JB's Pants and Underwear???

[DeeDee249]

Obviously, in cases of domestic abuse, one spouse would have to testify against the other, or the case can't be prosecuted. But in reading those links, I don't see it said that someone can be FORCED to testify against a spouse in a case where both are suspects in a murder.

 

[Toltec]

Haney asks:

Do you recall those particular

20 pants, when she would have worn those last?

21 PATSY RAMSEY: Not for sure. Probably

22 recently because they are dropped in the middle of the

23 floor, but I don't remember exactly.

24 TOM HANEY: They are kind of inside out.

25 PATSY RAMSEY: Right.

0457

1 TOM HANEY: 379 is a close up of it. It

2 appears they are stained.


So THESE ARE STAINED, THE PANTS ARE STAINED. HE IS NOT SAYING THE UNDERWEAR ARE STAINED.

NOW HERE IS WHERE HE TALKS ABOUT THE FABRIC OF THE PANTS:

And she had those, she

24 had worn the black velvet ones to Priscilla's.

25 What she had on earlier that day, I just

1 can't remember. It might have been those.

so, the pants on the floor are pants alone without underwear, because Haney is being very specific and says they are stained. He is not saying there are underwear inside the pants which appear to be stained. Because if you read the interview later on he mentions underwear but not in relation to these pants.

So she wore black velvet to the Whites and had these on possibly earlier that day.

And I do not believe for a minute that Patsy would not know what she had on earlier that day. She would, sorry, she would.

So there are two pairs of pants in JonBenet's bathroom...one on a shelf with buckles....another on the bathroom floor, turned inside out and soiled.

How can Patsy NOT NOTICE a pair of pants in that tiny bathroom when she supposedly went in the night of dec 25 to fetch the long underwear?

 

[BOESP]

Obviously, in cases of domestic abuse, one spouse would have to testify against the other, or the case can't be prosecuted. But in reading those links, I don't see it said that someone can be FORCED to testify against a spouse in a case where both are suspects in a murder.

I'm not too sure the indictment would have been murder of some degree. It would depend on what evidence the prosecutor had. Seems like it would lean toward reckless homicide or voluntary manslaughter (or maybe even involuntary manslaughter since I think it was accidental, stemming from something that the killer had no idea would kill JonBenet and certainly no intent in killing her). I know nothing about Colorado Code but maybe someone else here could list what the indictment choices could possibly be.

 

[BOESP]

So there are two pairs of pants in JonBenet's bathroom...one on a shelf with buckles....another on the bathroom floor, turned inside out and soiled.

How can Patsy NOT NOTICE a pair of pants in that tiny bathroom when she supposedly went in the night of dec 25 to fetch the long underwear?

Maybe she was angry ... so angry she couldn't see straight. :angel:

 

[UKGuy]

Maybe she was angry ... so angry she couldn't see straight. :angel:

BOESP,

Not to mention that Patsy would have supervised JonBenet bathing and dressing for the White's party.



.

 

[UKGuy]

So there are two pairs of pants in JonBenet's bathroom...one on a shelf with buckles....another on the bathroom floor, turned inside out and soiled.

How can Patsy NOT NOTICE a pair of pants in that tiny bathroom when she supposedly went in the night of dec 25 to fetch the long underwear?

Toltec,

OK no underwear just pants, so what happened to her underwear?

Is it important that there is no follow up question regarding the underwear?


.

 

[BOESP]

BOESP,

Not to mention that Patsy would have supervised JonBenet bathing and dressing for the White's party.



.

If I recall correctly UKGuy, Patsy and JonBenet even had a little tiff while JonBenet was dressing for the party at the Whites on the 25th. Patsy stated she liked for her and JonBenet to dress alike and wanted JonBenet to wear a red turtleneck to the Whites. JonBenet adamantly refused and Patsy says that was that. :snooty:

JonBenet won the spat and we're told she wore the sequined, white shirt.

Now how did Patsy not notice all this tossed-around clothing???

