Partially Wrapped Gifts

[JMO8778]

Why would we believe any of it? Why believe they were BR's birthday gifts just because she said so.

for sure;whatever Patsy says is usually just the opposite of the truth.
So if they weren't BR's gifts,then the boxes would have to have been empty(which makes sense,if they'd contained the size 12 underwear prior).Otherwise,how was she going to explain that they'd held BR's gifts,if they held something else?
At the least,Patsy knew the boxes were empty.JR probably told her he'd gotten rid of the rest,but she didn't know where;i.e.-the golf club bag,or else she'd have had her story in sync with his.

 

[UKGuy]

It could have been in one of PR's interviews where she said that- but as with all things PR said in her interviews- it was after the murder and obviously they would tailor their answers to fit the evidence. It isn't surprised to see that when shown crime scene photos and asked by LE to explain the "partially wrapped" gifts in the wineceller that she would offer her explanation of what they were, why they were there and why they were "partially wrapped". Why would we believe any of it? Why believe they were BR's birthday gifts just because she said so.

UKGuy- I am a RDI, I am not exclusively a PDI, though I must say I lean that way. I think you have to realize that we will never know exactly where those panties were originally. We DO know that PR admits buying them as a gift for Jenny. So they existed in the house. Size 12 Bloomies were bought- size 12 Bloomies were on a dead JBR. This was Christmas. PR was notoriously lax about details, so no surprise that they hadn't been mailed out yet.
Here's my logic:
1. PR admit buying size 12 Bloomies Day of the Week panties in size 12 as a gift for her niece Jenny on her shopping trip to NYC in November 1996, included in the set, as in all Day of the Week sets, was a pair that said "Wednesday".
2. A pair of size 12 Bloomies Day of the Week panties saying "Wednedsay" were found on a dead JBR.
3. It should be as least considered that the pair on JBR was the same pair as was included in that set bought for Jenny, as size 12 was definitely NOT bought for JBR.
4. If they were bought as a gift, it should be at least considered that they may have been wrapped. If they were wrapped, the box had to be UNwrapped to get the panties out.
5. The partially "wrapped" gifts in that photo may very well have been partially "UNwrapped".
6. The stagers HAD to get them from somewhere. Intruders would not know either that they existed in a wrapped gift or that JBR's panties were not stored in her bedroom but in her bathroom.
7. Therefore, it is my OPINION that either PR or JR used the panties intended for Jenny, either because they were aware of the fact that those panties were right there in the basement; they MAY have matched panties JBR had on that day; OR they used them because they did not want to go back upstairs to her room to get one of her own pairs.
If they were taken from Jenny's wrapped gift, it has to be considered that the wrapped gift was already in the basement, and was, in fact one of the gifts in the crime scene photo, regardless of what PR said those gifts were.
She herself claims that she stored gifts there, though I don't believe her claim that she wrapped gifts in the wineceller (No table in there- no one would sit on the dirty floor to wrap presents).
SO- Size 12 panties bought for Jenny = opened gifts in wineceller = Jenny's panties removed from wrapped gift and put on a dead JBR.

DeeDee249,

It could have been in one of PR's interviews where she said that- but as with all things PR said in her interviews- it was after the murder and obviously they would tailor their answers to fit the evidence. It isn't surprised to see that when shown crime scene photos and asked by LE to explain the "partially wrapped" gifts in the wineceller that she would offer her explanation of what they were, why they were there and why they were "partially wrapped". Why would we believe any of it? Why believe they were BR's birthday gifts just because she said so.

We do not have to believe they were intended for Burke. Patently such a statement is easily checked, gifts for a young boy would not be suitable for a young girl or an adult. Since there were no further questions in this direction the balance of probability suggests the investigators accepted Patsy's explanation.

Here's my logic:
1. PR admit buying size 12 Bloomies Day of the Week panties in size 12 as a gift for her niece Jenny on her shopping trip to NYC in November 1996, included in the set, as in all Day of the Week sets, was a pair that said "Wednesday".
2. A pair of size 12 Bloomies Day of the Week panties saying "Wednedsay" were found on a dead JBR.
3. It should be as least considered that the pair on JBR was the same pair as was included in that set bought for Jenny, as size 12 was definitely NOT bought for JBR.
4. If they were bought as a gift, it should be at least considered that they may have been wrapped. If they were wrapped, the box had to be UNwrapped to get the panties out.
5. The partially "wrapped" gifts in that photo may very well have been partially "UNwrapped".
6. The stagers HAD to get them from somewhere. Intruders would not know either that they existed in a wrapped gift or that JBR's panties were not stored in her bedroom but in her bathroom.
7. Therefore, it is my OPINION that either PR or JR used the panties intended for Jenny, either because they were aware of the fact that those panties were right there in the basement; they MAY have matched panties JBR had on that day; OR they used them because they did not want to go back upstairs to her room to get one of her own pairs.
If they were taken from Jenny's wrapped gift, it has to be considered that the wrapped gift was already in the basement, and was, in fact one of the gifts in the crime scene photo, regardless of what PR said those gifts were.
She herself claims that she stored gifts there, though I don't believe her claim that she wrapped gifts in the wineceller (No table in there- no one would sit on the dirty floor to wrap presents).
SO- Size 12 panties bought for Jenny = opened gifts in wineceller = Jenny's panties removed from wrapped gift and put on a dead JBR.

