Team JonBenet

[Brefie]

Dude...out of 73 people, Patsy alone was never excluded as the author of the ransom note, the note that was written on paper from inside the house with a pen from inside the house. That's overwhelming, if you ask me. Add in fibers matching her jacket found in the paint tray, on the piece of tape, and in the knot of the garotte. A less wealthy and affluent woman would have not have fared as well as Patsy Ramsey did with that kind of evidence pointing at her.

Well said, NP. Had it been a poor family, they would have arrested first and investigated later.

For all of you IDI's....where are the fibers? Patsy's got on to the tape, although she was never even in the same room - funny how that works out. But where are the fibers from an unknown intruder?

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Dude...out of 73 people, Patsy alone was never excluded as the author of the ransom note, the note that was written on paper from inside the house with a pen from inside the house. That's overwhelming, if you ask me. Add in fibers matching her jacket found in the paint tray, on the piece of tape, and in the knot of the garotte. A less wealthy and affluent woman would have not have fared as well as Patsy Ramsey did with that kind of evidence pointing at her.

PR's fibers found anywhere in her own house is about as meaningless as it gets.

If PR had authored the 2 1/2 page note, she would have been pegged by experts in about a minute.

 

[Brefie]

PR's fibers found anywhere in her own house is about as meaningless as it gets.

If PR had authored the 2 1/2 page note, she would have been pegged by experts in about a minute.

Not really, how did they get on the tape on JBR's mouth, when apparently Patsy was never in the same room as the piece of tape?

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Hello yourself. There was also ZERO evidence that an uninvited person was in the house that night.

I believe the term in court is 'beyond a reasonable doubt'. I don't think 'overwhelming' comes into it at all, or there would be very few perps in prison.

DNA, footprint, unidentified black fibers, unidentified handwriting (yes, unidentified handwriting), and a murdered 6 year old are all evidence of an uninvited person.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Not really, how did they get on the tape on JBR's mouth, when apparently Patsy was never in the same room as the piece of tape?

OMG you're not serious, are you?!? PR's fibers found on JBR? PR is JBR's MOM! Of course she has her fibers all over her!

 

[Brefie]

OMG, I'm like, totally serious.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

OMG, I'm like, totally serious.

JBR is going to be covered in PR fibers. Normally.

 

[Brefie]

Well, I would like expert confirmation that folks who live in the same house usually have 4 fibers around their mouths at any given time.

If I get it, I will happily move on to the million other things that point a finger at the Ramsey's.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Well, I would like expert confirmation that folks who live in the same house usually have 4 fibers around their mouths at any given time.

If I get it, I will happily move on to the million other things that point a finger at the Ramsey's.

JBR is going to have PR fibers all around her. In an environment where JBR is being strangled, taped, moved from her bedroom, moved to the basement, against her free will, its hard to say that 4 PR fibers wouldn't show up around JBR's mouth. Were there any dust or floor sweepings on her clothes? Its not exactly a clean-room environment, is it?

 

[Brefie]

Why is it not unusual for PR's fibers to be all over her...but no intruder fibers??

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Why is it not unusual for PR's fibers to be all over her...but no intruder fibers??

The intruder produced either no or few fibers. I thought I read there were black fibers from an unidentifed source.

 

[Brefie]

Is it possible to leave ZERO evidence after such a scenario? A BRUTAL murder and trips around a good chunk of a house? Not a single fingerprint or ANYTHING??? Yet Patsy's fibers are OBVIOUSLY ALL OVER JBR?

I thought the black fibers were from John's shirt??

 

[aussiesheila]

Good Lord. You don't FIGHT off a child molester everytime he wants to have his way with your child. I imagine you only have to let most abusers that you are on to them to get them to stop. I mean, really, if it's an on-going struggle to keep a child abuser away, then that's just plain demented and why wouldn't you shop them to the police???

It's not a matter of having to FIGHT off a child molester at all. The molester isn't going to do anything in front of Patsy or John for heaven's sake. In fact child molesters go out of their way to be friendly and helpful and generally well-liked and trusted by the parents. That way the mother (in this case) is going to feel happy leaving her daughter in the care of these people for whatever reason. She is never going to see any evidence of the abuse unless it is those vague symptoms that a pediatrician (if he is unscrupulous) can reassure the mother are due to innocent things.

And I have NEVER, EVER heard of a mother just 'having to accept' that her husband's best friend is joining in the 'abuse'. Why wouldn't she just tell John?

Are you saying that because you have NEVER, EVER heard of a mother just 'having to accept' that her husband's best friend is joining in the 'abuse' that it never happens? This is erroneous thinking, a lot of things happen in the world that most people never hear about.

I am saying that in Patsy's case I think she must have decided, however subconciously, to accept what was happening. Clearly IMO, she suspected something because she was constantly taking JonBenet to Dr B. She seemed to accept his excuses for all the complaints that JonBenet suffered from, so she didn't really put up a fight, I say in that sense, she 'accepted' the abuse.

And 'POSSIBLY' joined in the abusing? Are you suggesting that Patsy offered up JonBenet to so many people she wasn't quite sure who all of the members were?

What I am saying is that just as she never saw her father do anything to JonBenet, she never saw this other person either. I have never suggested she 'offered up' JonBenet to anyone. I think the friend would have started abusing JonBenet at parties or when she came over to play with his daughter. Patsy would have seen indications but again, she went to Dr B, and again he made all the excuses that Patsy accepted.

Why didn't she tell John? Too difficult? Easier and more comfortable to keep it hidden? That is as close as I can can get to a reason.

The thing is that with situations like this it all starts so gradually and builds up little by little so that by the time you take a stand you are already involved yourself in that you have allowed it to happen for some time before blowing the whistle. The cunning abusers know this and use it against you, so that if Patsy was to tell John, she not only would have to face up to the fact that she was abused as a child, she would also have to explain to him why she had let it get to the stage it had.

Easier to ignore it and expect JonBenet to live with it, just as she did. What we experience in our families as children we accept as 'normal'. I don't think we ever escape from that. If the 'normal' experiences of your childhood happen to your own child it is much easier to accept.

I don't know whose opinion of Patsy is worse....I daresay it's yours.

Although I feel pretty angry at Patsy, I keep telling myself she was a victim, which she was and she really should be pitied. If she was sexually abused by her father as a child she would have been very damaged by it. Not all victims are fortunate enough to get the therapy or whatever is required to get them to face up to what happened to them as a child and to begin to recover from it and heal to whatever extent is possible and to call themselves survivors. I think must be enormously confronting and traumatic to start this process and some people just never manage to do it for whatever reason and I would not like to judge them for that.

Edited to add: what makes you think Don abused Patsy?

I'll have to leave my answer to this for the time being. I don't have the sources at my fingertips but I do have some. Will post later. Jayelles has the best one.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Is it possible to leave ZERO evidence after such a scenario? A BRUTAL murder and trips around a good chunk of a house? Not a single fingerprint or ANYTHING??? Yet Patsy's fibers are OBVIOUSLY ALL OVER JBR?

I thought the black fibers were from John's shirt??

There's not ZERO evidence. There's an unidentifed footprint, unidentified handwriting, and cord and tape from an unknown source.

There is ZERO evidence of any animosity towards JBR from any of her family members.

PS, Experts found out after-the-fact that Scott P. had a strange past that could have resulted in his 'lack of a core self'.

 

[aussiesheila]

Dude...out of 73 people, Patsy alone was never excluded as the author of the ransom note, the note that was written on paper from inside the house with a pen from inside the house. That's overwhelming, if you ask me.

That's overwhelming evidence that Patsy wrote the note, I agree. But it is not overwhelming evidence that Patsy or John or Burke killed JonBenet, accidentally or otherwise IMO.

Add in fibers matching her jacket found in the paint tray, on the piece of tape, and in the knot of the garotte. A less wealthy and affluent woman would have not have fared as well as Patsy Ramsey did with that kind of evidence pointing at her.

Patsy fibers in Patsy's paint tray would have an innocent explanation.

Patsy fibers on the piece of tape would also have an innocent explanation if as I believe, that the duct tape was pre-used, found lying around somewhere in the basement and placed over JonBenet's mouth after death.

Patsy fibers in the knot of the garotte is not a fact as far as I am aware.

 

[aussiesheila]

Is it possible to leave ZERO evidence after such a scenario? A BRUTAL murder and trips around a good chunk of a house? Not a single fingerprint or ANYTHING??? Yet Patsy's fibers are OBVIOUSLY ALL OVER JBR?

I thought the black fibers were from John's shirt??

The black fibers were not from John's shirt. As far as I know they did not match anything in the house so probably came from the intruder.

The intruder also left a DNA stain on the panties, a pubic hair on the white blanket, a skid mark on the wall under the window, some skin under JonBenet's fingernails, some animal hair on her hands, pineapple in her stomach, a footprint in the cellar, cigarette butts and stirred up dirt outside the northern window to the basement toilet, lengths of white cord and a metal baseball bat in an area of the garden not used by children. And there's probably more that they've never told us about.

 

[narlacat]

I'm thinking the black fibres were 'consistent with' JR's black shirt.
I know it's not a definitive match but I don't think you can say with certainty that they didn't come from JR's shirt.

 

[narlacat]

<<There's not ZERO evidence. There's an unidentifed footprint>>

The footprint was identified.
Burke Ramsey owned Hi Tecs, could have very well been his.

 

[Nuisanceposter]

The black fibers were not from John's shirt. As far as I know they did not match anything in the house so probably came from the intruder.

The intruder also left a DNA stain on the panties, a pubic hair on the white blanket, a skid mark on the wall under the window, some skin under JonBenet's fingernails, some animal hair on her hands, pineapple in her stomach, a footprint in the cellar, cigarette butts and stirred up dirt outside the northern window to the basement toilet, lengths of white cord and a metal baseball bat in an area of the garden not used by children. And there's probably more that they've never told us about.

The DNA in the panties was old and degraded and is not definitely linked to an intruder.

The hair on the blanket was not a pubic hair but an ancillary hair, like from someone's arm, and it was traced back through analysis to someone in Patsy's family. (ST's book)

There's no way to age that skid mark on the wall, and there was no debris around there indicating someone had come through the window, which had an intact spider web spanned across. Those windows measure 18 by 30 inches. The doors and alarm system in the R house were not locked or on that night. Any door would have sufficed for exit/entry and been a better choice than those tiny windows.

Anything under JonBenet's nails could have been there for any length of time (no proof she had a bath that day - Patsy can't seem to remember) and when her nails were clipped for analysis in the coroner's office, they didn't use a clean set of clippers for each nail like they were supposed to. There's no solid proof that anything under her nails came from an intruder.

The animal hair could possibly have come from one of Patsy's paint or make up brushes. Does not prove an intruder when we don't know the source and there are possibilities inside the home.

Cigarette butts and debris stirred up - again, no way to age how long that had been like that. The cigarette butts are interesting though, as I've never heard of them. Did they test the saliva on the butts for DNA and try to trace them that way?

I have never heard of lengths of white cord found outside - did that cord match the cord that was found around JB's neck? If not, we can't assume it was there because of an intruder. As or the bat, a child's toy could end up anywhere. A kid could have flung it into an area where they don't normally go. LHP said the Ramsey kids thought nothing of making a mess and just walking away from it for someone else to clean up.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

<<There's not ZERO evidence. There's an unidentifed footprint>>

The footprint was identified.
Burke Ramsey owned Hi Tecs, could have very well been his.

"...could have very well been his" isn't identified. The print is today unidentified.

"...PR hasn't been excluded as the author" doesnt mean shes the author. The handwriting is today unidentified.

I'm reading about an unidentified palm print, unidentified DNA, missing roll of duct tape, and missing cord remnants too.