JB's Pants and Underwear???

[coloradokares]

SEE ABOVE.

One lie beggets another lie which necessitates the telling of more lies until in a random moment the truth slips out which requires a myriad of more lies or total amnesia to try to cover that. It it no wonder the whole of it was such a web of lies. The only reason this was not prosecuted was as long as John wouldnt testify against Patsy and vice versa, and remember the law is so long as they were legally bound by marriage , one could not be compelled to testify against the other, and you cannot be forced into self incrimination they were home free. All they had to do is have amnesia and we know that to be the truth to the point the phrase was coined as having Ramnesia. They got away with it !! What I want to know is what prevents an arrest now. It is true John cannot be forced to incriminate himself. But till death us do part should I'd think cover the ability to no longer hide behind the fact that one spouse cant be forced to testify against the other. So whala abracadabra....JMK. The perfect wag the dog right after Patsy passing. Exccept the DNA spoiled that plan. Well its only my opinion but its way past time to get to the bottom of it all. It is time to hold the feets to the flames so to speak. I am not holding my breath. I have come to believe the case will never be prosecuted. The case was solved long ago, just never prosecuted. Sickening isnt it? JMHO

 

[BOESP]

One lie beggets another lie which necessitates the telling of more lies until in a random moment the truth slips out which requires a myriad of more lies or total amnesia to try to cover that. ... The case was solved long ago, just never prosecuted. Sickening isnt it? JMHO

:clap::blowkiss: :clap::blowkiss: :clap::blowkiss:

 

[Albert18]

So Solace, you are wondering if JonBenet may not have been wearing any underwear during the day on the 25th? Then she may not have worn any underwear that night when she put on the black velvet pants? Maybe she wore tights that night but no underwear? So there isn't missing underwear?

Is this what you are thinking?

 

[Solace]

One lie beggets another lie which necessitates the telling of more lies until in a random moment the truth slips out which requires a myriad of more lies or total amnesia to try to cover that. It it no wonder the whole of it was such a web of lies. The only reason this was not prosecuted was as long as John wouldnt testify against Patsy and vice versa, and remember the law is so long as they were legally bound by marriage , one could not be compelled to testify against the other, and you cannot be forced into self incrimination they were home free. All they had to do is have amnesia and we know that to be the truth to the point the phrase was coined as having Ramnesia. They got away with it !! What I want to know is what prevents an arrest now. It is true John cannot be forced to incriminate himself. But till death us do part should I'd think cover the ability to no longer hide behind the fact that one spouse cant be forced to testify against the other. So whala abracadabra....JMK. The perfect wag the dog right after Patsy passing. Exccept the DNA spoiled that plan. Well its only my opinion but its way past time to get to the bottom of it all. It is time to hold the feets to the flames so to speak. I am not holding my breath. I have come to believe the case will never be prosecuted. The case was solved long ago, just never prosecuted. Sickening isnt it? JMHO

Hello Darlin,

I do not know if that law is so true. I do believe the husband or wife can be forced to testify. I think. I think.

 

[coloradokares]

Hello Darlin,

I do not know if that law is so true. I do believe the husband or wife can be forced to testify. I think. I think.

My belief is it is true here, however Patsy is deceased now. Should that not end that ? I think Lacey willnever prosecute irregardless. SHAMEFULL That is my opinion

 

[Ames]

I recall that they were black pants. There was confusion about the "jeans" worn by PR as well as JBR that day. The "jeans" were made of black velvet, not denim, and PR is questioned about this distinction by LE. She calls them black velvet jeans, and then LE asks if they are denim, to which PR clarifies by stating that they they were jeans, but made of black velvet. JBR's were the same thing- jeans (from the Gap) made of black velvet.

And they were left on her Bedroom floor, not her bathroom floor.

 

[Ames]

It sounds like Patsy is talking about two different pairs of pants: 'those' (black velvet pants) which JonBenet wore to the Whites and 'those' others which were found on the floor inside out, and had traces of soiling in them.