 

[UKGuy]

If I recall correctly UKGuy, Patsy and JonBenet even had a little tiff while JonBenet was dressing for the party at the Whites on the 25th. Patsy stated she liked for her and JonBenet to dress alike and wanted JonBenet to wear a red turtleneck to the Whites. JonBenet adamantly refused and Patsy says that was that. :snooty:

JonBenet won the spat and we're told she wore the sequined, white shirt.

Now how did Patsy not notice all this tossed-around clothing???

BOESP

Of course, and this tells you Patsy has something to hide. She does not want to go anywhere near any underwear questions, remember she never noticed what underwear JonBenet was wearing when she returned from the White's, just that they would have remembered if she had not worn any!

All that stuff about the red-turtleneck may just be a story to explain its appearance in the bathroom, no big story needed for the pants on the floor though.


.

 

[Ames]

So there are two pairs of pants in JonBenet's bathroom...one on a shelf with buckles....another on the bathroom floor, turned inside out and soiled.

How can Patsy NOT NOTICE a pair of pants in that tiny bathroom when she supposedly went in the night of dec 25 to fetch the long underwear?

Because she had selective memory loss.

 

[Ames]

Toltec,

OK no underwear just pants, so what happened to her underwear?

Is it important that there is no follow up question regarding the underwear?


.

I agree. I think that there was underwear inside of those pants, or else Haney would have asked about them. He let alot of things slide...but, that would have been obvious, and Patsy brought up the fact that JB was not great at wiping. I think that Haney would have said..."did she not wear underwear with those pants? If so, then where were they. If not...then why not?"

 

[Ames]

If I recall correctly UKGuy, Patsy and JonBenet even had a little tiff while JonBenet was dressing for the party at the Whites on the 25th. Patsy stated she liked for her and JonBenet to dress alike and wanted JonBenet to wear a red turtleneck to the Whites. JonBenet adamantly refused and Patsy says that was that. :snooty:

JonBenet won the spat and we're told she wore the sequined, white shirt.

Now how did Patsy not notice all this tossed-around clothing???

This is why I believe that JB wore that red turtleneck to bed that night....it wasn't found on JB's Bedroom floor along with everything else she had ever worn, and dropped on the floor. It was found on the bathroom counter, this is why I believe that Patsy took it off of her. SHE is the one that placed it on the counter...that is something that PATSY would have done....NOT JB. I wonder if there really was a fight about that turtleneck, afterall...or did Patsy come up with that excuse when she saw the picture of it on the Bathroom counter, and had to come up with an explaination. As I have said before....Steve Thomas...even believes that she wore that red turtleneck to bed. She probably walked in from the party, carrying gifts, as Burke had described. She and Burke ate a little snack of pineapple before heading to bed, and once she got in her room, Patsy changed NOT ONLY her pants, but also her shirt....putting the red turtleneck on her for her to sleep in. Probably to save time the next morning, before leaving for their trip. JB wet the bed, and got the shirt wet, Patsy went to angrily take it off of her in the bathroom and that I believe...is when the accident happened, and I don't think that it involved a flashlight.

 

[JMO8778]

I agree. I think that there was underwear inside of those pants, or else Haney would have asked about them. He let alot of things slide...but, that would have been obvious, and Patsy brought up the fact that JB was not great at wiping.

what strikes me is that Patsy could have helped her wipe better,I always kept baby wipes around long after the kids were babies.or was she just too darn lazy to do that?
I know JB had soiling issues,but ALL of her underwear was stained? sounds like she wasn't helping her very much.

 

[DeeDee249]

