Page 1 of 16 1234511 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 12 of 191
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Candyland
    Posts
    5,132

    Default The Huge (Girls Size 12-14) "Bloomies" Underwear on JonBenet, Modeled By Six-Year-Old

    As promised, I purchased a packet of size 12/14 Bloomies from Bloomingdales in NY and here are some photos of them.

    The first is for KoldKase. I think it was you who once asked about the packet they came in and how it was sealed.

    This is the packet:-
    Attached Images Attached Images  
    Last edited by Cherokee; May 29, 2012, 12:24 am at Tue May 29 0:24:41 UTC 2012.
    This is my opinion and it may not be copied in whole or in part without my written permission

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Candyland
    Posts
    5,132

    Default

    This is the seal. There is a little plastic "string" which goes through the loop at the end, the tags and the hole in the zipper. You need to break this to open it. In the photo, the seal is intact:-
    Attached Images Attached Images  
    This is my opinion and it may not be copied in whole or in part without my written permission

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Candyland
    Posts
    5,132

    Default

    And this is the size 12/14 and size 4/6 side by side. My daughter is almost exactly the same weight and height as Jonbenet was when she died (and she is almost exactly the same age too - 6 years and 6 months). I won't be getting her to model the larger knickers as I don't think it would be right to do so. The dimensions of the knickers are as follows:-

    Size 12/14 - measure 12 inches from waistband to bottom of crotch and waistband is 22 inches unstretched.

    Size 4/6 - measure 8.5 inches from waistband to crotch and waistband is just under 17 inches unstretched.

    The size 4/6 fit my daughter just now.

    My observation without her trying them on is that they would be very "gapey" at the crotch and would hang down at the crotch. The legs look very wide.
    Attached Images Attached Images  
    This is my opinion and it may not be copied in whole or in part without my written permission

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Candyland
    Posts
    5,132

    Default

    Copied from WS:-

    Well I just did a little experiment. I offered the larger size knickers to my daughter and she exclaimed "Mummy! These are too big! More like YOUR size". So there is no way she would mistake them for her own. Then I got her to try them on and they are simply huge on her. They wouldn't fall down round her ankles necessarily - not past her hip bones anyway, but they would certainly slip down as far as her hipbones - at which point the crotch is level with her knees. They are also incredibly baggy. Every heard the expression "droopy drawers"? They bag out at the back and form a little tunnel from one side to the next.

    They would be extremely uncomfortable to wear and I quite frankly cannot imagine any child being happy to do so.

    Another poster mentioned the possibility of them being worn over pullups and they would certainly accomodate rather large pullups with PLENTY of room to spare.
    This is my opinion and it may not be copied in whole or in part without my written permission

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    755

    Default

    Try one more experiment. Have her put them on, and then put on a pair of pants over them. I will wager that they will come off entirely with the pants, and that you would have to extract them from inside the pants in order to put them back on.

    Edited to add: Now this was a useful thing to do. The picture of the size relationships alone is valuable grist for our discussion mill.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Candyland
    Posts
    5,132

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Why_Nut
    Try one more experiment. Have her put them on, and then put on a pair of pants over them. I will wager that they will come off entirely with the pants, and that you would have to extract them from inside the pants in order to put them back on.
    Let me get this clear:-

    Put the oversized knickers on first
    Put normal sized knickers on atop?
    Then try to remove the normal sized ones to see if the large ones come off inside?

    Or do you mean trousers? Remember pants = knickers to me and "panties" is a naughty word here so I struggle to use it in posts!
    This is my opinion and it may not be copied in whole or in part without my written permission

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    755

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jayelles
    Let me get this clear:-

    Put the oversized knickers on first
    Put normal sized knickers on atop?
    Then try to remove the normal sized ones to see if the large ones come off inside?

    Or do you mean trousers? Remember pants = knickers to me and "panties" is a naughty word here so I struggle to use it in posts!
    Mea culpa. Yes, trousers, jeans, that sort of thing. Outerwear for the legs you would not mind having your child wear in cold weather.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Candyland
    Posts
    5,132

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Why_Nut
    Mea culpa. Yes, trousers, jeans, that sort of thing. Outerwear for the legs you would not mind having your child wear in cold weather.
    OK (she thinks this is hilarious).

    I tried it with both jeans and velour trousers. The knickers didn't come right off - but they ended up down below her bottom.

    I don't know what the result would be if she'd been wearing them for a while and they'd had time to "work down". I'll try that tomorrow because she's in bed now.

    When I got her to try them on before, it was on top of her own knickers. This time I got her to wear them against her skin and it was truly awful. The legs openings are so wide that she isn't "covered" at all (if you get my drift). Her sheuch (good Scottish word for that gneral area) is pretty much totally exposd at the slightest movement.

    I quite simply cannot believe that any child would be happy to wear these.

    I wish I could demonstrate how baggy they are on a life-size dummy. Even before I tried them on my daughter, I didn't think by looking at them that they would be quite as baggy as they are.

    ETA - it would be like having no knickers on at all and I would imagine the seam on the inside of the trousers would rub against her skin.

    I wonder if the velvet trousers she was wearing were tested to see if they'd been against her skin in that area or if there were signs of her being "half-commando"?
    This is my opinion and it may not be copied in whole or in part without my written permission

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

    Default Fleet white taking JonBenét home

    All this talk reminds me of the time when Steve Thomas interviewed Nedra Paugh in Atlanta, and he brought up the subject of toilet training with Nedra. I'm wondering just how old JonBenét was when she was at the Whites with Daphne (?).

    I would never have sent a man home with his daughter's little playmate, and dirty underwear like that. Imagine the humiliation for JonBenét.


    Page 137 Steve Thomas Hardback (Thanks to Little)

    [quote]Nedra talked nonstop. But if you could stay with her long enough, reality might drop into the conversation. She revealed a bit more about JonBenet messing her pants and bed, a subject she had minimized in our previous interview. Now, however, she said that the child did not wipe properly after a bowel movement, and quite often an adult would have to wash her bottom and change her undies. They called it "dirtying." The grandmother also mentioned two occasions when the little girl had gone to play with her best friend, Daphne White, and had come home with Fleet White carrying her soiled underwear, saying that JonBenet had had an accident and was wearing a pair of Daphne's panties. That made me think of another
    alternative to the foreign DNA found in her clothing.
    elle: The RST can't handle the truth!
    Just my opinion.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Not Boulder, Colorado
    Posts
    840

    Default

    Size didn't matter. The Wednesday tag is what mattered.
    Last edited by Paradox; August 1, 2006, 8:12 pm at Tue Aug 1 20:12:39 UTC 2006.

  11. #11

    Default

    Let me see if I remember correctly. Patsy claimed that JonBenet was sound asleep after returning from the Whites and the Fernies and Stines and being transported up to her bed.

    Patsy claims that she removed JonBenet's black nelvet pants. Does she mention changing the panties, or adjusting them in any way? Any reference?

    Patsy then CLAIMS that she replaced JonBenet's black pants with long johns. Did Patsy mention why she put a BEDWETTER in LONG JOHNS ... in long johns instead of pullups (or nothing at all)?

    Why long johns? Have you ever tried to thread cooked, damp spaghetti pasta through a narrow straw? That's what it's like threading a sleeping child's legs into long johns. It's damn near IMPOSSIBLE!!! The child's limbs are TOTALLY limp. That NEVER HAPPENED!

    So WHY the COMPULSION to thread spaghetti through a straw? No central heating? Nope. No COMFORTER? Nopey, nope. So there is NO COMPELLING REASON for a mother to go through that ORDEAL with a sleeping, bedwetting child.

    Then why was JonBenet FOUND with long johns on?

    JohnBenet would ONLY have long johns on IF she was AWAKE at some point AFTER returning home from the Whites. The most likely scenario is that she was awake and wanted to play with Chrismas toys. She did NOT need the warmth for bed ... but for playing downstairs, or eating pineapple it makes perfect sense. Being awake also 'splains why her bladder was almost empty prior to the murder.

    Sooooo ... if JonBenet was wearing long johns, then Patsy HAD TO BE LYING!!!


    JonBenet would ONLY have needed long johns if she was awake and was trapsing around the house. NO PARENT is gonna go through the threading ordeal unnecessarily. Patsy LIED.

    ... and as others have pointed out ... size 12 panties would have come off with the black pants when pulled off a sleeping six year old. And ... NO PARENT is gonna put those panties back ON under those conditions.

    Patsy LIED! Why?


    ...YumYum

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Candyland
    Posts
    5,132

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by YumYum012
    Let me see if I remember correctly. Patsy claimed that JonBenet was sound asleep after returning from the Whites and the Fernies and Stines and being transported up to her bed.

    Patsy claims that she removed JonBenet's black nelvet pants. Does she mention changing the panties, or adjusting them in any way? Any reference?

    Patsy then CLAIMS that she replaced JonBenet's black pants with long johns. Did Patsy mention why she put a BEDWETTER in LONG JOHNS ... in long johns instead of pullups (or nothing at all)?

    Why long johns? Have you ever tried to thread cooked, damp spaghetti pasta through a narrow straw? That's what it's like threading a sleeping child's legs into long johns. It's damn near IMPOSSIBLE!!! The child's limbs are TOTALLY limp. That NEVER HAPPENED!

    So WHY the COMPULSION to thread spaghetti through a straw? No central heating? Nope. No COMFORTER? Nopey, nope. So there is NO COMPELLING REASON for a mother to go through that ORDEAL with a sleeping, bedwetting child.

    Then why was JonBenet FOUND with long johns on?

    JohnBenet would ONLY have long johns on IF she was AWAKE at some point AFTER returning home from the Whites. The most likely scenario is that she was awake and wanted to play with Chrismas toys. She did NOT need the warmth for bed ... but for playing downstairs, or eating pineapple it makes perfect sense. Being awake also 'splains why her bladder was almost empty prior to the murder.

    Sooooo ... if JonBenet was wearing long johns, then Patsy HAD TO BE LYING!!!


    JonBenet would ONLY have needed long johns if she was awake and was trapsing around the house. NO PARENT is gonna go through the threading ordeal unnecessarily. Patsy LIED.

    ... and as others have pointed out ... size 12 panties would have come off with the black pants when pulled off a sleeping six year old. And ... NO PARENT is gonna put those panties back ON under those conditions.

    Patsy LIED! Why?


    ...YumYum
    Gosh, I agree with you. What would you do with a SLEEPING child? You would remove any outer graments which would be restrictive in bed or which would cause the child to become to warm - and you would leave it at that.

    On Websleuths, there is a discussion about the Bloomies. One poster offered the suggestion that the Wednesday size 12/14 knickers were used as a substitute for her Wednesday 4/6 knickers. The poster hypothesised that perhaps the Wednesday knickers had been seen by others - perhaps at the White's party and this was why it was necessary for her to be wearing Wednesday Bloomies when her body was discovered. In that case - what happened to the smaller Wednesday Bloomies? Were they ever found?

    Could the longjohns have been put on simply to keep the larger Bloomies on or to cover up the fact that they would have looked so huge and ... unlikely?
    This is my opinion and it may not be copied in whole or in part without my written permission



Similar Threads

  1. Book Proposal for "Prostitution of Justice" by Thomas C. "Doc" Miller
    By Tricia in forum ***Sneek Preview*** - Tom Miller's Book
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: August 4, 2007, 9:15 pm, Sat Aug 4 21:15:02 UTC 2007
  2. John Ramsey's '98 Interview...Things That Were "Strange" or "Out Of Place"
    By AMES in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 119
    Last Post: June 19, 2007, 11:51 am, Tue Jun 19 11:51:40 UTC 2007
  3. "South Park," "SNL" & "Mad TV" Ramsey Episodes
    By RiverRat in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: September 2, 2006, 3:54 pm, Sat Sep 2 15:54:35 UTC 2006
  4. The Ramseys and "lynchings" and "lynch mobs"
    By JustinCase in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: June 20, 2004, 1:25 pm, Sun Jun 20 13:25:02 UTC 2004
  5. 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
  •