The Eighth Pair of Underwear

[tumble]

This picture http://www.acandyrose.com/12251996christmasmorning.gif on christmas morning seems to show JBR with assymetrical pigtails.
Ie hair hanging down on both sides but the tail is not originating from the side but from the back.

 

[trixie]

1.JonBenet did not put the "wednesday" panties on...she didn't know how to read!

2. JonBenet soiled her play pants....where are her soiled panties???

3. Who wiped JonBenet's bottom before placing the size 12 "wednesday" panties on her?

JonBenet dressed herself before going to the Whites. She took off her play pants in her bathroom....but did not change her soiled panties.

Patsy was the one who cleaned JonBenets soiled bottom AND placed the "W" panties on her. Patsy was all for appearances. Her little princess was not going to be found dead wearing soiled panties period.

Hi Toltec, the police have the soiled panties in evidence. I can say this because I remember seeing the crime scene photo of the jeans and panties , one inside the other, in the bathroom floor and the panties had a giant skid mark in them. If the police took the picture, they took the jeans and panties. I just cannot believe nobody remembers this crime scene picture. Also, Patsy was shown this picture when being interviewed and she explained that Jonbenet sometimes didn't wipe very well. This whole incident was covered quite extensively in Patys interview. Doesn't anybody remember this?

 

[tumble]

I remember seeing the crime scene photo of the jeans and panties , one inside the other

Yes trixie, that makes sense. I had a hard time understanding how the feces could get into the pants croach(if she was wearing underware). I have seen such 'accidents' and the feces tend to be located on the pants lining and not in the croach(if its a big accident).

 

[LinasK]

Athough patsy says she cannot remember bathing or dressing JonBenet prior to leaving for the Whites. Patsy does state she and JonBenet fell out over what she should wear, so we can assume she did to some unknown extent oversee what JonBenet was wearing, and if the red turtleneck was contentious, I cannot see patsy allowing JonBenet to wear oversize underwear, not for a dinner party visit!

So unless JonBenet had an accident and secretly wore the size-12's to the Whites, its likely the reason she is wearing them is that the person who redressed her in the size-12's did it deliberately, possibly as a form of defensive staging.

If you think over the crime-scene or the house , even after it had been cleaned up somewhat, there is an air of disorder e.g. the long underwear pants hanging out of the cupboard, hair ties strewn over the JonBenet's bedroom floor, soiled jeans lying on the bathroom floor, bags of clothing lying about, her barbie nightgown lying, out of context, next to her dead body.

In general the rest of the crime-scene has been cleaned up, but these untidy elements suggest that she was redressed upstairs, but in a hurry, possibly her hair was re-styled, why this would be required I am not certain, but it seems somebody thought it appropriate, this same person or another found the size-12 underwear which was in her bedroom, and redressed JonBenet, followed by her long underwear pants.

Now the person who selected the size-12 underwear had an eye to detail, since they chose a Wednesday pair, but when JonBenet was redressed in those panties it was likely Thursday December the 26th. It would have been much more indeterminate if they had chosen any day except a Wednesday or a Thursday, for some reason it must be the Wednesday pair and that they were oversized was not an issue.

Agree.

I've never seen black underpants for children either.

Ditto. I don't think they make black underwear for little girls. It's all pastels, which are worn under any clothes. Black velvet pants would be opaque enough not to show any color through.

I can't just can't see any 6-year-old child begging for a pair of underwear,
a bike maybe but not a pair of underwear.

My 5-year-old would beg for them if they had princesses on them!

 

[BBB167893]

"I just cannot believe nobody remembers this crime scene picture. Also, Patsy was shown this picture when being interviewed and she explained that Jonbenet sometimes didn't wipe very well. This whole incident was covered quite extensively in Patys interview. Doesn't anybody remember this?"

I think I just posted it on another thread!

"barefeet

Does not sound strange to me."

Me, neither. Kids go barefoot all the time, especially to bed. Besides, there are a few pics of JB barefoot, as well.

