JonBenet black fibres found in underpants

  • Thread starter Thread starter Deleted member 187229
  • Start date Start date
Could the black fibres found in JonBenets underpants have come from her black velvet pants she wore to the whites Christmas party and not John’s black shirt?

Earlier in the case, the police had thought the fibers from the body came from John Ramsey’s bathrobe or Patsy’s black pants or from the blanket found near JonBenét or from the blanket that had been found inside the suitcase under the broken basement window. The fibers might also have come from JonBenét’s own clothes or from one of her stuffed animals. By now, however, all of those possibilities had been excluded, and the only logical explanation was that the fibers came from whatever had been used to wipe JonBenét or possibly from someone who might have rubbed up against her when she was unclothed, which allowed fibers to find their way along her skin and eventually into the folds of her labia. In any event, the clothes worn by Patsy and John on Christmas would have to be compared with the fibers" (Schiller 1999a:563).

"The police reported that they had been unable to find a match for the fibers discovered on JonBenét’s labia and on her inner thighs. The fibers did not match any clothes belonging to John or Patsy. The police were stumped." - PMPT
 
Last edited:
That’s the problem, the police only tested patsy snd johns clothes and not Jonbenets. Jonbenet was wearing underpants that were too big for her. That is why the black fibres from her black velvet pants got inside her labia folds. The logical explanation is the fibres came from jonbenets black velvet pants she wore to the whites Christmas party because her underpants were too big and loose allowing the velvet pants to make contact with her skin.
 
That’s the problem, the police only tested patsy snd johns clothes and not Jonbenets. Jonbenet was wearing underpants that were too big for her. That is why the black fibres from her black velvet pants got inside her labia folds. The logical explanation is the fibres came from jonbenets black velvet pants she wore to the whites Christmas party because her underpants were too big and loose allowing the velvet pants to make contact with her skin.
Didn't Patsy say she had normal size underwear on that night?
 
That’s the problem, the police only tested patsy snd johns clothes and not Jonbenets. Jonbenet was wearing underpants that were too big for her. That is why the black fibres from her black velvet pants got inside her labia folds. The logical explanation is the fibres came from jonbenets black velvet pants she wore to the whites Christmas party because her underpants were too big and loose allowing the velvet pants to make contact with her skin.
Dark blue and "dark" fibers were found. The dark blue fibers were said to be consistent with cotton towel material. The "dark" fibers were matched to the sweater John wore that night. This excludes the velvet pants as having been the garment the "dark" fibers were shed from.

I don't believe JBR was walking around in size 12 underpants. She literally wouldn't be able to walk in underpants that could be pulled up to her armpits and they'd have been obvious under velvet pants because they'd be bulky. Patsy said she didn't notice anything.
 
Earlier in the case, the police had thought the fibers from the body came from John Ramsey’s bathrobe or Patsy’s black pants or from the blanket found near JonBenét or from the blanket that had been found inside the suitcase under the broken basement window. The fibers might also have come from JonBenét’s own clothes or from one of her stuffed animals. By now, however, all of those possibilities had been excluded, and the only logical explanation was that the fibers came from whatever had been used to wipe JonBenét or possibly from someone who might have rubbed up against her when she was unclothed, which allowed fibers to find their way along her skin and eventually into the folds of her labia. In any event, the clothes worn by Patsy and John on Christmas would have to be compared with the fibers" (Schiller 1999a:563).

"The police reported that they had been unable to find a match for the fibers discovered on JonBenét’s labia and on her inner thighs. The fibers did not match any clothes belonging to John or Patsy. The police were stumped." - PMPT
I'm sure LE went through the house with a fine tooth comb looking for potential matches but if her bathing and hygiene was hit and miss, couldn't those fibers been there for a while?
 
Dark blue and "dark" fibers were found. The dark blue fibers were said to be consistent with cotton towel material. The "dark" fibers were matched to the sweater John wore that night. This excludes the velvet pants as having been the garment the "dark" fibers were shed from.

I don't believe JBR was walking around in size 12 underpants. She literally wouldn't be able to walk in underpants that could be pulled up to her armpits and they'd have been obvious under velvet pants because they'd be bulky. Patsy said she didn't notice anything.
She could wear huge underpants because she was wearing the black velvet pants over the op. The velvet pants would hold the underpants up. I’ve often wondered if patsy putvthe big underoants on jonbenet because of her irritation in her vagina. She had been to the doctor a few times about it and it was put diwn to irritation from bubble bath. Maybe she thought the loose underpants would help as opposed to wearing tight underwear and was too embarrassed or paranoid to mention it because of the sexual abuse allegations. I used to wear big underpants as a child because I grew up with a single dad who had no idea and my undies were always falling down. The loose underwear is weird but doesn’t prove anything.
 
I'm sure LE went through the house with a fine tooth comb looking for potential matches but if her bathing and hygiene was hit and miss, couldn't those fibers been there for a while?
Yes, it is a possibility. I have thought and written about this thought before - the blood that was wiped down from her thigh could have come from since the last time that she was washed, so could fibers. We know that it did not happen on the 25th and do not have any clear statements whether the kids had a bath on the 24th. Patsy only stated that they must have had but she did not remember cause they did not like taking baths. So, if we can assume that she was last bathed on the 24th or even the 23d, the blood and the fibers both had plenty of time to get transferred there from multiple places. They had a party at the house on the 23th and she also had a public performance that day. Maybe she used a public toilet at the mall. She was playing on the floor at the Whites. There are multiple possibilities how the fibers got there. And multiple periods of time when the SA could have happened that resulted in bleeding that had to be wiped away.
 
