Page 5 of 20 FirstFirst 12345678915 ... LastLast
Results 49 to 60 of 229

Thread: Bonita Papers

  1. #49

    Default

    I'm here koldkase! I've been gone most of the day. Took my 78 year old mother to the mall for some necessities. I'm exausted from pushing her wheelchair. (she's a bad girl and has put on weight!)

    Anyway, I wanted to comment on the Melody Stanton remark about a psyshic scream. I think it says in ST's book that she first reported a scream to LE. Then only after the Ramsey investigaters spoke with her she then changed it to "negative psyshic energy." Then she switched back to a childs scream. She told LE, "I know what a childs scream sounds like. I heard a child scream." Sounds to me like she was intimdated by the Ramseys investigaters into changing her story, then decided to tell the truth anyway. I wonder what tactics the Ramsey investigaters used and who else they did that to?
    Some people believe that was actually Patsy screaming.

    If all this info was gathered from LE interviews then there are a whole lot of interview "things" we haven't read yet, or at least we only got partial transcripit of the ones we did read. I don't remember reading in any interview about Patsys cosmetic surgery on her face or receding chin, among other things. What else was left out of the interviews, hmmm?

  2. #50

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Karen View Post
    I'm here koldkase! I've been gone most of the day. Took my 78 year old mother to the mall for some necessities. I'm exausted from pushing her wheelchair. (she's a bad girl and has put on weight!)

    Anyway, I wanted to comment on the Melody Stanton remark about a psyshic scream. I think it says in ST's book that she first reported a scream to LE. Then only after the Ramsey investigaters spoke with her she then changed it to "negative psyshic energy." Then she switched back to a childs scream. She told LE, "I know what a childs scream sounds like. I heard a child scream." Sounds to me like she was intimdated by the Ramseys investigaters into changing her story, then decided to tell the truth anyway. I wonder what tactics the Ramsey investigaters used and who else they did that to?
    Some people believe that was actually Patsy screaming.

    If all this info was gathered from LE interviews then there are a whole lot of interview "things" we haven't read yet, or at least we only got partial transcripit of the ones we did read. I don't remember reading in any interview about Patsys cosmetic surgery on her face or receding chin, among other things. What else was left out of the interviews, hmmm?
    Now, give Mom a break. It's easy to gain weight when you depend on a wheel chair to get around. Maybe you need to put a motor on it?

    So you think Melody in fact did hear the scream? I think so, too. The timing is consistent with the rigor. Also, the metallic sound her husband heard could have been that metal bat being thrown onto the concret on the side of the house.

    Didn't someone write that the Ramsey PIs were on the ground Day Two? And the Ramsey investigators were trying to intimidate Fleet White, as well? What PIs do in this kind of work is talk to witnesses and get them to sign affadavits, which are their statements taken by the PIs. It's to lock them into a story, giving the investigators leads and tips as well. It can be used to prompt a witness in court, or to trip up a witness or rebut their testimony, should it need to be rebutted. So Ramsey PIs taking statements so soon after a murder across the street, it would be easy to intimidate a witness or even just get her story wrong on paper, and once she signs it, if there's a mistake on it she didn't catch, or if she misremembered something or remembered something different later, she's fighting an uphill battle after that. Sounds like this happened to Stanton.

    So, between Bonita and Thomas and Schiller, Stanton's story is sufficiently documented for my purposes. The "scream" matches up with the rigor in the body, as well. So that's my starting point for what happened in the bedroom that resulted in the blood on the pillowcase--in theory, of course.

    Yes, there is plenty we haven't seen or heard about, I'm sure. If our country ever digresses into anarchy and it becomes the wild west again, I'm heading straight for those files.... Wanna be my sidekick? :cowboy:

    "University of Colorado Law Professor Paul Campos declared the letter a 'reckless exoneration.' He went on to state, 'Everyone knows that relative immunity from criminal conviction is something money can buy.
    Apparently another thing it can buy is an apology for even being suspected of a crime you probably already would have been convicted of committing if you happened to be poor.'"
    FF: WRKJB?

    ~~~~~~~
    Bloomies underwear model:
    3 Dimensional

    ~~~~~~
    My opinions, nothing more.

  3. #51

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by koldkase View Post
    I have been reading the Bonita Papers. It makes me crazy, because with all the years we've been looking at these sources, evidence, etc., I have a better perspective on what I'm reading and I simply cannot bear the injustice of no one being arrested in this murder when clearly the evidence was sufficient to bring it to trial.

    It's late so I'll just write a few short notes for now.

    1. I notice a lot of the information Bonita wrote came from the LE and BDA interviews with the Ramseys. I feel like I know much of this by heart, I've read it so many times now in so many sources.

    2. Bonita took her notes from the actual case files, if memory serves. What part of the case files has never been specified, but it doesn't seem like it can only be the LE interviews we have, because she does write about some things not in the LE interviews of the Ramseys. For example:

    3. Bonita starts out with the "child's scream" we read about in PMPT and Thomas' book. Ramsey neighbor Melody Stanton stated to LE she heard it between 12 and 2 am, and that it was a child's scream that "lasted three to five seconds and stopped as abruptly as it started."

    Thomas wrote that Stanton later recanted her statement, saying she could have heard a "psychic" scream. That was enough to effectively paint her as a flake, so...court testimony avoided for her.

    For the sake of argument, which we've been having a discussion about JonBenet being first attacked, her head injury being sustained near or in her bedroom because of her blood being on the pillowcase, let's say Melody did hear that scream just like she said. Let's say it was a child's scream and it lasted seconds and then stopped abruptly.

    Would that indicate JonBenet saw the attack coming and then screamed, abruptly stopping when her head was bashed in?

    If she was attacked on the second floor and not in the basement, as some people like to believe, how would the family not hear her scream from there? I can't imagine they wouldn't have.

    Of course, we don't know what Melody Stanton actually heard, if anything, but it is something to ponder because Bonita wrote that Stanton in fact worried about the child, imagining that the parents were taking care of her, whatever had happened.

    If Bonita got that info directly from Melody Stanton's original statement to LE, documented in a police report, I think the timeliness and detail carry a bit more weight than I have been giving this info.

    I'm going to think about this some more. Any ideas?
    I've thought about that scream many times. I've often wondered if it wasn't Patsy screaming instead of JBR. I've also wondered how Stanton could know so much about the scream (e.g., stopped as suddenly as it began) if she was sleeping. Was she asleep or did she say she was just lying there?

    But then I think. Stanton said it was between 12 and 2 am and that makes me think she did hear something because how would she have known the possible time line before all the information came out?

    At any rate, if she did hear a scream, I have to think it came from the basement which makes me think it might have been PR. If JBR screamed, she was conscious which means the head blow came right at that time. Once your victim screams, if you are an intruder, you have to get out of the house immediately but we know that perp did several things following the head blow. The perp fashinoned the garrote, cleaned and redressed the body and then placed it in the wine cellar. If JBR screamed, then, it had to be a family member, IMHO, because an intruder would have to strike the blow and get out right away.

  4. #52
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    In the Federal Witness Protection Program
    Posts
    1,311

    Default

    I think she heard the scream. If I recall, she said originally that it woke her up! Then, SHE woke her husband up. By then, the scream had stopped, but he reported hearing a sound like "metal scraping concrete" coming from the R house. (the paint cans being moved to make room for JB?"
    After the R lawyers got to her, Mrs. Stanton changes her story to the "negative energy" blah-blah. The Stantons eventually move away from Boulder. But at some point, Mrs. Stanton stands by her original claim of hearing the scream. She has never mentioned (as far as I know) being intimidated or threatened by the R lawyers, though I can certainly understand why she wouldn't admit it.

    Could it have been Patsy screaming? I suppose it could, but I think I'd know a child's scream also. I will always believe the head bash happened as a result of the scream. Whatever was taking place that night that caused her to bleed from the vagina was probably painful enough to cause both the scream and the blood. And it was likely done in a darkened room. The flashlight, being used to walk around the darkened house (this, too, was reported by a neighbor who saw "strange moving lights" in the R kitchen window). So the flashlight was handy, and when she screamed, it became the bludgeon which caused the blunt force trauma noted at the autopsy.
    This is my Constitutionally protected OPINION. Please do not copy or take it anywhere else.

  5. #53
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    12

    Default

    I've been following all your remarks about the Papers and was prompted to read them, myself. If you don't mind my interjecting my observations, I'd like to mention my impressions about them.

    I, like most of you, had forgotten quite a bit of what I'd read and with all the new information that has come to light since they first came out and my having become more familiar with the case, I find it much easier to see discrepancies. I had been inclined to jot down the differences as I read along, but since I didn't, it's hard to remember everything I've noticed so far; however, I do recall a few of them (and I'm only about half-way through reading.)

    First, she made an error in Patsy's birthdate, having said she was born in 1966 rather than in 1956. Then, later, she made the same error with JonBenet's birthday, saying she was born on August 8 rather than August 6. And, the way I read it, she said Jay Ramsey had another son, other than John and Jeff. Since it's entirely possible that I misread what she wrote, I'll quote her and perhaps someone can show me what she means by this:

    "John Bennett Ramsey was born on December 7, 1943, the first of
    two sons, to James ("Jay") and Mary Bennett Ramsey in Omaha,
    Nebraska. His brother, Jeffrey, was born five years later. A former Air Force pilot and decorated World War II veteran, Jay worked as a flight instructor in several private schools after leaving the military. Shortly after Kin's birth, Jay was appointed as the Director of the Nebraska Department of Aeronautics. In 1957 Jay left his home state of Nebraska and
    this job to move his family to Okemos, Michigan, not far from Lansing, were he eventually became head of the Michigan Aeronautics Commission."

    So, unless she called "Jeffrey" "Kin" by mistake, it appears she is talking about another son entirely.

    There is another thing she wrote, which must be an error, also. I say this because when I mentioned this on Topix, I was very quickly called down, saying I was incorrect. I hadn't remembered where I had read it, but I believe that when posters corrected me, they used transcripts from Patsy's interviews for sources. What I'm referring to is Bonita saying that the morning of the "kidnapping" there was a red turtleneck soaking in JonBenet's bathroom. So, either this statement is in error or Patsy lied when she claimed the red turtleneck was NOT soaking but that it was rolled up in a ball in JB's bathroom.

    In reading back over this, did Bonita also say that when Patsy put JB to bed that night that she put the red turtleneck on her along with the white thermal long johns? (I really do need to go back and check; that is, unless some here can clarify this.)

    I believe this might be an important issue since JB was found in the white shirt with the sparkly star emblazened on it that she had worn to the White's house the night before. It might appear that JB had recently worn the red turtleneck and soiled it, for which Patsy was soaking it to remove a stain -- a stain like blood, perhaps? In any event, I'd like to see some other thoughts about this.

    It could have been just another error, since there have been quite a few that I've noticed. And some of the errors are so obvious, IMO, they stick out like a sore thumb. Thanks, mBm.

  6. #54
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    In the Federal Witness Protection Program
    Posts
    1,311

    Default

    There has long been confusion about the red turtleneck. There was also another red piece of JB's clothing, a red jumpsuit (like a leotard) she wore to perform at a Mall shortly before her death. Patsy mentioned seeing it in the laundry area outside JB's room, noting she meant to wash it when she got home from the trip. We all know Patsy had first said she wanted JB to wear that red turtleneck with her black velvet pants and vest to the White's so she would match Patsy's own outfit of black velvet pants, red sweater. JB refused, insisting (according to Patsy) on wearing the white sweatshirt with silver sequin star which Patsy said she had had recently bought at Gap Kids along with the black velvet pants and vest. At first, Patsy said JB did wear the red turtleneck (or wore it to bed) but when confronted with photos of the White's party, she had to admit that JB had worn the white shirt. Since the Rs story was that JB was asleep when they got home and Patsy dressed her for bed by pulling off her black velvet pants and putting on the longjohns and leaving her in the white shirt, that left Patsy with no explanation as to how the red turtleneck became soiled. I doubt Patsy would want to put a soiled turtleneck on JB for a Christmas party, so at some point that day or night it became soiled.
    The discrepancy seems to be whether it was found soaking IN the sink or balled up ON the sink. Crime scene photos would tell the truth, but we do not have access to them all and I have not seen this particular matter addressed THOROUGHLY in any of LE's questioning of Patsy.
    I would hope this red shirt was taken into evidence, but I bet it wasn't. If it was, it should reveal if there were blood or urine stains on it, especially if it was not soaking in the sink.
    I am not sure I feel that Patsy would soak the shirt instead of hiding/removing/throwing it away if there was blood on it and that blood came from whatever caused her vaginal trauma or head bash. The bash was a closed-scalp injury, so no blood there, but with a horrible fracture like that, there would certainly have been a nosebleed. I know LE asked Patsy about nosebleeds, but it has never been addressed by LE to my satisfaction if there was blood on her pillowcase. They allude to it, but that's it.
    This is important because if JB was laid on her bed unconscious at some point after the head bash but before being brought to the basement (were I believe he garrote and the rest of the staging took place, it tells us where the head bash likely took place (or if she was slammed into the edge of the tub, sink, a faucet, etc.- this would have happened upstairs, not in the basement.
    But the head bash from a flashlight could have happened anywhere.
    This is my Constitutionally protected OPINION. Please do not copy or take it anywhere else.

  7. #55
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Posts
    12

    Default

    DeeDee, thank you for your response. The reason I mentioned the red turtleneck being soiled, possibly with blood, was because of the blood on the pillowcase.

    Do you have any scenarios that could link the two? I can't imagine Patsy going off on a trip and leaving any clothing soaking, but it seems, given the length of time she allowed for getting ready for the trip, she wouldn't have had time to wash the shirt that morning. But with some stains, soaking is almost a necessity. If the red turtleneck indeed WAS soaking, why didn't Patsy finish washing it out the night before rather than leaving it overnight?She had allowed barely enough time to get everyone ready to leave that morning and adding that to her busy schedule that morning was something I can't understand.

    The entire issue of the red turtleneck vs the red jumpsuit is so muddled it will take someone much smarter than I to figure it all out. But it shows that the investigators on many occasions just never asked the right questions. That was demonstrated repeatedly.

  8. #56
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    In the Federal Witness Protection Program
    Posts
    1,311

    Default

    I don't believe the red jumpsuit has anything to do with the crime. One thing about crimes and the people who commit them- sometimes, although they are lying about the crime, some things they say will be the truth. They mix lies and truths as a way to make their lies seem more plausible, BUT also to muddle the facts. As far as Patsy goes, as she was telling LE her movements that morning, I feel that she actually did notice the red jumpsuit (NOT the red turtleneck) laying across the ironing board, just as she said it was, and that she made a mental note to wash it upon her return because it was soiled from her last wearing. I believe those statements are likely true.
    Blood might not have stained a red shirt that badly, or been all that difficult to remove. Still- there is that matter of how and when the shirt got soiled- it had to be clean that day because Patsy wanted her to wear it to the White's. We have proof she didn't wear it- she is seen in photos wearing the white shirt. So how did it get soiled?
    To me, there are TWO puzzling places where blood has been noted- JB's pillow, the pink nightie and one where it is theorized- the red turtleneck. No good explanation exists for any of them. Obviously blood got on her nightie and the pillow that night, most likely from blood that oozed from her nose or mouth after the head bash. So that infers she was either wearing the pink nightie and NOT the longjohns and white shirt or that the pink nightie and pillow may have been on the bed near her. What would make the puzzle easier to solve is if we knew WHERE the blood was on the nightie. That lets us know if the blood came from the vaginal injury or from oozing blood from the head bash.
    The coroner noted "tan mucus" both in her nostrils and on her cheek. "Tan" means blood-tinged. Blood turns brownish when it is exposed to oxygen and dries. That would make the mucus "tan". Normal mucus is clear or white/yellowish. We know her mouth and nose were swabbed. That would determine of it was blood. But those results have not been made public as far as I know.
    This is my Constitutionally protected OPINION. Please do not copy or take it anywhere else.

