No intruder?

[Agatha_C]

Now picture a size 12 in size 6 undies or swim suit...... You know you laughed or cringed because it was ridiculous to picture...LOL...

 

[Ames]

Perhaps the DNA blew in thru the window? Landed on her longjohns and then fell on the blood stain?

I appreciate the importance of keeping an open mind, but not so open that...well you probably know the rest.

And how long were those longjohns locked up in an evidence room?...That touch DNA could have been from ANYBODY....how many people handled it? Just because there is touch DNA on the longjohns...it doesn't mean that it came from the killer...if that is all you got....well...you probably know the rest.

 

[MurriFlower]

Ummm...not sure, but I don't believe that this is a pantie chart. Panties are not made in a 6X...for one thing...and the size that JB was found wearing was 12-14. This chart is sized...10-12, 14-16 (14-16 being extra large) ....JB would have worn a size 6-8. Aren't you from a different country...or am I thinking of another IDI??? My daughter was the exact size of JB ...when she was 6 (if fact, she even looks like her, and is told that constantly)...she wore a 6-8 when she was 6 years old. This...IMO... is a clothing chart...not a panty size chart....there IS a difference. I know that you are not the one that initially posted it though. My daughter....is 9 now...and can still wear the 6-8 panties....but wears a size 10 in clothes. You say that a size 12 is for girls 9-10 years old....there is NO WAY that my daughter would be able to wear a size 12. They would be humungous....and if she were to have worn a size 12-14 at the age of 6....well, that would have just been ridiculous. Regardless if this is a panty chart or not....there is a humongeous difference between a size 6 and a size 12-14.

Feel free to post the correct chart if you believe this one is not for underwear.

 

[Ames]

I know right!!!! I mean when PR took her pants off, she would have clearly seen the panties and everything else...

I dont know about other mothers, but I would have laughed and remembered that..... Forever!

I know! The leg holes would have been up past her waist...I would have remembered that too.

 

[Ames]

Feel free to post the correct chart if you believe this one is not for underwear.

I am looking...but, I can tell by the way it is sized...it is not for underwear. Underwear...as I have stated before...comes in 4-6, 6-8. 8-10, 10-12, 12-14, (Which is what Jonbenet was found wearing) 14-16.....This chart has it as 10-12, 14-16. Jonbenet was found wearing size 12-14.....so that tells me that the chart is not right. That and the fact that I buy underwear for my daughter, and I know how they are sized. I will keep looking...I know that it is on the net somewhere.

------------
Jayelles bought some of them...so it comes straight from the horses mouth...this is from one of her posts over at FFJ...notice the way that the panties are sized...just like I said. And not 10/12....14/16. The 12 and the 14 are together....12/14. I am beginning to wonder if you even know what I mean...especially if you are from a different country and your sizing charts are different.

"And this is the size 12/14 and size 4/6 side by side. My daughter is almost exactly the same weight and height as Jonbenet was when she died (and she is almost exactly the same age too - 6 years and 6 months). I won't be getting her to model the larger knickers as I don't think it would be right to do so. The dimensions of the knickers are as follows:-

Size 12/14 - measure 12 inches from waistband to bottom of crotch and waistband is 22 inches unstretched.

Size 4/6 - measure 8.5 inches from waistband to crotch and waistband is just under 17 inches unstretched."

-----------

The chart is for Apparel....not undewear...
Definition of Apparel...

ap·par·el

   https://secure.reference.com/sso/register_pop.html?source=favorites/əˈpær

əl/ Show Spelled [uh-par-uh

l] Show IPA noun, verb, -eled, -el·ing or ( especially British

) -elled, -el·ling.
–noun 1. clothing, esp. outerwear; garments; attire; raiment.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

And how long were those longjohns locked up in an evidence room?...That touch DNA could have been from ANYBODY....how many people handled it? Just because there is touch DNA on the longjohns...it doesn't mean that it came from the killer...if that is all you got....well...you probably know the rest.

matching DNA mixed with blood on the inside crotch of her underwear vastly reduces evidence locker ideas. Factor in the fact that anybody known to have handled the evidence was tested, factor in the notion that anybody not tested who knew themselves they handled JBR's clothing either before or after her murder and didn't GET themselves tested...I mean how suspicious would THAT be?

 

[MurriFlower]

I am looking...but, I can tell by the way it is sized...it is not for underwear. Underwear...as I have stated before...comes in 4-6, 6-8. 8-10, 10-12, 12-14, (Which is what Jonbenet was found wearing) 14-16.....This chart has it as 10-12, 14-16. Jonbenet was found wearing size 12-14.....so that tells me that the chart is not right. That and the fact that I buy underwear for my daughter, and I know how they are sized. I will keep looking...I know that it is on the net somewhere.

------------
Jayelles bought some of them...so it comes straight from the horses mouth...this is from one of her posts over at FFJ...notice the way that the panties are sized...just like I said. And not 10/12....14/16. The 12 and the 14 are together....12/14. I am beginning to wonder if you even know what I mean...especially if you are from a different country and your sizing charts are different.

"And this is the size 12/14 and size 4/6 side by side. My daughter is almost exactly the same weight and height as Jonbenet was when she died (and she is almost exactly the same age too - 6 years and 6 months). I won't be getting her to model the larger knickers as I don't think it would be right to do so. The dimensions of the knickers are as follows:-

Size 12/14 - measure 12 inches from waistband to bottom of crotch and waistband is 22 inches unstretched.

Size 4/6 - measure 8.5 inches from waistband to crotch and waistband is just under 17 inches unstretched."

-----------

The chart is for Apparel....not undewear...
Definition of Apparel...

ap·par·el

   https://secure.reference.com/sso/register_pop.html?source=favorites/əˈpær

əl/ Show Spelled [uh-par-uh

l] Show IPA noun, verb, -eled, -el·ing or ( especially British

) -elled, -el·ling.
–noun 1. clothing, esp. outerwear; garments; attire; raiment.

These knickers keep growing!! They were size 12 (for a 10 year old) now they are 12-14 and are humungous!! Her own knickers were size 6 now they're 4-6 and are shrinking. Are you guys for real??

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

In case you missed it:

http://www.jstor.org/pss/1290529

Deceptive Police Interrogation Practices: How Far is Too Far.

Basically, anything that is drawn from an interrogation of PR or JR needs to be independently verifiable to be credible.

If the police tell PR that JBR was found wearing oversize underwear, or found with JBR's shirt fibers, it could be a lie. The objective is to extract a confession by any means necessary.

If the police or the DA tell the public that DNA exhonerates the R's, thats going to be based on actual valid evidence.

 

[MurriFlower]

In case you missed it:

http://www.jstor.org/pss/1290529

Deceptive Police Interrogation Practices: How Far is Too Far.

Basically, anything that is drawn from an interrogation of PR or JR needs to be independently verifiable to be credible.

If the police tell PR that JBR was found wearing oversize underwear, or found with JBR's shirt fibers, it could be a lie. The objective is to extract a confession by any means necessary.

If the police or the DA tell the public that DNA exhonerates the R's, thats going to be based on actual valid evidence.

I think this will fall on deaf ears HOTYH, RDI just believe everything asked in interviews could be proven by a report that is just being kept secret for some reason.

My understanding of the permitted interview technique used is that they can say what they like, but they cannot produce a false report to back it up. So if they actually showed the Rs or their lawyer the report, it would have to be exactly what they said it was and was also the actual report they would produce in court. This is why there was nothing shown. Either the report did not exist or what it said was not the conclusion they told the R's was contained in the report.

 

[SunnieRN]

This is true ONLY if you can prove the police went too far. Since you or I or anyone not in the BPD have no way of knowing all the evidence that is in custody, you can not prove law enforcement went too far.

The R's also has representation there at all times. They were only questioned within the guidelines that were preset by their lawyers. Pretty lucky for the R's I would say! Also very convenient, since it was known ahead of time what would be asked.

In case you missed it:

http://www.jstor.org/pss/1290529

Deceptive Police Interrogation Practices: How Far is Too Far.

Basically, anything that is drawn from an interrogation of PR or JR needs to be independently verifiable to be credible.

If the police tell PR that JBR was found wearing oversize underwear, or found with JBR's shirt fibers, it could be a lie. The objective is to extract a confession by any means necessary.

If the police or the DA tell the public that DNA exhonerates the R's, thats going to be based on actual valid evidence.

 

[SunnieRN]

matching DNA mixed with blood on the inside crotch of her underwear vastly reduces evidence locker ideas. Factor in the fact that anybody known to have handled the evidence was tested, factor in the notion that anybody not tested who knew themselves they handled JBR's clothing either before or after her murder and didn't GET themselves tested...I mean how suspicious would THAT be?

You admitted as did most RDI supporters, that many mistakes were made by the BPD while collecting and processing evidence. What should give us enough peace of mind to believe that the long johns were not contaminated at some point while in the chain of command, prior to them being tested? This could have occurred at any time. Not saying they were contaminated after the fact, but I believe the possibility exists.

 

[Agatha_C]

This is true ONLY if you can prove the police went too far. Since you or I or anyone not in the BPD have no way of knowing all the evidence that is in custody, you can not prove law enforcement went too far.

The R's also has representation there at all times. They were only questioned within the guidelines that were preset by their lawyers. Pretty lucky for the R's I would say! Also very convenient, since it was known ahead of time what would be asked.

Sunni,

We have shown proof that the big panties exist. The Rs recognize the validity of the big panties. An arrest warrant for JMK, that was good enough for IDI at the time, stated as fact that she was in large panties. PR admitted to the panties belonging in the house and it would have been no big deal for JB to be wearing them.

At some point I think we need to realize this is argument just for the sake of argument.

 

[SunnieRN]

Of course you are completely correct Agatha.

 

[MurriFlower]

Sunni,

We have shown proof that the big panties exist. The Rs recognize the validity of the big panties. An arrest warrant for JMK, that was good enough for IDI at the time, stated as fact that she was in large panties. PR admitted to the panties belonging in the house and it would have been no big deal for JB to be wearing them.

At some point I think we need to realize this is argument just for the sake of argument.

In the absence of any evidence, other than anecdotal, that size 12 Bloomingdales panties (made to fit a 10 year old) would have been so large they would have fallen off JBR, and as these drew no comment from either the coroner or police witnesses, the myth about the redressing in oversized panties by PR should therefore be able to be put to bed permanently. We can assume that if she was in fact wearing size 12 panties, then JBR put them on herself.

I'm happy to cease arguing about it provided it isn't continually being brought up by RDI as an accepted fact and as part of their 'totallity of evidence' against the R's.

 

[Ames]

These knickers keep growing!! They were size 12 (for a 10 year old) now they are 12-14 and are humungous!! Her own knickers were size 6 now they're 4-6 and are shrinking. Are you guys for real??

I will say it again...stay with me okay....the size of underwear that JB was found wearing has never ever changed....they were size 12-14. It always has been and always will be. The sizes found in her drawer...were 4-6....why is that so hard for you??? It's really not that difficult to understand...really.

 

[Ames]

In the absence of any evidence, other than anecdotal, that size 12 Bloomingdales panties (made to fit a 10 year old) would have been so large they would have fallen off JBR, and as these drew no comment from either the coroner or police witnesses, the myth about the redressing in oversized panties by PR should therefore be able to be put to bed permanently. We can assume that if she was in fact wearing size 12 panties, then JBR put them on herself.

I'm happy to cease arguing about it provided it isn't continually being brought up by RDI as an accepted fact and as part of their 'totallity of evidence' against the R's.

They were size 12-14 and were NOT made to fit a 10 year old girl....and even if they were....JB was SIX!!!! Four whole years younger...than 10.

 

[joeskidbeck]

I still have not figured out how anyone can not believe that these panties existed and were on JonBenet. How in the world did the BPD come up with this if they were not on her? If they were as inept as we've come to believe, who was the mastermind that thought of this? Since the rest of the package were not found in the home, are we supposed to believe that some really lucky detective just said "hey, I know what, let's pretend she had on really big panties and see if it will stick?" That's a pretty ludicrous notion.

 

[Agatha_C]

They were size 12-14 and were NOT made to fit a 10 year old girl....and even if they were....JB was SIX!!!! Four whole years younger...than 10.

I had my 7y/o try on my 11 y/o panties (recieved at christmas) this morning (after the, its not gross, she's your sister conversation...lol). It was the funniest thing to see, all three of us laughed until we cried and then we laughed some more.

So let me share our findings, though they did not slide down her hips as soon as she put them on, they did however slide down as she walked. We wont even get into the flapping swinging crotch...LOLOLOLOLOLOL... Sorry you had to be there...... My baby then tried to slide her jeans on and guess what happened? the panties slid up with the pants forcing material to bunch around the waist band and all she could do was pull at the material that was uncomfortable in her crotch area... She hated it and wanted to take them off and I didt blame her... I know what I know, I saw it with my own eyes and nothing anyone says to be contrary is going to sway that.

 

[UKGuy]

In the absence of any evidence, other than anecdotal, that size 12 Bloomingdales panties (made to fit a 10 year old) would have been so large they would have fallen off JBR, and as these drew no comment from either the coroner or police witnesses, the myth about the redressing in oversized panties by PR should therefore be able to be put to bed permanently. We can assume that if she was in fact wearing size 12 panties, then JBR put them on herself.

I'm happy to cease arguing about it provided it isn't continually being brought up by RDI as an accepted fact and as part of their 'totallity of evidence' against the R's.

MurriFlower,

Are you still talking nonsense? Why are you wasting peoples time with your absence of evidence arguments.

How about you apply your absence of evidence to your invented DNA, you have not produced anything to prove its existence. So since its like the size-12's, so it must be fake, the DNA claim is bogus , made up just to get the Ramsey's of the hook.

Step up to the plate, and stop playing games.



.

 

[UKGuy]

Sunni,

We have shown proof that the big panties exist. The Rs recognize the validity of the big panties. An arrest warrant for JMK, that was good enough for IDI at the time, stated as fact that she was in large panties. PR admitted to the panties belonging in the house and it would have been no big deal for JB to be wearing them.

At some point I think we need to realize this is argument just for the sake of argument.

Agatha_C,
Nice. :great: