of trying to make sure it didn't happen during a pageant or in one of her expensive costumes. Plus hiding it from the other pageant moms.
I don't know about you, but with many moms, that would be very frustrating and many people would be WAY past patience with it after three years.
All the more reason to suspect a tired, slightly tipsy, stressed-out PR who still had to get ready for TWO trips between 10 pm and 6 am totally lost it
after JBR had yet ANOTHER toilet lapse that night. Add it to all the other stuff she was doing and BAM! She lost it.

 

[DeeDee249]

This has bothered me for a long time.
We are all in agreement that JBR wore black velvet pants to the White's. PR admits this, and it has been said by those who have seen them that this is consistent with photos from the White's.
I recall reading in PR's interviews with LE where she was shown several photos of JBR's bedroom and bathroom taken as evidence. There a lot of clothes strewn about- the family was messy about this stuff anyway, according to housekeeper LHP. And PR was getting ready for a trip- she says she was using JAR's bedroom (right next to JBR's) as a "staging" area for packing (her words). There are clothes strewn about JAR's bed as well as both beds in JBR's room.
LE shows PR these photos and asks about several items of clothing, especially black pants with panties still inside them that appear to be soiled with fecal matter. PR admits that yes, that it is so. She claims that these are NOT the black velvet pants that JBR wore that day; she claims that JBR has black "play pants" also, and that it was a pair she had worn previously and then (disgustingly) just LEFT on the floor with the fecal matter and all. It is also disgusting that any mother would leave them there as well, no matter HOW busy you are.
LE seems to just swallow this explanation (as they do so much of the babble PR throws at them) and I do not recall ever seeing them ask WHERE are the black velvet pants she wore THAT day to the White's. LHP claims the family never used hampers; JR usually put his soiled clothes down the laundry chute, PR and the kids left them on the floor where ever they took them off, underwear included. So apparently JBR just pulled her pants down and stepped out of them and just left them there.
So WHERE were the black pants from that day? According to the parents, PR pulled off her pants while she was asleep and pulled the long-johns on her. This could very well be the case, but then the black velvet pants should be seen somewhere on the floor of her room. I don't think PR ever was asked where they were, nor did she say.
I think that the soiled pants in the photo may have been the black velvet pants from that day. I think JBR was awake when she arrived home and may either have soiled herself before leaving the White's, in the car, or shortly after arriving home. This would certainly have started PR off on that downward spiral of rage. With all she had to do that night still before her, and then to have JBR poop her pants yet AGAIN and probably after refusing to go potty as well.

 

[Ames]

This has bothered me for a long time.
We are all in agreement that JBR wore black velvet pants to the White's. PR admits this, and it has been said by those who have seen them that this is consistent with photos from the White's.
I recall reading in PR's interviews with LE where she was shown several photos of JBR's bedroom and bathroom taken as evidence. There a lot of clothes strewn about- the family was messy about this stuff anyway, according to housekeeper LHP. And PR was getting ready for a trip- she says she was using JAR's bedroom (right next to JBR's) as a "staging" area for packing (her words). There are clothes strewn about JAR's bed as well as both beds in JBR's room.
LE shows PR these photos and asks about several items of clothing, especially black pants with panties still inside them that appear to be soiled with fecal matter. PR admits that yes, that it is so. She claims that these are NOT the black velvet pants that JBR wore that day; she claims that JBR has black "play pants" also, and that it was a pair she had worn previously and then (disgustingly) just LEFT on the floor with the fecal matter and all. It is also disgusting that any mother would leave them there as well, no matter HOW busy you are.
LE seems to just swallow this explanation (as they do so much of the babble PR throws at them) and I do not recall ever seeing them ask WHERE are the black velvet pants she wore THAT day to the White's. LHP claims the family never used hampers; JR usually put his soiled clothes down the laundry chute, PR and the kids left them on the floor where ever they took them off, underwear included. So apparently JBR just pulled her pants down and stepped out of them and just left them there.
So WHERE were the black pants from that day? According to the parents, PR pulled off her pants while she was asleep and pulled the long-johns on her. This could very well be the case, but then the black velvet pants should be seen somewhere on the floor of her room. I don't think PR ever was asked where they were, nor did she say.
I think that the soiled pants in the photo may have been the black velvet pants from that day. I think JBR was awake when she arrived home and may either have soiled herself before leaving the White's, in the car, or shortly after arriving home. This would certainly have started PR off on that downward spiral of rage. With all she had to do that night still before her, and then to have JBR poop her pants yet AGAIN and probably after refusing to go potty as well.

Excellent post. I have never read anywhere, that stated what happened to those black velvet pants. That's a good observation about the black pants in the photo...that Patsy called JB's "play pants"....actually being the ones that she wore to the party. Alot of things would make sense if that were the case.

 

[UKGuy]

This has bothered me for a long time.
We are all in agreement that JBR wore black velvet pants to the White's. PR admits this, and it has been said by those who have seen them that this is consistent with photos from the White's.
I recall reading in PR's interviews with LE where she was shown several photos of JBR's bedroom and bathroom taken as evidence. There a lot of clothes strewn about- the family was messy about this stuff anyway, according to housekeeper LHP. And PR was getting ready for a trip- she says she was using JAR's bedroom (right next to JBR's) as a "staging" area for packing (her words). There are clothes strewn about JAR's bed as well as both beds in JBR's room.
LE shows PR these photos and asks about several items of clothing, especially black pants with panties still inside them that appear to be soiled with fecal matter. PR admits that yes, that it is so. She claims that these are NOT the black velvet pants that JBR wore that day; she claims that JBR has black "play pants" also, and that it was a pair she had worn previously and then (disgustingly) just LEFT on the floor with the fecal matter and all. It is also disgusting that any mother would leave them there as well, no matter HOW busy you are.
LE seems to just swallow this explanation (as they do so much of the babble PR throws at them) and I do not recall ever seeing them ask WHERE are the black velvet pants she wore THAT day to the White's. LHP claims the family never used hampers; JR usually put his soiled clothes down the laundry chute, PR and the kids left them on the floor where ever they took them off, underwear included. So apparently JBR just pulled her pants down and stepped out of them and just left them there.
So WHERE were the black pants from that day? According to the parents, PR pulled off her pants while she was asleep and pulled the long-johns on her. This could very well be the case, but then the black velvet pants should be seen somewhere on the floor of her room. I don't think PR ever was asked where they were, nor did she say.
I think that the soiled pants in the photo may have been the black velvet pants from that day. I think JBR was awake when she arrived home and may either have soiled herself before leaving the White's, in the car, or shortly after arriving home. This would certainly have started PR off on that downward spiral of rage. With all she had to do that night still before her, and then to have JBR poop her pants yet AGAIN and probably after refusing to go potty as well.

DeeDee249,

So WHERE were the black pants from that day? According to the parents, PR pulled off her pants while she was asleep and pulled the long-johns on her. This could very well be the case, but then the black velvet pants should be seen somewhere on the floor of her room. I don't think PR ever was asked where they were, nor did she say.

They don't seem to have been accounted for, unless this is them:

http://www.acandyrose.com/s-Flight755-baggagecheck12271996.htm
black & gray girls pants (64BAB)

Here is the transcript of that discussion - from the June 1998 interrogation:

Detective Tom Haney talking to Patsy (looking at photos)

TH: "It's a bathroom."

PR: "This one looks like someone went to the potty and didn't flush."

TH: "Okay, is that out of the ordinary?"

PR: "Not terribly. No."

TH: "Did you take JonBenet to the bathroom prior to putting her to bed?"

PR: "No."

TH: "Would she have gotten up during the night and gone to the bathroom?"

PR: "Possibly."

TH: "If she did, would she have flushed?"

PR: "Not necessarily."

... later ...


PR: "This is JonBenet's floor, her pants."

TH: "Do you recall those particular pants, when she would have worn those last?"

PR: "Not for sure. Probably recently because they are dropped in the middle of the floor, but I don't remember exactly."

TH: "They are kind of inside out."

PR: "Right."

TH: "Here is a close up of it. It appears they are stained."

PR: "Right."

TH: "Is that something JonBenet had a problem with?"

PR: "Well she, you know, she was at the age where she was learning to wipe herself and, you know, sometimes she wouldn't do such a great job."

TH: "Did she have accidents , if you will, in the course of the day or the night, as opposed to just bed wetting?"

PR: "Not usually, no, huh-uh. That would probably be more from just not wiping real well."

TH: "Okay. Do you know how long those would have been in that position on the floor in there?"

PR: "It depends when she wore them last."

TH: "Again, do you recall?"

PR: "I don't remember."

TH: On Christmas day were you in that bathroom at all?"

PR: "Very likely, but I can't say for sure."

TH: "Had you been in there that day, would you have done something with them?"

PR: "Well, I got, you know -- that night I got -- I know I got the long johns for her out of that bathroom."

TH: "Right, out of one of the drawers in there."

PR: "Yeah."

TH: "Do you recall seeing those on the floor that night when you got the -- "

PR: "No."

TH: "underwear?"

PR: "They could have been there. I don't know."

TH: "Is it possible that some point during the night she would have gotten up and put those on or thrown them down there or changed in some way?"

PR: "I just -- I can't imagine that. No, because I put those -- she was zonked out asleep, so I put her to bed. And she had those, she had worn the black velvet ones to Priscilla's."

You would also think if the black velvet pants were in anyway possibly linked to say some toileting accident JonBenet had had, either at the White's or on returning that their dissapearance would have been queried?

On the same track, if a toileting issue had been the trigger for JonBenet's death, why leave the soiled pants lying on her bathroom floor of all places, since it just draws attention to JonBenet's toilet problems. Its difficult not to miss them, particularly as Patsy herself states she was in the bathroom fetching longjohns e.g.

TH: "Right, out of one of the drawers in there."

PR: "Yeah."

TH: "Do you recall seeing those on the floor that night when you got the -- "

PR: "No."

TH: "underwear?"

PR: "They could have been there. I don't know."

This is not a big deal for Patsy, she is simply umming and awing, could be, might be, can't remember etc, imo JonBenet's toilet details have no major significance to Patsy.

Between these pants on the floor, and JonBenet being left in urine-soaked underwear and longjohns, the very ones Patsy said she fetched, why bother at all with any form of staging, if you leave evidence in plain view of the very matter that you construct a crime-scene to hide?


.

 

[JMO8778]

DeeDee249,

They don't seem to have been accounted for, unless this is them:

http://www.acandyrose.com/s-Flight755-baggagecheck12271996.htm
black & gray girls pants (64BAB)

Here is the transcript of that discussion - from the June 1998 interrogation:

Detective Tom Haney talking to Patsy (looking at photos)



You would also think if the black velvet pants were in anyway possibly linked to say some toileting accident JonBenet had had, either at the White's or on returning that their dissapearance would have been queried?

On the same track, if a toileting issue had been the trigger for JonBenet's death, why leave the soiled pants lying on her bathroom floor of all places, since it just draws attention to JonBenet's toilet problems. Its difficult not to miss them, particularly as Patsy herself states she was in the bathroom fetching longjohns e.g.


This is not a big deal for Patsy, she is simply umming and awing, could be, might be, can't remember etc, imo JonBenet's toilet details have no major significance to Patsy.

Between these pants on the floor, and JonBenet being left in urine-soaked underwear and longjohns, the very ones Patsy said she fetched, why bother at all with any form of staging, if you leave evidence in plain view of the very matter that you construct a crime-scene to hide?


.

But the things Patsy was trying to hide are probably the same things she was being so vague about,which are in turn,probably a good clue.
She said the toilet hadn't been flushed...my thought there is perhaps JB had an accident,it was enough to put in the toilet,but then,her rage took over,and it was forgotten about-never flushed.
I don't necessarily think leaving the items you mentioned alone,and not bothering with them any further means there was no toileting accident...I suspect the R's were more concerned w/ her actual body and the crime scene.Her bed not being fixed to look as if an intruder took her demonstrates that,IMO.

 

[JMO8778]

I noticed the R's usually direct things in the opposite direction,or are vague about specific info. they want to hide.So this is just my take on Patsy's words;I thought it might be interesting,take or leave what you want out of it.In italics are her vague comments(my translation in red):

TH: "It's a bathroom."

PR: "This one looks like someone went to the potty and didn't flush." (translation: it may not have been flushed,but that doesn't mean someone used it.(see my last post)

TH: "Okay, is that out of the ordinary?"

PR: "Not terribly. No." (may very well be out of the ordinary;you'd think she would have at least flushed the toilet,even if she was sloppy).

TH: "Did you take JonBenet to the bathroom prior to putting her to bed?"