"Edit: BTW, wednesday, was that the 25th or 26th"

25th, pretty sure.

"Why take this staging business to such extremes.
Alright, I agree there was staging. Staging for a purpose."

Indeed.

"Thinking a deranged intruder staged this scene for his personal gratification is beyond me in this case so I discount that."

Especially since he wouldn't stage it to look like an intruder, which is what happened here. (I use the "poison in the wine" analogy.)

 

[aussiesheila]

True...and a good point. She may very well have been unconscious when she was dressed in the size 12s.

I've always thought it so odd that she was wearing the correct day panties, meaning it was a Wednesday, and the panties were the ones with Wednesday printed on them. Like the person who dressed her in them wanted the correct day panties. I would imagine they were in order in the package starting with Sunday or Monday, certainly not Wednesday - so did the person who picked them out intentionally choose the Wednesday pair to correspond with it being a Wednesday? Would JonBenet herself have thought to find the correct day panties?

I think JonBenet did choose them, I'm sure she would have been able to read the days of the week. I think she put them on herself as she was getting dressed to go the the White's party. I think it was just after she and Patsy had that 'little tiff' and Patsy was balling the red turtleneck sweater in JonBenet's bathroom in a furious rage. I think JonBenet retreated to her bedroom to escape her mother's wrath and when she needed to get clean panties, instead of going to the bathroom drawers where her size 6s were, (as well as her screaming mother), she went to her bedroom cupboard where the packet of size 12s were and got the Wednesday pair. She wore a pair of black velvet tights over them which would have held them up, and a black velvet dress over that which would have hidden any bulkiness.

What is very curious is that the police never asked Patsy about what JonBenet had on under the longjohns that Patsy put on JonBenet when she tucked her into bed. Or did they and I missed it?

 

[aussiesheila]

This picture http://www.acandyrose.com/12251996christmasmorning.gif on christmas morning seems to show JBR with assymetrical pigtails.
Ie hair hanging down on both sides but the tail is not originating from the side but from the back.

I think the pigtail high up at the back of her head was the normal one she wore. Patsy said she normally wore it to bed that way too. I think the second one was the one the pedophiles put one her to get her hair out of the way of the garotte so they could operate it properly.

 

[aussiesheila]

Hi Toltec, the police have the soiled panties in evidence. I can say this because I remember seeing the crime scene photo of the jeans and panties , one inside the other, in the bathroom floor and the panties had a giant skid mark in them. If the police took the picture, they took the jeans and panties. I just cannot believe nobody remembers this crime scene picture. Also, Patsy was shown this picture when being interviewed and she explained that Jonbenet sometimes didn't wipe very well. This whole incident was covered quite extensively in Patys interview. Doesn't anybody remember this?

Yes I remember it trixie, but I have never seen the crime scene photo. The trouble is there is no way of knowing when those soiled panties were dropped on the bathroom floor. I can't remember when LHP said she was last there, but I think it might have been Monday morning, so those panties could have been there since Monday afternoon. They might be the ones she dropped just before changing to go to the Whites though. If there were no other pairs lying around then they most likely were. I am wondering just how many pairs of soiled panties the police collected. Were any found in the bedroom?

 

[BBB167893]

I think JonBenet did choose them, I'm sure she would have been able to read the days of the week. I think she put them on herself as she was getting dressed to go the the White's party. I think it was just after she and Patsy had that 'little tiff' and Patsy was balling the red turtleneck sweater in JonBenet's bathroom in a furious rage. I think JonBenet retreated to her bedroom to escape her mother's wrath and when she needed to get clean panties, instead of going to the bathroom drawers where her size 6s were, (as well as her screaming mother), she went to her bedroom cupboard where the packet of size 12s were and got the Wednesday pair. She wore a pair of black velvet tights over them which would have held them up, and a black velvet dress over that which would have hidden any bulkiness.

