JBR, PR and UMI

[WHITEFANG]

Wouldn't be the first time a defense lawyer did something unethical.

nor prosecutors

 

[DeeDee249]

"Consistent with..." Perhaps there were thirty three million garments with fibers "consistent with" Patsy's. Has any official made an estimate?

Perhaps there are. But one of those 33 million garments belonged to someone living in the home where those fiber were found on a child's body. And not only that, a garment proven (by photographic evidence) to have been worn the night the child died.
As has been explained to you many times-" consistent with" is the only way fiber analysis is described by anyone analyzing the fibers. "Consistent with" when done by the proper channels, holds up in court. This isn't MY criteria- it is the standard for the science.
While Patsy's garment was certainly not made of fibers unique to it, the location of that garment in the same home as fibers found on a body also found in that home narrow it down considerably. And that isn't just for this case, it would be true of any case where fiber analysis is done and finds a garment or fabric "consistent with" fibers at a crime scene.

 

[MurriFlower]

Not the brown or black fibers. It was red fibers that were found in the paint tote, garrote knot and inside the tape. The interview where LE tells Patsy in the presence of LW that fibers from her sweater/jacker were found in the paint tray, the tape and knot of the garrote can be found in the 2000 interview with Patsy listed in the archives on ACR. It is pretty far down near the bottom.

Four (4) red fibers were found on the tape. That's it. I would expect that either or both JR and FW embraced PR who was wearing the jacket again that morning. JR removed the tape from JBR's mouth and FW went back down to the wine cellar and picked up the tape from the floor. The cops didn't even know PW had a similar jacket, so that wasn't tested for 'consistent with'.

 

[DeeDee249]

Four (4) red fibers were found on the tape. That's it. I would expect that either or both JR and FW embraced PR who was wearing the jacket again that morning. JR removed the tape from JBR's mouth and FW went back down to the wine cellar and picked up the tape from the floor. The cops didn't even know PW had a similar jacket, so that wasn't tested for 'consistent with'.

It was the red fibers also found in the knot and paint tote. And unless PW's jacket came from the same manufacturing plant at the same time with the same dye lot, hers wouldn't be a match. Patsy actually said that hers was bought at a different place and quite a while after PW. She also described PWs as a different color/pattern. PW's jacket would have to be the same as Patsy's for any testing to matter. Then, too, Patsy's jacket was IN the house and was worn the day JB died. And was still being worn when she was found. With that taken with the fibers found, I'd bet the rent they came from Patsy's jacket.

 

[MurriFlower]

It was the red fibers also found in the knot and paint tote. And unless PW's jacket came from the same manufacturing plant at the same time with the same dye lot, hers wouldn't be a match. Patsy actually said that hers was bought at a different place and quite a while after PW. She also described PWs as a different color/pattern. PW's jacket would have to be the same as Patsy's for any testing to matter. Then, too, Patsy's jacket was IN the house and was worn the day JB died. And was still being worn when she was found. With that taken with the fibers found, I'd bet the rent they came from Patsy's jacket.

There were only four (4) red fibres found on the tape,

The only mention of the paint tote and garrotte knot was a suggestion by the investigators (during the 2000 interview), but not backed by anything and here clarified by Steve Thomas.

17 Q. Do you know if there was any
18 forensic evidence of Patsy Ramsey's clothing
19 at all besides the duct tape area on
20 JonBenet?
21 A. As we sit here now, no, I don't
22 recollect any other fiber evidence, other than
23 what we have discussed linking the mother to
24 JonBenet.

In the absence of the actual forensic report, I think we can rely more on a sworn deposition than a question raised by an investigator during an interview. If he had said 'we have a video of you murdering your daughter' would you then believe that was evidence too? Wouldn't you say, 'well show it to me'? Or 'someone saw you murder your daughter', you would want to know who this was? These are just techniques used to try to get a suspect to believe they have evidence, so that they will try to explain it away, and (hopefully) incriminate themselves in so doing.

 

[madeleine]

Since you seem to be going down the FWDI path,

It's not the only path I am going down to,that's the problem.There are lots of questions that need an answer re lots of other people that were under the umbrella of suspicion,IMO.Yes,he is one of them in my mind.
There are things that point to the Ramsey's and you're willing to take those under the microscope,but not when it comes to stuff that points in other directions,why?
Have you ever considered that maybe someone(who had a key to the house and that's how he get in) placed that suitcase there in order for LE to think it was an intruder that came through that window?Yes it could be John Ramsey who did it,but what if it was NOT him?

