What was John wearing the morning of Dec. 26?

[Camper]

UKGuy, I sat in the premeditated position for nearly two years.

My thought on that has been dormant for a LONG time. But you have spurred some NEW thoughts for me on that.

1. Since things were not adequately packaged for Christmas giving in Michigan, things left in the basement NOT READY for departue the morning of the 26th.

2. Could it be that PR did not WANT to go to Michigan for an after Christmas celebration, and as I recall had not pre arranged with the helpie person in Charlevoix to prep the vacation house for Christmas guests. (Please feel free to correct me IF I remember wrongly on this.)

3. Plus with so much work to do for the big boat trip, JonBenet's upcoming contest, PR was being overtaxed. WE do not know what was happening under the Ramsey roof to add to that.

4. PR did everything wonderfully and over the top, it does seem strange that things had slipped, at least the view from where I sit. The annual Christmas letter was late.

I might ponder pre meditated again, particularly IF the 911 call only two days BEFORE Christmas was caused by a 'problem' in the home. A 'problem' that WE can only guess at.

What number is SuperDaves MbP post?

Resume the Daisy Dance.

.

 

[UKGuy]

UKGuy, I sat in the premeditated position for nearly two years.

My thought on that has been dormant for a LONG time. But you have spurred some NEW thoughts for me on that.

1. Since things were not adequately packaged for Christmas giving in Michigan, things left in the basement NOT READY for departue the morning of the 26th.

2. Could it be that PR did not WANT to go to Michigan for an after Christmas celebration, and as I recall had not pre arranged with the helpie person in Charlevoix to prep the vacation house for Christmas guests. (Please feel free to correct me IF I remember wrongly on this.)

3. Plus with so much work to do for the big boat trip, JonBenet's upcoming contest, PR was being overtaxed. WE do not know what was happening under the Ramsey roof to add to that.

4. PR did everything wonderfully and over the top, it does seem strange that things had slipped, at least the view from where I sit. The annual Christmas letter was late.

I might ponder pre meditated again, particularly IF the 911 call only two days BEFORE Christmas was caused by a 'problem' in the home. A 'problem' that WE can only guess at.

Resume the Daisy Dance.

.

Camper,
Curiously I would factor premeditation in after I had explained other features.

Currently my take on premeditation is this. There is the long range well thought out and executed type that does not seem to apply here, then there is the short range type where a problem or issue has been identified, but a course of action has been delayed, this could be because there is no obvious plan, or the action seems beyond the pale?

If JonBenet was being sexually abused and this was becoming problematic, was there the possibility that aspects of JonBenet's public behaviour was raising eyebrows, did one of the Ramsey's know that a friend or acquaintance had mentioned something, say at any of the xmas-time parties? e.g. JonBenet's prior behaviour when visiting the White's may have taken on a different color, when analysed in the context of her death, that is the White's may have something of interest to add on this topic. Did both parents collude in her abuse, leading to tension e.g. JonBenet receiving more attention?

So your thought:

I might ponder pre meditated again, particularly IF the 911 call only two days BEFORE Christmas was caused by a 'problem' in the home. A 'problem' that WE can only guess at.

May have some substance to it.


.

 

[rashomon]

rashomon,
Thats only if the injury was inflicted by the paintbrush, anyway thats irrelevant since any invasive sexual assault would separate her labia, and as part of my theory I'm assuming JonBenet was the victim of a sexual assault which was later hidden by wiping her down , and redressing her in size-12's!

There exist vicious sexual attacks on victims where blunt trauma force is used (just think of what Ted Bundy did), and the whole genital area is injured, but in JB's case, the outer genital was uninjured, there was only this small wound inside her vagina. Which imo makes a scenario likely that this was not an attack against a resisting victim, but a calculatedly inflicted inury on an inert body.

We don't know what was wiped off JB's body. Blood? Semen? Urine? Feces?
Or maybe the stager of the scene wiped off the blood to see if the inflicted wound looked 'convincing' enough?
The wiping down could also have been an unreflected act done on impulse, without any 'reasoning' at all.

Or a change in the staging could have been the reason: they may have wanted to stage it as a sex crime first, then thought about adding the ransom note for more drama, so they redressed the body for a kidnapping scenario.
There are just so many possible explanation as to why JB was wiped down.

 

[UKGuy]

There exist vicious sexual attacks on victims where blunt trauma force is used (just think of what Ted Bundy did), and the whole genital area is injured, but in JB's case, the outer genital was uninjured, there was only this small wound inside her vagina. Which imo makes a scenario likely that this was not an attack against a resisting victim, but a calculatedly inflicted inury on an inert body.

We don't know what was wiped off JB's body. Blood? Semen? Urine? Feces?
Or maybe the stager of the scene wiped off the blood to see if the inflicted wound looked 'convincing' enough?
The wiping down could also have been an unreflected act done on impulse, without any 'reasoning' at all.

Or a change in the staging could have been the reason: they may have wanted to stage it as a sex crime first, then thought about adding the ransom note for more drama, so they redressed the body for a kidnapping scenario.
There are just so many possible explanation as to why JB was wiped down.

rashomon,
JonBenet was sexually assaulted internally, this is distinct from external genital trauma which can be laid at the door of any cause e.g. douching.

Patently JonBenet had internal bleeding, Coroner Meyer remarks upon the blood smears on her thighs, underwear, labia , and absence of, indicating she was wiped down!

Or maybe the stager of the scene wiped off the blood to see if the inflicted wound looked 'convincing' enough?

And the presence of blood would not indicate this, if it was meant to be obvious why was JonBenet not defiled in a grotesque manner?

The wiping down could also have been an unreflected act done on impulse, without any 'reasoning' at all.

Same could be said of her sexual assault, or her head bash ...

Or a change in the staging could have been the reason: they may have wanted to stage it as a sex crime first, then thought about adding the ransom note for more drama, so they redressed the body for a kidnapping scenario.
There are just so many possible explanation as to why JB was wiped down.

How about some kiss and occam, apply some common sense, they may have wanted to stage it as a sex crime first or it may have its origin in a bona fide sexual assault, you should demonstrate this is inconsistent with the forensic evidence before enumerating alternative speculations.

That is any assumed sexual assault staging may independent of an original sexual assault and intended to obsfucate it!

You do not add the ransom note for dramatic effect, or are you suggesting the author penned the ransom note as an extension of their persona?

Staging is mainly dependent on the decedents cirumstances e.g. Someone who ligature strangles a victim may hang them up to stage a suicide, penning a fake suicide note. Someone killed in a car may have the car rolled into a river to fake an accident. Parents who through anger assault their children, tend to fake accidents to explain away their injuries.

There are just so many possible explanation as to why JB was wiped down.

Well you should start with the most obvious one e.g. to remove forensic evidence.

Ted Bundy's pathology was different he was a male predator seeking out middle class, college age victims to sexually violate.


.

 

[rashomon]

rashomon,

And the presence of blood would not indicate this, if it was meant to be obvious why was JonBenet not defiled in a grotesque manner?

The parents may not have brought themselves to do that. Or they decided to abandon the sexaul assault staging in favor of a kidnapping scenario.

That is any assumed sexual assault staging may independent of an original sexual assault and intended to obsfucate it!

The person who delivered the head blow may not have been the same person who was JB's chronic abuser. Suppose John had been abusing JB without Patsy's knowledge, and it was he who suggested to her that she stage it as a sexual predator scene? Because he wanted to obfuscate the signs of chronic abuse in JB's body by inflicting the paintbrush wound?

You do not add the ransom note for dramatic effect, or are you suggesting the author penned the ransom note as an extension of their persona?

I'm suggesting that the author penned the ransom note to throw just another dramatic 'outside' element into the mix.

There do exist theories about Patsy Ramsey possibly suffering from DID (dissocative identity disorder), which are currently being discussed on FFJ and C&J.
The CASKU experts pointed out that the stager of the scene penned the ransom note to 'undo' the crime in her own mind.

Staging is mainly dependent on the decedents cirumstances e.g. Someone who ligature strangles a victim may hang them up to stage a suicide, penning a fake suicide note. Someone killed in a car may have the car rolled into a river to fake an accident. Parents who through anger assault their children, tend to fake accidents to explain away their injuries.

The Ramseys many have had their reasons not to take JB to the hospital after the rage attack. JB's chronic sexual abuse for example.

Well you should start with the most obvious one e.g. to remove forensic evidence.

What stands out in the JBR case is that removing forensic evidence was not high on the Ramseys' list of priorities. For example, they even left the pen and paper from the incriminating ransom note behind in their kitchen.

How about some kiss and occam, apply some common sense, they may have wanted to stage it as a sex crime first or it may have its origin in a bona fide sexual assault, you should demonstrate this is inconsistent with the forensic evidence before enumerating alternative speculations.

You should ask yourself another question: was 'common sense' a vital ingredient in that staging scenario? Time after time it has been pointed out that he whole staging 'doesn't make sense', and indeed it doesn't.
Delmar England wrote that the whole staging was chaos from start to finish, and the more I learn about this case, the more I'm inclined to believe him.
Therefore it is possible that we are attributing a level of logic and reasoning to the stager of the scene which this person did not have, for this person was in a panic, and panic prevents people from thinking clearly.

Since we don't know what went on in the stager's mind when (s)he e.g. put the longjohns on JonBenet but left the bizarre garrote on (two contradictory staging elements), we run into problems if we want to 'prove' (or disprove) anything here.

 

[UKGuy]

The parents may not have brought themselves to do that. Or they decided to abandon the sexaul assault staging in favor of a kidnapping scenario.

The person who delivered the head blow may not have been the same person who was JB's chronic abuser. Suppose John had been abusing JB without Patsy's knowledge, and it was he who suggested to her that she stage it as a sexual predator scene? Because he wanted to obfuscate the signs of chronic abuse in JB's body by inflicting the paintbrush wound?

I'm suggesting that the author penned the ransom note to throw just another dramatic 'outside' element into the mix.

There do exist theories about Patsy Ramsey possibly suffering from DID (dissocative identity disorder), which are currently being discussed on FFJ and C&J.
The CASKU experts pointed out that the stager of the scene penned the ransom note to 'undo' the crime in her own mind.

The Ramseys many have had their reasons not to take JB to the hospital after the rage attack. JB's chronic sexual abuse for example.

What stands out in the JBR case is that removing forensic evidence was not high on the Ramseys' list of priorities. For example, they even left the pen and paper from the incriminating ransom note behind in their kitchen.

You should ask yourself another question: was 'common sense' a vital ingredient in that staging scenario? Time after time it has been pointed out that he whole staging 'doesn't make sense', and indeed it doesn't.
Delmar England wrote that the whole staging was chaos from start to finish, and the more I learn about this case, the more I'm inclined to believe him.
Therefore it is possible that we are attributing a level of logic and reasoning to the stager of the scene which this person did not have, for this person was in a panic, and panic prevents people from thinking clearly.

Since we don't know what went on in the stager's mind when (s)he e.g. put the longjohns on JonBenet but left the bizarre garrote on (two contradictory staging elements), we run into problems if we want to 'prove' (or disprove) anything here.

rashomon,

Well the staging makes sense to me, so much so, it allows me to rule out Steve Thomas' Toilet Rage Theory!

I do not consider the longjohns and garrote, which is not bizarre, its just a garrote, to be contradictory, why so?

Patsy stated she placed longjohns on JonBenet and placed her sleeping to bed. Next moring Jonbenet is discovered dead wearing longjohns, allegedly asphyxated by the garrote.

Delmar England wrote that the whole staging was chaos from start to finish

It is hardly chaos if it worked and you and Delmar cannot decipher it!

I'm suggesting that the author penned the ransom note to throw just another dramatic 'outside' element into the mix.

There do exist theories about Patsy Ramsey possibly suffering from DID (dissocative identity disorder), which are currently being discussed on FFJ and C&J.
The CASKU experts pointed out that the stager of the scene penned the ransom note to 'undo' the crime in her own mind.

Well I never majored in psychology so I'll leave the state of Patsy's mind to others.


.

 

[BlueCrab]

Right, and we know how John always tells the truth BlueCrab. Oh and one more thing, later on John says they were loosely tied.

Solace,

Please provide your source that states John Ramsey said Jonbenet's hands were loosely tied when he found her in the basement.

BlueCrab

 

[rashomon]

rashomon,
Well the staging makes sense to me, so much so, it allows me to rule out Steve Thomas' Toilet Rage Theory!

The rage atttack on JB needn't have been caused by toilet issues.

I do not consider the longjohns and garrote, which is not bizarre, its just a garrote, to be contradictory, why so?

Yes, but why not just put a piece of rope around JB's neck? Why make it so bizarre? If it was a staged scene, it was meant to be bizarre, and why was it meant to be bizarre? Because it was intended to direct suspicion away from the parents as the perps.
Cyril Wecht for example swallowed the bait at once, theorizing about this being an erotic asphyxiation killing, only that he (to the Ramseys' anger) associated John Ramsey with it, and not an intruder.
Now if the Ramseys wanted to stage it as a sex crime, why did they leave JB's long underwear on? Wouldn't the long underwear on the child contradict a sex crime scenario? That's what I meant by 'contradictory' elements in the staging.
The answer imo is that the Ramseys wanted to stage it as a sex crime AND a kidnapping - in short, they staged too much. Criminal profilers have pointed out that people who stage a scene ofen make the mistake of staging too much.
And since a kidnapper who wants to abduct the child would not strip the child of her clothing, the Ramseys dressed her in the long undwear and then stated she had been put to bed in them. (kidnapper snatched JB from bed)
Long underwear, ransom note = kidnapping scenario
garrote, paintbrush injury = sexual pervert scenario
The duct tape and the wrist ligatures could serve either scenario - kidnapping or/and sexual predator staging.

It is hardly chaos if it worked

The reason why it worked was not because the Ramseys were criminal masterminds, but because the police failed to react immediately after JB's body had been found. Both parents should have been taken to the police station immediately, not have been allowed to speak to each other, their clothing should have been collected right away, they should have been questioned separately and locked into the contradictions of their respective statements.
Do you think Patsy would have stood up to pressure when confronted with the lab findings (fibers from her jacket in the garrote) after a few days only?
I think she would have broken down and confessed even before any lab testing was done, for she was still full inner turmoil.
But the police stood and let the Ramseys vanish right in front of their eyes. And later were never again able to break through the protective shield of lawyers with whom they surrounded themselves. And since DA Hunter and his minions failed to act aggressively, everything played in the Ramseys' hands.

I never majored in psychology so I'll leave the state of Patsy's mind to others.

Does one always need a degree to make oneself familiar with a topic?
I think these theories are fascinating, and although I know very little about it all, I hope to learn more from the posters here and other forums.

 

[UKGuy]

The rage atttack on JB needn't have been caused by toilet issues.

Yes, but why not just put a piece of rope around JB's neck? Why make it so bizarre? If it was a staged scene, it was meant to be bizarre, and why was it meant to be bizarre? Because it was intended to direct suspicion away from the parents as the perps.
Cyril Wecht for example swallowed the bait at once, theorizing about this being an erotic asphyxiation killing, only that he (to the Ramseys' anger) associated John Ramsey with it, and not an intruder.
Now if the Ramseys wanted to stage it as a sex crime, why did they leave JB's long underwear on? Wouldn't the long underwear on the child contradict a sex crime scenario? That's what I meant by 'contradictory' elements in the staging.
The answer imo is that the Ramseys wanted to stage it as a sex crime AND a kidnapping - in short, they staged too much. Criminal profilers have pointed out that people who stage a scene ofen make the mistake of staging too much.
And since a kidnapper who wants to abduct the child would not strip the child of her clothing, the Ramseys dressed her in the long undwear and then stated she had been put to bed in them. (kidnapper snatched JB from bed)
Long underwear, ransom note = kidnapping scenario
garrote, paintbrush injury = sexual pervert scenario
The duct tape and the wrist ligatures could serve either scenario - kidnapping or/and sexual predator staging.
The reason why it worked was not because the Ramseys were criminal masterminds, but because the police failed to react immediately after JB's body had been found. Both parents should have been taken to the police station immediately, not have been allowed to speak to each other, their clothing should have been collected right away, they should have been questioned separately and locked into the contradictions of their respective statements.
Do you think Patsy would have stood up to pressure when confronted with the lab findings (fibers from her jacket in the garrote) after a few days only?
I think she would have broken down and confessed even before any lab testing was done, for she was still full inner turmoil.
But the police stood and let the Ramseys vanish right in front of their eyes. And later were never again able to break through the protective shield of lawyers with whom they surrounded themselves. And since DA Hunter and his minions failed to act aggressively, everything played in the Ramseys' hands.
Does one always need a degree to make oneself familiar with a topic?
I think these theories are fascinating, and although I know very little about it all, I hope to learn more from the posters here and other forums.

rashomon,

The rage atttack on JB needn't have been caused by toilet issues.

Really you know it was a rage attack and not some other category of assault?

Steve Thomas' Toilet Rage theory promotes bedwetting as the causal factor, and that the likely location that this occurred to be the bathroom.

I have suggested a Sexual Rage theory to take its place.

Yes, but why not just put a piece of rope around JB's neck? Why make it so bizarre? If it was a staged scene, it was meant to be bizarre, and why was it meant to be bizarre? Because it was intended to direct suspicion away from the parents as the perps.
Cyril Wecht for example swallowed the bait at once, theorizing about this being an erotic asphyxiation killing, only that he (to the Ramseys' anger) associated John Ramsey with it, and not an intruder.
Now if the Ramseys wanted to stage it as a sex crime, why did they leave JB's long underwear on? Wouldn't the long underwear on the child contradict a sex crime scenario? That's what I meant by 'contradictory' elements in the staging.
The answer imo is that the Ramseys wanted to stage it as a sex crime AND a kidnapping - in short, they staged too much. Criminal profilers have pointed out that people who stage a scene ofen make the mistake of staging too much.
And since a kidnapper who wants to abduct the child would not strip the child of her clothing, the Ramseys dressed her in the long undwear and then stated she had been put to bed in them. (kidnapper snatched JB from bed)
Long underwear, ransom note = kidnapping scenario
garrote, paintbrush injury = sexual pervert scenario
The duct tape and the wrist ligatures could serve either scenario - kidnapping or/and sexual predator staging.

Because it was intended to direct suspicion away from the parents as the perps.
No I disagree, I have already suggested what its intended role was.

Well bizarre is your interpretation, Lou Smit had a similar take on it, and as you point out Cyril Wecht elaborated on EA activities.


Now if the Ramseys wanted to stage it as a sex crime, why did they leave JB's long underwear on? Wouldn't the long underwear on the child contradict a sex crime scenario? That's what I meant by 'contradictory' elements in the staging.
Who said anything about them staging a sex crime, this is your interpretation not mine.

Its only contradictory because it does not fit into your current interpretation.

psychology: Some profilers include a Psychological Autopsy in their toolkit, try google:http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=ISO-8859-1&q="Psychological+Autopsy"&btnG=Google+Search

Its used a lot by the US armed forces and the insurance industry, as well as Law Enforcement.



.

 

[rashomon]

rashomon,
Really you know it was a rage attack and not some other category of assault?

UKGuy,

We don't 'know' what it was, but a rage attack is very likely imo.

I have suggested a Sexual Rage theory to take its place.

What do you think happened? That John Ramsey sexually assaulted JB by jabbing a paintbrush into her vagina and Patsy fashioned the garrote and wrote the ransom note? Remember that fibers from her jacket were found in the garrote, the paint tray and the duct tapl, and in all probability she penned the ransom note.

No I disagree, I have already suggested what its intended role was.

So you don't think it was intended to direct the attention away from the parents as the perps?

Well bizarre is your interpretation, Lou Smit had a similar take on it, and as you point out Cyril Wecht elaborated on EA activities.

I think that the stager of the scene fashioned it that way because it was meant to look bizarre, that this is what the stager thought a bizarre strangling tool must look like.

Who said anything about them staging a sex crime, this is your interpretation not mine.

I know that this is not your interpretation. My post was a reply to your (valid) question: "suppose" this was staged as a sex crime, then why did the Ramseys not display the body in a more shocking way? Why inflict the injury for staging puposes to her vagina and then put her in long underwear which would then hide this injury? Isn't this a contradicion?
And indeed this would be the case if the Ramseys' intention had been to stage this only as a sex crime. But they didn't. The staged it as a sex crime AND a kidnapping, and since kidnappers for ransom don't undress their victims when abducting them, the Ramseys put the long underwear on JB.

It is only contradictory because it does not fit into your current interpretation.

It does fit into my current interpretation. See above.

psychology: Some profilers include a Psychological Autopsy in their toolkit, try google:http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&ie=ISO-8859-1&q=%22Psychological+Autopsy%22&btnG=Google+Search

Its used a lot by the US armed forces and the insurance industry, as well as Law Enforcement.

Thanks for the link, UKGuy. Sounds very interesting!
I have started a thread on Patsy Ramsey on FFJ and C&J, and originally wanted to call it "psychological autopsy of Patsy Ramsey". I didn't know that this is a term profilers actually use.
I'm going to start a thread on her here too, and put your link over there.