PR: "No." (meaning,she probably at least tried to.she's too firm about this one,even though she's vague on other things.denying taking her to the bathroom means she is trying to say she didn't see JB's dirty pants.)

TH: "Would she have gotten up during the night and gone to the bathroom?"

PR: "Possibly." (but probably not on her own(?),from the way it sounds)

TH: "If she did, would she have flushed?"

PR: "Not necessarily." (meaning,she probably would have)

... later ...


PR: "This is JonBenet's floor, her pants."

TH: "Do you recall those particular pants, when she would have worn those last?"

PR: "Not for sure. Probably recently because they are dropped in the middle of the floor, but I don't remember exactly." (she does recall)

TH: "They are kind of inside out."

PR: "Right."

TH: "Here is a close up of it. It appears they are stained."

PR: "Right."

TH: "Is that something JonBenet had a problem with?"

PR: "Well she, you know, she was at the age where she was learning to wipe herself and, you know, sometimes she wouldn't do such a great job."

TH: "Did she have accidents , if you will, in the course of the day or the night, as opposed to just bed wetting?"

PR: "Not usually, no, huh-uh. That would probably be more from just not wiping real well." (meaning,she likely did have daytime accidents).

TH: "Okay. Do you know how long those would have been in that position on the floor in there?"

PR: "It depends when she wore them last."

TH: "Again, do you recall?"

PR: "I don't remember." (she does remember).

TH: On Christmas day were you in that bathroom at all?"

PR: "Very likely, but I can't say for sure." (far too vague...she was in there.she knows it).

TH: "Had you been in there that day, would you have done something with them?"

PR: "Well, I got, you know -- that night I got -- I know I got the long johns for her out of that bathroom." (big red flag here...she stumbles a lot over this question.she also never answers the question-would you have done something with them? Instead,she redirects the question).

TH: "Right, out of one of the drawers in there."

PR: "Yeah."

TH: "Do you recall seeing those on the floor that night when you got the -- "

PR: "No." (translation: she does recall).

TH: "underwear?"

PR: "They could have been there. I don't know." (meaning,she does know).

TH: "Is it possible that some point during the night she would have gotten up and put those on or thrown them down there or changed in some way?"

PR: "I just -- I can't imagine that. No, because I put those -- she was zonked out asleep, so I put her to bed. And she had those, she had worn the black velvet ones to Priscilla's."
(another red flag here...she stumbles a heck of a lot over this question.)

so my take on it is she wore these pants sometime that day,or that evening,and had an accident in them. Patsy sure does dance around these questions a lot.Her denial lends more credence to it being toilet rage that set her off,IMO.

 

[UKGuy]

But the things Patsy was trying to hide are probably the same things she was being so vague about,which are in turn,probably a good clue.
She said the toilet hadn't been flushed...my thought there is perhaps JB had an accident,it was enough to put in the toilet,but then,her rage took over,and it was forgotten about-never flushed.
I don't necessarily think leaving the items you mentioned alone,and not bothering with them any further means there was no toileting accident...I suspect the R's were more concerned w/ her actual body and the crime scene.Her bed not being fixed to look as if an intruder took her demonstrates that,IMO.

JMO8778,
Patsy had probably been advised to be vague and refer to amnesia.

I don't necessarily think leaving the items you mentioned alone,and not bothering with them any further means there was no toileting accident...I suspect the R's were more concerned w/ her actual body and the crime scene.Her bed not being fixed to look as if an intruder took her demonstrates that,IMO.

I agree leaving evidence lying about does not mean what it refers to never took place, but imo, why bother with all the wine-cellar staging then, why construct the ransom note, if one look in the bathoom, scene of an alleged toilet-rage, shows potential evidence?

I'm starting to be inclined towards a BDI!



.

 

[JMO8778]

JMO8778,
Patsy had probably been advised to be vague and refer to amnesia.


I agree leaving evidence lying about does not mean what it refers to never took place, but imo, why bother with all the wine-cellar staging then, why construct the ransom note, if one look in the bathoom, scene of an alleged toilet-rage, shows potential evidence?

I'm starting to be inclined towards a BDI!



.

I really don't think Patsy would have so adamantly denied the pants if the weren't a problem.
I think you look at it way too hard,UK.It's really quite simple.Patsy laid it all out,right there in front of LE.

JMO.