 

[madeleine]

Not all of them. But even if so, what's your point? If you're going to say that these people were all hacks looking for money or publicity, you needn't bother. I've heard it all before, and it's garbage. That I know of, none of them took any money and in Epstein's case, he wouldn't touch it until the Justice Department told him there was no conflict of interest. That's not even considering their credentials (which are as good as I guess they can be in this field--whether or not that's worth anything depends on how you view the practice of document analysis).

No,I don't mean they did it for publicity or money but in order to create reasonable doubt on behalf of their client (Wolf).That's what I meant earlier when I said that all this evidence sounds more like evidence a defence lawyer would use and not a prosecutor.

 

[madeleine]

I can understand your feelings, madeleine. But as I see it, FW did more to bring justice to JB than her parents ever did. Maybe that's why ST felt the way he did. In fact, if memory serves, that's exactly why.

I understand that this is how you feel and here's MY problem,I never felt this way about FW,I just can't,not until I am clear about what their fight was about and not after finding out that he was turned into a key-witness without being checked properly .

 

[madeleine]

I've had all these suspicions re FW from the start and I've mentioned it over and over.And what did I get?FW is a hero,back off.How can I back off I nobody ever answers or has explanations re what is troubling me.Is anybody willing to go with me through all the things that trouble me re FW?NO.

 

[MurriFlower]

I've had all these suspicions re FW from the start and I've mentioned it over and over.And what did I get?FW is a hero,back off.How can I back off I nobody ever answers or has explanations re what is troubling me.Is anybody willing to go with me through all the things that trouble me re FW?NO.

I've got the same thing on here with any others I've asked about, (LHP & SS). IMO, these are the people who along with FW & PW are the closest to this aside from the R's.

 

[Tadpole12]

I've had all these suspicions re FW from the start and I've mentioned it over and over.And what did I get?FW is a hero,back off.How can I back off I nobody ever answers or has explanations re what is troubling me.Is anybody willing to go with me through all the things that trouble me re FW?NO.

Hi madeleine.

Yes it's puzzling, the disintegration of the Whites and Ramseys relationship.
FW is said to be 'beyond reproach'.
How could the Ramseys fear that FW would arrive armed?
Why did tensions escalate to that point?:waitasec:

 

[DeeDee249]

It's not the only path I am going down to,that's the problem.There are lots of questions that need an answer re lots of other people that were under the umbrella of suspicion,IMO.Yes,he is one of them in my mind.
There are things that point to the Ramsey's and you're willing to take those under the microscope,but not when it comes to stuff that points in other directions,why?
Have you ever considered that maybe someone(who had a key to the house and that's how he get in) placed that suitcase there in order for LE to think it was an intruder that came through that window?Yes it could be John Ramsey who did it,but what if it was NOT him?

I am willing to consider anyone- as long as there is something to link them to the body. Other than the unnamed DNA, there are only parental fibers.
I don't think we will ever know exactly what happened between JR and FW. There were witnesses to some of it, but I have never seen where anyone who witnessed the exchange gave a statement to police.
I'd LOVE to know what it was about, because what we are led to believe is this:
FW saw the Rs lack of cooperation with police as detrimental to solving the crime or proving their innocence. There are some who believe that FW knew what happened that night and wanted the Rs to tell the truth. When JR thought FW was going to tell LE, he pointed a finger at FW. It was at that point FW stopped talking. Can't blame him, either. I feel that some of the Rs friends, including FW, MAY have been called to the house after JB was killed. JR slipped and said "there were a lot of people here at 3 in the morning". Possibly the staging was done after these friends left, and possibly after the Rs talked to one of their lawyers. Maybe that's what FW was so upset about- the staging. Too bad we'll likely never know. IF JR dies before FW, he may decide to talk then.

 

[madeleine]

I am willing to consider anyone- as long as there is something to link them to the body. Other than the unnamed DNA, there are only parental fibers.
I don't think we will ever know exactly what happened between JR and FW. There were witnesses to some of it, but I have never seen where anyone who witnessed the exchange gave a statement to police.
I'd LOVE to know what it was about, because what we are led to believe is this:
FW saw the Rs lack of cooperation with police as detrimental to solving the crime or proving their innocence. There are some who believe that FW knew what happened that night and wanted the Rs to tell the truth. When JR thought FW was going to tell LE, he pointed a finger at FW. It was at that point FW stopped talking. Can't blame him, either. I feel that some of the Rs friends, including FW, MAY have been called to the house after JB was killed. JR slipped and said "there were a lot of people here at 3 in the morning". Possibly the staging was done after these friends left, and possibly after the Rs talked to one of their lawyers. Maybe that's what FW was so upset about- the staging. Too bad we'll likely never know. IF JR dies before FW, he may decide to talk then.

You know,it's great that you think like this because it shows you still have faith in people and their intentions.I can't ,not in this case,maybe that's why I blamed the parents first.I understand your point of view but as far as I am concerned I can't be sure that it's not the other way around.You are suspicious because there are parental fibers,I am suspicious because FW arrived there at 6.03 and at 6.06 he went straight to the basement and claims he saw nothing.He came in contact with the suitcase,window and tape and I have no idea whether he messed with them or NOT.It's weird to me that PR called 911 at 5.52 and the White's arrived there in less then 10 min even if they lived 4 min apart.

 

[madeleine]

Hi madeleine.

Yes it's puzzling, the disintegration of the Whites and Ramseys relationship.
FW is said to be 'beyond reproach'.
How could the Ramseys fear that FW would arrive armed?
Why did tensions escalate to that point?:waitasec:

I've tried to find a serious source for FW pulling the gun incident,best I came up with was a chat with S.Singular ,so dunno.
Det.Mason states in his depo that it was a major fight but says nothing about a gun.

 

[MurriFlower]

I am willing to consider anyone- as long as there is something to link them to the body. Other than the unnamed DNA, there are only parental fibers.
I don't think we will ever know exactly what happened between JR and FW. There were witnesses to some of it, but I have never seen where anyone who witnessed the exchange gave a statement to police.
I'd LOVE to know what it was about, because what we are led to believe is this:
FW saw the Rs lack of cooperation with police as detrimental to solving the crime or proving their innocence. There are some who believe that FW knew what happened that night and wanted the Rs to tell the truth. When JR thought FW was going to tell LE, he pointed a finger at FW. It was at that point FW stopped talking. Can't blame him, either. I feel that some of the Rs friends, including FW, MAY have been called to the house after JB was killed. JR slipped and said "there were a lot of people here at 3 in the morning". Possibly the staging was done after these friends left, and possibly after the Rs talked to one of their lawyers. Maybe that's what FW was so upset about- the staging. Too bad we'll likely never know. IF JR dies before FW, he may decide to talk then.

I felt that the tone of the RN indicted that the author was well known to JR as it sounded personal and there were those cryptic references, which may have indicated a close relationship of some kind. Let's say JR was being blackmailed for some reason and had refused to pay any more?? He didn't really expect JBR to be harmed, just held for a bit to demonstrate the blackmailer's power and get the payments going again. After they found JBR dead, what was JR to do? Confess to being the reason some deranged blackmailer killed his baby and also have the secret exposed? No, I think he would have just 'sorted' it. Perhaps FW was told about it and they argued. Anyone we know of disappear suddenly after JBR's killing?

 

[WHITEFANG]

While Patsy's garment was certainly not made of fibers unique to it, the location of that garment in the same home as fibers found on a body also found in that home narrow it down considerably. And that isn't just for this case, it would be true of any case where fiber analysis is done and finds a garment or fabric "consistent with" fibers at a crime scene.[/QUOTE]

And fibers consistent with the incriminating fibers found could not be introduced in any other way nor during any other time frame than from Patsy's jacket, that day? Were any other fibers found, at all.

What about fibers from every single item of clothing, cars' upholstery, carpeting, packaging, bedding, within 5 miles of wherever JonBenet and everyone she came in contact with that could be consistent fibers? Fibers can be microscopic.

 

[WHITEFANG]

As has been explained to you many times-" consistent with" is the only way fiber analysis is described by anyone analyzing the fibers. "Consistent with" when done by the proper channels, holds up in court. This isn't MY criteria- it is the standard for the science.

"prosecutors may have misrepresented the fiber evidence ...Although they at one point said the fibers found on the duct tape were "identical" to fibers... it's likely that the match is only to that type of jacket, not the exact jacket that Patsy wore"

And that isn't just for this case, it would be true of any case where fiber analysis is done and finds a garment or fabric "consistent with" fibers at a crime scene.

 

[DeeDee249]

While Patsy's garment was certainly not made of fibers unique to it, the location of that garment in the same home as fibers found on a body also found in that home narrow it down considerably. And that isn't just for this case, it would be true of any case where fiber analysis is done and finds a garment or fabric "consistent with" fibers at a crime scene.

And fibers consistent with the incriminating fibers found could not be introduced in any other way nor during any other time frame than from Patsy's jacket, that day? Were any other fibers found, at all.

What about fibers from every single item of clothing, cars' upholstery, carpeting, packaging, bedding, within 5 miles of wherever JonBenet and everyone she came in contact with that could be consistent fibers? Fibers can be microscopic.[/QUOTE]

The world is full of fibers. That HOUSE was full of fibers. BUT- if that garrote knot had fibers that were identical to the ones on Patsy's jacket and she denied owning the cord and denied seeing the body in the basement (more on this later) then there is no other explanation (IMO) for the fibers being THERE except that Patsy tied the knot.
As far as all those other fibers you list- none of them were noted, at least on the tape, cord. There are fibers which were not publicly sourced- the tan cotton fibers (not sure if these are the same as the brown cotton fibers that LE were asking about cotton work gloves). Some feel these tan cotton fibers may be from JB's American Girl Doll (NOT the MyTwinn JB lookalike she got from Patsy Christmas morning). The American Girl dolls had tan cotton cloth bodies. The dolls, made by the Pleasant Company, are still made today. They have vinyl heads tied onto the cotton stuffed bodies with a cord. The company suggests putting a piece of duct tape over the knot at the back of the doll's head if the knot interferes with the dolls hair or clothes. Some feel this may have been the source of the tape. That doll was not found, I believe, yet shortly after JB's death, a woman from the Pleasant Company said that a doll was ordered by someone from JR's company, Access Graphics, and delivered to the company address.
No official statement has been made about this (please correct me if I am wrong) and there has been no comment about who placed the order, nor has it been made public if LE tried to get this information.
If a "replacement" doll was ordered after JB died, it obviously wasn't for her. Could it have been ordered because LE asked for the doll and the original doll was hidden/destroyed? We just don't know.

There were other "unsourced" fibers noted- dark blue cotton fibers that were thought to be from a navy terry robe belonging to JR. These fibers were found on her thighs and pubic area, and are what led the coroner to conclude she was wiped down.

Then we have the dark wool fibers that were found to be identical to JR's wool shirt that he wore that day. These were found in the panty crotch.

About Patsy not seeing the body till JB was covered up under the Christmas Tree- one comment Patsy made about the red ink heart on JB's palm tells me she was lying about this. She described it as a "pretty good little heart, you know?", inferring that JB couldn't have drawn such a nice heart. Yet she also said she never noticed a red ink heart on JB that night as she got her ready for bed. So if the "intruder" put that heart on her sometime after she was taken from her room, and if Patsy never saw her body in the basement, and her body was already covered with an afghan and sweatshirt when Patsy came into the room and supposedly saw her daughter for the first time since putting her to bed the night before, then...when could Patsy have seen that heart.
Both parents have said they never read the autopsy or looked at the photos (can't blame them- I wouldn't either).
Obviously Patsy's statement about the heart was troubling later, so she then said that she really didn't "see" it, but only heard about it.
But if that were true, why describe it as a "pretty good little heart"?

 

[BBB167893]

It is also unethical, according to the same judicial book of canons, to delay a case from proceeding unnecessarily, including stalling.

I'm sure I could find a whole mess of breaches Mr. Wood has committed. It may help you to remember, Fang, that there was a whole lot of political BS that went on leading up to this interview, including trying to have certain participants excluded from the proceedings. And after that, Wood's stall tactics and filibustering made them so upset, they threatened to walk out

If Patsy didn't have the answer to that question, it doesn't necessarily follow that she murdered her daughter. She doesn't have to explain what she can't in order to be credible and innocent. In fact, to me, not being able to answer that question speaks more to her integrity than if she tried to manufacture some bull.

That problem is, she DID try to manufacture some bull, two full years after the fact. John's own writing contradicts her story. What's she going to do, sue HIM?

No soap, Fang. It looks BAD. I think there's something you should know about me, Fang. I used to be an IDI, a pretty adamant one at that. Everything you have suggested thus far has already occured to me. You see, one of the things that makes me like I am is because I can think like an IDI, whereas IDI (with almost no exceptions) cannot think like RDI.

 

[BBB167893]

Perhaps there are. But one of those 33 million garments belonged to someone living in the home where those fiber were found on a child's body. And not only that, a garment proven (by photographic evidence) to have been worn the night the child died.
As has been explained to you many times-" consistent with" is the only way fiber analysis is described by anyone analyzing the fibers. "Consistent with" when done by the proper channels, holds up in court. This isn't MY criteria- it is the standard for the science.
While Patsy's garment was certainly not made of fibers unique to it, the location of that garment in the same home as fibers found on a body also found in that home narrow it down considerably. And that isn't just for this case, it would be true of any case where fiber analysis is done and finds a garment or fabric "consistent with" fibers at a crime scene.

:clap: :clap: