Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 12345
Results 49 to 57 of 57
  1. #49

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by cynic View Post
    I suppose there is slight degree of ambiguity in the Q and A, but given the context it's unlikely that the interpretation that they were Burke's pajama bottoms is incorrect.
    This is what was specifically said (beginning at around 62:20 into the show.)
    KoldKase: You did mention that there were pajama bottoms on the floor that were believed to be Burke’s and I’m assuming they were boy’s pajama bottoms on her bedroom floor.
    Jim Kolar: That was my interpretation of the reports that I read.
    KoldKase: OK…
    Tricia (party pooper) Griffith: Ok that’s it, you know what, KoldKase, I apologize, we’ll have to get to your 8 other questions next time...
    I'll be bringing my stun guns to the party next time.... Tricia, step AWAY from the HOLD button!
    Attached Images Attached Images  

    "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.

  2. #50

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Karen View Post
    I'm sorry koldkase and Cherokee. I was just rambling on and on with my own thoughts, not really referring to your posts at all. Sometimes there is a disconnect between the brain and typing fingers and my posts don't come out the way I intended.
    That's the problem with message board posting. You can't hear voice inflection or daydream musing on the subject at hand.
    Oh, we understand perfectly, which is why we often have to apologize, as well. I think Tricia needs to start giving out a "Mind-reading Kit" to members.


    "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

    Bumped for Fr Brown: check out page 2 and cynic's post on page 3 which quotes Kolar's book on the topic of the pj bottoms, as well.

    "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.

  4. #52

    Default

    If this helps, Fr Brown, I went back to the blog radio show to look for that particular question on the boys pajama bottoms in particular, and the question is at approx. minute 62:10:

    I asked Chief Kolar about the pajama bottoms on the floor of JB's bedroom which he wrote about in his book. My question was phrased this way:

    Me: "You did mention that there were pajama bottoms on the floor that were believed to be Burke's and I'm assuming they were boys pajama bottoms on her bedroom floor?"

    Kolar: "That was my interpretation of the reports that I read."

    "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.

  5. #53

    Default

    Here's a section of the transcript of the June 1998 interview between Det. Haney and Patsy where they discuss the pants found in JB's bathroom:

    http://www.forumsforjustice.org/foru...ead.php?t=9945

    16 THOMAS HANEY: Now you're looking
    17 at 16?
    18 PATSY RAMSEY: Uh-hum.
    19 (INAUDIBLE.)
    20 (Patsy Ramsey looking down into the
    21 photographs to respond.)
    22 PATSY RAMSEY: Nothing.
    23 THOMAS HANEY: Okay, go on to
    24 number 17. And what is 17? We have moved --
    25 PATSY RAMSEY: Into the bathroom.
    0265
    1 (INAUDIBLE.)
    2 THOMAS HANEY: Okay, that's on the
    3 shelf behind the --
    4 PATSY RAMSEY: On the shelf, yes.
    5 Okay.
    6 (Patsy Ramsey looking down into the
    7 photographs.)
    8 PATSY RAMSEY: Looks like a pair of
    9 pants, little buckle (INAUDIBLE).
    10 THOMAS HANEY: Are they play things
    11 or --
    12 PATSY RAMSEY: Yeah.
    13 THOMAS HANEY: You don't recall
    14 when she last wore them?
    15 PATSY RAMSEY: No.

    16 THOMAS HANEY: Anything else in 17
    17 then, towels or anything that's --
    18 PATSY RAMSEY: (INAUDIBLE
    19 RESPONSE.)
    20 TRIP DeMUTH: This might be the
    21 drawer open slightly.
    22 THOMAS HANEY: Number 18?
    23 TRIP DeMUTH: How about the red
    24 item in the upper right-hand corner?
    25 PATSY RAMSEY: I think it's a
    0266
    1 little turtleneck, a little cotton turtleneck,
    2 and I had wanted her to wear it to the Whites
    3 and she didn't want to wear it.
    4 TRIP DeMUTH: How did it end up
    5 there?
    6 PATSY RAMSEY: Don't remember. A
    7 crown. Oh, God.
    And they go back to these same pants in the bathroom floor again later:

    16 TOM HANEY: How about 378?
    17 PATSY RAMSEY: This is JonBenet's floor, her
    18 pants.
    19 TOM HANEY: Do you recall those particular
    20 pants, when she would have worn those last?
    21 PATSY RAMSEY: Not for sure. Probably
    22 recently because they are dropped in the middle of the
    23 floor, but I don't remember exactly.
    24 TOM HANEY: They are kind of inside out.
    25 PATSY RAMSEY: Right.
    0457
    1 TOM HANEY: 379 is a close up of it. It
    2 appears they are stained.
    3 PATSY RAMSEY: Right.
    4 TOM HANEY: Is that something that JonBenet
    5 had a problem with?
    6 PATSY RAMSEY: Well she, you know, she was at
    7 age where she was learning to wipe herself and, you
    8 know, sometimes she wouldn't do such a great job.
    9 TOM HANEY: Did she have accidents, if you
    10 will, in the course of the day or the night, as opposed
    11 to just bed wetting?
    12 PATSY RAMSEY: Not usually, no, huh-uh. That
    13 would probably be more from just not wiping real well.
    14 TOM HANEY: Okay. Do you know how long those
    15 would have been in that position in 378 on the floor in
    16 there?
    17 PATSY RAMSEY: It depends when she wore them
    18 last.
    19 TOM HANEY: Again, do you recall?
    20 PATSY RAMSEY: I don't remember.
    21 TOM HANEY: On Christmas day were you in that
    22 bathroom at all?
    23 PATSY RAMSEY: Very likely, but I can't say
    24 for sure.
    25 TOM HANEY: Had you been in there that day,
    0458
    1 would you have done something with them?
    2 PATSY RAMSEY: Well, I got, you know -- that
    3 night I got -- I know I got the long Johns for her out
    4 of that bathroom.
    5 TOM HANEY: Right, out of one of the draws in
    6 there.
    7 PATSY RAMSEY: Yeah.
    8 TOM HANEY: Do you recall seeing those on the
    9 floor that night when you got the --
    10 PATSY RAMSEY: No.
    11 TOM HANEY: -- underwear.
    12 PATSY RAMSEY: They could have been there. I
    13 don't know.
    14 TOM HANEY: Could have.
    15 PATSY RAMSEY: Could have been there, yes.
    16 Don't know for sure.
    17 TOM HANEY: Is it possible that some point
    18 during the night she would have gotten up and put those
    19 on or thrown them down there or changed in some way;
    20 trying to account for those being there.
    21 PATSY RAMSEY: I just -- I can't imagine
    22 that. No, because I put those -- she was zonked out
    23 asleep, so I put her to bed. And she had those, she
    24 had worn the black velvet ones to Priscilla's.
    25 What she had on earlier that day, I just
    0459
    1 can't remember. It might have been those. I just
    2 can't remember. Could have taken those off, you know,
    3 gotten the dress to go to Priscilla's and then left
    4 them there.
    5 TOM HANEY: When she was out riding her bike,
    6 do you remember, think back, look back at what she was
    7 wearing.
    8 PATSY RAMSEY: Can't remember. (Inaudible).

    9 Envelope.
    10 TOM HANEY: I don't know. But it is
    11 obviously after these have been picked up and stretched
    12 out for a photograph just -- it could be a
    13 (inaudible). Evidence. And 380.
    The black velvet pants JB wore to the Whites' party were on the trunk at the bottom of the bed weren't they? Or am I misremembering because it was a mystery for many years and I saw a part of that trunk in a larger photo and there appears to be pants on it?

    At any rate, these pants in question seem to be in the bathroom, not in the bedroom, and they don't appear to be pajamas at all.

    So as far as I can tell, there is no source I have seen, other than Kolar's interpretation of reports he saw, that a pair of boys pajama bottoms were found in the floor of JonBenet's bedroom.

    I can see why no one else reported that. Thomas, clearly, felt sorry for Burke getting jammed into this life-long nightmare as a child. So perhaps Thomas chose not to include this info for that reason--as well as because Burke was a minor.

    At any rate, I find it strange and inappropriate that "boy" pajama bottoms were there, especially considering that the autopsy revealed the victim had been sexually abused before the night of her murder. I can't imagine any other male child who would have left his pajama bottoms in JB's room, either.

    If Haney asked Patsy about this, then the transcript we have is redacted. Or perhaps they didn't even tape that, if it occurred, because of Burke's age.

    Just speculating, of course, but it seems a serious omission in questioning the parents, considering the evidence and the level of abuse this little girl suffered before death.

    So I hope this helps answer some of your questions--as much as any speculation can.

    "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.

  6. #54
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    The "Beehive State" It's true. Look it up
    Posts
    5,176

    Default

    Ok I am going to be a bit of a tease here but there is a chance that Chief James Kolar will join us again Sunday on Tricia's True Crime Radio. MAYBE.
    A BIG MAYBE.

    8 pm Eastern Sunday Oct 27th

    KEEP THIS LINK HANDY CUZ NEXT SUNDAY WE MIGHT HEAR FROM CHIEF KOLAR...MAYBE.
    tgrif@xmission.com
    FFJ C/O Tricia Griffith
    6300 N Sage Wood Drive
    Suite H #214
    Park City UT
    84098




    I am unaware of anyone who's profited from exploiting the Ramsey murder over a longer period of time, with a greater disregard for the principles of accuracy and fairness, than the production team of Mills and Tracey.They truly do inhabit a different moral universe from real journalists. It's the difference between journalism and propaganda.
    Alan Prendergast,reporter for Westword

  7. #55
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    In the Federal Witness Protection Program
    Posts
    1,311

    Default

    I also am skeptical about boys' pajama bottoms. These were male detectives. I mean no disrespect to our guys here, but most men seeing a pair of black kids' pants on the floor will likely think they are boys' pants. They are just not attuned to fabrics, either. Boys and girls can both have black pants, but only a girl would have black VELVET.
    In another conversation, Patsy described a pair of black pants in a photo as "play pants". This is another difference that a male detective might not make. These could have been sweats, cotton, etc.
    This is my Constitutionally protected OPINION. Please do not copy or take it anywhere else.

  8. #56

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Tricia View Post
    Ok I am going to be a bit of a tease here but there is a chance that Chief James Kolar will join us again Sunday on Tricia's True Crime Radio. MAYBE.
    A BIG MAYBE.

    8 pm Eastern Sunday Oct 27th

    KEEP THIS LINK HANDY CUZ NEXT SUNDAY WE MIGHT HEAR FROM CHIEF KOLAR...MAYBE.
    Okay, tease, what's the dish? I can't imagine Kolar doesn't want a piece of this news week.

    "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.

  9. #57

    Wink

    Quote Originally Posted by koldkase View Post
    Okay, tease, what's the dish? I can't imagine Kolar doesn't want a piece of this news week.
    He's supposed to be on the show along with Beth Karas. Make your Sunday plans now. LOL

    I only know this because I read it over at WS. So, yes, I am gossiping...LOL

    The above is just my opinion, right or wrong, but please leave it at FFJ.



Similar Threads

  1. Listen to James Kolar talk about new book on Tricia's show tonight! (July 18, 2012)
    By Cherokee in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 24
    Last Post: July 19, 2012, 8:43 pm, Thu Jul 19 20:43:59 UTC 2012
  2. Tonight (12/26/11) 9 pm EST -A special Jonbenet Ramsey show on Websleuths radio!
    By Tricia in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: January 3, 2012, 8:54 pm, Tue Jan 3 20:54:49 UTC 2012
  3. Websleuths Radio Show Sunday 8 PM EST, August 14, 2011 - JonBenet Ramsey
    By Tricia in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 69
    Last Post: September 2, 2011, 9:31 pm, Fri Sep 2 21:31:52 UTC 2011

Posting Permissions

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