I reckon everyone will agree with steps 1-3. But step 4. has a few conditionals inserted one of which is a tautology. Lets parse it:

If they were bought as a gift

you have already assumed this is true in 1.

it should be at least considered that they may have been wrapped.

Sure but which wrapping, Bloomingdales or FAO Schwartz?

If they were wrapped, the box had to be UNwrapped to get the panties out.

Always true.

5. The partially "wrapped" gifts in that photo may very well have been partially "UNwrapped".

Patsy is on record stating she opened these gifts:

Partially wrapped FAO Schwartz (55KKY)
Partially wrapped FAO Schwartz (56KKY)
Partially wrapped FAO Schwartz (57KKY)

Now she said FAO Schwartz mailed these gifts back to her along with the free wrapping so presumably they would have kept a record of how many packages were mailed? So can tey tell us if one is missing i.e. there should be four? I suspect the gifts were name-tagged else what is the point of fancy wrapping that needs to be opened? Review the picture showing JonBenet on xmas-morning with a FAO Schwartz wrapped gift to her left. How did anyone know who that was intended for if it was still wrapped?

6. The stagers HAD to get them from somewhere. Intruders would not know either that they existed in a wrapped gift or that JBR's panties were not stored in her bedroom but in her bathroom.

Sure but it does not follow that any of the latter locations are the one in question the size-12's may have been stored in Patsy's bedroom drawer, unwrapped.

7. Therefore, it is my OPINION that either PR or JR used the panties intended for Jenny, either because they were aware of the fact that those panties were right there in the basement; they MAY have matched panties JBR had on that day; OR they used them because they did not want to go back upstairs to her room to get one of her own pairs.

The size-12's do not have to be located in the basement. The matching may be relevant or a consequence of the choice available. I reckon they were chosen because the person redressing JonBenet did not want to go anywhere near her bedroom. If you consider the logic a non-Wednesday pair of size-6's is as potentially inconsistent as a Wednesday pair of size-12's. e.g. a post-mortem explanation for either is still required. That is size versus day-of-the-week.

7.
If they were taken from Jenny's wrapped gift, it has to be considered that the wrapped gift was already in the basement, and was, in fact one of the gifts in the crime scene photo, regardless of what PR said those gifts were.

This would follow if we knew that any of the gifts were partially-wrapped and empty?

7.
She herself claims that she stored gifts there, though I don't believe her claim that she wrapped gifts in the wineceller (No table in there- no one would sit on the dirty floor to wrap presents).

John contradicts this in his interview. So why should Patsy say she wrapped those gifts there, then later tell investigators she placed the size-12's into JonBenet's bathroom drawer, when by her own logic, she would know they were already missing, I reckon this indirectly implicates John?

SO- Size 12 panties bought for Jenny = opened gifts in wineceller = Jenny's panties removed from wrapped gift and put on a dead JBR.

Maybe. Why do the gifts need to be opened, if they already know they are intended for Burke. I reckon its not Patsy who would not know but John?


.

 

[UKGuy]

for sure;whatever Patsy says is usually just the opposite of the truth.
So if they weren't BR's gifts,then the boxes would have to have been empty(which makes sense,if they'd contained the size 12 underwear prior).Otherwise,how was she going to explain that they'd held BR's gifts,if they held something else?
At the least,Patsy knew the boxes were empty.JR probably told her he'd gotten rid of the rest,but she didn't know where;i.e.-the golf club bag,or else she'd have had her story in sync with his.

JMO8778,

At the least,Patsy knew the boxes were empty.

Who says so? Alike the size-12's missing from JonBenet's bathroom panty drawer, if there had been any empty gift-wrapping we would have known about it, since Patsy would have been asked to comment.

Partially wrapped FAO Schwartz (55KKY)
Partially wrapped FAO Schwartz (56KKY)
Partially wrapped FAO Schwartz (57KKY)

Surely this description would have included the word empty if any or all were?


.

 

[JMO8778]

JMO8778,


Who says so? Alike the size-12's missing from JonBenet's bathroom panty drawer, if there had been any empty gift-wrapping we would have known about it, since Patsy would have been asked to comment.


Surely this description would have included the word empty if any or all were?


.

