No intruder?

[Holdontoyourhat]

What's absurd is that you keep arguing mute points. JB was sexually assulted. Until the guilty person is identified, whom the choice of guilt varies depending upon intelligence levels, knowledge and evidence, whether it is a molester or a pedophile is a mute point. I would think you would find this next post fascinating however, as it gives very understandable explanations and reasons for the difference. Differences which are recognizeable if you read the post.

That would be moot points, not mute points. Are you like 16 or what? I prefer to discuss this case with adults and not minors but there's no way to know is there?

Agatha, BRAVO, thank you for this information as it is a good primer for those who want to know and understand the difference between molesters and pedophiles!! Those who wish to remain in the dark will not be swayed unfortunately.

Bravo Agatha.



Read the above article HOTYH. You stated the true difference yourself. Also RDI does not 'suggest' internal and external injuries. Multiple experts (of which you are NOT one of) do.

Where did I state RDI suggested internal and external injuries. You're making stuff up again? I stated no such thing. I stated 'despite internal and external injuries'. I already know the coroner described both external and internal injuries.

Your constant uninformed arguments make me wonder about your true motivation is in posting. I asked you once before, would you care to answer now, since you didn't prior?

Uh, no. You're very rude.

Also, what in the heck are you referring to with Johns golf clubs vs pageants? Pageants have been discussed multiple times. The only reference to Johns clubs have been a potential hiding place to get items out of the house (after all, despite his daughters death, he had to have both sets of his golf clubs brought to him by Patsys sister) and the fact that JB had been hit in the face with a golf club, by BR. 'Splain yourself Lucy.

mine in blue

And here we are delving into golf clubs while ignoring pageants. Do you even know which pageant was the biggest, what city it was in, who won, who else was there, etc.?

 

[MurriFlower]

Murri, That's not a barbie gown she's wearing. Even PR admitted she wasn't wearing the Barbie gown Christmas morning. She said the Christmas morning PJ's were under JBR pillow, her words not mine, and they were pajama's not a nightgown.

Sorry, but what she is wearing in the picture is not whats laying next to the blanket.

The picture UKGuy showed did not have a Barbie on it either.

Sorry, but this is the exact colour. Pyjamas have two parts, a top and bottom. One part is still in the bed, the other was taken to the winecellar wrapped in the blanket.

 

[Agatha_C]

Murri, If you read what I said and you obviously did't. I don't think the pink thing in the basement is a nightgown, I think it's something else.

As for it being the pj's she wore on Christmas, just how big do you think JBR was? What part of the pj's was that to be that big? I think it was a robe.

 

[joeskidbeck]

I think the confusion over the pink "things" are caused by the fact that we are looking at one photo and in the interviews Patsy is looking at totally different photos. In those, the evidence is already in plastic bags. I believe the photo we are looking at here is one of the first photos taken of the scene. Yes, I believe there was a Barbie gown in the cellar and it had Barbie's face on it. Heck, even patsy admits it, but the pink thing laying next to the white blanket is solid pink and believe me (or go check Mattel's website) nothing about Barbie apparel is ever solid. Her photo is going to be on it.
Murri, those were pajamas JonBenet wore Christmas morning, remember Patsy saying she couldn't "put her hands on" the bottoms when she got home even though the top was under the pillow where it should be. No way those pajama bottoms were big enough to be the pink "thing" in the cellar. I believe and will go find the link where the officer who first arrived said there were two blankets in the cellar, one white and one pink. The Barbie I see in this pink blanket is not in a box or in plastic, all I can see is the Ponytail sticking out of the blanket and a small part of her face. It is the exact staging that was performed on JonBenet. For whatever reason, LE redacted the pink blanket from the crime scene evidence list. That would be a question that I would very much like answered. WHY?????
UKGuy, I am not disagreeing with what you are saying at all, I just think the fact that we are not looking at the same photos as Patsy and the detective is skewing our views.

 

[Agatha_C]

Beck,

Good call, I thought I was crazy or blind. But your 100% right, its to big to be a 6y/o little girls nightgown. You, my Gel, are on to something....

 

[joeskidbeck]

If you guys will follow this link you will see where Detective Everett states that when he went into the basement there were two blankets:

http://www.acandyrose.com/s-Flight755-baggagecheck12261996.htm

From link: Det. Michael Everett informed Your Affiant that after the discovery of the girl's body that he walked through the basement area of the house to attempt to determine if any persons were present in the basement. In the area where Det. Arndt had told Det. Everett that the decedent had been found by her father he observed two blankets on the floor in the center of the room. (BLACKED OUT ARE)
snipped from link


This information can be found about 3/4 of the way down the page. I knew I wasn't losing my mind. The pink "thing" is a pink blanket. There was a barbie nightgown, but not in this photo.

 

[SunnieRN]

Quote:
Originally Posted by SunnieRN View Post
What's absurd is that you keep arguing mute points. JB was sexually assulted. Until the guilty person is identified, whom the choice of guilt varies depending upon intelligence levels, knowledge and evidence, whether it is a molester or a pedophile is a mute point. I would think you would find this next post fascinating however, as it gives very understandable explanations and reasons for the difference. Differences which are recognizable if you read the post.

That would be moot points, not mute points. Are you like 16 or what? I prefer to discuss this case with adults and not minors but there's no way to know is there?

Agatha, BRAVO, thank you for this information as it is a good primer for those who want to know and understand the difference between molesters and pedophiles!! Those who wish to remain in the dark will not be swayed unfortunately.

Bravo Agatha.



Read the above article HOTYH. You stated the true difference yourself. Also RDI does not 'suggest' internal and external injuries. Multiple experts (of which you are NOT one of) do.

Where did I state RDI suggested internal and external injuries. You're making stuff up again? I stated no such thing. I stated 'despite internal and external injuries'. I already know the coroner described both external and internal injuries.

Your constant uninformed arguments make me wonder about your true motivation is in posting. I asked you once before, would you care to answer now, since you didn't prior?

Uh, no. You're very rude.

Also, what in the heck are you referring to with Johns golf clubs vs pageants? Pageants have been discussed multiple times. The only reference to Johns clubs have been a potential hiding place to get items out of the house (after all, despite his daughters death, he had to have both sets of his golf clubs brought to him by Patsys sister) and the fact that JB had been hit in the face with a golf club, by BR. 'Splain yourself Lucy.


My comments:

You are right and it should have read moot, that's what I get for posting after 13.5 hours work. Your comment was not only rude, but childish, but unfortunately it seems to be par for the course, along with avoiding issues.

As for where I got you RDI comment. Here:


I dont even understand why RDI is so adamant about no pedophilia and only 'child molestation'. It sure seems like a very thin and almost no line between the two. How does RDI characterize the injuries? Sexually assaulted? Molested? Accidental? What?

And here:

Is RDI suggesting that despite internal and external sexual injuries, the unknown male DNA in her shorts, the oversize underwear (source requested), and alleged prior sexual abuse, that there was never any sexual attraction on the part of the perp? Yes, no, or maybe?

This has NOTHING to do with what I said HOTYH, I stated that it was Experts and Not RDI that garnered the information. Now who is acting 16?? Who is being evasive and rude?


As for being rude, HOTYH, I know why most people on this forum believe RDI or IDI or why they're on the fence. It's not rude to ask a person why they have a certain opinion, or why they take a certain stance. For you to call me rude for that, again points out personal attributes toward myself and other members of this forum, as I am not the only one you are rude to.

 

[Agatha_C]

Sunni, stand up and take a bow?

You are so right, what does it matter.. Pedo or molester, someone hurt that baby and finding that person known or unknown is all that matters....

 

[SunnieRN]

Thank you Agatha! This is the most important aspect, someone sexually assaulted and killed JonBenet. This forum has taught me the bs that has plagued this case from day one. Even things that experts state as fact are argued and called RDI theories. Nope sorry, they're the facts. Makes me wonder about posters hidden agendas.


JOB thank you so much for the link. I knew there were two blankets, just not from where. Wish we could see the rest of those photos. ;-)

 

[joeskidbeck]

Thank you Agatha! This is the most important aspect, someone sexually assaulted and killed JonBenet. This forum has taught me the bs that has plagued this case from day one. Even things that experts state as fact are argued and called RDI theories. Nope sorry, they're the facts. Makes me wonder about posters hidden agendas.


JOB thank you so much for the link. I knew there were two blankets, just not from where. Wish we could see the rest of those photos. ;-)

Sunnie, that would be wonderful. I would love to see all those items from Patsy's home that she either denied owning or didn't remember if she owned them or not. But, boy she didn't have any problems remembering what her friends owned (speaking of PW's jacket here)!

 

[Agatha_C]

Hey now Beck, they remembered they didn't keep the suitcase in the train room

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Thank you Agatha! This is the most important aspect, someone sexually assaulted and killed JonBenet. This forum has taught me the bs that has plagued this case from day one. Even things that experts state as fact are argued and called RDI theories. Nope sorry, they're the facts. Makes me wonder about posters hidden agendas.


JOB thank you so much for the link. I knew there were two blankets, just not from where. Wish we could see the rest of those photos. ;-)

Do you mean the tabloid hired monday morning quarterback armchair experts who used fake doctored photos to second guess the coroner, pediatrician, and the FBI's CASKU? Those experts? The experts nobody quotes in the news instead they quote DNA? Prior abuse is ancient tabloid myth and hype. Nobody prints that cr#% anymore.

All I need now is RDI's lame attempt at a 180 degree spin from FBI's stating "no sign of prior abuse" to nonsensical oxymoron 'no sign that the acute injuries are from prior abuse'. Or how nobody will print anything bad about JR because they're afraid of LW. It would be priceless if it werent so cheap.

my bold

Mine isn't THAT hidden. I'm working on a middle-aged asian male socialist pedo theory. Used pageants to stalk little girls, chose JBR.

Every blue moon I learn something here I can use...

 

[MurriFlower]

Murri, That's not a barbie gown she's wearing. Even PR admitted she wasn't wearing the Barbie gown Christmas morning. She said the Christmas morning PJ's were under JBR pillow, her words not mine, and they were pajama's not a nightgown.

Sorry, but what she is wearing in the picture is not whats laying next to the blanket.

So what was it again?? I can't keep up with everyone's different RDI theories. A blanket, a Barbie nightgown, a full sized Barbie doll, was it bloodstained, where did it come from and who identified it? Not the right colour for Barbie, not enough face, not big enough, boy this is confusing.

 

[MurriFlower]

If you guys will follow this link you will see where Detective Everett states that when he went into the basement there were two blankets:

http://www.acandyrose.com/s-Flight755-baggagecheck12261996.htm

From link: Det. Michael Everett informed Your Affiant that after the discovery of the girl's body that he walked through the basement area of the house to attempt to determine if any persons were present in the basement. In the area where Det. Arndt had told Det. Everett that the decedent had been found by her father he observed two blankets on the floor in the center of the room. (BLACKED OUT ARE)
snipped from link


This information can be found about 3/4 of the way down the page. I knew I wasn't losing my mind. The pink "thing" is a pink blanket. There was a barbie nightgown, but not in this photo.

So where did it say there was a pink blanket? Did it describe the blanket at all? Was it cotton, wool, acrylic? Did it come from JBR's bed (her bedroom was mostly pink)? Was it a comforter/throw from her bed? Was there a matching one on the other bed? Did the IDI bring it or if not what was it doing with the white blanket from JBR's bed?

I also noticed this second blanket mentioned a while ago, but for some reason, the RDIs posting at the time reckoned it was a 'mistake'. Go figure!!

 

[UKGuy]

If you guys will follow this link you will see where Detective Everett states that when he went into the basement there were two blankets:

http://www.acandyrose.com/s-Flight755-baggagecheck12261996.htm

From link: Det. Michael Everett informed Your Affiant that after the discovery of the girl's body that he walked through the basement area of the house to attempt to determine if any persons were present in the basement. In the area where Det. Arndt had told Det. Everett that the decedent had been found by her father he observed two blankets on the floor in the center of the room. (BLACKED OUT ARE)
snipped from link


This information can be found about 3/4 of the way down the page. I knew I wasn't losing my mind. The pink "thing" is a pink blanket. There was a barbie nightgown, but not in this photo.

joeskidbeck,
Well if there was a second blanket, why should that call into question both Patsy Ramsey's and Tom Haney's evidence? They both state that they can see a barbie nightgown in front of their eyes. When the bloodstaines were being analysed at the lab it will have been laid out and photographed.

I could understand Tom Haney mistaking the nightgown as a barbie nightgown, but not Patsy, Tom Haney even asks is it her barbie doll's? A question that confirms its identity, and is suggestive of the line of questioning.

The barbie nightgown is no blanket it exists independently of the number of blankets found at the crime-scene. Its has been identified by the parents, BPD and a dna testing lab!


.

 

[UKGuy]

So where did it say there was a pink blanket? Did it describe the blanket at all? Was it cotton, wool, acrylic? Did it come from JBR's bed (her bedroom was mostly pink)? Was it a comforter/throw from her bed? Was there a matching one on the other bed? Did the IDI bring it or if not what was it doing with the white blanket from JBR's bed?

I also noticed this second blanket mentioned a while ago, but for some reason, the RDIs posting at the time reckoned it was a 'mistake'. Go figure!!

MurriFlower,

Maybe the pink barbie nightgown which has been identified as such and entered in the BPD evidence log was mistaken as a blanket?

Others continue to assert that the pink barbie nightgown is indeed a blanket. Go figure!

.

 

[UKGuy]

So what was it again?? I can't keep up with everyone's different RDI theories. A blanket, a Barbie nightgown, a full sized Barbie doll, was it bloodstained, where did it come from and who identified it? Not the right colour for Barbie, not enough face, not big enough, boy this is confusing.

MurriFlower,

It will sure be confusing for anyone promoting an IDI theory since the evidence exists, has been identified and cataloged, and to date no IDI theory has ever incorporated the crime-scene evidence into a coherent theory.

All thats available is remarks about touch-dna and pedophiles.


.

 

[UKGuy]

Beck,

Good call, I thought I was crazy or blind. But your 100% right, its to big to be a 6y/o little girls nightgown. You, my Gel, are on to something....

Agatha_C,

Well if its not JonBenet's, and we know it is a barbie nightgown, and we do, then does it belong to an adult e.g. Patsy?


.

 

[BBB167893]

OK you're not making sense. Are you saying that JBR was molested by a child molester that might not be a pedophile?

I guess I am.

 

[Agatha_C]

UKGuy,

Thats a fair question. I tend to agree with Beck on this. I don't think we have been shown all the pictures, therefor I don't think we are looking at the same one that they were discussing in the interview. For everything leaked to the public, I feel there is twice as much that wasn't. This is one of them. My opinion though, as usually, I think your right on the money, in this maybe not. We weren't there to see the picture PR was shown.

Please know, I respect your opinion and so appreciate everything I have learned from you.