Sounds like that to me too!!

 

[Ames]

They are neither, they are just simple black fabric kid's pants.
There were also black velvet jeans, that she wore to the White's with the matching black velvet vest and white star shirt. PR also wore black velvet jeans to the White's.

And if they were black....and there wasn't any panties inside of them, and they were soiled...then how could Patsy have seen that in a picture? I would imagine that if she had soiled the black pants...without wearing underwear....the soiled part wouldn't have been noticable....especially in a picture.

 

[DeeDee249]

Hello Darlin,

I do not know if that law is so true. I do believe the husband or wife can be forced to testify. I think. I think.

They cannot. There may be certain circumstances, but in general they cannot be forced to testify. However, someone can voluntarily testify against a spouse.

As far as the pants, in the interviews with PR she talks about the clothes she and JBR wore to the White's. She mentions her own outfit of red sweater, black velvet jeans, and red/black/white fleec jacket. She mentions JBR wearing black velvet jeans, matching black velvet vest, and she talks about wanting her to wear the red turtleneck (that was found balled up on a counter)so their outfits would match, but JBR refusing and wanting instead to wear the white Gap shirt with sequined star that she was found in. I read this on ACandyRose, but I think I recall also reading it in ST's book and PMPT.

 

[DeeDee249]

In the interview about the pants, LE brings the staining to PR's attention and PR says it looks to her like it was from improper wiping more than actual soiling. The crime scene photos were in color, and if they were enlarged enough, you'd probably be able to see traces of fecal staining, even if the pants were black.

 

[Ames]

In the interview about the pants, LE brings the staining to PR's attention and PR says it looks to her like it was from improper wiping more than actual soiling. The crime scene photos were in color, and if they were enlarged enough, you'd probably be able to see traces of fecal staining, even if the pants were black.

Maybe...but, I think that she was wearing underwear with those pants, and that is what is stained from improper wiping....rather than the pants themself. I could be wrong though, it certainly wouldn't be the first time. I believe that Haney would have asked her where JB's underwear was. To me, it would have been quite odd to see a pair of pants on the floor of a dead child's room, with stains from improper wiping on the pants themself...without any underwear around anywhere. If I had of been Haney, I would have been asking questions about that, if that was the case. That's why I believe that there were panties inside of the pants...and that is what was stained.

 

[DeeDee249]

Maybe...but, I think that she was wearing underwear with those pants, and that is what is stained from improper wiping....rather than the pants themself. I could be wrong though, it certainly wouldn't be the first time. I believe that Haney would have asked her where JB's underwear was. To me, it would have been quite odd to see a pair of pants on the floor of a dead child's room, with stains from improper wiping on the pants themself...without any underwear around anywhere. If I had of been Haney, I would have been asking questions about that, if that was the case. That's why I believe that there were panties inside of the pants...and that is what was stained.

Certainly this could be the case. If there were panties, and Haney failed to ask about them, it wouldn't be the only thing that slipped by. My daughter had very few accidents when potty training. But when it did happen, I threw those panties away. I mean, how cheap are kids' undies? Cheap. The panties may have been thrown away. I would hope LE checked the R garbage, but you never know. They still haven't tested the spoon that was in the pineapple for DNA.

 

[BOESP]

Certainly this could be the case. If there were panties, and Haney failed to ask about them, it wouldn't be the only thing that slipped by. My daughter had very few accidents when potty training. But when it did happen, I threw those panties away. I mean, how cheap are kids' undies? Cheap. The panties may have been thrown away. I would hope LE checked the R garbage, but you never know. They still haven't tested the spoon that was in the pineapple for DNA.

DeeDee, I believe Tom Wickman in his only interview (given not too long ago) stated they checked and rechecked everything and checked garbage cans, including neighbors' cans. I wish I'd saved the link to his interview. It would wake a few people up as to what was actually done in the way of crime scene processing.