UK,she was asked to comment.Why would she be questioned at all about these boxes if they held gifts for BR? It would be self-explanatory. All it says are 'partially wrapped FAO Schwartz'.That could just mean partly wrapped boxes.Was Patsy implying she took the gifts out to take along on the trip,since his bday was in Jan.?

 

[DeeDee249]

The box(s) need not have been empty. The package/tube of panties may have been included with other items in a larger box. As far as the wrapping paper that was used- we have incomplete crime scene photos to work with- we have never seen all the photos available. While it is true that the paper shown in the corner of the wineceller photo was the FAO Schwartz paper, we should not assume that all the gifts were wrapped in the same paper. We could also assume that at least one box MAY have been a gift for BR. The way I understand it, LE never really investigated those gifts further, as far as discovering what was in the boxes and noting what paper they were wrapped with. They were listed as "partially unwrapped gifts"- the end. Then when PR was questioned about them she of course had her own "explanations".
Bloomies panties are in a small package- often a plastic tube not much bigger than a soda can. They could very easily be put in a box containing clothes, or even a bigger toy.

 

[DeeDee249]

UK,she was asked to comment.Why would she be questioned at all about these boxes if they held gifts for BR? It would be self-explanatory. All it says are 'partially wrapped FAO Schwartz'.That could just mean partly wrapped boxes.Was Patsy implying she took the gifts out to take along on the trip,since his bday was in Jan.?

Gifts for BR would not necessarily be self-explanatory. Video games and such are not always gender-specific, and even if it were boy's clothing, there may have been other boys PR was giving gifts to aside from her son.
I think though she was questioned about the boxes and their state of (un)wrapping, she was not questioned about the content because in my opinion, LE never investigated the contents.
However, I CAN imagine LE forming a link between what had to have looked like NEW Bloomies size 12 panties on a dead JBR- and PR's own admission to buying the size 12 Bloomies panties as a GIFT for her niece- and the partially unwrapped gifts found right there in the wineceller not far from a dead child wearing seemingly those same aforementioned panties (even if the rest of the Bloomies panties were not found there). Nor was it ever mentioned that I can recall that the supposedly "found" set of size 12's that were sent to LE from Atlanta was a complete set of 7 pairs or had a Wednesday pair missing. It amazes me that more wasn't made of THAT anyway. Was it supposed to be a COINCIDENCE that PR admits to buying the Bloomies panties and an identical pair was found on her daughter? I never saw anyone ask her, nor even SAY, that the too-big Bloomies panties found on a dead JBR must have been from the set PR bought for Jenny in NYC. So I suppose the spin is that the "intruder" must have also shopped at Bloomies and also bought day-of-the-week panties that were the identical size PR bought for her niece. Because if they are trying to say that an intruder knew where those panties were OR they were found coincidentally, that flies in the face of reason.
Don't forget that PR is tailoring her answers to fit her own story. If she had bought boy's clothes or toys for someone else, what's to stop her from saying they were for her son? Nothing. UNLESS LE examined those closely enough to know if they were tagged and if so, whose names were on them, and I don't ever recall seeing evidence that they DID, in fact, question the Rs mentioning the contents of the gifts and any tags that were in them.

 

[UKGuy]

UK,she was asked to comment.Why would she be questioned at all about these boxes if they held gifts for BR? It would be self-explanatory. All it says are 'partially wrapped FAO Schwartz'.That could just mean partly wrapped boxes.Was Patsy implying she took the gifts out to take along on the trip,since his bday was in Jan.?

JMO8778,

UK,she was asked to comment.

No questions were asked about why any particular package was empty!

e.g.

...

20 PATSY RAMSEY: I believe for, you know, I
21 held some back for Burke's birthday which is in
22 January.
23 TRIP DEMUTH: Okay.
24 TOM HANEY: So that could have been that.
25 PATSY RAMSEY: Yeah. I don't remember what

0393
1 was in them.
2 TOM HANEY: Would any of these packages be
3 opened?
4 PATSY RAMSEY: Probably. Well, see, these
5 came up, I was at FAO Schwartz in New York when
6 JonBenet and I were up there for a trip, and I had them
7 sent back to Boulder and they wrapped them, free gift
8 wrapping.
9 So like right here it looks like I kind of
10 peeled a little back to see what was in it because I
11 couldn't remember what was in them.
12 TRIP DEMUTH: If the wrapping has been undone
13 partially, that was --
14 PATSY RAMSEY: I probably would have done
15 that to peek to see what was in there.
16 TRIP DEMUTH: Okay.

...

So note although Trip Demuth established that Patsy opened the gifts intended for Burke, no mention was made that any were empty, nor was Patsy asked to comment specifically on the contents, so presumably they all contained a gift.

I repeat Patsy tells us she purchased these gifts for Burke, and that they were mailed to her by FAO Schwartz in New York, so she knew for whom they were intended prior to her looking, which contradicts lines 14 and 15.