  9. #57
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    8,381

    Default

    Courtesy of "Little"
    Steve Thomas "Jonbenét"

    *snip*
    Since John and Patsy were dodging us, we were attempting to build
    a historical file the hard way, through talking to their friends and family
    members. We were hunting for a name from the past, someone with a
    grudge, perhaps an enemy capable of negotiating that big confusing
    house in Boulder and killing JonBenet.
    Nedra gave us some two dozen suspects off the top of her head, and
    when we asked if the initials SBTC meant anything to her, she snapped,
    "Yes. Son of a :(:(:(:(:( Tom Carson." Years before, Carson, the current
    chief financial officer at Access Graphics, had been involved in Nedra's
    dismissal from the company. She also pointed to Fleet and Priscilla
    White, Jeff Merrick and his "vicious" wife, housekeeper Linda Hoffmann-Pugh,
    a handyman, a painter, the gardener, the nanny, and a couple
    91
    of neighborhood kids. While thinking about other possible suspects,
    she accused one worker of theft, called a black man "boy," and de-
    scribed a little girl the same age as JonBenet as homely. But she had not
    one negative word to say about John Ramsey, which I thought was
    unique for a mother-in-law.
    Nedra was a sad sight, With her head tilted listlessly to the side, her
    bathrobe hanging open, and both hands gnarled by arthritis, but she
    spoke almost without pause, giving us a mass of information that we
    would dig through for months.
    She was swift to defend John Ramsey for assembling his own team
    of lawyers and investigators. "It's not that you folks in Boulder aren't
    doing a good job and can't resolve this," she said. "But it's my under-
    standing that. . . there's never been a kidnapping in Boulder, so if
    you've never been on a kidnapping before, you need great minds who
    have done this before."
    She agreed with Mervin Pugh, Suzanne Savage, and John Andrew
    Ramsey in thinking that no stranger could have navigated that maze of
    a house. "You couldn't find the basement in that house if you didn't
    know where it was. You know it was down, but which door would
    you go through to find it? There's a lot of doors that look like a basement
    door in that house."I
    Such identical statements coming from a number of independent
    witnesses who were all well acquainted with the house were painting a
    good picture that no stranger as involved in this crime. Whoever did
    it knew the layout. Nedra said Patsy would never return to that house
    and had told her husband: "Torch it:"
    Nedra was chatty about almost everything else but became evasive
    when asked about the bed-wetting history of JonBenet. During the
    interview questions kept coming to my mind. I was very curious about
    the bag of diapers that police had found hanging out of the cabinet just
    outside JonBenet's room and about why Patsy had told police that the
    child went to sleep in a red turtleneck although the body was found in
    a white top and the turtleneck had been discovered rolled up on the
    bathroom sink. Could there have been a bed-soiling accident that
    night? Patsy was the only person who could tell us, and she wouldn't.
    It is not unusual for a parent to lash out in unreasoning anger after
    becoming extremely frustrated with a child over toileting issues. It is
    also not unheard of for children to dirty themselves as a defense against
    sexual abuse and incest, intentionally making themselves unattractive to
    the offender. We let Nedra's evasiveness go for now but would later
    92
    become convinced that bed-wetting played a significant role in what-
    ever happened to the child.
    Detectives don't like to jump to conclusions, and we did not yet
    know what had happened. We try to let the evidence lead where it will,
    and we were too early in the process of interviewing those who best
    knew JonBenet to make a definite decision.
    I wanted to know what JonBenet would do if awakened suddenly.
    "She didn't like you pulling her out of bed," her grandmother replied.
    "She would scream bloody murder." From my perspective, Nedra
    apparently saw where this line of questioning might lead. "Unless they
    chloroformed her or taped her mouth, she would have screamed like
    you wouldn't believe." So in the view of one family member, it seemed
    unlikely that a stranger could have slipped the girl quietly out of the
    bedroom. I liked the idea that JonBenet was a fighter.
    *snip*
    Nedra didn't like where this interview was going.
    elle: The RST can't handle the truth!
    Just my opinion.

