Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 25 to 36 of 55
  1. #25
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    8,381

    Default Ramsey's clothes

    While searching for information on the black and red jacket ... ...

    Spade
    Member

    Registered: Aug 2003
    Location: Denver, CO
    Posts: 345
    clothing
    Keep in mind that Bonita wrote-up her info in 1999. The 2000 Atlanta interviews verify much of what she says about clothing, but are more up-to-date.


    One of the problems in the investigation was delayed gathering of
    evidence. It was not until almost a year after the murder that the Boulder police through D.A. Hofstrom finally asked for the clothing worn by Ramsey family members to Whites’ dinner party on the night of December 25. Fleet had taken photos during the holiday gathering which were turned over to the police department, and police request the clothing that was depicted in these photos. Another month would go by before the Ramseys, through their legal counsel and private investigators, would comply with this request.

    At that time, two black shirts from John and black pants and a red and black checked sweater from Patsy were provided. Two months later additional clothing, a red short sleeved shirt and a red turtleneck shirt, were also turned over by Patsy through the private investigator. The police department was informed that since John owned several pairs of khaki pants matching those in the photograph, John had not been able to determine which pair were worn on December 25. Not only had all of this clothing probably been reworn and been through many cleaning or laundering processes, the move from the Ramsey home had been done by a professional moving company. once again, contamination of evidence obtained from these articles of clothing could very likely present problems in any prosecution.

    Considering the delayed cooperation from the Ramseys in turning over the clothing, it was significant what items of clothing requested by the police department were not turned over. Patsy had told the officers that she had worn black short boots, to the White’s dinner party. The boots had never beaver been given to police officials in spite of repeated requests. At a subsequent session with the police department to give handwriting samples, Patsy had been wearing short black fur boots, and the detectives wondered if these were the boots that the Ramseys were saying they could not locate. The detectives were anxious to locate the fur boots to test for beaver hair.
    elle: The RST can't handle the truth!
    Just my opinion.

  2. #26
    BobC is offline Poster of the EON - Fabulous Inimitable Transcript and Book Reviewer
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    4,435

    Default

    Ellie--what I recall of that shard was that there was only one and very small. Can anyone help?

  3. #27
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    8,381

    Default

    Trouble is Bob, there is so much information out there, and sometimes mistakes are made. This last document was from the Courts. One would think they would have the correct information, but this isn't the case. Look at all the wrong information that's in Judge Carne's report leaning toward an invisible intruder. I personally like to give the source when I can, but this isn't always possible.

    Gets to be frustrating after a while, doesn't it? Still, most posters know this is happening.
    elle: The RST can't handle the truth!
    Just my opinion.

  4. #28
    BobC is offline Poster of the EON - Fabulous Inimitable Transcript and Book Reviewer
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    4,435

    Default

    Absolutely. For four years everyone from the media on down to the forums was quoting Psalm 118, and it turned out to be some other Psalm according to Steve Thomas. So ya never know. And I do mean we will never know.

  5. #29
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Sitting in front of my PC
    Posts
    1,177

    Default why didnt the detectives take

    john and patsy's clothing that day....or that next day?

    i dont understand who goofed or why they goofed.

    wouldnt it be against the law to withhold clothing/evidence for
    years and years and years???

    i dont get that.

    anyone know,
    purr

  6. #30
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    8,381

    Default Unbelievable, Purr!

    Doesn't make any sense, does it Purr? The Ramseys walked away from the scene of the crime with their clothes on their back. They should have been led into a Police car straight away. Unbelievable!

    Linda Arnd'ts clothes were bagged that day and handed in. Go figure!?
    elle: The RST can't handle the truth!
    Just my opinion.

  7. #31

    Default Elle and Imon

    Elle, your prior post quotes:

    "http://www.acandyrose.com/03312003carnes11-20.htm

    Wolf vs Ramsey Civil Case 1:00-CV-1187-JEC
    Carnes Order March 31, 2003 (Page 11 thru 20)

    Page 17

    12 The bleeding in JonBenet's genital area indicates she was alive when she was
    assaulted. (SMF 48; PSMF 48.) Her hymen was torn and material consistent with
    wooden shards from the paintbrush used to make the garrote were found in her
    vagina. (SMF 48-49; PMSF 48-49.) No evidence, however, suggests that she was
    the victim of chronic sexual abuse. (SMF 50; PSMF 50.)"

    Imon, your prior post asks for clarification of birefringent material.

