What Shirt Was JB Wearing When She Was Killed?

[UKGuy]

There is no documented evidence that a douching product was used in the Ramsey household.

If there was and it was considered relevant Steve Thomas would have let us know all about it in his book, since it backs up his Toilet Rage theory.

It seems reasonable to assume that Patsy may have been rasing her voice to JonBenet in the bathroom, whilst either cleaning her up, or telling her off for not wiping herself down?

Why should Patsy apply an adult product to such a young child, if it were not such a serious homicide, then the use of such a product on a child may suggest it was being used to remove evidence of sexual abuse?

.

 

[Veronica10]

Good lord, I love that post of yours JMO just quoted, Veronica10. You've nailed the Ramsey home dynamic and the real Patsy, imo. JR was gone much of the time - Patsy ran that house and her children and had to be on top of everything all the time to maintain the image she deperately wanted others to see. I don't believe for a second that Patsy was the modest, biddable, perhaps flighty but never ever cross Southern belle she and JR portrayed her as, and I also don't believe she had no idea what was in the bank account or her husband's paycheck and/or bonus, either.

I have to wonder exactly what Patsy's home dynamic as a child was - it seems as though Don Paugh is a manly man and Nedra was the slightly batty woman-behind-the-man and enabler asserting her influence where she could. Perhaps Patsy, being the assertive and gung ho type of person she was, decided to up it a notch and wear the pants more than her mother did because JR was off doing his own thing so often. It seems as though she deferred to John when he acted like he meant business, or whenever she needed to give him the puppy dog eyes and feel taken care of. Just my opinion. Whatever the case, I do feel Patsy had some mental issues that were a result perhaps from genetics, or perhaps from the home she herself grew up in...issues that could result in the unplanned and unintentional death of her daughter.

I can kinda see the douching, and that explains a lot, because I've always had trouble seeing JR as a molester due to lack of evidence proving he was...but the idea of a mother subjecting her daughter to douche at 6 years old is so repulsive that I automatically want to reject it.

:blushing: Thank you NP.
I agree about the douching being repulsive but it's the only thing that makes sense to me.
One other thought regarding Patsy which makes me know she was involved in the death of her daughter...if it were truly an intruder...if an intruder broke into the house that night, savagely murdered and sexually assaulted her baby..if that happened, Patsy Ramsey would have become the national spokesperson for families of murdered children. She would have organized and outshone any Mark Klass or John Walsh. She would be on the National stage and doing a good job of it. That was her personality, that was her ability to organize grandiose efforts. She was great at it. Instead there was a slinking away and attempts to do damage control when her ego got the better of her.

 

[Veronica10]

UK,
You say....
"Why should Patsy apply an adult product to such a young child, if it were not such a serious homicide, then the use of such a product on a child may suggest it was being used to remove evidence of sexual abuse?"

Why would Patsy bleach her daughter's hair? Or why would she apply makeup on her six year old. I don't have an answer to Patsy's logic.

 

[Solace]

UK,
You say....
"Why should Patsy apply an adult product to such a young child, if it were not such a serious homicide, then the use of such a product on a child may suggest it was being used to remove evidence of sexual abuse?"

Not at all UK. And douches are disposable also.

Why would Patsy bleach her daughter's hair? Or why would she apply makeup on her six year old. I don't have an answer to Patsy's logic.

As far as Patsy using the douche to remove sexual evidence, it is beyond the realm. She is not the kind of woman who is going to clean up after her husband rapes her child. Forget it.


And as Veronica has pointed out, she dyed her daughter's hair. We are talking very blond here and that requires ammonia. If a mother is going to put ammonia based product on their 5 year old child or as young as 4, she would have no problem using a douche on her if she thought the constant infections from the "accidents" warranted it. The pageants are atrocious and anyone who has looked at JB performing can see clearly she has practiced for hours.

 

[UKGuy]

UK,
You say....
"Why should Patsy apply an adult product to such a young child, if it were not such a serious homicide, then the use of such a product on a child may suggest it was being used to remove evidence of sexual abuse?"

Why would Patsy bleach her daughter's hair? Or why would she apply makeup on her six year old. I don't have an answer to Patsy's logic.

Veronica10

Those are rhetorical questions, JonBenet's pageant activity answers your questions.

There is no evidence to suggest Patsy was douching JonBenet, any theory built on this basis is without any forensic foundation and is totally speculative, that is it lies in the same realm of conjecture as Lou Smit's intruder theory!


.

 

[Solace]

Veronica10

Those are rhetorical questions, JonBenet's pageant activity answers your questions.

There is no evidence to suggest Patsy was douching JonBenet, any theory built on this basis is without any forensic foundation and is totally speculative, that is it lies in the same realm of conjecture as Lou Smit's intruder theory!


.

UK, with all due respect to you and your theories, Veronica is entitled to her opinion without condescension. If you believe there is sexual abuse, so be it. If Veronica chooses to believe otherwise, it is from her studying of the case. There are two sides to your sexual abuse theory with lots of doctors from each side debating it. There is no evidence to suggest that Patsy was NOT douching JonBenet. You are basing your opinion on forensic evidence in this autopsy report. The CORONER HIMSELF ONLY VERBALLY SUPPORTED IT. HE DID NOT PUT HIS SUPPORT OF THAT THEORY IN WRITING. Which leads me to believe that there is a chance it could have come from something else.

There is plenty of evidence that she suffered from chronic infections, which douching will bring on, if it is done on a regular basis. This is not a "simplistic" theory as you posted. It is a well thought out theory that Veronica and I happen to agree on. I know it is not popular with you but that is another story.

I happen to believe that Patsy would not let this happen to JonBenet or firstly herself. She is certainly not going to clean up after John rapes his daughter and she is not looking like the mealey mouse woman who would look the other way. She is angry though and angry enough to slam JonBenet across a cold bathroom floor and crack her skull and then frantically shake her back and forth to wake her to no avail.

 

[Veronica10]

UK, with all due respect to you and your theories, Veronica is entitled to her opinion without condescension. If you believe there is sexual abuse, so be it. If Veronica chooses to believe otherwise, it is from her studying of the case. There are two sides to your sexual abuse theory with lots of doctors from each side debating it. There is no evidence to suggest that Patsy was NOT douching JonBenet. You are basing your opinion on forensic evidence in this autopsy report. The CORONER HIMSELF ONLY VERBALLY SUPPORTED IT. HE DID NOT PUT HIS SUPPORT OF THAT THEORY IN WRITING. Which leads me to believe that there is a chance it could have come from something else.

There is plenty of evidence that she suffered from chronic infections, which douching will bring on, if it is done on a regular basis. This is not a "simplistic" theory as you posted. It is a well thought out theory that Veronica and I happen to agree on. I know it is not popular with you but that is another story.

I happen to believe that Patsy would not let this happen to JonBenet or firstly herself. She is certainly not going to clean up after John rapes his daughter and she is not looking like the mealey mouse woman who would look the other way. She is angry though and angry enough to slam JonBenet across a cold bathroom floor and crack her skull and then frantically shake her back and forth to wake her to no avail.

Solace, :clap:

UK, To me the sexual abuse angle does not fly. To you, it does. I trust my instincts as I'm sure you trust your own. I see the douching theory as logical.

 

[UKGuy]

Solace, :clap:

UK, To me the sexual abuse angle does not fly. To you, it does. I trust my instincts as I'm sure you trust your own. I see the douching theory as logical.

Veronica10,

Lou Smit trusted his instinct, he along with the Ramsey's also professed beliefs of many kinds.

You may consider the douching theory as logical yet you offer no forensic evidence, your douching theory is mere speculation.

Uisng the same information that you have offered I can interpret it so that behind closed doors in the bathroom Patsy was sexually abusing JonBenet, since JonBenet's cries and protestation were heard by LHP, then it must be so.

This douching theory is nonsense, its a product of your imagination it has no basis in reality, there is no forensic evidence to confirm it!



.

 

[Solace]

Veronica10,

Lou Smit trusted his instinct, he along with the Ramsey's also professed beliefs of many kinds.

You may consider the douching theory as logical yet you offer no forensic evidence, your douching theory is mere speculation. Your sexual abuse theory is mere speculation. There is vaginal scarring. Who says only a finger can do that? It cannot be done any other way. Is that a vaginal rule?

Uisng the same information that you have offered I can interpret it so that behind closed doors in the bathroom Patsy was sexually abusing JonBenet, since JonBenet's cries and protestation were heard by LHP, then it must be so. You really want this to be sexual abuse UK, but that does not make it so.

This douching theory is nonsense, its a product of your imagination it has no basis in reality, there is no forensic evidence to confirm it! There is scarring which does not necessarily have to be done with someone's finger. It can be done with a douching contraption most definitely, especially if it is being done on an unwilling child.

Gee Wilickers UK, I think you doth protest too much. Chill out, it is a case and hardly going to be solved today. This Board is for discussion and Veronica's and my theory has basis to it.




.

Veronica, do you think we touched on a nerve here. Have a nice weekend!

 

[Ames]

I agree with you AMES. Can you imagine how insane they were that night.

I am sure that they were crazy out of their minds.

 

[Ames]

Remember, the staging was taking place in a dark basement (maybe the flashlight was used to assist). They certainly didn't turn any lights on down there (neighbors would have seen). So the fact that JB had urine on her longjohns is absolutely no surprise. Can you imagine the sheer panic of the stager? It is completely believable to me that the stager didn't notice a post-mortem release of urine.

I totally agree with you. I just don't think that they noticed it...either because they were freaking out...or because it was dark in the basement...or both.

 

[Ames]

If that was the initial cause; Ames, I know you posted somewhere about jeans being found in the bedroom or the bathroom (there was a crime scene photo where Haney (I Believe( asked Patsy about their being soiled). Was there underwear in those jeans?

Other posters may need to help me on this, but Patsy was shown, in one of her interviews, pictures of underwear and jeans....it is my understanding that the underwear was left inside of the jeans....taken off together...at the same time.

 

[Ames]

Solace,

It was the bathroom, and from memory, there was no mention of underwear, the subject under discussion were her soiled pants/jeans.

This has spawned the Missing Underwear question?


.

No, the missing underwear question is referring to the ones that were taken off of her, before she was redressed in the size 12 undies.

 

[Ames]

I think you are right UK. But I would like to be certain. Because it could change things if there were underwear in the jeans. And how is it that the jeans get soiled if she is wearing underwear - not to be too graphic here - but it seems they were soiled enough to show up in a picture and if she were wearing underwear. I don't know.

If you read the interview with Patsy...it is pretty clear that there were underwear and pants on the floor. I agree with you....if the dark pants were stained...how would that show up in a picture? From the wording of the interview...I gathered that the panties (underwear) were stained...NOT the pants (trousers), and that they were left inside the pants (trousers).

 

[Ames]

We all know that Patsy changed her mind about what JB was put to bed in. I think that she was wearing the red turtleneck, and the collar was used to choke her with. This is why, I believe, that her arms were up and over her head...in the position that they would be IF someone had of pulled her shirt off, from the bottom (of the shirt). Grabbing at the bottom and pulling upward....over the head...and the sleeves pull the arms upward, so that the shirt comes off. (Ever taken a shirt off a child? You grab the shirt at the bottom, pull upward...over the head...the child's arms go straight up, and then you pull the sleeves off. This is why I think that JB was found with her arms up and over her head.)[/QUOTE,,,,,,,,,,,,,Also to put a shirt on a child the first thing you ask them to do is put their arms stright up !

Lannie, yes, you are right...when taking off the shirt on a child, the arms go up and the shirt comes off....and its reversed when putting a shirt on the child...the arms go up and the shirt goes on. I believe this is why her arms were above her head. I do not believe that she was dragged....wouldn't Burke or John (if he wasn't involved at that point) hear the bumping....bump, bump, bump....down the steps. Wouldn't she have had some sort of friction burn?

 

[Ames]

Solace,

If it were a fact that JonBenet was wearing underwear then this would have been itemized somewhere. I have to check the interview re same. I also asked Ames who did a post on it.

I have speculated that on Xmas day JonBenet may not have been wearing any underwear at all, which then suggests she was not wearing any the previous night? Yes, but you cannot tell whether she was or was not wearing underwear by speculating. Maybe she was not wearing it Christmas day but then at some point did put some on.

And I forget the dates now, but I think Patsy stated that JonBenet shared a bed with Burke? She said in her interviews that intermittently JonBEnet would go into Burke's room when she was afraid or if she wet her bed. She said she slept in her room that night.

So if my memory is correct, Burke and JonBenet share a bed, JonBenet declines to wear underwear, then she has a toileting issue, what does that sound like? But you are assuming they were in the same bed that night.

I don't think that Burke had any part in this...and I don't believe that he was molesting his sister.

 

[Ames]

UK,

My counterpoints in red.

"Not dark enough to prevent her from being sexually assaulted either digitally or with the paintbrush handle, part of which may have been left inside her?"

I think JB was unconcious...she did not fight at all. I think a flashlight was used to help the stager see. I don't think the darkness prevented the person from staging the scene.

"Also if she was wiped down to remove blood or whatever, then the urine-soaked clothing would have been manifestly obvious!"

I think she was wiped down prior to her actual death. The longjohns were placed on her after cleaning. She maybe had a post-mortem release of urine after the re-dress. Also, I believe the wipe down was to remove feces. I think the tiolet rage may have involved a bowel movement.

"JonBenet was left wearing urine-soaked clothing because these did not matter to her killer or the person who staged the wine-cellar crime scene!

What did matter was hiding the sexual assault!"

I don't think they were hiding a sexual assault...I think they were staging one. I am of the school which doesn't believe JB was sexually abused prior to that night. I think the damage to her hymen may have been from Patsy using a douche on her. I just don't see the tell-tale signs of JB being sexually abused (she was confident, and out-spoken, gregarious, etc.). This is purely a gut feeling for me. I can totally see Patsy using a douche due to her own fears of ovarian cancer, female cleanliness, and JB's recurring infections.