What is very curious is that the police never asked Patsy about what JonBenet had on under the longjohns that Patsy put on JonBenet when she tucked her into bed. Or did they and I missed it?

I'll look.

 

[UKGuy]

Following on from Jayelle's post regarding the size-12's being definitively too large.

One suspicion I have had is that a guest or a host at the White's party saw JonBenet's underwear, this may have Fleet's Daughter, Priscillia or Fleet assisting JonBenet with her toilet.

And that one of the Ramsey's present knew this, otherwise just why is the Wednesday so important given other aspects such as her still wearing her white gap top were explained away?


.

 

[tumble]

Following on from Jayelle's post regarding the size-12's being definitively too large.

One suspicion I have had is that a guest or a host at the White's party saw JonBenet's underwear, this may have Fleet's Daughter, Priscillia or Fleet assisting JonBenet with her toilet.

And that one of the Ramsey's present knew this, otherwise just why is the Wednesday so important given other aspects such as her still wearing her white gap top were explained away?


.

Yes that's a good thought. Maybe those oversized ones didn't look so very oversized to the perp if they were pulled up high on her unconsious body. On a standing person they would hang down alot but on a person lying down maybe it didn't look too strange.

 

[Britt]

One suspicion I have had is that a guest or a host at the White's party saw JonBenet's underwear, this may have Fleet's Daughter, Priscillia or Fleet assisting JonBenet with her toilet.

And that one of the Ramsey's present knew this, otherwise just why is the Wednesday so important given other aspects such as her still wearing her white gap top were explained away?

Yes, exactly... and/or the person who had seen the underwear was John. And Patsy, lone perp, was staging the crime to try to fool John as well as police (though clearly, John caught on and got with the program).

 

[tumble]

Where the size 6 wednesday panties accounted for?

If UKGuys conjecture is true those panties should be lying somewhere, abit soiled presumably.

Also if this is the case why wouldn't just an explanation of ' we changed her undies when we put her to bed' due . And why did she have panties under the longjohns at all?
Looks like the staging was directed to fool someone who knew even more than the persons at the Whites. Someone who knew that she actually went to bed wearing wednesday panties, or at least some panties.
And did the state of the panties also matter, soiled or not soiled.
This explains maybe why the change of panties was needed at all.
Everything had to look like the time she went to bed.
Not many persons left then, who fooled who?

It's up to you now ...

 

[Jayelles]

Yes that's a good thought. Maybe those oversized ones didn't look so very oversized to the perp if they were pulled up high on her unconsious body. On a standing person they would hang down alot but on a person lying down maybe it didn't look too strange.

It wold be worse if they were pulled up when she was lying down, the waistband would go up to her armpits and much of her groin area would be exposed. The legs holes are VERY large for a 6 year old child.

These underpants are very baggy indeed - the waistband might sit on the child's hips without falling down too much but the leg holes are truly massive on my daughter who is almost exactly the same height and weight as JBR was when she died.

 

[UKGuy]

Where the size 6 wednesday panties accounted for?

If UKGuys conjecture is true those panties should be lying somewhere, abit soiled presumably.

Also if this is the case why wouldn't just an explanation of ' we changed her undies when we put her to bed' due . And why did she have panties under the longjohns at all?
Looks like the staging was directed to fool someone who knew even more than the persons at the Whites. Someone who knew that she actually went to bed wearing wednesday panties, or at least some panties.
And did the state of the panties also matter, soiled or not soiled.
This explains maybe why the change of panties was needed at all.
Everything had to look like the time she went to bed.
Not many persons left then, who fooled who?

It's up to you now ...

tumble,

There are many features of JonBenet's homicide that are puzzling, not least why she was redressed in size-12 underwear.

This aspect may have in common with the wiping of the flashlight the desire to remove forensic evidence, that is, its possible her original size-6 underwear contained seminal dna, so had to be removed, along with her genital area being wiped down?

We can speculate that John wiped JonBenet down, so did he remove her size-6 underwear, and replace these with the size-12's?

Her sexual assault was hidden in this manner, and the wine-cellar scenario became that of a ransom-note/abduction.

So is it possible prior to her death that JonBenet was victim to sexual abuse, which was then covered up with the homicide and stagings?


.

 

[LinasK]

tumble,

There are many features of JonBenet's homicide that are puzzling, not least why she was redressed in size-12 underwear.

This aspect may have in common with the wiping of the flashlight the desire to remove forensic evidence, that is, its possible her original size-6 underwear contained seminal dna, so had to be removed, along with her genital area being wiped down?

We can speculate that John wiped JonBenet down, so did he remove her size-6 underwear, and replace these with the size-12's?

Her sexual assault was hidden in this manner, and the wine-cellar scenario became that of a ransom-note/abduction.

So is it possible prior to her death that JonBenet was victim to sexual abuse, which was then covered up with the homicide and stagings?


.

I don't know who wiped her down, but this is my theory.

 

[UKGuy]

I don't know who wiped her down, but this is my theory.

LinasK,

Well Johns black woolen shirt has been identified as the source for the fibers on and around her genital area.

John stated he never undressed JonBenet on ariving back from the White's so he has locked himself into having no skin to skin contact with JonBenet.

Yet we know definitively someone wiped JonBenet down, and most likely removed her size-6 underwear, whilst redressing her in the size-12's which look similar and had Wednesday on them.

So the removal of forensic evidence along with staging that would only appear consistent to say another Ramsey, which patently has as its purpose to hide a sexual assault. Whilst the staging mimics that of some deranged sociopath e.g. not something a parent would do?

So in conjunction with the wiping clean of the flashlight this suggests a Ramsey who does not wish to be associated with the crime-scene!

LinasK you have a strong case.

.

 

[Eagle1]

LinasK,

Well Johns black woolen shirt has been identified as the source for the fibers on and around her genital area..............

.......So the removal of forensic evidence along with staging that would only appear consistent to say another Ramsey, which patently has as its purpose to hide a sexual assault. Whilst the staging mimics that of some deranged sociopath e.g. not something a parent would do?

So in conjunction with the wiping clean of the flashlight this suggests a Ramsey who does not wish to be associated with the crime-scene!

.

All that you say seems to be true, but I have a hunch JR wouldn't know there was a pkg of size 12 day of the week undies in JBR's drawer, or wherever they were kept, UNLESS JBR was so excited when she and her mom returned from the NY shopping trip she may have told him about them, that they'd bought an extra set for her cousin.

Some killers I think take undies with them, as in a cold case I saw recently, maybe Jackie Dowallaby, can't remember the name for sure. Her SOILED underpants were lying just a few feet from her dead body.

Fibers from JR's wool shirt don't prove absolutely that he was there. Let's remember that possibly someone else could have gotten hold of his shirt, so that using it was staging. (If he wasn't personally involved. I don't think he's ever said where his shirt was while he was sleeping, right?)

UKGuy, I don't quite follow you, why you're saying some of the Whites "saw" the size 6 underwear. Did you leave out something or am I just not getting it?

 

[tumble]

It wold be worse if they were pulled up when she was lying down, the waistband would go up to her armpits and much of her groin area would be exposed. The legs holes are VERY large for a 6 year old child.

These underpants are very baggy indeed - the waistband might sit on the child's hips without falling down too much but the leg holes are truly massive on my daughter who is almost exactly the same height and weight as JBR was when she died.

Thanks for the good info Jayelle,
as these underware look so strange maybe this wednesday thing is the only explaination why those were indeed chosen before any ordinary size 6.

And UKGuy, removing forensic evidence indeed sound like a plausible cause for changing them at all.
But why put on underware at all. Having no underware under a pajamas is not uncommon.
Are you suggesting that the underware staging was directed against one Ramsey by another Ramsey?
As the size 12 lookes so strange JR would probably not hope to fool PR with such a thing, and vice versa.
Maybe the staging was directed against Burke by the R's?

 

[UKGuy]

All that you say seems to be true, but I have a hunch JR wouldn't know there was a pkg of size 12 day of the week undies in JBR's drawer, or wherever they were kept, UNLESS JBR was so excited when she and her mom returned from the NY shopping trip she may have told him about them, that they'd bought an extra set for her cousin.

Some killers I think take undies with them, as in a cold case I saw recently, maybe Jackie Dowallaby, can't remember the name for sure. Her SOILED underpants were lying just a few feet from her dead body.

Fibers from JR's wool shirt don't prove absolutely that he was there. Let's remember that possibly someone else could have gotten hold of his shirt, so that using it was staging. (If he wasn't personally involved. I don't think he's ever said where his shirt was while he was sleeping, right?)

UKGuy, I don't quite follow you, why you're saying some of the Whites "saw" the size 6 underwear. Did you leave out something or am I just not getting it?

Eagle1,

Yes but the same reasoning would apply to nearly everyone else, except for Patsy.

JonBenet's own underwear were stored in the bathroom, this is where she would find clean underwear.

Its possible someone searched both the bathroom and her bedroom for a pair of underwear with Wednesday printed on them. Not finding any in the bathroom settled for the size-12's out of the bedroom?

Yes questioning regarding the location of John's shirt, worn to the White's party, has never been covered in any depth, but it would mean going into his bedroom and retrieving his shirt, with the risk he may awaken.

I've thought the same regarding Patsy were her fibers faked? Although not deliberate her fibers may have arrived by chance or as they say, an accident of circumstance. But given the specific features we are discussing the possibilty that both Patsy's AND John's fibers arrived by chance at those particular locations e.g. her genitals, underside of the duct-tape and the garrote knotting is astronomical!

Jayelle's has suggested Patsy was framed, similarly John's inclusion now requires someone to frame him? This is becoming so convoluted I expect to see a theory proposing that Burke did it, and framed his parents!

If you are going to frame someone then surely there are simpler and more concrete methods available e.g. personal items, objects with fingerprints etc.

JonBenet whilst using the toilet would commonly request others to assist her. Fleet White has remarked that on more than one occassion he had to wipe JonBenet down.

So its possible at some point during the White's party a guest or a host saw JonBenet's underwear, even remarked on it, assuming she wore a day-of-the-week pair. This other person may have been a guest e.g. another Ramsey?

IMO the reason JonBenet was discovered in the wine-cellar dressed as she was, was because forensic evidence had to be removed from her genital area, so she was wiped down, her size-6's removed, and the size-12's and white longjohns hurriedly replacing these. No attempt was made to remove her white gap top, but her pink barbie-gown was on hand to finish the process, and she was wearing no socks! So you can visualise JonBenet becoming undressed in stages to satisfy the requirements of a bedtime abduction?

Whilst in actuality she was probably sexually assaulted and killed while wearing the very clothes she wore to the White's. With the possible exception of her black velvet pants, since obviously these would have to be removed to facilitate a sexual assault!

Another aspect to this is that I proposed the reason the barbie-gown was never placed on her was that a combination of rigor-mortis and the garrote knotting made this impractible to achieve. For those who have the medical knowledge, would this place a time limit on when the wiping-down may have been done, that is, say early morning 4am or 5am rigor-mortis would have prevented her from being wiped down?

So we have a staged homicide, a hidden sexual assault, along with the removal of forensic evidence e.g. her size-6 underwear and flashlight fingerprints.

Her Wednesday underwear would only matter to those who knew she was wearing them on the Wednesday, otherwise any other pair of underwear would have been sufficient!

Although many sexual predators take articles belonging to their victims e.g. shoes, underwear. Not many hang around to wipe their victim down and redress them in the correct day of the week underwear.

Like so many other features of the forensic evidence precisely which day of the week underwear JonBenet was wearing is a detail I consider would be lost on your average intruder!


.