John Ramsey when being interviewed by Lou Smit states:

...

0272
20 JOHN RAMSEY: Well Patsy had gotten a bunch
21 of gifts at FAO Swartz up in New York in early
22 December, some of which were for them were for
23 Burke's birthday, which was in January. She didn't
24 know they were in the closet exactly,

...

So how did Patsy not know this, and how can this be reconciled with her own bizarre statements about taking a peek at gifts that she herself purchased, and that the FAO Swartz wrapping identified anyway.

To put Patsy in the frame you must demonstrate that the size-12's were wrapped in FAO Swartz wrapping and that the gifts had no name or product tags affixed.

Again I reckon Patsy is covering up for John, her whole story about the xmas-gifts, and the location of the size-12's is totally inconsistent.

Check this for Patsy's answers:

...

10 TRIP DEMUTH: Now in 148 there is also this
11 white pocket, do you know what that is?
12 PATSY RAMSEY: Huh-uh, it looks like cotton.
13 I don't know.
14 TRIP DEMUTH: Okay. It is hard to sort of
15 figure out where all of these pictures are taken, but
16 there is another package over here.
17 PATSY RAMSEY: Uh-huh.
18 TRIP DEMUTH: Does that look out of place or
19 in the proper place?
20 PATSY RAMSEY: Well, I had -- you know, I
21 stacked up some packages along there (inaudible).
22 Kicked (inaudible) or something. I kind of have it
23 backed up here.
24 TRIP DEMUTH: Okay. So the packages in 146,
25 it looks like it is out of place to you?

0392
1 PATSY RAMSEY: Uh-huh. Yeah. See, that
2 looks -- the door would be here.
3 TRIP DEMUTH: It is hard.
4 PATSY RAMSEY: So that would be back in here
5 somewhere. I was right in front of the door.
6 TRIP DEMUTH: No. Here are the screens. You
7 see the screens over here, the small screens, so it is
8 more back in this.
9 PATSY RAMSEY: Yeah. I would tuck them
10 there.
11 TRIP DEMUTH: I guess the point is, there
12 wasn't one that was off by itself. They should have
13 all been together.
14 The location in picture 148 is the correct
15 place for all of the packages to have been?
16 PATSY RAMSEY: Right.

...

I wonder what line 12 was, the blanket?

Now both John and Patsy are asked do these packages look out of place? Patsy answers eventually in line 16 Right. e.g. a package is out of place. I'm assuming in lines 20-23 Patsy is attempting to say she only stored the packages in the WC, but as per normal cannot be quite certain of the actual physical arrangement.


.

 

[UKGuy]

The box(s) need not have been empty. The package/tube of panties may have been included with other items in a larger box. As far as the wrapping paper that was used- we have incomplete crime scene photos to work with- we have never seen all the photos available. While it is true that the paper shown in the corner of the wineceller photo was the FAO Schwartz paper, we should not assume that all the gifts were wrapped in the same paper. We could also assume that at least one box MAY have been a gift for BR. The way I understand it, LE never really investigated those gifts further, as far as discovering what was in the boxes and noting what paper they were wrapped with. They were listed as "partially unwrapped gifts"- the end. Then when PR was questioned about them she of course had her own "explanations".
Bloomies panties are in a small package- often a plastic tube not much bigger than a soda can. They could very easily be put in a box containing clothes, or even a bigger toy.

DeeDee249,

While it is true that the paper shown in the corner of the wineceller photo was the FAO Schwartz paper, we should not assume that all the gifts were wrapped in the same paper.

So why the need for Patsy to peek at the FAO Schwartz gifts, and where is the fourth unwrapped gift containing someting intended for a young girl?

They were listed as "partially unwrapped gifts"- the end.

Totally incorrect. The warrant itemised the gifts as:

http://community.bouldernews.com/extra/ramsey/1997/09/29-2.html
Partially wrapped FAO Schwartz (55KKY)
Partially wrapped FAO Schwartz (56KKY)
Partially wrapped FAO Schwartz (57KKY)




.

 

[coloradokares]

DeeDee249,

So why the need for Patsy to peek at the FAO Schwartz gifts, and where is the fourth unwrapped gift containing someting intended for a young girl?


Totally incorrect. The warrant itemised the gifts as:

http://community.bouldernews.com/extra/ramsey/1997/09/29-2.html
Partially wrapped FAO Schwartz (55KKY)
Partially wrapped FAO Schwartz (56KKY)
Partially wrapped FAO Schwartz (57KKY)






.

Check out the typos on the ransom note listing. " S.B.J.C" How odd Are we sure this is accurate of is this the Newspapers typo?

 

[UKGuy]

Check out the typos on the ransom note listing. " S.B.J.C" How odd Are we sure this is accurate of is this the Newspapers typo?

coloradokares,
Well I'm not certain, try acandyrose, same warrant:
http://www.acandyrose.com/s-Flight755-baggagecheck12261996.htm

.

 

[DeeDee249]

You're right- I meant to say they were listed as "partially wrapped".

However, we have only PRs word that the packages were exclusively from FAO Schwartz. She does admit to being in NYC in November of that year, though JR talks about a December trip to FAO Schwartz. Whichever it was, it was during PR's shopping trip to NYC that she purchased the 2 sets of Bloomies panties (one in JBR's size 6 and one size 12 for Jenny) as well as whatever she purchased in FAO Schwartz for BR or anyone else.
Again- it is only PR's word about what was in the gifts in the basement, who they were for and what they were wrapped in. If she admits to LE that she may have opened them to "peek at what was in them" because she couldn't remember it isn't to big a leap to say that they were "peeked" into to find the panties. Obviously this would not be something she would freely say.

 

[UKGuy]

You're right- I meant to say they were listed as "partially wrapped".

However, we have only PRs word that the packages were exclusively from FAO Schwartz. She does admit to being in NYC in November of that year, though JR talks about a December trip to FAO Schwartz. Whichever it was, it was during PR's shopping trip to NYC that she purchased the 2 sets of Bloomies panties (one in JBR's size 6 and one size 12 for Jenny) as well as whatever she purchased in FAO Schwartz for BR or anyone else.
Again- it is only PR's word about what was in the gifts in the basement, who they were for and what they were wrapped in. If she admits to LE that she may have opened them to "peek at what was in them" because she couldn't remember it isn't to big a leap to say that they were "peeked" into to find the panties. Obviously this would not be something she would freely say.

DeeDee249,

However, we have only PRs word that the packages were exclusively from FAO Schwartz. She does admit to being in NYC in November of that year, though JR talks about a December trip to FAO Schwartz.

Yes, JR says December:

...
0272
20 JOHN RAMSEY: Well Patsy had gotten a bunch
21 of gifts at FAO Swartz up in New York in early
22 December, some of which were for them were for
23 Burke's birthday, which was in January. She didn't
24 know they were in the closet exactly,
...

Patsy just states:

...
17 TOM HANEY: Before we go on, could we just
18 talk briefly about the packages, these were presents
19 for whom, the ones that were left in there?
0392
20 PATSY RAMSEY: I believe for, you know, I
21 held some back for Burke's birthday which is in
22 January.
23 TRIP DEMUTH: Okay.

So presumably Trip DeMuth is referring to these gifts?

Partially wrapped FAO Schwartz (55KKY)
Partially wrapped FAO Schwartz (56KKY)
Partially wrapped FAO Schwartz (57KKY)

2 TOM HANEY: Would any of these packages be
3 opened?
4 PATSY RAMSEY: Probably. Well, see, these
5 came up, I was at FAO Schwartz in New York when
6 JonBenet and I were up there for a trip, and I had them
7 sent back to Boulder and they wrapped them, free gift
8 wrapping.

No mention of the size-12's here or Jenny's gift.

I reckon the Partially wrapped FAO Schwartz gifts would have to have contained gifts suitable for Burke otherwise more questions would have followed, same procedure if any FAO Schwartz wrapped gift had been empty, so Patsy's explanantion regarding the FAO Schwartz gifts appears consistent.

Again- it is only PR's word about what was in the gifts in the basement, who they were for and what they were wrapped in.

Sure, my understanding is that Trip DeMuth is only referring to the Partially wrapped FAO Schwartz gifts, I know of no other record itemising any other partially/unwrapped gifts in the wine-cellar?

She does admit to being in NYC in November of that year, though JR talks about a December trip to FAO Schwartz. Whichever it was,

Patsy states in interview that it was November 96 that she purchased the size-12's. Which makes sense because I guess she would not take JonBenet along to FAO Schwartz to observe her purchasing gifts for Burke?

Atlanta 2000 Interview
http://www.jonbenetindexguide.com/2000ATL-Patsy-Interview-Complete.htm

...

1 Q. The underwear that she was

2 wearing, that is Bloomi's panties, do you

3 know where they come from as far as what

4 store?

5 A. Bloomingdales in New York.

6 Q. Who purchased those?

7 A. I did.

8 Q. Do you recall when you purchased

9 them?

10 A. It was, I think, November of '96.

11 Q. In the fall of 1996, how many

12 trips did you make to New York?

13 A. Two, I believe.

14 Q. Do you recall, and again, the

15 same, same qualification I gave you when we

16 started, which is, I understand that you are

17 not going to give me exact dates, but the

18 two trips you made, did you make those with

19 different groups of people?

20 A. Yes.

21 Q. The first trip, who was that trip

22 with?

23 A. The first trip was a

24 mother-daughter trip with my mother Nedra

25 Paugh, my sister Pam Paugh, friends Susan

0079

1 Flanders from Charlevoix, Michigan, and her

2 daughter and a friend of Susan's, Ms.

3 Kirkpatrick I believe was her name, and her

4 daughter, and JonBenet and myself.

5 Q. And the second trip you made was?

6 A. The second trip we made was with

7 Glen and Susan Stein.

8 Q. Is that the trip -- which trip

9 was the November trip?

10 A. With the children.

11 Q. Was that -- that is the first

12 trip?

13 A. Yes.

14 Q. And the second trip that you and

15 your husband and the Steins took, was that

16 also November, but later in the month, or

17 was that a December trip?

18 A. I think it was December.

19 Q. And maybe this will help jog your

20 memory as to time. I believe that was the

21 time of the Christmas parade in Boulder.

22 A. Yes.

23 Q. Is that correct?

24 A. Yes.

25 Q. Were you out of town?

0080

1 A. I remember that.

2 Q. Which of those two trips did you

3 purchase the Bloomi's?

4 A. The first trip.

5 Q. Was it something that was selected

6 by JonBenet?

7 A. I believe so.

8 Q. Was it your intention, when you

9 purchased those, for those to be for her,

10 not for some third party as a gift?

11 A. I bought some things that were

12 gifts and some things for her. So I

13 don't --

14 Q. Just so I am clear, though, it is

15 your best recollection that the purchase of

16 the underpants, the Bloomi's days of the

17 week, was something that you bought for her,

18 whether it was just I am buying underwear

19 for my kids or these are special, here's a

20 present, that doesn't matter, but it was your

21 intention that she would wear those?

22 A. Well, I think that I bought a

23 package of the -- they came in a package of

24 Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, Friday.

25 I think I bought a package to give to my

0081

1 niece.

2 Q. Which niece was that?

3 A. Jenny Davis.

4 Q. They came in, if you recall, do

5 you remember that they come in kind of a

6 plastic see-through plastic container.

7 A. Right.

8 Q. They are rolled up?

9 A. Yes.

10 Q. So if I understand you correctly,

11 you bought one package for Jenny Davis, your

12 niece, and one for JonBenet?

13 A. I am not sure if I bought one or

14 two.

15 Q. Do you remember what size they

16 were?

17 A. Not exactly.

18 Q. JonBenet was found wearing the

19 Wednesday Bloomi's underpants, and your

20 understanding is correct, that is a fact, you

21 can accept that as a fact, when she was

22 found murdered. Those underpants do not fit

23 her. Were you aware of that?

...

So why should the Bloomingdales panties ever be wrapped in FAO Schwartz paper? The size-12's and Burke's gifts are separated chronologically.

 

[coloradokares]

coloradokares,
Well I'm not certain, try acandyrose, same warrant:
http://www.acandyrose.com/s-Flight755-baggagecheck12261996.htm

.

Just for grins and giggles I did indeed click on the link you leftUK. You and I both knew the accurate answer, But if the other was being presented as an authentic copy of the warrant, and it at first glance appeared as though that is what they were trying to convey That was the give away. This was nothing more than some copy. I wonder how much we take as fact is article? Or does this not leave anyone else wondering. Ok.... I guess I am just fussy like that. I want to see orginal not someones rendering of a list.

 

[JMO8778]

Patsy just states:

So presumably Trip DeMuth is referring to these gifts?

Partially wrapped FAO Schwartz (55KKY)
Partially wrapped FAO Schwartz (56KKY)
Partially wrapped FAO Schwartz (57KKY)



No mention of the size-12's here or Jenny's gift.

I reckon the Partially wrapped FAO Schwartz gifts would have to have contained gifts suitable for Burke otherwise more questions would have followed, same procedure if any FAO Schwartz wrapped gift had been empty, so Patsy's explanantion regarding the FAO Schwartz gifts appears consistent.


Sure, my understanding is that Trip DeMuth is only referring to the Partially wrapped FAO Schwartz gifts, I know of no other record itemising any other partially/unwrapped gifts in the wine-cellar?

..if I may add a thought...it sounds like the box containing the size 12's disappeared.(into the golf bag at that !)
In other words,there were several gifts brought into the basement together,perhaps they were just grabbed hurriedly,and,keep in mind,JR was questioned about the night vision goggles.So it sounds to me like he didn't turn the light on,and perhaps he opened more boxes than he needed to.
Perhaps Patsy wasn't present for this.She would have known the FAO S. boxes were for BR.She may have simply told JR where the box(s) for Jenny were,and he inadvertently grabbed BR's as well.But only the one(s) for Jenny disappeared,as they were only the ones relevant to the crime.BR's were left behind,being considered unimportant.(just as his knife was).