You're probably right about why the red turtleneck was on the counter, Ames. Housekeeper Linda Hoffman-Pugh said the R kids always dropped their clothes on the floor wherever they took them off. PR did too. It was a visually messy home. PR was used to it, and when people live like that they stop "seeing" the clutter.
Even if the intent was not to put her to bed wearing the red turtleneck so she would be half-dressed the next morning- a shirt like that (I assume it was a plain cotton-knit kids' shirt) would be just as comfortable as pajamas, and it wouldn't be unusual for a parent to allow a sleepy child to keep it on for the night.
I'm on the fence about which shirt she wore to the White's. I know ST mentioned the red shirt, and he has seen the pictures. But did he actually state that the pictures show her wearing the red shirt? I read his book, but don't recall.
I feel she wore the white star shirt. And I think that awake or not, when they got back that night, PR put her thermal long johns on her and left whichever shirt she was wearing on her, but removed the black velvet vest that was part of the outfit she wore. PR is vague about exactly what the outcome was of the "disagreement" they had about whether she would wear the red or white top to the White's. She mentions which one JBR WANTED to wear, but that's all I remember.
Going back to Haney's questioning about the soiled pants- he may have assumed that like most people, pants are pulled off separately from underwear, and the two garments are not pulled off in one action so the panties stay inside the pants when dropped on the floor. While men may not use the word "panties" when discussing little girls' underwear, I feel he would still use the word "underwear" and not refer to them as pants. When he says "pants" I feel he means just that- long black childs' slacks.
As far as why he didn't ask where the soiled underwear was that she was wearing when she removed the pants- he may have assumed she either left them on when she took the pants off OR put them somewhere else when she removed them. Let's face it- there is A LOT the Rs weren't pinned down on when it comes to the interviews.

 

[JMO8778]

You're probably right about why the red turtleneck was on the counter, Ames. Housekeeper Linda Hoffman-Pugh said the R kids always dropped their clothes on the floor wherever they took them off. PR did too. It was a visually messy home. PR was used to it, and when people live like that they stop "seeing" the clutter.
Even if the intent was not to put her to bed wearing the red turtleneck so she would be half-dressed the next morning- a shirt like that (I assume it was a plain cotton-knit kids' shirt) would be just as comfortable as pajamas, and it wouldn't be unusual for a parent to allow a sleepy child to keep it on for the night.
I'm on the fence about which shirt she wore to the White's. I know ST mentioned the red shirt, and he has seen the pictures. But did he actually state that the pictures show her wearing the red shirt? I read his book, but don't recall.
I feel she wore the white star shirt.

he says she did wear the white shirt.I don't think the red one was under it,bc a turtleneck would have shown in the pics; the white shirt looks like it had a low neckline in the artist's drawing.

And I think that awake or not, when they got back that night, PR put her thermal long johns on her and left whichever shirt she was wearing on her, but removed the black velvet vest that was part of the outfit she wore.

I'm confused about that,did she ever state she took the vest off? or are we supposed to believe the 'intruder' did that? where did the vest end up?
I have to wonder about the LJ's though..I'm not sure she ever made it to bed anyway,but I think those were chosen after death b/c they were clean and in the dryer (or were washed and dried after her death),and also bc they would have held on the big underwear better..or at least it would have been hidden..unlike if she was wearing a gown.I think they nixed putting her in a gown for that reason.And maybe that's why it was found nearby.I suspect the blanket,LJ's and gown were all washed together,and that they wanted clean,dna free clothes for her to be found in.
If it was a toileting accident,I think they wouldn't have put those back on her.

Going back to Haney's questioning about the soiled pants- he may have assumed that like most people, pants are pulled off separately from underwear, and the two garments are not pulled off in one action so the panties stay inside the pants when dropped on the floor. While men may not use the word "panties" when discussing little girls' underwear, I feel he would still use the word "underwear" and not refer to them as pants. When he says "pants" I feel he means just that- long black childs' slacks.
As far as why he didn't ask where the soiled underwear was that she was wearing when she removed the pants- he may have assumed she either left them on when she took the pants off OR put them somewhere else when she removed them. Let's face it- there is A LOT the Rs weren't pinned down on when it comes to the interviews.

yea,that was pretty slack.too bad Thomas wasn't questioning that part.

 

[DeeDee249]

Yep, ST would have done a better job, I bet. I think the Rs specifically refused to allow ST to question them at some point. I seem to recall that. They and their Dream Team knew ST would ask all the right questions.

Y'know, I don't remember seeing anything about the vest other than PR describing the Gap outfit (which I believe was new, that's why JBR wanted to wear it) as being the black velvet jeans and vest and the white sequin star top. I remember PR saying she wanted JBR to wear the red shirt with the pants and vest so they would match each other, but JBR wanted to wear the white one. You know how kids are. I can imagine a 6-year old JBR, who was probably even more interested in clothes than your average 6-year old girl because of the pageants, photo shoots, etc., wanting to wear the white top for any number of reasons. She liked the sequins, or because it was bought as a set with the black velvet pants and vest, or because her mom wanted her to wear the red one and she didn't want to match her mom or she didn't want to wear an old red shirt with the new outfit.

