Who Killed Jon Benet Ramsey? Poll

Who Killed Jon Benet Ramsey? POLL

  • John

    Votes: 124 8.4%
  • Patsy

    Votes: 547 37.2%
  • Burke

    Votes: 340 23.1%
  • An Intruder, (anyone including someone known to them)

    Votes: 459 31.2%

  • Total voters
    1,470
Status
Not open for further replies.
  • #301
Yes, it is possible. I have even read where the statement that the sample contained DNA from a non-R male was deliberately misleading. It was something about the male DNA having the genetic fingerprint of the MOTHER of the male donor, and technically that would make it PAUGH DNA, not R. So if it was BR's DNA, this was a way of deflecting away from him, and under Colorado law, nothing could be made public if it implicated or identified him in any way.


thanks so much (btw,the reason I chose you to ask questions of is b/c you said you are a member of MENSA,and so I knew you were smart! :) ).
Anyway,it's been awhile since I've studied genetics,but I do recall (and correct me if I'm wrong),and I think UK pointed this out as well...that most ppl think a person inherits 1/2 of their dna from each parent,when in fact,they inherit only 25% from each parent,and the rest comes from the grandparents (and generations before them).So that makes perfect sense,if that's the case.
 
  • #302
thanks so much (btw,the reason I chose you to ask questions of is b/c you said you are a member of MENSA,and so I knew you were smart! :) ).
Anyway,it's been awhile since I've studied genetics,but I do recall (and correct me if I'm wrong),and I think UK pointed this out as well...that most ppl think a person inherits 1/2 of their dna from each parent,when in fact,they inherit only 25% from each parent,and the rest comes from the grandparents (and generations before them).So that makes perfect sense,if that's the case.


Dee Dee Mensa or not, you are a genius!!! In fact it is correct that if they compared the DNA as JMO8778 suggests that does create a whole new ballgame not only regarding Burke (and that does raise my eyebrows considerably) But JAR as well. I have always had it wandering in and out of my mind if Burke was not set to take the fall if the push would have come to the shove as Burke was too young to be held accountable. That does change all the questions when you consider the generations before them. Brilliant. I think I knew that but it never clicked
 
  • #303
That whole dna thing was odd anyway,back when they 'found' more to put into the database....I say 'found' because it seems to me that they went 'fishing' for more dna,so to speak...and the pond was stocked.So then they had an excuse to say 'aha! look,here's proof of an intruder!',when in fact it's no proof at all.
 
  • #304
That whole dna thing was odd anyway,back when they 'found' more to put into the database....I say 'found' because it seems to me that they went 'fishing' for more dna,so to speak...and the pond was stocked.So then they had an excuse to say 'aha! look,here's proof of an intruder!',when in fact it's no proof at all.


Pond was stocked LOLOLOL What a hoot
 
  • #305
Dee Dee Mensa or not, you are a genius!!! In fact it is correct that if they compared the DNA as JMO8778 suggests that does create a whole new ballgame not only regarding Burke (and that does raise my eyebrows considerably) But JAR as well. I have always had it wandering in and out of my mind if Burke was not set to take the fall if the push would have come to the shove as Burke was too young to be held accountable. That does change all the questions when you consider the generations before them. Brilliant. I think I knew that but it never clicked

I agree,it's brilliant,thanks Deedee :)
 
  • #306
Pond was stocked LOLOLOL What a hoot

lol.seriously I think they figured enough might replicate if they took another sample.only,at the least,I think it's JB's own dna that added enough to the mix to be put into the database,via stutter bands.
 
  • #307
I still go with a timeline like this:
10 pm- return home

10-11pm- BR plays with toys (Parents admit this) and JBR changes for bed. It is entirely possible that she was awake, though sleepy, and PR did help her dress for bed- the long johns could have been put on her then and need not have been done just for the staging. It is something I myself had done with my own child at that age. When we arrived home and she fell asleep in the car, I woke her to walk in the house, often just letting her sleep in whatever shirt she was wearing (especially if it was cotton knit, like the red turtleneck or white Gap top) and putting only pajama bottoms or thermals on her. That very thing may actually have happened with JBR.
JBR and/or BR have a bedtime snack, with JBR consuming the pineapple. The tea may or may not have been consumed at this time. PR was a sloppy housekeeper and it was well known that she didn't keep a tidy kitchen and put things away. That glass and tea bag may have been there previously. The tea bag in the glass doesn't mean that the glass was used for tea. If a mug was used, the teabag could still have been put into an empty glass just because it was there.

11 pm-1 am- BR goes to bed, possiblly JR goes to bed, PR remains up and dressed from the party as she fusses around taking care of last-minute details for the trip(s). JBR may have gone to bed, but PR probably tried to get her to go to the bathroom and she may have refused.
1 am- or thereabouts- whatever events led up to the death of JBR transpire around now. JBR possiby calls PR after soiling her bed (yet again) after refusing to go to the bathroom before bed. This may have been what set PR off dragging her into the bathroom and the rest- well, we all have our own ideas about what happened next.

2 am- by this time JBR is dead. The parents have begun to form their coverup plans, the ligature has already been devised and applied (so that when police find a dead child in the home, they cay SEE what caused her death and not probe further. WRONG!
Over the next 3 hours, the panicked parents write the note, and piece together what their story will be, and at this time, R friends MAY have been called over; phone calls to lawyer friend Mike Bynum and others may take place at this time- 3 hours really isn't that much time in a situation like this.

By 5:45 am the Rs are ready to make that 911 call. BR, having been awoken by the commotion, walks in during the call. He is sent back to bed, the Rs unaware that he has been recorded on the 911 call.

6:10 am- Showtime, By this time, Officer French has arrived and the events that we know all too well unfold.
 
  • #308
I still go with a timeline like this:
10 pm- return home

10-11pm- BR plays with toys (Parents admit this) and JBR changes for bed. It is entirely possible that she was awake, though sleepy, and PR did help her dress for bed- the long johns could have been put on her then and need not have been done just for the staging. It is something I myself had done with my own child at that age. When we arrived home and she fell asleep in the car, I woke her to walk in the house, often just letting her sleep in whatever shirt she was wearing (especially if it was cotton knit, like the red turtleneck or white Gap top) and putting only pajama bottoms or thermals on her. That very thing may actually have happened with JBR.
JBR and/or BR have a bedtime snack, with JBR consuming the pineapple. The tea may or may not have been consumed at this time. PR was a sloppy housekeeper and it was well known that she didn't keep a tidy kitchen and put things away. That glass and tea bag may have been there previously. The tea bag in the glass doesn't mean that the glass was used for tea. If a mug was used, the teabag could still have been put into an empty glass just because it was there.

11 pm-1 am- BR goes to bed, possiblly JR goes to bed, PR remains up and dressed from the party as she fusses around taking care of last-minute details for the trip(s). JBR may have gone to bed, but PR probably tried to get her to go to the bathroom and she may have refused.
1 am- or thereabouts- whatever events led up to the death of JBR transpire around now. JBR possiby calls PR after soiling her bed (yet again) after refusing to go to the bathroom before bed. This may have been what set PR off dragging her into the bathroom and the rest- well, we all have our own ideas about what happened next.

2 am- by this time JBR is dead. The parents have begun to form their coverup plans, the ligature has already been devised and applied (so that when police find a dead child in the home, they cay SEE what caused her death and not probe further. WRONG!
Over the next 3 hours, the panicked parents write the note, and piece together what their story will be, and at this time, R friends MAY have been called over; phone calls to lawyer friend Mike Bynum and others may take place at this time- 3 hours really isn't that much time in a situation like this.

By 5:45 am the Rs are ready to make that 911 call. BR, having been awoken by the commotion, walks in during the call. He is sent back to bed, the Rs unaware that he has been recorded on the 911 call.

6:10 am- Showtime, By this time, Officer French has arrived and the events that we know all too well unfold.

Mine is nearly ditto. Only I am not sure that JonBenet made it to bed that night. IF she did it follows like yours except who was called and when. I really think that Lockheed was informed.
 
  • #309
I still go with a timeline like this:
10 pm- return home

10-11pm- BR plays with toys (Parents admit this) and JBR changes for bed. It is entirely possible that she was awake, though sleepy, and PR did help her dress for bed- the long johns could have been put on her then and need not have been done just for the staging. It is something I myself had done with my own child at that age. When we arrived home and she fell asleep in the car, I woke her to walk in the house, often just letting her sleep in whatever shirt she was wearing (especially if it was cotton knit, like the red turtleneck or white Gap top) and putting only pajama bottoms or thermals on her. That very thing may actually have happened with JBR.
JBR and/or BR have a bedtime snack, with JBR consuming the pineapple. The tea may or may not have been consumed at this time. PR was a sloppy housekeeper and it was well known that she didn't keep a tidy kitchen and put things away. That glass and tea bag may have been there previously. The tea bag in the glass doesn't mean that the glass was used for tea. If a mug was used, the teabag could still have been put into an empty glass just because it was there.

11 pm-1 am- BR goes to bed, possiblly JR goes to bed, PR remains up and dressed from the party as she fusses around taking care of last-minute details for the trip(s). JBR may have gone to bed, but PR probably tried to get her to go to the bathroom and she may have refused.
1 am- or thereabouts- whatever events led up to the death of JBR transpire around now. JBR possiby calls PR after soiling her bed (yet again) after refusing to go to the bathroom before bed. This may have been what set PR off dragging her into the bathroom and the rest- well, we all have our own ideas about what happened next.

2 am- by this time JBR is dead. The parents have begun to form their coverup plans, the ligature has already been devised and applied (so that when police find a dead child in the home, they cay SEE what caused her death and not probe further. WRONG!
Over the next 3 hours, the panicked parents write the note, and piece together what their story will be, and at this time, R friends MAY have been called over; phone calls to lawyer friend Mike Bynum and others may take place at this time- 3 hours really isn't that much time in a situation like this.

By 5:45 am the Rs are ready to make that 911 call. BR, having been awoken by the commotion, walks in during the call. He is sent back to bed, the Rs unaware that he has been recorded on the 911 call.

6:10 am- Showtime, By this time, Officer French has arrived and the events that we know all too well unfold.

DeeDee249,
Your timeline might be stretched a little, but only two people really know!

10-11pm- BR plays with toys (Parents admit this) and JBR changes for bed.
Yes this is the parents story, it may be fabricated to remove John and Burke from JonBenet's presence e.g. ingorance. Also Burke is on record stating he saw JonBenet walk into the house. So we know both John and Burke later changed their stories to match the Ramsey version of events that other people are now using to base their theories on?

The evidence strongly suggests that JonBenet never made it to her bed, nor dressed for it, since the staged evidence is arranged to portray a bedtime abduction with JonBenet still wearing her white-gap top, and below the waist redressed to hide something?

That is, if JonBenet had originally been in bed, then why not, during the redressing phase of the staging, take the pajamas from her bed and place these onto her?


JBR and/or BR have a bedtime snack, with JBR consuming the pineapple. The tea may or may not have been consumed at this time.
mmm, well Burke's fingerprints were on the pineapple bowl, so until its rebutted I'll assume Burke was present at some point during JonBenet's pineapple snack? The pineapple snack is what nearly blows the Ramsey's version of events out of the water, since at this point JonBenet is patently alive, and walking about. So that she is asleep in bed then abducted is no longer the only theory on the table.

The real issue is one of timing and how soon did the pineapple snack start after arriving back? I would suggest by 10:30 pm or earlier since JonBenet ate little at the White's. It would take JonBenet all of 10 minutes to settle down, e.g. 5 minutes to dump her clothes and do any changes then 5 minutes down to the kitchen? I reckon by 10:45 pm JonBenet is snacking, and Burke has sipped his tea. Note these are personal treats, not mandatory meals, so it suggests the family atmosphere was convivial.

Whatever happened next, I reckon JonBenet never ever made it to her bed, maybe someone else's bed, but not her own, and not wearing any pajamas, which were still on her bed the next day. Which is inconsistent with Patsy's account of affairs. e.g. key aspects of the staging conflict with the forensic evidence and witness statements.

Speculating on what occured next:
JonBenet may have gone down to the basement then she was killed?

JonBenet may have shared Burke's bed during which it was Burke who developed some form of Toilet Rage because JonBenet wet the bed, or they played doctors leading to some dispute, and Burke whacking JonBenet?

JonBenet may have shared Johns bed, leading to some dispute and JonBenet's death, with John effecting some initial staging and telling Patsy some fabricated story, thus inducing her to assist with the staging?

JonBenet was involved in Patsy's version of the Toilet Rage theory?

This latter theory seems to me to be the weakest since patently Patsy knew JonBenet had just consumed pineapple and milk, high in fuid content, so bedwetting or a toilet incident seems high on the list. I reckon Patsy would have been resigned to this occurring , more so, if JonBenet had been drinking coke or similar at the White's.
 
  • #310
Do either of you,Deedee,UK (or any RDI,if you want to answer) have any notion about the santa suit,and why the questions about it? In particular,why would LE ask if it had been in the windowsill?
Re: the secret santa visit,since JR is the one calling himself 'santa' in DOI...ie-'and santa had one more thing to do'..IMO this had something to do with him.
 
  • #311
I wonder if they found some red fibers in the window sill or in that proximity and they're trying to account for them? Of course Patsys red fibers were all over the tape, etc. but maybe they are trying to find an alternate source for them. Fibers can't be matched to an absolute certainty so maybe it's an elimination process?
 
  • #312
The only reason for the questions about the santa suit being in the window sill would have been because fibers matching the suit had been found in that window sill. This, to me, was an asinine question to ask. Why would a santa suit be in the window sill? Of course what they really meant was there a person WEARING the santa suit climbing in or out of that window. Did they not think that question would tip off JR to what they were thinking? And having been clued in to that, did they not consider that he'd simply say "NO"?

I have read where that question was asked, but never read anything about santa suit fibers actually being found there.
It was late Christmas night on the eve of an early flight and day-long trip to Charlevoix. PR was up and about getting ready. It had been a long day. I simply can't imagine JR waiting for an opportunity to get dressed up in a santa suit for the purposes of sneaking into JBR's room to molest her. And I can't believe he'd have thought she wouldn't know it was her daddy.
For that to have occurred, it would have had to occur too close to their arrival home. JBR was likely dead by midnight. This was 2 hours after they arrived home. PR was almost certainly awake, and as many of us feel, never went to bed at all. And for that matter, why would JR have to climb in the window anyway? He was already in the house. If he had wanted to disguise himself as santa, he could have gotten dressed anywhere in the house.
And forget about Santa Bill. He'd have never fit in that window. And with his recent heart surgery, he'd never have been able to climb up the wall and wriggle out that window, replacing the heavy metal grate. Not to mention that the suitcase would never have supported him. Didn't happen.
 
  • #313
JBR may very well have shared BR's bed - she was know to do so, PR admitted this as well. If she'd used the flashlight to slip into his room in the dark, then wet the bed, I suppose he could have been angered enough to take that flashlight and bash her on the head. But I really don't know if scrawny BR could have hit her hard enough to make that crack.

I don't make as much of the long johns as some people do. Just because this was a staged crime scene doesn't mean EVERYTHING was part of the staging. I think it is entirely possible and believable that she DID put on the long johns for bed; maybe the pink pajamas from the night before (seen in the Christmas morning photos) were urine stained. Maybe they were in the wash with the sheets from that night. LHP said that the sheets in the crime photos were not he same sheets she put on the bed the last time she was there, which was Dec. 23rd (the day of the R party). So PR must have changed the sheets on JBR's bed herself, possibly Christmas morning. That would have been an upsetting start to the day right there; with all PR had to deal with Christmas Day, plus going to the White's, then getting home late and still having stuff to do before an early flight the next morning
 
  • #314
JBR may very well have shared BR's bed - she was know to do so, PR admitted this as well. If she'd used the flashlight to slip into his room in the dark, then wet the bed, I suppose he could have been angered enough to take that flashlight and bash her on the head. But I really don't know if scrawny BR could have hit her hard enough to make that crack.

I don't make as much of the long johns as some people do. Just because this was a staged crime scene doesn't mean EVERYTHING was part of the staging. I think it is entirely possible and believable that she DID put on the long johns for bed; maybe the pink pajamas from the night before (seen in the Christmas morning photos) were urine stained. Maybe they were in the wash with the sheets from that night. LHP said that the sheets in the crime photos were not he same sheets she put on the bed the last time she was there, which was Dec. 23rd (the day of the R party). So PR must have changed the sheets on JBR's bed herself, possibly Christmas morning. That would have been an upsetting start to the day right there; with all PR had to deal with Christmas Day, plus going to the White's, then getting home late and still having stuff to do before an early flight the next morning

sure but it appears,at least to me,(thx for answering those q's btw! :) ) that the pink pj's were still on her bed,in the crime scene photo.I'm not sure she ever made it to bed,but if she did,maybe she did wear the lj's instead.
 
  • #315
sure but it appears,at least to me,(thx for answering those q's btw! :) ) that the pink pj's were still on her bed,in the crime scene photo.I'm not sure she ever made it to bed,but if she did,maybe she did wear the lj's instead.


JMO8778,
Accepting DeeDee249's assumptions, then were the longjohns already urine-stained from a bedwetting incident?

Why bother with any size-12's, since if JonBenet is already wearing longjohn's then simply pull them up, problem solved?

Patsy is on record stating she fetched the longjohns from JonBenet's bathroom, we also know that no size-12's were discovered in her bathroom, so patently Patsy never fetched those size-12's at that point, so why did she not select another pair, any pair, of size-6's? I suspect from the questions put to her that there was a Wednesday pair of Bloomingdales size-6's available, but Patsy was not playing ball, and chose to forget if she purchased a size-6 pack for JonBenet.

I reckon the longjohns were an important part of the staging, but why did Patsy elect to choose those rather than her pajamas, personally the size-12's and the longjohns are not clothing I think Patsy would chose?


.
 
  • #316
JMO8778,
Accepting DeeDee249's assumptions, then were the longjohns already urine-stained from a bedwetting incident?
IMO it was a post-mortem release.

Why bother with any size-12's, since if JonBenet is already wearing longjohn's then simply pull them up, problem solved?
what if someone at the White's noticed she was wearing the Wed. underwear? it needed to match what she had on prior.I don't believe the stager or stagers ever thought size would be an issue.

Patsy is on record stating she fetched the longjohns from JonBenet's bathroom, we also know that no size-12's were discovered in her bathroom, so patently Patsy never fetched those size-12's at that point, so why did she not select another pair, any pair, of size-6's? I suspect from the questions put to her that there was a Wednesday pair of Bloomingdales size-6's available, but Patsy was not playing ball, and chose to forget if she purchased a size-6 pack for JonBenet.
my thought as well.

I reckon the longjohns were an important part of the staging, but why did Patsy elect to choose those rather than her pajamas, personally the size-12's and the longjohns are not clothing I think Patsy would chose?


.
good question.
but whatever happened,they or *the stager elected to leave her shirt on,so it appears this person or persons didn't want to go back up to her bedroom? and perhaps the lj's were in the dryer,with the blanket? if so then this also suggests the stager also wanted *clean items,with as little as possible R dna on them.
but I see what you're saying..that all of these things implicate JR,not Patsy .I do wonder about her fiber evidence though.
 
  • #317
IMO it was a post-mortem release.

what if someone at the White's noticed she was wearing the Wed. underwear? it needed to match what she had on prior.I don't believe the stager or stagers ever thought size would be an issue.

my thought as well.


good question.
but whatever happened,they or *the stager elected to leave her shirt on,so it appears this person or persons didn't want to go back up to her bedroom? and perhaps the lj's were in the dryer,with the blanket? if so then this also suggests the stager also wanted *clean items,with as little as possible R dna on them.
but I see what you're saying..that all of these things implicate JR,not Patsy .I do wonder about her fiber evidence though.

JMO8778,
what if someone at the White's noticed she was wearing the Wed. underwear? it needed to match what she had on prior.I don't believe the stager or stagers ever thought size would be an issue.
That is your assumption it may not have been the stagers? Also we do not know if there was a size-6 Wednesday pair in JonBenet's bathroom panty drawer, the police questioning of Patsy suggest there was. Also to redress JonBenet in size-12's, a 12-year old girls underwear, seems to undermine any attempt at consistency. Size is just as important as day of the week!



good question.
but whatever happened,they or *the stager elected to leave her shirt on,so it appears this person or persons didn't want to go back up to her bedroom? and perhaps the lj's were in the dryer,with the blanket? if so then this also suggests the stager also wanted *clean items,with as little as possible R dna on them.
but I see what you're saying..that all of these things implicate JR,not Patsy .I do wonder about her fiber evidence though.
Sure but my point is this. The PDI is so meticulous with detail e.g. day of the week etc, but when it comes to making JonBenet appear as if she really had been in bed, it falls apart, because she is left wearing day clothes. I reckon if Patsy had done the initial staging she would have redressed JonBenet in pajamas? Since I reckon Patsy did the second phase of the staging, it was possibly her who brought the barbie-gown to redress JonBenet?

Personally I think there is something missing, its probably invisible due to evidence removal, but with JonBenet found wearing her day clothes above her waist, yet she was wiped down and redressed below the waist, all whilst neglecting to make the staging consistent e.g. pajamas.

This is not something Patsy would do, she would have made sure JonBenet looked as if she had been abducted sleeping from her bed. The PDI attributes this motive to her, yet fails to explain why she never did it, necessitating a story about placing a sleeping JonBenet to bed, and placing the longjohns on her, never mind the lies regarding the size-12's.


The PDI does not stack up. Patsy assaults and kills JonBenet, then messes up the staging with longjohns and size-12's, leaving her white-gap top on her, yet wipes her down? Why not redress her in any pair of size-6's, because if it is to said JonBenet changed into the size-12's after arriving home, then the same could be said for any pair of size-6's in fact Patsy could state this as a fact e.g. JonBenet arived home and went upstairs to change etc, who can contradict her? And redress her in any pair of pajamas, from any drawer, who can say otherwise?


suggests the stager also wanted *clean items,with as little as possible R dna on them.
Sure but why not select items that fit in with your staging? Picking items that then need additional explanations seem to contradict this assumption. wrt the size-12's it actually causes Patsy to lie outright!


Patsy's fiber evidence can be explained by her being involved in the wine-cellar staging. That does not mean she initially assaulted or whacked JonBenet on the head. She may have been presented with a cleaned up JonBenet redressed in size-12's and longjohns, and told she was dead?



.
 
  • #318
Patsy's fiber evidence can be explained by her being involved in the wine-cellar staging. That does not mean she initially assaulted or whacked JonBenet on the head. She may have been presented with a cleaned up JonBenet redressed in size-12's and longjohns, and told she was dead?



.
possibly,and perhaps it was Patsy who was heard screaming,not JB? Especially if Ms Stanton was correct about the time.. around 2am.
As for the rest,I'm not saying it was Patsy who did it;I'm only saying it appears someone or someones didn't want risk going back up to JB's room.Her room wasn't staged to appear as if she was taken from her bed anyway.
Anyway,you have to wonder what the heck the line of reasoning was with the white gap top and lj's on her..as in,what was the original intent,before the RN was written? were they going to put her outside,appearing she had wandered out of the house,and her pants were now missing (trophy item taken by the assaulter,'proof' she was assaulted by someone outside the house?).
 
  • #319
I recall PR being spoken to about the fact that there were no other size 12s found in the home, but don't recall that it was said that LE found a size 6 that said "Wednesday". For that matter, while LE mentions removing size 4-6 panties, LE never mentions specifically that ANY other panties that were "Bloomies Day of the Week" panties were found an all, except for the pair on the body.

As far as JBR wearing day clothes- not exactly. While she was wearing a cotton sweatshirt top, the long johns were not day clothes. And as I have mentioned- every mother has once in a while put a child to bed wearing the shirt they had worn that day, especially when a child has fallen asleep elsewhere (on a couch, in a car, etc.) You can pull off the pants and pull on pajama bottoms (or thermal undies) without waking the child; pulling a shirt over the head and manipulating their arms to change out of the shirt into pajama tops is more difficult to do without waking the child.
The fact that JBR was wearing a shirt worn that day with long johns may have no bearing on the crime. It's the replacement panties that have a bearing on the crime.
However- I have not seen where there was any mention of the pink pajama tops and bottoms JBR wore Christmas Eve (and seen in the Christmas morning photos) . There is something on her bed that seems to be at least one half of the pink pajamas. If it was the top, then where are the bottoms? They may be a BIG link to the crime- if stained with blood or other matter. So where are they? I don't recall seeing them on any evidence list. I wonder if they went out the door with Auntie P?
Now, the disappearance of the pink pajama bottoms would make me suspicious of the long johns. Then I'd have reason to think that the long johns were put on her after whatever caused the vaginal bleeding. THEN it makes sense. Blood on the panties- blood on the pink pajama bottoms- blood on her pubic area and thighs. Wipe the blood, change the panties, change the pink pajama bottoms. To make it look like she was abducted from bed, she'd have to be wearing appropriate clothes.
 
  • #320
UK,what do you make of the R's original comments to LE that JB went to bed wearing the red turtleneck? Because obviously an intruder would not have changed her clothes before abducting her.Just goes to show how chaotic their thinking was at the time,although I do think they had a reason for saying that,either it was 1- true,she did go to bed with that shirt on,as ST says,or 2-they were trying to account for that shirt,for some reason.If so,was the collar twisted,from where she was manually strangled,as Dr Spitz says,and or was it wet with urine,and so there was indeed a bedwetting accident?(I guess their thinking,being so chaotic at the time,was that it would be believable an intruder changed it before taking her, since it was wet).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
76
Guests online
1,528
Total visitors
1,604

Forum statistics

Threads
632,543
Messages
18,628,166
Members
243,191
Latest member
MrsFancyGoar
Back
Top