 

[UKGuy]

..if I may add a thought...it sounds like the box containing the size 12's disappeared.(into the golf bag at that !)
In other words,there were several gifts brought into the basement together,perhaps they were just grabbed hurriedly,and,keep in mind,JR was questioned about the night vision goggles.So it sounds to me like he didn't turn the light on,and perhaps he opened more boxes than he needed to.
Perhaps Patsy wasn't present for this.She would have known the FAO S. boxes were for BR.She may have simply told JR where the box(s) for Jenny were,and he inadvertently grabbed BR's as well.But only the one(s) for Jenny disappeared,as they were only the ones relevant to the crime.BR's were left behind,being considered unimportant.(just as his knife was).

JMO8778,

..if I may add a thought...it sounds like the box containing the size 12's disappeared.(into the golf bag at that !)

Sure looks that way.

In other words,there were several gifts brought into the basement together,perhaps they were just grabbed hurriedly,and,keep in mind,JR was questioned about the night vision goggles.So it sounds to me like he didn't turn the light on,and perhaps he opened more boxes than he needed to.

Maybe, also might be there is a simpler explanation.

turn the light on,and perhaps he opened more boxes than he needed to.
Perhaps Patsy wasn't present for this.She would have known the FAO S. boxes were for BR.She may have simply told JR where the box(s) for Jenny were,and he inadvertently grabbed BR's as well.But only the one(s) for Jenny disappeared,as they were only the ones relevant to the crime.BR's were left behind,being considered unimportant.(just as his knife was).

Yes could be, but if Patsy knows why does she implicate herself by lying to the investigators over the size-12's?

 

[UKGuy]

Just for grins and giggles I did indeed click on the link you leftUK. You and I both knew the accurate answer, But if the other was being presented as an authentic copy of the warrant, and it at first glance appeared as though that is what they were trying to convey That was the give away. This was nothing more than some copy. I wonder how much we take as fact is article? Or does this not leave anyone else wondering. Ok.... I guess I am just fussy like that. I want to see orginal not someones rendering of a list.

coloradokares,
You are right, not everything you read is fact, some stuff you have to accept e.g. Holly Smith saying JonBenet's size-6's were mostly soiled. Its best to look at the original then some other source for confirmation.

Or look at the gifts in question, over time those gifts have become conflated to include Jenny's size-12's, yet they were purchased at separate points in time, so should have different wrappings, also Susan Stein would be able to tell us since she was with PR on the December trip.


.

 

[coloradokares]

coloradokares,
You are right, not everything you read is fact, some stuff you have to accept e.g. Holly Smith saying JonBenet's size-6's were mostly soiled. Its best to look at the original then some other source for confirmation.

Or look at the gifts in question, over time those gifts have become conflated to include Jenny's size-12's, yet they were purchased at separate points in time, so should have different wrappings, also Susan Stein would be able to tell us since she was with PR on the December trip.


.

I totally trust that Holly Smith provided compete information that was accurate as possible as regards JonBenets underwear. I know the reporter that interviewed this sexual abuse officer. I trust the source of this information to be nothing but the highest quality and accurate or this reporter would not have tied her own reputation to that special coverage.

 

[DeeDee249]

JMO8778,

Sure looks that way.


Maybe, also might be there is a simpler explanation.


Yes could be, but if Patsy knows why does she implicate herself by lying to the investigators over the size-12's?

PR lied about the pineapple, owning the bowl it was in (at first) and about her daughter being awake when she got home that night. She may have lied about what her daughter wore that day as well. Why is lying about the panties, when-where-and for whom they were bought any different? She lied about not remembering if she bought one or 2 packages of panties. Believe me- she remembers.
Once again....NO intruder would have gone back upstairs to look for panties, and if they had- they would never have thought to look in her BATHROOM. Those panties were put on hr by her parent(s). A parent couldn't bring themselves to leave their child naked. The size 12 were used because they were THERE and the Rs didn't want to risk going upstairs and/or because they replaced an identical pair she had been wearing.

 

[UKGuy]

PR lied about the pineapple, owning the bowl it was in (at first) and about her daughter being awake when she got home that night. She may have lied about what her daughter wore that day as well. Why is lying about the panties, when-where-and for whom they were bought any different? She lied about not remembering if she bought one or 2 packages of panties. Believe me- she remembers.
Once again....NO intruder would have gone back upstairs to look for panties, and if they had- they would never have thought to look in her BATHROOM. Those panties were put on hr by her parent(s). A parent couldn't bring themselves to leave their child naked. The size 12 were used because they were THERE and the Rs didn't want to risk going upstairs and/or because they replaced an identical pair she had been wearing.

DeeDee249,

PR lied about the pineapple, owning the bowl it was in (at first) and about her daughter being awake when she got home that night. She may have lied about what her daughter wore that day as well. Why is lying about the panties, when-where-and for whom they were bought any different?

It is different, and the difference is what makes her lies so significant. Herein lies the distinction: the pineapple, the bowl etc have nothing to do with staging a crime-scene, these are the obvious consequence of circumstance and the denial is forced upon Patsy.

The lies and multiple explanations offered for JonBenet wearing size-12's are not consistent with the crime-scene staging, no denial need be forced upon Patsy, if she redressed JonBenet in those size-12's, and this was part of some vision she had of how the wine-cellar and its victim should be presented, then patently she must have known some credible explanation would be required as to why JonBenet was wearing size-12 underwear. The removal of the remaining size-12's from the crime-scene torpedoed her later explanation, so if she opened the size-12's up removed a pair, redressed JonBenet, then disposed of the other 6-pairs, she would know that they were not available to confirm her explanation of how they arrived in JonBenet's panty drawer. e.g. her explanation is not a denial of knowledge, or of the existence of the size-12's as is the case with the pineapple and the bowl!

She lied about not remembering if she bought one or 2 packages of panties. Believe me- she remembers.

But not that she purchased the size-12's, she confirms that the size-12's are Ramsey property and that no intruder brought them into the house.

Once again....NO intruder would have gone back upstairs to look for panties, and if they had- they would never have thought to look in her BATHROOM.

I agree.

Those panties were put on hr by her parent(s).

It sure looks that way, but which parent?

A parent couldn't bring themselves to leave their child naked.

Well thats how an intruder would leave JonBenet, naked and bloody, the intruder whilst indulging his fetish would not be considering the aesthetics or modesty of JonBenet's appearance.

The size 12 were used because they were THERE and the Rs didn't want to risk going upstairs and/or because they replaced an identical pair she had been wearing.

They were used to stage a crime-scene, and they may have been placed on her upstairs, otherwise you may expect blood on the blankets? The importance of the staging is that we can figure out what the stagers intentions were e.g. we know that the stager never intended that the investigators should think that the intruder had redressed JonBenet, because the remaining size-12's were not left at the crime-scene. From the LE remarks in the Atlanta interview they told Patsy that they had not found any size-12's anywhere in the house, and that they had removed 15-pairs of size-6's from her panty drawer. This placed Patsy in the frame and after some discussion the Ramsey investigators were handed some size-12's to explain away their existence upon JonBenet.

So lets consider the crime-scene staging wrt size-12's. LE say they removed 15-pairs of size-6's from her panty drawer. So theoretically that is 2 sets of seven individual day-of-the-week pairs, potentially a choice from two pairs of Wednesday size-6's to place on JonBenet. The 15th pair could be any day of the week, including a Wednesday. So whomever redressed JonBenet elected to ignore these Wednesday size-6's in favor of the size-12 Wednesday pair. Furthermore Patsy would have been fully aware that redressing JonBenet in the size-12's would eventually raise a question, and if her explantion was to be that JonBenet must have redressed herself, since neither her parents or the intruder did so, then why not dispense with the size-12's and choose any pair of size-6's, since the same answer can offered to explain away JonBenet not wearing an alleged Wednesday-pair of size-6's? That is JonBenet's underwear via size or day-of-the-week may be questionable, but selecting the size-12's is totally inconsistent, whereas any pair of size-6's is defensible and probably no questions may ever have been raised, as to JonBenet being redressed?

You may say that Patsy chose the Wednesday size-12's so the day-of-the-week matched her size-6's worn to the White's, so why did she neglect the size-6's in JonBenet's panty drawer, and having done so, then fail to have some explanation for her crime-scene staging?

imo its because it was another Ramsey who redressed JonBenet, probably the same person who wiped her down, and who did not want to present JonBenet bloodied and naked, so avoided her bedroom, and this person assumed that the Wednesday size-12's would look OK, as crime-scene staging, then intentionally removed the remaining 6-pairs of size-12's, placing Patsy in an untenable position to explain away how JonBenet came to be wearing them.

So thats the difference: in one context Patsy's lies are a denial, in another they offer an explanation for crime-scene evidence which is contradicted by investigators telling Patsy they found no such other associated evidence anywhere in the house, this implicates Patsy and flags up a staged crime-scene.


.

 

[JMO8778]

imo its because it was another Ramsey who redressed JonBenet, probably the same person who wiped her down, and who did not want to present JonBenet bloodied and naked, so avoided her bedroom, and this person assumed that the Wednesday size-12's would look OK, as crime-scene staging, then intentionally removed the remaining 6-pairs of size-12's, placing Patsy in an untenable position to explain away how JonBenet came to be wearing them.



.

I had a thought here...that does seem logical,esp. if it were JOHN who did the redressing..(as the fiber evidence appears to indicate).
It would be perfectly normal for Patsy to have been in JB's room that night... should Burke wake up and see her going in or out of her bedroom.But it appears JOHN did *not want to be seen anywhere near JB's bedroom !