    Here are some interesting facts I found in searching old articles:

    Page 9, Autopsy Report:

    "Vaginal Mucosa: All of the sections contain vascular congestion and focal interstitial chronic inflammation. The smallest piece of tissue, from the 7:00 position of the vaginal wall/hymen, contains epithelial erosion with underlying capillary congestion. A small number of red blood cells is present on the eroded surface, as is birefringent foreign material. Acute inflammatory infiltrate is not seen."

    At the time the autopsy report was released (1997), it was felt this birefringent, or shiny, foreign material could have been the deposit of a latex glove in the vaginal tract. However, later, many of the Boulder and Denver newspapers started reporting that it was indeed a small shard of the paintbrush that was used in the "garotte." I have not found any substantiation for that claim, but they were all reporting it as something investigators said.

    Per Smit: "At some point, the child was then hit over the head with such force it crushed her skull. But her nightmare wasn’t over. Shortly before she died, investigators believe she was sexually assaulted with a piece of the paintbrush that was used to make the garrote."
    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/...in523884.shtml

    One of these investigators was probably Linda Arndt:
    http://www.courttv.com/archive/natio...amsey2_ap.html

    Boulder County Coroner John Meyer, who conducted the autopsy on 6-year-old JonBenet, said the child's pubic area showed evidence consistent with having been wiped by a cloth.
    http://denver.rockymountainnews.com/...107jonnn.shtml

    Note that Meyer's statement was NOT that the entire body was wiped down, but only her pubic area. WHY if no sexual assault had taken place prior to the staging? This could explain the multi colored fibers, including the dark blue ones, mentioned in an earlier post. This revelation coupled with ONLY John Ramsey's sweater fibers being found in her pubic area, is extremely suggestive, n'est-ce pas?

    Texan, I agree with you that the most damning fiber evidence was Patsy's entwined in the ligature. But why would she violently strangle her own daughter? Perhaps John's fiber evidence and the wiping down of the pubic area only is the answer.....Could Patsy have been in a jealous rage?????

  8. #32
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    8,381

    Default

    Thank you for this information, DejaNu. I'm reading over it now. Much appreciated!
    elle: The RST can't handle the truth!
    Just my opinion.

  9. #33
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    8,381

    Default

    DejaNu,

    I've always thought along the same lines as Steve Thomas, that Patsy was in a rage of some sort. Had it just been the head wound and the strangulation to finish this little girl off, there would have been no need to even wipe her pubic area at all; therefore I feel that Patsy Ramsey must have known beforehand that little JonBenét was being sexually abused, and this would now be known when they examined JonBenét's body, and they were up half the night planning and scheming to make it look like a pedophile's work. They failed!

    Having said this, I'm troubled when I read that JonBenét was still alive when the paintbrush was inserted into her genital area, and shudder thinking it was one of her parents, but, I'm thinking here that both the Ramseys probably thought JonBenét was already dead.

    http://denver.rockymountainnews.com...1107jonnn.shtml


    Former FBI profiler Gregg McCrary, who has followed the case closely, was not surprised that fingerprints were not found on the flashlight. Rough or textured surfaces don't easily retain fingerprints.

    The batteries are another story.

    "That's a little more suspicious," McCrary said. "By their nature, batteries would be a better surface on which to leave fingerprints because they're typically shiny and smooth."

    If the flashlight was used to strike a blow to JonBenet's head, and if the killer had taken the time to wipe down the batteries, McCrary thinks that would support his suspicion that the crime was committed by someone close to the family.

    "An intruder would have spent very little time in the house," McCrary said. "They'd want to put as much time and distance between themselves and the crime scene as possible.

    "Why not just take the flashlight with you, if you want to get rid of it? To wipe down batteries is just not consistent with an intruder."

    .................................................. ..................................................

    I'm not changing my opinion. I am more convinced than ever that the Ramseys are guilty! Thank you again for this information DejaNu.
    elle: The RST can't handle the truth!
    Just my opinion.

  10. #34
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    New Mexico
    Posts
    2,897

    Default I agree Elle....

    If JonBenet had only experienced the head wound, the Ramseys could easily have called an ambulance and had her taken in for emergency care for an "accident".....

    In that case the head wound could have been explained away as a fall down the winding metal stair case, a fall off of the balcony outside of JonBenet's window, fall down the basement stairs etc.....

    Since the Ramseys were a prominent family in the Boulder community, the "accident" probably would never even have been investigated.....

    However when one adds in the evidence of sexual molestation that would have been discovered in the emergency room, (Emergency Room Dr.s do check over their young patients for signs of sexual abuse regularly when they come in for trauma treatment of any sort) then one realizes that the Ramseys could not take the risk of letting JonBenet be treated for the head trauma....

    The evidence of sexual abuse was the deciding factor for instigating the cover up.....This now had to look like a crime perpetrated by an intruder, as it could not be portrayed as a simple accident when there was the added factor of vaginal trauma.....

    The parents having participated in abusing JonBenet; John sexually, and Patsy crushing her skull with the maglite, probably thought JonBenet was dead or near death and in order to escape exposure and punishment for their deeds, decided on an elaborate coverup in which the garrot and the paintbrush were used in such horrifying ways that no one would ever believe that the parents were capable of this kind of crime....

    I believe that the Ramseys fully intended to draw the investigators away from their home with the kidnap ransom note, and relocate JonBenet's body to some remote site for burial once the immediate pressure was off and they were at leisure to do so.....

    In their distress over the accidental murder of JonBenet, they failed to realize that the police would be searching the entire home, and not just be drawn away to the surrounding city and mountains looking for the suposedly kidnapped child.....John, when he realized that the entire house was to be searched and JonBenet found, knew that he needed to be the one to find the body and corrupt the crime scene as much as possible......

    All of the same scenario applies if it was Burke who was discovered molesting JonBenet, except that Burke was sent his bedroom after the initial blow to JonBenet's head, not knowing of the seriousness of the situation, and John was called in to assist in finishing the murder of JonBenet and in the cover up....

    Either way, both John and Patsy participated in the murder.....

    Voyager

  11. #35

    Default

    If Patsy (or John) found John Andrew molesting and went to strike him but missed and hit JB, the samey same would apply, IMO.

  12. #36
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    8,381

    Default

    Voyager: I believe that the Ramseys fully intended to draw the investigators away from their home with the kidnap ransom note, and relocate JonBenet's body to some remote site for burial once the immediate pressure was off and they were at leisure to do so.....

    This is exactly how I think it may have happened, Voyager. Had the Ramseys wanted the body discovered sooner, wouldn't they have chosen another room with easier access? Instead they chose a room hidden deep in the basement with a wooden latch locking the door from the outside.

    Although, there is also talk that Ramsey had hidden the body and then transferred it there (?).

    Officer French looked at the door, saw the lock and never opened this door. Officer Reichman tried to open this same door and stopped when he felt resistance. Fleet White did open it earlier in the morning, and he didn't see anything. Steve Thomas page 19 PB

    Fleet White was looking into that room in the dark, of course.
    According to Steve Thomas, a fluorescent lighting fixture lay sideways on a shelf, with two switches near the outward -opening white door. page 71 PB

    Steve talks about John Ramsey. snapping his fingers and saying..."It was instant. I mean, as soon as I opened the door I saw the white blanket ...and I knew what was up." He then finds JonBenét ...italics are mine.

    Steve talks about this door opening outwards, that Ramsey would have had to step back or aside before moving through. He didn't say he saw the blanket after he turned on the light but "instantly." Whereas Fleet had stood in the same doorway that morning and saw nothing in the windowless darkness.
    Steve considered that Ramsey might have known something before he entered. Page 192-193 Steve Thomas PB

    N.B. I ordered a used Hardback recently from Barnes & Noble. It was shipped and lost! These Paperback page numbers will be different, but at least the PB is the one that is updated.
    elle: The RST can't handle the truth!
    Just my opinion.



Similar Threads

  1. Game changer? The "missing" evidence
    By cynic in forum Crimes, Trials & Missing Persons
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: November 27, 2012, 8:32 pm, Tue Nov 27 20:32:14 UTC 2012
  2. One Piece of "Physical" Evidence - Hanging?
    By VP in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 49
    Last Post: September 2, 2006, 2:38 am, Sat Sep 2 2:38:20 UTC 2006
  3. Debunking the Seven Pieces of "Evidence": #2 - The Duct Tape and The Cord Garotte
    By Dunvegan in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: September 13, 2002, 9:58 am, Fri Sep 13 9:58:37 UTC 2002
  4. Debunking the Seven Pieces of "Evidence" That "Prove" the Intruder Theory.
    By Dunvegan in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: September 10, 2002, 7:34 pm, Tue Sep 10 19:34:10 UTC 2002

Posting Permissions

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