Veronica, you have some very good points here. I agree with you on everything that you have said here. I believe also, that JB had also soiled (defecated) along with wetting herself that night. I believe that is one of the things that pushed Patsy over the edge that night. I also agree with you about the douche....good point about Patsy's fear of ovarian cancer, female cleanliness, and JB's infections.

 

[Ames]

Agreed, the staged sexual assault was done to point away from the parents. A parent would NEVER do that, right? I don't think it was to hide a previous rape, I think it was to direct police towards a stranger, an intruder.

Exactly....a stranger/intruder that has NEVER been found...because he doesn't exist.

 

[Ames]

<snipped>

She is tough. Soooooooo, She is definitely taking medication. I would bet money on it. I will just say it. Definitely. Had a couple of glasses of wine and is exhausted. She has been up since the crack of dawn, opened presents, made breakfast, had kids over to play with Berke, John went to the airport to check on the plane, then Patsy played with Jon Benet, fixed some sort of lunch (she thinks), dyed her hair and got everyone ready to go to the Whites. But before that, they went up to the moutain to see a cross or something and Jon Benet wanted to get out and touch it. IT WAS A FULL DAY. I am exhausted just thinking about it. Then went to the Whites, socialized, had some wine, left at 9:00 dropped off some gifts, came home and Patsy is in no mood so don't f%$# around. And JonBenet, either had an accident and it infuriated Patsy again or was very sassy to Patsy. There was something going on in the bathroom - the hair ties are all over the floor, the red turtleneck is in a ball. I don't know if the jeans from JonBenet are in the bathroom, but there is a picture in evidence of jeans scrunched up like someone stepped out of them and they are soiled. There are also fibers from the garrote that were found in the bed.

As I said before, Cyril Wecht, although I don't like his sexual asphixiation theory, presents evidence of bruising on both sides of Jon Benet's head (on the inside) as if someone shooked her frantically. Now that is interesting.

Excellent post. I believe the bruising IS from someone shaking her frantically. After Patsy injured her daughter to the point of no return...JB was unconscious...Patsy realized what she had done...and started frantically shaking her...trying to revive her.

 

[Ames]

UK,

"If she was wiped down prior to her death, how do you explain the blood smears on her size-12 underwear and that of her genitalia?

If her wipe down was to remove feces, why did they leave her feces soiled pants/jeans lying on the bathroom floor, this is just as negligent as leaving her wearing urine-soaked underwear?"

I think the blood on the size 12 undies came from an internal injury in her vagina, it trickled down after her death. It may not have reached the outside of her body for a while. I don't think anyone noticed the soiled undies balled up inside the pants in the bathroom. I don't think the soiled undies/pants had anything to do with the incident that occurred on the night of 12/25...that's why they were left there. I think the upstairs of the house was quite unkempt. Lots of clothes everywhere etc.


"Coroner Meyer who actually performed her autopsy was of the opinion that JonBenet had been digitally penetrated and that in addition to her acute injuries, some were chronic. The enlargement of JonBenet's hymen was atypical for girl of her age group. This is not evidence of douching it is evidence of sexual activity, and Coroner Meyer intimated that he considered it predated the time of her death. Definitively Coroner Meyer did not suggest her vaginal injuries may have been caused by one or more methods one of which was douching, he never mentioned it.

My understanding is that douching has the opposite effect and is more likely to lead ovarian infections, since the douching removes the bodies natural anti-bodies and helpful bacteria that would defend against infection?"

I think JB may have been digitally penetrated that night (with a gloved finger along with paintbrush). However, I think the damage to her hymen over time (the chronic injuries he examined) may have been from douching. You're right about douching removing the antibodies and it actually being counter-productive, but that is not believed by everybody. Many old school women swear by them and use them quite routinely. They would not be on the market and a large part of the feminen hygiene market share if people were not using them (for benefit of the female body or not). This is my theory after pouring through all information I could. My gut tells me she was not sexually abused. I think JB was a "sparkplug" and would not have allowed abuse. She also was quite vocal and not afraid to speak out.

"There were three people in that house and any one of them may have killed JonBenet.

JonBenet may have endured the discipline of pageants and accompanying sexual abuse for years, her family life was dysfunctional, to simply blame it all on Patsy as a rage incident appears somewhat simplistic to me."

Rage incidents DO happen and it is not simplistic to me at all. In fact, I think Patsy was a prime candidate to lose her shizz and snap.

WOW...I can see that we think alike. I agree with your entire post. I believe that the panties were inside of the pants on the floor...and the panties...NOT the pants were soiled. The Ramsey's, in their panic...or because the panties were hidden, didn't see them. And, just like you said...those panties and pants had absolutely nothing to do with the murder. Rage incidents happen every single day...its hard to accept...but, it is true. I believe that with Patsy's personality, PLUS the stress of the day, PLUS the stress of getting everything ready for the trip, PLUS the "couple of cocktails" that she admitted to having at the White's party......she snapped.