 

[UKGuy]

You're probably right about why the red turtleneck was on the counter, Ames. Housekeeper Linda Hoffman-Pugh said the R kids always dropped their clothes on the floor wherever they took them off. PR did too. It was a visually messy home. PR was used to it, and when people live like that they stop "seeing" the clutter.
Even if the intent was not to put her to bed wearing the red turtleneck so she would be half-dressed the next morning- a shirt like that (I assume it was a plain cotton-knit kids' shirt) would be just as comfortable as pajamas, and it wouldn't be unusual for a parent to allow a sleepy child to keep it on for the night.
I'm on the fence about which shirt she wore to the White's. I know ST mentioned the red shirt, and he has seen the pictures. But did he actually state that the pictures show her wearing the red shirt? I read his book, but don't recall.
I feel she wore the white star shirt. And I think that awake or not, when they got back that night, PR put her thermal long johns on her and left whichever shirt she was wearing on her, but removed the black velvet vest that was part of the outfit she wore. PR is vague about exactly what the outcome was of the "disagreement" they had about whether she would wear the red or white top to the White's. She mentions which one JBR WANTED to wear, but that's all I remember.
Going back to Haney's questioning about the soiled pants- he may have assumed that like most people, pants are pulled off separately from underwear, and the two garments are not pulled off in one action so the panties stay inside the pants when dropped on the floor. While men may not use the word "panties" when discussing little girls' underwear, I feel he would still use the word "underwear" and not refer to them as pants. When he says "pants" I feel he means just that- long black childs' slacks.
As far as why he didn't ask where the soiled underwear was that she was wearing when she removed the pants- he may have assumed she either left them on when she took the pants off OR put them somewhere else when she removed them. Let's face it- there is A LOT the Rs weren't pinned down on when it comes to the interviews.

DeeDee249,
On returning from the White's, Burke stated that JonBenet walked into the house.

The presence of the pineapple tells you JonBenet was awake, and walked about after returning from the Whites.

It is likely that the parents account of redressing a sleeping JonBenet prior to placing her into bed is wholly ficticious, simply because their original accounts were contradictory, later amended, with suitable memory loss caveats.

Steve Thomas is on record stating JonBenet wore the gap-top to the White's party.

imo JonBenet was either wearing the red-turtleneck when killed, or it had been removed to faciltate a sexual assault, or it was intended to play some part in another staging scenario?

Also although there may not be any underwear inside those soiled pants on the floor, and this might suggest that JonBenet never wore any that day e.g. because they are soiled, then patently since Patsy supervised JonBenet's bathing and dressing, she even alleges they argued over which clothing to wear, then she will have made sure JonBenet was wearing underwear, and most certainly not the size-12's!

Also if JonBenet died as a result of bedwetting etc, then why did someone prepare a pineapple snack for JonBenet prior to bedtime, most children who wet the bed have their pre-bedtime fluids strictly rationed?

Speculating there is also the long shot that JonBenet changed back into the soiled pants, and wore the red turtleneck for the reasons you suggest, Patsy cannot say this since Jonbenet is not supposed to be awake, so fabricates an argument, after her death JonBenet is undressed possibly in the bathroom, where she is wiped down etc?


.

 

[UKGuy]

Yep, ST would have done a better job, I bet. I think the Rs specifically refused to allow ST to question them at some point. I seem to recall that. They and their Dream Team knew ST would ask all the right questions.

Y'know, I don't remember seeing anything about the vest other than PR describing the Gap outfit (which I believe was new, that's why JBR wanted to wear it) as being the black velvet jeans and vest and the white sequin star top. I remember PR saying she wanted JBR to wear the red shirt with the pants and vest so they would match each other, but JBR wanted to wear the white one. You know how kids are. I can imagine a 6-year old JBR, who was probably even more interested in clothes than your average 6-year old girl because of the pageants, photo shoots, etc., wanting to wear the white top for any number of reasons. She liked the sequins, or because it was bought as a set with the black velvet pants and vest, or because her mom wanted her to wear the red one and she didn't want to match her mom or she didn't want to wear an old red shirt with the new outfit.

