Something that has been bugging me... (WARNING: GRAPHIC CONTENT)

[icedtea4me]

Four red fibers, which were consistent with Patsys Black, Red and Gray Jacket?

How do you explain the hundreds of unsourced fibers that were found?

Was an analysis done of the blanket that John put on top of JonBenet?

 

[BBB167893]

Was an analysis done of the blanket that John put on top of JonBenet?

Frankly, icedtea4me, I see no need to explain them. It was a large house known to have a lot of people in it.

Patsy's fibers, OTOH, are damning not just because they were hers but WHERE they were and her inability to account for them (though her shifting stories sure tried)!

 

[inspector rex]

Frankly, icedtea4me, I see no need to explain them. It was a large house known to have a lot of people in it.

Patsy's fibers, OTOH, are damning not just because they were hers but WHERE they were and her inability to account for them (though her shifting stories sure tried)!

You see no need for anyone to explain how fibers from unknown persons/sources came to be there.

If anyone had the right to be in that house, surely it's one of the people who lived there?

 

[andreww]

You see no need for anyone to explain how fibers from unknown persons/sources came to be there.

If anyone had the right to be in that house, surely it's one of the people who lived there?

You understand that there are probably a million unknown fibers in that house right?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Anti-K]

We should only be concerned with those fibers that were found in incriminating locations.

Unsourced trace evidence found in incriminating locations can have innocent explanations. But, sourced trace evidence found in incriminating locations can have innocent explanations, too. So, if unsourced fibers can innocently find their way into incriminating locations than so can Ramsey fibers.

The incriminatory value of the Ramsey fibers (for the Ramseys) is low, for obvious reasons (Ramsey home). And, the unsourced fibers have some exculpatory value (for the Ramseys) because investigators went to great length to source those fibers and their efforts failed.

Investigators went so far as to tape the floors and closets of the Ramsey home. And, yet fibers (and, hairs; and DNA) that were found in incriminating locations (tape, ligatures; genital area) remain unsourced. This should not be dismissed lightly.

Unsourced trace evidence (fibers, hairs, DNA) found in incriminating locations is exactly what we could expect to find if this crime had been committed by an unknown person. Just sayin...
...

AK

 

[Aynia]

JMHO unsourced fibers doesn't exactly means intruder fibers, they're just that, unsourced, again MOO

 

[inspector rex]

We should only be concerned with those fibers that were found in incriminating locations.

Unsourced trace evidence found in incriminating locations can have innocent explanations. But, sourced trace evidence found in incriminating locations can have innocent explanations, too. So, if unsourced fibers can innocently find their way into incriminating locations than so can Ramsey fibers.

The incriminatory value of the Ramsey fibers (for the Ramseys) is low, for obvious reasons (Ramsey home). And, the unsourced fibers have some exculpatory value (for the Ramseys) because investigators went to great length to source those fibers and their efforts failed.

Investigators went so far as to tape the floors and closets of the Ramsey home. And, yet fibers (and, hairs; and DNA) that were found in incriminating locations (tape, ligatures; genital area) remain unsourced. This should not be dismissed lightly.

Unsourced trace evidence (fibers, hairs, DNA) found in incriminating locations is exactly what we could expect to find if this crime had been committed by an unknown person. Just sayin...
...

AK

So, AK are you saying that there was nothing found in the house that matched any of the fibers except four!!

Wow, if that doesn't put doubt into the minds of RDI enthusiasts, then nothing will..........

 

[BBB167893]

You see no need for anyone to explain how fibers from unknown persons/sources came to be there.

If anyone had the right to be in that house, surely it's one of the people who lived there?

Oh, no. I'm not doing that dance with you AGAIN. What I said speaks for itself, or at least it should.

Frankly, CherCher and andreww have it, far as I'm concerned.

 

[BBB167893]

We should only be concerned with those fibers that were found in incriminating locations.

That's what I'm doing!

Look, for those who STILL don't get it, let me explain it simply:

Patsy's fibers were found in four places directly linked to the crime, on items the Rs CLAIMED were never in the house before the night in question and would have had no chance to pick up fibers, especially since she said she never wore those clothes in the basement and never painted while she wore them. Moreover, when she tried to account for them, after having TWO FULL YEARS to consider the question, her claim was in conflict with what JR had already written in DOI.

Thus, the logical conclusion is that the fibers transferred to those items through direct contact with her clothing. Same deal with JR's fibers in JB's underwear. Logically, they scuffed off his sleeve on her clothing when he drew his arm back.

None of this takes a big leap of imagination.

 

[inspector rex]

Oh, no. I'm not doing that dance with you AGAIN.

Spin me around again!!

What I said speaks for itself, or at least it should.

Believe me, it does.

Frankly, CherCher and andreww have it, far as I'm concerned.

Good to see you are all on the same page.

 

[BBB167893]

Spin me around again!!

No, thank you! I made my statement.

Believe me, it does.

What's THAT supposed to mean?

Good to see you are all on the same page.

Whether we are or not has nothing to do with it.

 

[inspector rex]

That's what I'm doing!

Look, for those who STILL don't get it, let me explain it simply:

Patsy's fibers were found in four places directly linked to the crime, on items the Rs CLAIMED were never in the house before the night in question and would have had no chance to pick up fibers, especially since she said she never wore those clothes in the basement and never painted while she wore them. Moreover, when she tried to account for them, after having TWO FULL YEARS to consider the question, her claim was in conflict with what JR had already written in DOI.

Thus, the logical conclusion is that the fibers transferred to those items through direct contact with her clothing. Same deal with JR's fibers in JB's underwear. Logically, they scuffed off his sleeve on her clothing when he drew his arm back.

None of this takes a big leap of imagination.

And the unsourced fibers? How did they get there?

 

[icedtea4me]

And the unsourced fibers? How did they get there?

John, in the process of saying "Goodbye" to those at the White's home, places his hand on people's shoulders thereby picking up fibers from their clothing. Voila.

 

[OliviaG1996]

Why would the unsourced brown fibers, if those are the ones we're speaking of, make sense only if IDI? If one or more of the Rs were wearing gloves, that would leave the fibers on the incriminating areas, too. Wearing gloves would be their only option if they didn't want to leave their touch DNA all over the wooden stick, cord, and duct tape. The gloves could've gone with the rest of the missing items (cord, possible missing paintbrush piece, tape) wherever they stashed them. JMO.

Additionally, I don't understand why RDIs should dismiss fibers consistent with those of JR and PR found in the incriminating areas. Living in the same house as JBR, and/or JR and FW coming in contact with the duct tape when JBR's body was discovered in the wine cellar, doesn't explain the amount of red fibers found on the sticky side of the duct tape.

From Foreign Faction: Who Really Kidnapped JonBenét? by James Kolar:
"Further, fibers from this jacket [note: Patsy Ramsey's Essentials jacket] were also matched to trace fibers collected from the wrist ligature, neck ligature, and vacuumed evidence from the paint tray and Wine Cellar floor.

"Some intruder theorists thought that the transfer of Patsy's jacket fibers to the duct tape may have taken place after John had removed it from JonBenet's face, and placed it on the white blanket in the cellar. They believed it possible that prior contact taking place between the blanket and jacket could account for the transfer of these fibers to the tape.

"Lab technicians had conducted experiments with the same brand of duct tape, by attempting to lift trace fibers from the blanket recovered in the Wine Cellar. Direct contact was made in different quadrants of the blanket. There was some minimal transfer of jacket fibers made to the tape during this exercise, but Trujillo told me lab technicians didn't think that this type of transfer accounted for the number of jacket fibers that had been found on the sticky side of the tape. It was thought that direct contact between the jacket and tape was more likely the reason for the quantity of fibers found on this piece of evidence."

 

[BBB167893]

And the unsourced fibers? How did they get there?

Probably the same way: picked up by the parents' clothing.

Now you answer my question.

 

[inspector rex]

Probably the same way: picked up by the parents' clothing.

Now you answer my question.

You first!

Quote Originally Posted by SuperDave View Post
Sure looks like it:

Dr. Richard Krugman, Dean of the University of Colorado Medical School, an expert first contacted for assistance in the Ramsey case by the D.A.’s office, was the most adamant supporter of the finding of chronic sexual abuse. He felt that in considering the past and present injuries to the hymen that the bedwetting/soiling took on enormous significance. He believed that this homicide was an indecent of “toilet rage” and subsequent cover up. He told the group of experts and detectives about another Colorado case where both parents had been at home and both were charged. “The JonBenet case is a text book example of toileting abuse rage," Krugman stated.

Where does this quote come from? Please provide a link.

 

[BBB167893]

You first!

:facepalm:

Where does this quote come from? Please provide a link.

Here you go:

http://www.acandyrose.com/1999-BonitaPapers.htm

 

[inspector rex]

:facepalm:



Here you go:

http://www.acandyrose.com/1999-BonitaPapers.htm

I know the story, Bonita Sauer worked for Dan Hoffman and her nephew sold her notes to the tabloids.
However, the actual notes you quoted from, (on ACR) where did these come from?
Does anyone know if this Bonita Sauer even exists?
Who is Spade and what does he/she have to do with all this?

If we are to hear quote after quote from this source, I think we need to verify that it is what it purports to be.

 

[Anti-K]

That's what I'm doing!

Look, for those who STILL don't get it, let me explain it simply:

Patsy's fibers were found in four places directly linked to the crime, on items the Rs CLAIMED were never in the house before the night in question and would have had no chance to pick up fibers, especially since she said she never wore those clothes in the basement and never painted while she wore them. Moreover, when she tried to account for them, after having TWO FULL YEARS to consider the question, her claim was in conflict with what JR had already written in DOI.

Thus, the logical conclusion is that the fibers transferred to those items through direct contact with her clothing. Same deal with JR's fibers in JB's underwear. Logically, they scuffed off his sleeve on her clothing when he drew his arm back.

None of this takes a big leap of imagination.

The argument you present here is sad. Mrs Ramsey – the liar – says she never did this or that and she can’t explain how the fibers got where they were (I bet an intruder would say the same things!). And Mr Ramsey said something different. Therefore, BINGO, direct transfer! Case closed. Good grief.

Fibers don’t care. They just don’t care. They don’t care about us and they don’t care about our silly little arguments and they don’t care about how they got where ever they got or who put them there. They just float around and they hitch rides on people and things and they transfer, transfer, transfer...

Still, when they transfer to incriminating locations we need to take note.

But, we should expect Ramsey fibers to be present in the home.

Of the four locations where fibers consistent with the Ramsey/White jacket were found only two of them should be considered incriminating: the ligature around the neck and the tape.

We know they were in the paint tote and on the wc floor. They were on the blanket, and perhaps, pre-crime, they could have even been on the victim. This increases chances for secondary (or, further) transfer, and, it is easy to see someone transferring these fibers from one or more of these locations to an incriminating location.

Compare this to the unsourced brown, cotton fibers that were found on the ligatures, the tape and the genital area.

Yes, of course, these could also be present due to innocent transfer (ALL the fibers could be present due to innocent transfer!). But, the fact that these fibers were not sourced, despite great effort, throws this into doubt.

The fibers consistent with the Ramsey/White jacket are incriminating for the Ramseys); and, the unsourced fibers are exculpatory for the Ramseys.
...

AK

 

[Anti-K]

Why would the unsourced brown fibers, if those are the ones we're speaking of, make sense only if IDI? If one or more of the Rs were wearing gloves, that would leave the fibers on the incriminating areas, too. Wearing gloves would be their only option if they didn't want to leave their touch DNA all over the wooden stick, cord, and duct tape. The gloves could've gone with the rest of the missing items (cord, possible missing paintbrush piece, tape) wherever they stashed them. JMO.

Additionally, I don't understand why RDIs should dismiss fibers consistent with those of JR and PR found in the incriminating areas. Living in the same house as JBR, and/or JR and FW coming in contact with the duct tape when JBR's body was discovered in the wine cellar, doesn't explain the amount of red fibers found on the sticky side of the duct tape.

From Foreign Faction: Who Really Kidnapped JonBenét? by James Kolar:
"Further, fibers from this jacket [note: Patsy Ramsey's Essentials jacket] were also matched to trace fibers collected from the wrist ligature, neck ligature, and vacuumed evidence from the paint tray and Wine Cellar floor.

"Some intruder theorists thought that the transfer of Patsy's jacket fibers to the duct tape may have taken place after John had removed it from JonBenet's face, and placed it on the white blanket in the cellar. They believed it possible that prior contact taking place between the blanket and jacket could account for the transfer of these fibers to the tape.

"Lab technicians had conducted experiments with the same brand of duct tape, by attempting to lift trace fibers from the blanket recovered in the Wine Cellar. Direct contact was made in different quadrants of the blanket. There was some minimal transfer of jacket fibers made to the tape during this exercise, but Trujillo told me lab technicians didn't think that this type of transfer accounted for the number of jacket fibers that had been found on the sticky side of the tape. It was thought that direct contact between the jacket and tape was more likely the reason for the quantity of fibers found on this piece of evidence."

This is just one example from Kolar’s book that gives me serious doubts about... I probably should just leave that alone.

Here’s the quote:
"Lab technicians had conducted experiments with the same brand of duct tape, by attempting to lift trace fibers from the blanket recovered in the Wine Cellar. Direct contact was made in different quadrants of the blanket. There was some minimal transfer of jacket fibers made to the tape during this exercise, but Trujillo told me lab technicians didn't think that this type of transfer accounted for the number of jacket fibers that had been found on the sticky side of the tape. It was thought that direct contact between the jacket and tape was more likely the reason for the quantity of fibers found on this piece of evidence."

Let’s break this down:
Experiment Intent – attempt to lift trace fibers from BLANKET.
Experiment Performed – direct contact was made in different quadrants of the BLANKET
Result - some minimal transfer of jacket fibers made to the tape (misleading, shows bias; should say fibers CONSISTENT with jacket fibers) from the BLANKET.

Let’s stop and think about this for a bit.

Techs touch tape to blanket. Fibers consistent with Ramsey/White jacket are transferred to tape. Minimal. So what? I mean, the number of fibers (consistent with jacket) transferred is going to be limited to the number of fibers present on the blanket; right? And, what if there are only minimal fibers present? What if there are only minimal fibers present because the rest of the fibers had already been transferred to – gasp – the original piece of tape?

This just seems a goofy description of what might have been a legitimate experiment. And, were there fibers consistent with the jacket on the blanket, or were they just trying to life trace fibers? Kolar doesn’t seem to have read the report or to have talked to anyone involved in the experiment: Trujillo told him what the lab tech thought about it.
.

You know, with all the fibers from this jacket supposedly found it’s a wonder that the jacket had anything left to it. 
...

AK