I don't have a problem with Patsy not getting a shower. Maybe this was her routine. She said she always combed her hair and put on her make-up before going out and that she put on the same clothes from the previous night and was planning to get a shower and dressed after they got to MI. They were flying on their private plane so I'm sure to her it was no big deal.narlacat said:
What was John wearing the morning of Dec. 26?
- Thread starter Shanny
- Start date
Well, no it wasn't, PR says this in DOI, pg 10.snowqueen said:
'Slowly the normal routine for an early morning flight comes into focus.
Take a shower, get dressed, get going.'
Her shower being broken that day is the reason she gave for not having a shower, not because it was her routine not to..
JMO8778
..at the beach!
- Joined
- Jul 22, 2006
- Messages
- 5,554
- Reaction score
- 1,868
Is it possible she stayed up to get some last minute things done,and had to deal w. JB b/f she herself went to bed...and something went wrong then?
I have a q here....why was she redressed in new underwear,if it was a staged sexual assault?(which I think it was) but...why not just leave her in nothing instead? Would that be more realistic?Or could it be that b/c it was a parent doing the staging...they just couldnt bear to leave her that way?
JMO8778, I'm still pretty new to all of this, but it's my opinion that everything that was done throughout the staging was done because it was necessary.
IMO (if I'm reading the evidence right) the killer inflicted the sexual wound prior to JBR's death. I think it's likely that it bled more than the killer expected, and that a somewhat significant amount of blood ended up on the size six underwear. The killer has already planned to stage the crime scene twice: once for the person who becomes his accesory after the fact to JBR's murder, and once again for LE. But the blood is worrisome: it will interfere with the first staging, especially if it seeps through onto the white long johns.
The killer remembers that PR was wrapping presents in the basement, and that one of those gifts contains underwear that looks just like the ones JBR is wearing. Wherever the initial attack (where rage was, indeed, a factor) took place, the final assault/murder take place in the basement (though not necessarily the wine cellar). But the killer must partially unwrap several gifts to find the underwear; then, having cleaned JBR up to remove most of the blood, he puts the size 12 underwear on her, realizing only after he has begun just how ridiculously large they are--but then it's too late; they've already come in contact with JBR, and the killer may even realize that a tiny amount of blood is on them (though I doubt that). But they will suffice for his purpose; there's no danger of blood seeping onto the white long johns, and his first staging will fool his intended target.
Why would PR, who wrapped the gifts, need to unwrap several to find the size 12 underwear? Why would PR, familiar with children's underwear sizes (and, given the toileting issues, only too familiar with JBR's correct size) even attempt to put huge underwear on JBR? These things only make sense to me if they were done by someone who didn't know which package the underwear was in and just how big the size 12 would be on JBR--and this person, in my purely speculative opinion, is JR.
IMO (if I'm reading the evidence right) the killer inflicted the sexual wound prior to JBR's death. I think it's likely that it bled more than the killer expected, and that a somewhat significant amount of blood ended up on the size six underwear. The killer has already planned to stage the crime scene twice: once for the person who becomes his accesory after the fact to JBR's murder, and once again for LE. But the blood is worrisome: it will interfere with the first staging, especially if it seeps through onto the white long johns.
The killer remembers that PR was wrapping presents in the basement, and that one of those gifts contains underwear that looks just like the ones JBR is wearing. Wherever the initial attack (where rage was, indeed, a factor) took place, the final assault/murder take place in the basement (though not necessarily the wine cellar). But the killer must partially unwrap several gifts to find the underwear; then, having cleaned JBR up to remove most of the blood, he puts the size 12 underwear on her, realizing only after he has begun just how ridiculously large they are--but then it's too late; they've already come in contact with JBR, and the killer may even realize that a tiny amount of blood is on them (though I doubt that). But they will suffice for his purpose; there's no danger of blood seeping onto the white long johns, and his first staging will fool his intended target.
Why would PR, who wrapped the gifts, need to unwrap several to find the size 12 underwear? Why would PR, familiar with children's underwear sizes (and, given the toileting issues, only too familiar with JBR's correct size) even attempt to put huge underwear on JBR? These things only make sense to me if they were done by someone who didn't know which package the underwear was in and just how big the size 12 would be on JBR--and this person, in my purely speculative opinion, is JR.
JMO8778 said:
JMO8778,
Yes it is possible that Patsy had to deal with JonBenet prior to going to bed, then something went wrong, and this is the most likely scenario ...
The size-12's are like the pineapple, two faultlines running through the staged death of JonBenet e.g. one refers to upstairs when she was alive, the other to downstairs when she was dead, both are completely inconsistent with an intruder, or Toilet Rage theory.
Firstly I suspect that there is redacted forensic evidence e.g. the missing piece of the paintbrush handle, this may have been left inside JonBenet?
There is certainly evidence being withheld, since some aspects of of her death do not add up.
Now wrt size-12's lets assume a kiss/occam approach; e.g. the size-12's were actually located in the basement wrapped as a xmas-present?
Now
As a first assumption the answer I would go along with is yes, but the size-12's are so incongruous to the crime-scene its possible that some other reasoning was at work?
imo because the staging had been revised from that of a sexual assault to that of an abduction e.g. ransom note.
Possibly if I find the time I'll start a new thread dealing with the staging?
.
Dru said:
Dru,
Speculating, some may suggest that the Wednesday pair was more important than the size, since it chimes with JonBenet's tombstone inscription, and the Ramsey assumption that Jonbenet was killed xmas-day!
That is the size-6 Wednesday pair were her only Wednesday pair, and that possibly someone e.g. Fleet White had assisted JonBenet with her toileting at the party, so was in a position to be a witness if she had been redressed to wear, say a , Tuesday pair?
Why should JR know that the size-12 underwear was in the basement?
There is another explanation for all of this which I may expand upon in another thread.
.
rashomon said:
rashomon,
As far as I know yes, from memory Patsy purchased size-6, day-of-the-week underwear from bloomingdales, and it is relevant that no mention has been made of any Wednesday pair being found either in her underwear drawer, her bedroom or elsewhere in the house. Its my understanding that all the underwear taken from her underwear drawer in her bathroom was size-6.
If she was ever wearing any underwear on the evening of the 25th/26th Dec. then these would have been a size-6 pair, and likely a Wednesday pair, regardless of the day-of-the-week, no size-6 underwear has been linked to the crime-scene, so are presumed missing?
.
IrishMist said:
IrishMist,
This is the Missing Underwear question, but just play detective, and ask yourself what size of underwear would have been in JonBenet's underwear drawer, any takers on size-4-6?
They are only really missing if she was actually wearing them at the time of her death!
And if she was not, then your favorite theory should suggest an answer e.g. Toilet Rage or Sexual Rage both offer a valid reason why she should be wearing no underwear!
But only Sexual Rage requires her to be redressed in underwear to fake some degree of normalcy!
.
UKGuy, I'd be interested to hear your theory about the Wednesday underwear.
But I think any speculation that the Wednesday pair was chosen because someone at the Whites had seen them, perhaps by assisting JBR in toileting etc., is kind of iffy.
True, PR and JR said JBR was 'zonked' when they got home and that they didn't wake her to put her in pajamas. But if they had absolutely HAD to account for a different pair of underwear, couldn't PR have claimed that she replaced the underwear when JBR's pants were removed and the long johns put on?
Unless I'm mistaken, PR always made it sound like she'd removed the velvet pants and THEN put the long johns on, not like she took off the velvet pants and left the long johns, which were underneath, there. But if she took off the velvet pants and then put on the long johns, it would be easy for her to say, if the Whites or anyone else mentioned different underpants to the police, that she had replaced them at bedtime. She has the perfect reason for doing so; her little girl was known to have 'accidents'. So why would it matter if the Whites or anyone else had seen the Wednesday pair?
IMO, the only person who needed to be fooled by the Wednesday pair was PR, in the first staging JR might have arranged. And I think JR would have known what gifts PR had been working on, because I think she came home Christmas night complaining that she still had to get gifts wrapped and ready for the Charlevoix trip, and that she was the sort of person who would have listed them all off out loud just to show how much more work she had to do before she could go to bed that night...which is why I think that JR, and not PR, was in charge of bedtime for both JBR and BR on Christmas night.
But I think any speculation that the Wednesday pair was chosen because someone at the Whites had seen them, perhaps by assisting JBR in toileting etc., is kind of iffy.
True, PR and JR said JBR was 'zonked' when they got home and that they didn't wake her to put her in pajamas. But if they had absolutely HAD to account for a different pair of underwear, couldn't PR have claimed that she replaced the underwear when JBR's pants were removed and the long johns put on?
Unless I'm mistaken, PR always made it sound like she'd removed the velvet pants and THEN put the long johns on, not like she took off the velvet pants and left the long johns, which were underneath, there. But if she took off the velvet pants and then put on the long johns, it would be easy for her to say, if the Whites or anyone else mentioned different underpants to the police, that she had replaced them at bedtime. She has the perfect reason for doing so; her little girl was known to have 'accidents'. So why would it matter if the Whites or anyone else had seen the Wednesday pair?
IMO, the only person who needed to be fooled by the Wednesday pair was PR, in the first staging JR might have arranged. And I think JR would have known what gifts PR had been working on, because I think she came home Christmas night complaining that she still had to get gifts wrapped and ready for the Charlevoix trip, and that she was the sort of person who would have listed them all off out loud just to show how much more work she had to do before she could go to bed that night...which is why I think that JR, and not PR, was in charge of bedtime for both JBR and BR on Christmas night.
UKGuy said:
UKGuy,
I fully agree. THERE ARE A PAIR OF SIZE 6 UNDERWEAR MISSING FROM THE CRIME SCENE. JonBenet was obviously wearing size 6 underwear prior to being sexually assaulted and killed. There were only size 6 and size 4 underwear in her underwear drawer in the bathroom. The huge size 12/14 underwear had to have been put on her by the killer after death in a naive attempt to hide the sexual aspects of the crime.
Only a family member would have had motive to cover up the sexual assault and stage the crime scene to look like a kidnapping gone wrong. An intruder wouldn't have cared one way or the other.
It's interesting that Patsy, during the police interviews, tried to belittle the significance of size 12/14 underwear being found on the body by implying it was normal since JonBenet wore size 8's and 10's. But Patsy was wrong. Only sizes 4 and 6 were found in JonBenet's underwear drawer.
BlueCrab
A new pair of underwear could also have been put on JB to hide the toilet rage aspects of the crime. Suppose JB had soiled her underwear and the parents removed this crucial part of evidence. Which is why they had to put JB in some other underwear for their staged scene.BlueCrab said:
But the question remains why the killer (a family member) did not put one of the numerous available pairs of size 6 underwear on JonBenet's body then, but a largely oversized pair. Was it because 'Wednesday' was written on the size 12 underwear?
rashomon said:
rashomon,
I don't think the garrote scene was staged. The so-called garrote was actually a device used in rough sex -- erotic asphyxiation. IMO JonBenet could have died accidentally -- the victim of the extremely dangerous game of erotic asphyxiation. If so, the vicious postmortem battering of the body was staging to make it appear that it was the work of a small foreign faction of extremists, and therefore coincide better with the wording in the fake ransom note.
I also believe the killing involved more than one perpetrator, one of whom was a Ramsey family member.
BlueCrab
Similar threads