DeeDee249,
Where does the vest come from? The parents never said they removed a vest, and none is itemised in the autopsy report e.g.

EXTERNAL EXAM: The decedent is clothed in a long sleeved white knit
collarless shirt, the mid anterior chest area of which contains an
embroidered silver star decorated with silver sequins.

...

The long underwear are urine stained anteriorly over
the crotch area and anterior legs. No defects are identified. Beneath
the long underwear are white panties with printed rose buds and the
words "Wednesday" on the elastic waist band.

.

 

[BOESP]

This is why I believe that JB wore that red turtleneck to bed that night....it wasn't found on JB's Bedroom floor along with everything else she had ever worn, and dropped on the floor. It was found on the bathroom counter, this is why I believe that Patsy took it off of her. SHE is the one that placed it on the counter...that is something that PATSY would have done....NOT JB. I wonder if there really was a fight about that turtleneck, afterall...or did Patsy come up with that excuse when she saw the picture of it on the Bathroom counter, and had to come up with an explaination. As I have said before....Steve Thomas...even believes that she wore that red turtleneck to bed. She probably walked in from the party, carrying gifts, as Burke had described. She and Burke ate a little snack of pineapple before heading to bed, and once she got in her room, Patsy changed NOT ONLY her pants, but also her shirt....putting the red turtleneck on her for her to sleep in. Probably to save time the next morning, before leaving for their trip. JB wet the bed, and got the shirt wet, Patsy went to angrily take it off of her in the bathroom and that I believe...is when the accident happened, and I don't think that it involved a flashlight.

Yep, I agree with everything you said, although that won't bring this case to court. :razzRaspberry to the court and DA's office, not to Ames!)

I think Patsy grabbed JonBenet by the shoulders, collar or waistband, pushed, shoved, and/or jerked her around and into the bathroom, there was a fall and JonBenet's head hit something and Patsy landed on top of her, falling forcefully onto her head creating enough pressure to make that long fracture in her head. Or, maybe she slammed JonBenet's head against the floor while cleaning her during "corporal cleaning." This is, of course, just speculation, but that head injury, in my opinion, was not created by one whack over the head. It appears to be most consistent with a low-velocity+high-pressure injury, in my opinion.

 

[Albert18]

It appears to be most consistent with a low-velocity+high-pressure injury, in my opinion.

I suspect modern forensics could analyze the head injury and narrow down the possibilities. Hopefully that will be done some day by a freelancer investigating the case.

 

[Ames]

Yep, I agree with everything you said, although that won't bring this case to court. :razzRaspberry to the court and DA's office, not to Ames!)

I think Patsy grabbed JonBenet by the shoulders, collar or waistband, pushed, shoved, and/or jerked her around and into the bathroom, there was a fall and JonBenet's head hit something and Patsy landed on top of her, falling forcefully onto her head creating enough pressure to make that long fracture in her head. Or, maybe she slammed JonBenet's head against the floor while cleaning her during "corporal cleaning." This is, of course, just speculation, but that head injury, in my opinion, was not created by one whack over the head. It appears to be most consistent with a low-velocity+high-pressure injury, in my opinion.

Whew...I am so glad that Raspberry was not for me....I was just about to start to cry.

I don't think that I will ever budge from the bedwetting theory. John molesting JB while Patsy went out for a bit....(after a long Christmas day...and night...with the White's Party..and then having to get up early the next morning)..is absurd...IMO. John: Hmmmm....you know, Patsy just left, and I have no clue when she will be back, she probably will not be gone for too long, because we have to get up early, and its already past 10:00, but....gee....I think that I will take this opportunity to feed JB some pineapple and then, tuck her into bed....crawl in there with her...and then molest her, seeing as I won't get to do it on our trip, because nosy Patsy will be around". I just do not see that happening, at all. Maybe, one day....someone will step forward, and prove me wrong.