  10. #58
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    8,381

    Default

    Courtesy of Little

    Steve Thomas "JonBenét"

    108
    crab and/or shrimp" at the Whites' party. Neither the question nor the
    answer mentioned pineapple, which indicated that she ate what was
    found in her stomach at the autopsy after coming home, and we had
    found a ceramic bowl on the breakfast table containing pineapple.
    Patsy's prints were on the bowl.
    The question "What was JonBenet wearing when she went to bed
    on Christmas Day night?" was obliquely answered: "The best recollection is that she was wearing long underwear pants and a polo shirt when she went to bed." It did not mention what color the shirt was-the white one on the body or red, as Patsy had said on December 26. It did not mention the word turtleneck, which she had told police on the morning the body was found. It was an extremely evasive answer to a simple question.
    There is a downside to such probing questions, however, for they
    can educate a suspect about what investigators know, and I thought too
    much was being given away here. Also, written questions give no
    chance for a trained police interviewer to follow up on inconsistencies
    and bore in deep for information or to observe the body language of a
    nervous suspect.
    I think Patsy Ramsey was lying.
    elle: The RST can't handle the truth!
    Just my opinion.

  11. #59

    Default

    In JonBenet, Steve Thomas says that Patsy told cops on December 26 that she put JonBenet to bed the previous night in a red turtleneck sweater. Thomas hypothesizes that the sweater was removed after JonBenet had a bed-wetting accident. Werner Spitz said that the bruise on JonBenet's collarbone could have been caused by someone's knuckles digging into JonBenet's body as he or she clutched JonBenet by her garment. I speculate that the red turtleneck is stretched out in the collarbone area.

    Another poster whose name escapes me at the moment suggested that Patsy put JonBenet to bed in the red turtleneck because she wanted her to wear it the next day to meet the relatives. Since they were due to fly out early and didn't have a lot of time to get ready, it would make sense to get JonBenet dressed the night before.

    Finding that JonBenet had wet the red turtleneck which they'd been doing battle royal about a few hours earlier might have sent Patsy into a towering rage.

  12. #60

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by koldkase View Post
    Didn't someone write that the Ramsey PIs were on the ground Day Two? And the Ramsey investigators were trying to intimidate Fleet White, as well?
    According to JonBenet, Fleet White said that Mike Bynum called him the afternoon of December 26, the same day the body was found, and that three Ramsey investigators interviewed him on the 27th.

    White kept notes of everything.
    Last edited by fr brown; March 4, 2011, 2:25 pm at Fri Mar 4 14:25:34 UTC 2011.



Similar Threads

  1. Bonita Papers
    By Karen in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 101
    Last Post: February 9, 2005, 11:35 pm, Wed Feb 9 23:35:31 UTC 2005
  2. The "Bonita Papers" - Unedited Notes From Ramsey Case Documents
    By Tricia in forum Evidence Files: Ramsey murder case
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: April 10, 2004, 1:55 am, Sat Apr 10 1:55:43 UTC 2004
  3. The Complete Bonita Papers
    By Spade in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: January 20, 2004, 1:13 pm, Tue Jan 20 13:13:02 UTC 2004

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •