What's in this cellar room photo?

[cynic]

I wonder why it says "Bloodstains from nightgown???" What's with the question marks? Almost like the DNA lab report is questioning whether or not it is actually bloodstains or not. Kinda looks like a DNA Lab would know the difference between bloodstains, and say....Kool-Aid stains.

The question marks are a bit of editorializing.
A screen capture showing the report is below:

 

[BBB167893]

I'm also very suspicious of the BPD's findings, because I think there were those who were prepared (for reasons of their own) to do whatever it took to convict them.

I'm curious as to why you think that. (I'll also remember it the next time any IDI accuses US of having a conspiracy theory!)

Finding tape in stores in Boulder and then finding charges for the amount the tape costs proves nothing, in fact, in any other circumstances, it would not even warrant comment, let alone become some kind of 'evidence'!

SURE it wouldn't. :sarcasm: I'm sure it was just a coincidence.

So rather than account for them, RDI chooses to just deny!!!

I can think of a LOT of things IDI denies rather than try to account for. Stones in a glass house, and all that.

 

[BBB167893]

To me the staging was well thought out. Even though it threw suspicion on the Ramseys, it also left enough holes to put doubt in peoples minds.

Like I said, SunnieRn, they didn't have to fool the police or FBI. They had to fool ONE person out of twelve. The sad fact is, no matter how ridiculous your story is, SOMEONE out there will believe you. Ask OJ Simpson if you don't believe me. As PT Barnum supposedly said, "there's a sucker born every minute.

The Ramseys are not/were not dumb people, but they also had a lot of luck on their side.

I could swear someone said that a while back. I can't remember who it was, though.

 

[BBB167893]

Were the Ramsey's searched when they left the house that day, somehow I doubt it. It was winter so they could have taken out lots of stuff under their clothes.

No, they were not searched. And PR had a large fur coat on...

 

[joeskidbeck]

Hey Dave! Wasn't there a thread a while back about whether the killer or Ramseys were lucky or smart? I believe I voted the Ramseys were a little of both. The lucky part being because of the incompetence of the BPD. Anywhere else in this country and we would not be here tonight. I've been watching Inv.Discovery all day today and some of the smallest police departments in the country have solved some of the most horrendous and intricate cases you could imagine! Oh well, it's already been said, rice done cooked

 

[BBB167893]

Hey Dave! Wasn't there a thread a while back about whether the killer or Ramseys were lucky or smart?

Sure sounds familiar, beck!

I believe I voted the Ramseys were a little of both. The lucky part being because of the incompetence of the BPD. Anywhere else in this country and we would not be here tonight.

Say like you mean it, beck!

 

[DeeDee249]

You see, I went to quite a lot of trouble to try to demonstrate that the tape WAS grey on both sides, but you have chosen to ignore that, as I think you choose to ignore anything contrary to your own opinion.

I put credence into what the Rs say for the simple reason that I do not believe they had any involvement in their daughter's death, so they therefore had no reason to lie.

You, on the other hand, because you believe they DID IT, believe nothing (unless it suits your purposes) of what they said.

I'm also very suspicious of the BPD's findings, because I think there were those who were prepared (for reasons of their own) to do whatever it took to convict them. Finding tape in stores in Boulder and then finding charges for the amount the tape costs proves nothing, in fact, in any other circumstances, it would not even warrant comment, let alone become some kind of 'evidence'!

Obviously the picture of the grey tape that maddy posted from another forum was a different size, colour and type from that JBR's father described removing from her mouth. How does this affect RDI? Well, if they stop denying it and accept that there was grey tape and there was black tape, then there was obviously two (or more) IDI involved, who just happened to have a different roll of tape each. Nothing unusual about this I suppose for and IDI, but REALLY a BIG problem for RDI. Why? -- because there was there not only ONE type of tape not sourced to the R's, but there was TWO types!! BOTH of these have to be "accounted for".

So rather than account for them, RDI chooses to just deny!!!

Likewise, I'm sure.

 

[Toltec]

It has been proven that portraits and artwork on the Ramsey's walls had duct tape attached on the back. There is also the question of whether or not JB's American Girl doll had duct tape (and cord) as to the recommendations of the manufacturer. How can you say that ANY duct tape cannot be sourced to the Ramseys? I don't think the Ramseys were stupid people by any means and it would have taken a very stupid person to have kept that tape in their home. Please don't ask me how they got it out because you know as well as I do that Burke and Pam Paugh carried out everything the Ramseys needed to get rid of. This tape argument is flimsy at best and proves nothing,

Pam took an artpiece Patsy painted, along with American Girl Dolls???

 

[joeskidbeck]

Pam took an artpiece Patsy painted, along with American Girl Dolls???

I'm not saying that Pam took any of the art pieces out of the house, but it has been proven that several art pieces had duct tape on the back. Same kind used on JonBenet. This is why I cannot understand how IDI says the tape cannot be sourced to the house. Of course it can. But yes, she did remove dolls and we can only assume one was the American Girl, if not let's hope LE has it and can prove the tape is missing from it.

 

[KoldKase]

I put the 3 screen captures of the CBI DNA report (cynic posted one of these--thanks) in the JB Case Library at FFJ after Rashomon asked about this. I believe these captures/photos were taken either by Why Nut, Jayelles, and/or ACR--sorry, can't remember which one(s).

I also included an early discussion thread about the report at the swamp, regarding the source, with transcriptions also offered--including the one from Margoo, who used the question marks when she wasn't sure what the text said. Those were not on the original report--Margoo editorializing, as cynic said.

Here's a link if anyone is interested--scroll down the page past other case photos:

[ame="http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/showthread.php?p=185839#post185839"]Miscellaneous - Forums For Justice[/ame]

 

[KoldKase]

Also, here is a photo published by the NE in its book of the LE transcripts jams sold them for $40K. It shows the boxes with duct tape in the basement room. I played with enlarging it and contrast, etc., as I scanned it and it's not that good. But you can see a larger photo of these same boxes and the room in the NE's latest article on the case, also in color.

[ame="http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/showthread.php?t=9777"]Ramsey home: Basement photos - Forums For Justice[/ame]

 

[otg]

I put the 3 screen captures of the CBI DNA report (cynic posted one of these--thanks) in the JB Case Library at FFJ after Rashomon asked about this. I believe these captures/photos were taken either by Why Nut, Jayelles, and/or ACR--sorry, can't remember which one(s).

I also included an early discussion thread about the report at the swamp, regarding the source, with transcriptions also offered--including the one from Margoo, who used the question marks when she wasn't sure what the text said. Those were not on the original report--Margoo editorializing, as cynic said.

Here's a link if anyone is interested--scroll down the page past other case photos:

Miscellaneous - Forums For Justice

Thanks, koldkase.

If I'm not mistaken, you can post there at FFJ. I ran across a thread there where the 911-call was being discussed. If you can, would you be so kind as to post a link to the thread here for the posters there to take a look at if they're interested. I think they would find it helpful. Start here:
[ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=5713058#post5713058"]Who Has Heard Burke's Voice on The 911 Tape? - Page 4 - Websleuths Crime Sleuthing Community[/ame]


The files are posted here:
http://www.mediafire.com/?sz5vaaab2evbo
.

 

[UKGuy]

I put the 3 screen captures of the CBI DNA report (cynic posted one of these--thanks) in the JB Case Library at FFJ after Rashomon asked about this. I believe these captures/photos were taken either by Why Nut, Jayelles, and/or ACR--sorry, can't remember which one(s).

I also included an early discussion thread about the report at the swamp, regarding the source, with transcriptions also offered--including the one from Margoo, who used the question marks when she wasn't sure what the text said. Those were not on the original report--Margoo editorializing, as cynic said.

Here's a link if anyone is interested--scroll down the page past other case photos:

Miscellaneous - Forums For Justice

KoldKase,

Thanks for posting those CBI DNA report screen captures. I reckon they are critical evidence since along with the barbie doll, they suggest something other than the conventional theory.

.

 

[rashomon]

Ames,
Thanks, its a Screen Capture of the DNA lab report shown on the 48 Hours program. the image is floating about somewhere, maybe I should have it since its a crucial piece of evidence. I flagged the blood-stained barbie nightgown up, since I have never accepted it arrived in the basement accidentally.

(My thanks to KK for pointing out that the original sceen captures of the lab report don't contain any question marks after "bloostains from nightgown").

UKGuy,

Maybe the blood on the nightgown was the main reason why the Ramseys placed it the wine cellar together with the dead body? To make it appear as if the perp had molested and killed JonBenet down there, thus concealing that a violent encounter involving bleeding had occurred upstairs, in JonBenet's own bedroom, between the child and a family member.
And hadn't Patsy also been asked if JonBenet had nosebleeds? I think was Ames who posted this section from the interviews. I can't find the passage right now - if someone could post it,TIA. And where did Patsy say something like "I don't see any blood?"