Last edited:
I'm sure LE went through the house with a fine tooth comb looking for potential matches but if her bathing and hygiene was hit and miss, couldn't those fibers been there for a while?
John's sweater had never been worn before and the undies had presumably been taken from straight out of the package.
 
The loose underwear is weird but doesn’t prove anything.
The underpants weren't "loose", they were a size 12, which means a slender 6 yr. old could pull them up to her armpits. John Ramsey's fibers and NO OTHER FIBERS are in the crotch area along with some blood. The sweater was dry clean only and no one had knowledge of the sweater ever having been either worn or laundered before and the underpants had presumably been taken from straight out of the package. No one claimed any knowledge of JBR wearing those underpants that night. Patsy said she undressed JBR for bed but didn't notice them.

I get it that people who very badly want to believe either IDI or BDI are going to continue to dance around this but these are the facts.
 
John Ramsey's fibers and NO OTHER FIBERS are in the crotch area along with some blood. The sweater was dry clean only and no one had knowledge of the sweater ever having been either worn or laundered before and the underpants had presumably been taken from straight out of the package.
I think we need to be careful here. It was reported that the fibers found on the crotch area "were consistent with" fibers found on JR's new Israeli wool sweater.

"Were consistent with" means they shared similar characteristics, like color, material type, or texture. But that does not mean the fibers came from the sweater. Unlike DNA and fingerprints, fibers are typically not unique enough to identify a single source unless they're highly distinctive, such as a rare type of dye or damage pattern. JR's sweater was black wool--not exactly definitive.
 
John's sweater had never been worn before and the undies had presumably been taken from straight out of the package.
Was the sweater in the house though?
Was it set out on a bed? Did she touch it at any point and scratch herself?
Did she rib her hands on it because it was soft? I'm not a JR fan in the least, but it just seems very easy to transfer fibers once you have touched them especially if you don't wash your hands. I'm curious how long her fingernails were. Over all grooming seemed poor.
 
I think we need to be careful here. It was reported that the fibers found on the crotch area "were consistent with" fibers found on JR's new Israeli wool sweater.

"Were consistent with" means they shared similar characteristics, like color, material type, or texture. But that does not mean the fibers came from the sweater. Unlike DNA and fingerprints, fibers are typically not unique enough to identify a single source unless they're highly distinctive, such as a rare type of dye or damage pattern. JR's sweater was black wool--not exactly definitive.

The quote from the DA: "there are black fibers that, according to our testing that was conducted, that match one of the two shirts that was provided to us by the Ramseys, [John Ramsey's] black shirt."
 
Was the sweater in the house though?
Was it set out on a bed? Did she touch it at any point and scratch herself?
Did she rib her hands on it because it was soft? I'm not a JR fan in the least, but it just seems very easy to transfer fibers once you have touched them especially if you don't wash your hands. I'm curious how long her fingernails were. Over all grooming seemed poor.
The dark fibers weren't found anywhere else on her body. They were found in ONE specific area, her labia and underpants crotch along with her urine, blood and fibers shed from cotton towel material. It was believed the cotton towel was used to wipe her pubic area.
 
The quote from the DA: "there are black fibers that, according to our testing that was conducted, that match one of the two shirts that was provided to us by the Ramseys, [John Ramsey's] black shirt."
That's still not saying much since black wool is an extremely common fiber, and JR might also have had a black wool overcoat. Many men did and still do wear those, especially businessmen. Many of the Ramsey's male friends likely wore them.

From the FBI:

"In order to say that the fiber originated from the item of clothing, the clothing either had to be the only fabric of its type ever produced or still remaining on earth, or the transfer of fibers was directly observed. Since neither of these situations is likely to occur or be known, fiber examiners will conclude that the fibers could have originated from the clothing or that the fibers are consistent with originating from the clothing."
So, there we see that "consistent with" verbiage again. Just because JR's shirt contained black wool fibers and there were black wool fibers on JBR's panties, doesn't show they came from that shirt. They might have, but they also might not have.

More from the FBI link:

"It can never be stated with certainty that a fiber originated from a particular garment because other garments were likely produced using the same fiber type and color."

So, it is interesting, and if the rest of the evidence pointed in JR's direction, it would be supporting evidence to be sure. But, for the reasons stated by the FBI, it's not enough to convict someone when the fibers found are that common and there isn't any convincing evidence.

That's why they use phraseology like "matches" or "is consistent with."
 
The family's hopes also rest on DNA evidence collected at the crime scene, which included samples from an unknown male found under JonBenét's fingernails and in her underwear. Before his death in 2010, Smit compiled extensive evidence and identified around 20 potential suspects. His family continues his quest, confident that the killer's name is on his list.
 
John's sweater was imported from Israeli. It was a rare brand. Also, neither John or his attorney denied it, they both just had loud hissy fits and John never did answer the question.
 
John's sweater was imported from Israeli. It was a rare brand. Also, neither John or his attorney denied it, they both just had loud hissy fits and John never did answer the question.
The brand is irrelevant because many clothing manufacturers make clothing from black wool.

What would be more important is the type of wool fibers found on JBR. Most wool is sheep wool, but if it were llama, or alpaca, or a different type of animal wool, that might narrow it down a bit. Still, black wool is very common.

Whoever sold the wool to the Israeli company could have sold it to a hundred other companies.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
125
Guests online
6,137
Total visitors
6,262

Forum statistics

Threads
621,857
Messages
18,440,022
Members
239,779
Latest member
F0R3NSIC
Back
Top