 

[Ames]

Certainly this could be the case. If there were panties, and Haney failed to ask about them, it wouldn't be the only thing that slipped by. My daughter had very few accidents when potty training. But when it did happen, I threw those panties away. I mean, how cheap are kids' undies? Cheap. The panties may have been thrown away. I would hope LE checked the R garbage, but you never know. They still haven't tested the spoon that was in the pineapple for DNA.

Shoot, now ain't THAT the truth..Haney let ALOT....I mean ALOT of things slip by. I wished that I had of been the interviewer that day. I would have gotten a confession...LOL

JB had a drawer full of stained underwear....according to one of the child sexual abuse investigators that was there. So apparently, no matter how cheap they were, and how many millions (dollars) the Rams had...they didn't throw out any of JB's soiled undies.

 

[DeeDee249]

DeeDee, I believe Tom Wickman in his only interview (given not too long ago) stated they checked and rechecked everything and checked garbage cans, including neighbors' cans. I wish I'd saved the link to his interview. It would wake a few people up as to what was actually done in the way of crime scene processing.

I'm not totally faulting LE. I know they even took the plumbing apart to see if any evidence had been flushed away, though unless it was caught in a pipe, I don't know what they would have found after it was flushed into the sewer syytem. They were not accustomed to a crime like this, and had been told up front to "treat these people as victims, not suspects". There were slip-ups, to be sure, especially in the early hours. I don't think anyone disputes this.
Hindsight is always 20/20, right?

 

[Ames]

I'm not totally faulting LE. I know they even took the plumbing apart to see if any evidence had been flushed away, though unless it was caught in a pipe, I don't know what they would have found after it was flushed into the sewer syytem. They were not accustomed to a crime like this, and had been told up front to "treat these people as victims, not suspects". There were slip-ups, to be sure, especially in the early hours. I don't think anyone disputes this.
Hindsight is always 20/20, right?

I don't know either. I have often wondered why they would take the plumbing apart...and what they thought that they would find. Like you said...it would have been long gone...flushed into the sewer system.

 

[DeeDee249]

The only thing I can think of is that they were looking for something that HAD gotten caught in the pipes- the roll of duct tape, the rest of the cord and paintbrush, the original panties...
Someone thinking rationally might not have flushed any of these things, realizing they might clog the pipes and be discovered. But let's remember these people were in a panic and a heightened frenzy after the murder. They weren't thinking about that.

 

[UKGuy]

Certainly this could be the case. If there were panties, and Haney failed to ask about them, it wouldn't be the only thing that slipped by. My daughter had very few accidents when potty training. But when it did happen, I threw those panties away. I mean, how cheap are kids' undies? Cheap. The panties may have been thrown away. I would hope LE checked the R garbage, but you never know. They still haven't tested the spoon that was in the pineapple for DNA.

DeeDee249,

The interview is ambiguous since pants is the term used and Patsy even refers to a dress at one point.

The likely reason for not pressing Patsy on various issues is they do not want I cannot remember answers, they are trying to lock Patsy into a version of events that can later be knocked down in court.

After all the pants via the size-12's is a crucial issue, and they knew most of the size-6's taken from JonBenet's underwear drawer were stained or soiled, so those, if any, on the bathroom floor, are consistent with Patsy's answers, as is the fact that they were left lying on the floor and not cleared away, e.g. in the context of JonBenet's death, their existence was not viewed as unusual and meriting removal on the basis they suggested a toileting incident may have occurred?

.

 

[azwriter]

Hello Darlin,

I do not know if that law is so true. I do believe the husband or wife can be forced to testify. I think. I think.

I think that in a capitol murder case married couples would not receive a pass on testifying against each other. Or at least I hope there would be such a ruling.
JMO

 

[BOESP]

I think that in a capitol murder case married couples would not receive a pass on testifying against each other. Or at least I hope there would be such a ruling.
JMO

Here are some links concerning spousal privilege:

http://www.lawandfiction.com/law/column.5.html
http://www.mobar.org/journal/1999/sepoct/rold.htm

Also try putting in "spousal privilege" into Google or Yahoo or some other search engine.