 

[DeeDee249]

(My thanks to KK for pointing out that the original sceen captures of the lab report don't contain any question marks after "bloostains from nightgown").

UKGuy,

Maybe the blood on the nightgown was the main reason why the Ramseys placed it the wine cellar together with the dead body? To make it appear as if the perp had molested and killed JonBenet down there, thus concealing that a violent encounter involving bleeding had occurred upstairs, in JonBenet's own bedroom, between the child and a family member.
And hadn't Patsy also been asked if JonBenet had nosebleeds? I think was Ames who posted this section from the interviews. I can't find the passage right now - if someone could post it,TIA. And where did Patsy say something like "I don't see any blood?"

Patsy was asked whether JB had nosebleeds. She made her comment about "I don't see any blood, do you?" while looking at photos of JB's bed. That was an extremely odd comment for her to make. JB's death, gruesome as it was, was pretty free of blood as far as what was VISIBLE. The blood under her scalp was only seen at the autopsy, as was the small amount of blood in her vagina. The blood that was wiped from her pubic area and thighs was, well, wiped off. And only "tan mucus" (which could mean that it was bloody at one point, blood turning brownish as it is exposed to the air) was seen on her cheek and in her nostrils.
So why Patsy should even mention blood is a mystery. Or not.... So my thinking is that if there really was blood on the pink nightie, Patsy knew it and her comment was meant to portray that JB had not had a nosebleed that night so any blood on the nightie or on her was related to her death. THAT is true, of course. Patsy she did not say JB wore that nightie, but wore what she was found in. So any blood on the nightie means that she was 1. either wearing it for whatever activity caused her to bleed from the vagina or 2. She was wiped down with the nightie, which came out of the dryer with the white blanket. #1 of course, implies complete redressing.
Be interesting to know if BR recalls what pajamas JB was wearing that night after they came home- if she was wearing the pink nightie, or was wearing what she was found in. Remember, Patsy at first tried to say JB wore the red turtleneck to the White's but photos taken there and shown to Patsy by LE indicted she was wearing the white top she was found in.
I guess we will never know, as BR has refused (or BEEN TOLD to refuse) to talk to police about what he may recall about that night.

 

[UKGuy]

(My thanks to KK for pointing out that the original sceen captures of the lab report don't contain any question marks after "bloostains from nightgown").

rashomon,

Maybe the blood on the nightgown was the main reason why the Ramseys placed it the wine cellar together with the dead body? To make it appear as if the perp had molested and killed JonBenet down there, thus concealing that a violent encounter involving bleeding had occurred upstairs, in JonBenet's own bedroom, between the child and a family member.
And hadn't Patsy also been asked if JonBenet had nosebleeds? I think was Ames who posted this section from the interviews. I can't find the passage right now - if someone could post it,TIA. And where did Patsy say something like "I don't see any blood?"

UKGuy,
Yes I agree. Although you have to be careful since it may actually represent further staging. Patsy's remark "I don't see any blood?" is also likely meant to deceive, she knows the original crime-scene and it may not be the bedroom.

I reckon the nightgown is part of prior staging hence the barbie doll. Prior to that probably the red turleneck which was soaked and rinsed trhrough to remove any residual forensic evidence.

The Ramsey's probably iterated through various stagings then restaging as they realise some aspects conflict with their intended story. Eventually deciding to redress JonBenet in the white gap top.

Transposing a crime-scene from upstairs to the wine-cellar would contradict its purpose e.g staging. Unless originally this did ocur but was then refashioned with prior evidence being removed.

thus concealing that a violent encounter involving bleeding had occurred upstairs, in JonBenet's own bedroom, between the child and a family member.

Possibly but the forensic evidence does not support this. As Coroner Meyer remarked I think sexual contact and digital penetration took place in another Ramsey bedroom in which JonBenet was role playing, something which eventually led to her death.

.

 

[DeeDee249]

I am having some other thoughts about the boxed Barbie doll in the WC. The possible theories are that JB got it as a gift that day and she loved it (whereas she did NOT love the far more expensive MyTwinn doll Patsy gave her). So either Patsy needed to place it with her body because JB loved it or JB brought it down there with her (I don't believe this). No intruder, ESPECIALLY a stranger) would know what doll she liked or bother to bring one down there, and if a doll was going to be placed with the body deliberately, the doll would be placed in her arms or staged along with the body, not tossed on the floor.

But what if the doll was not for JB, but another gift for Jenny or another child? Then it could have been unwrapped as the stager(s) opened boxes looking for the panty set. It may have no other significance as far as the crime itself.

 

[UKGuy]

I am having some other thoughts about the boxed Barbie doll in the WC. The possible theories are that JB got it as a gift that day and she loved it (whereas she did NOT love the far more expensive MyTwinn doll Patsy gave her). So either Patsy needed to place it with her body because JB loved it or JB brought it down there with her (I don't believe this). No intruder, ESPECIALLY a stranger) would know what doll she liked or bother to bring one down there, and if a doll was going to be placed with the body deliberately, the doll would be placed in her arms or staged along with the body, not tossed on the floor.

But what if the doll was not for JB, but another gift for Jenny or another child? Then it could have been unwrapped as the stager(s) opened boxes looking for the panty set. It may have no other significance as far as the crime itself.

DeeDee249,

Then you should have excess gift wrapping? Why did Patsy not mention purchasing a doll? It might have no significance as you suggest.

I reckon it does, two barbie items located at a crime-scene, particularly one with pageant associations, cannot be ignored.

.

 

[DeeDee249]

DeeDee249,

Then you should have excess gift wrapping? Why did Patsy not mention purchasing a doll? It might have no significance as you suggest.

I reckon it does, two barbie items located at a crime-scene, particularly one with pageant associations, cannot be ignored.

.

Not sure what you mean about excess gift wrapping. There were wrapped gifts in the WC that had been opened. I don't think excess gift wrap would be something that would be part of the crime. OPENED wrapped gifts would be. And that we have, for a fact. Patsy did not specifically mention ANY other purchases she made during that shopping trip to NY with the exception of the panties for obvious reasons. I have not seen where she was asked in any interviews about any items other than the Bloomies panties. Patsy said that she purchased gifts for her own family as well as other gifts. I do not see her not mentioning buying a doll as problematic or suggestive of her not buying one. She mentions some gifts JB and BR received- the MyTwinn doll, the bike, BR's Nintendo.
What I do find puzzling is that if a doll was in the wineceller why isn't that mentioned in any interviews with Patsy or JR? If I were interviewing The Rs I'd have asked about it- was it a gift to her that year, if so, who gave it, etc.
I assume if the doll was in a position obvious to staging it would have been asked about. My feeling is that LE knew there were partially wrapped (or UNwrapped) gifts in there. The doll seems to be lying off to the side of that blanket. LE may have considered that doll in the box as having been a gift YET to be wrapped (Patsy told them that she wrapped gifts in there -NO WAY she did anything in THAT room) and she mentioned there were some she did not get to finish before Christmas.
Actually, it is frustrating because LE doesn't seem to ask about ANY items in the WC. It is as if, once JB was brought up to the living room, and other than taking some photos, LE didn't seem to be interested in the items in there once JB was no longer there.

 

[UKGuy]

Not sure what you mean about excess gift wrapping. There were wrapped gifts in the WC that had been opened. I don't think excess gift wrap would be something that would be part of the crime. OPENED wrapped gifts would be. And that we have, for a fact. Patsy did not specifically mention ANY other purchases she made during that shopping trip to NY with the exception of the panties for obvious reasons. I have not seen where she was asked in any interviews about any items other than the Bloomies panties. Patsy said that she purchased gifts for her own family as well as other gifts. I do not see her not mentioning buying a doll as problematic or suggestive of her not buying one. She mentions some gifts JB and BR received- the MyTwinn doll, the bike, BR's Nintendo.
What I do find puzzling is that if a doll was in the wineceller why isn't that mentioned in any interviews with Patsy or JR? If I were interviewing The Rs I'd have asked about it- was it a gift to her that year, if so, who gave it, etc.
I assume if the doll was in a position obvious to staging it would have been asked about. My feeling is that LE knew there were partially wrapped (or UNwrapped) gifts in there. The doll seems to be lying off to the side of that blanket. LE may have considered that doll in the box as having been a gift YET to be wrapped (Patsy told them that she wrapped gifts in there -NO WAY she did anything in THAT room) and she mentioned there were some she did not get to finish before Christmas.
Actually, it is frustrating because LE doesn't seem to ask about ANY items in the WC. It is as if, once JB was brought up to the living room, and other than taking some photos, LE didn't seem to be interested in the items in there once JB was no longer there.

DeeDee249,

Not sure what you mean about excess gift wrapping.

Assuming the gifts and their wrapping map one to one, then the doll should have wrapping lying around somewhere?

Yes it is interesting that the doll receives little attention, other than Patsy identifying it in her interview.

They were likely attempting to give away as little information to the R's as possible, hence the lack of questions on items we see as important?

.