Page 12 of 16 FirstFirst ... 28910111213141516 LastLast
Results 133 to 144 of 191
  1. #133

    Default

    "Not to mention, the DNA reports from the many crocs states clearly IF THERE WAS ONLY ONE DONOR, the Rams are excluded...."

    Not just that. DNA can NOT exclude suspects except in rape cases, and EVEN THEN, if there's only one rapist and the victim is not sexually active (I hope Nifong's reading this). JB was NOT raped, in the typical sense. In all other cases, DNA can only include suspects, not exclude them. That's what everyone forgets.

  2. #134
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Candyland
    Posts
    5,132

    Default More inconsistencies

    BORG Rainsong has finally decided that the model experiment is meaningless. Not only does she think that it's meaningless because my Tootsie - who is the same weight and height as JonBenet was when she died - isn't actually JonBenet and there COULD be some size differences which would make all the difference .... BORG Rainsong is now also claiming that we don't know for sure that the knickers Jonbenet was wearing were actually size 12.... She doesn't accept the word of the investigators - because they "lied" about other things.

    Hey folks - this tells me that BORG Rainsong, for one, is secretly SHOCKED about the knickers. She cannot believe that JonBenet would wear such oversized knickers OR that Patsy would put her in them - therefore .... it must be a mistake! It must have been smaller knickers - size 8 or 10 perhaps?

    Let's think about this. Bloomies come in three sizes - Small (4/6), Medium (8/10) and Large (12/14). The reports (which no-one has ever disputed UNTIL NOW!) have said she was found in size 12 - which is large. Patsy bought the knickers for her niece - whom she claimed in the Atlanta interviews was 12 when she bought them. OK - bear with me.

    Patsy was also asked in those interviews what size she normally bought for JonBenet and she said "size 8-10".

    Are we to believe that Patsy bought size 8-10 for her 12 year old niece ... and size 8-10 for 6 year old Jonbenet?

    Are we?

    (Close your mouth BORG Rainsong - we are not a codfish...)
    This is my opinion and it may not be copied in whole or in part without my written permission

  3. #135
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Hornetsville, NY
    Posts
    8,871

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by The Punisher
    "Not to mention, the DNA reports from the many crocs states clearly IF THERE WAS ONLY ONE DONOR, the Rams are excluded...."

    Not just that. DNA can NOT exclude suspects except in rape cases, and EVEN THEN, if there's only one rapist and the victim is not sexually active (I hope Nifong's reading this). JB was NOT raped, in the typical sense. In all other cases, DNA can only include suspects, not exclude them. That's what everyone forgets.
    Correct, Punisher. There are too many variables regarding DNA, such as the origiin of the DNA, when it was deposited, the quality of the DNA, placing the owner of the DNA at the crime scene at the critical time, connecting the DNA to the crime...

    In this case, no one can even connect the DNA to the crime. Just because there is degraded DNA in the underwear doesn't mean the owner of it had anything to do with JB's murder. A good suspect in this case would be one who could be placed at the crime scene at the time of JB's estimated death and who had left other physical evidence of being there - evidence such as fingerprints, fibers, hairs, footprints (no, not the HiTech logo that also can't be dated), blood, saliva... Once that suspect were found, then the DNA might or might not further bolster the case against him/her.

    Also, as Punisher says, just because a perp's DNA is not found does not mean s/he isn't the killer.
    Keep me away from the wisdom which does not cry,
    the philosophy which does not laugh,
    and the greatness which does not bow before children.

    ---Kahlil Gibran---

  4. #136
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    The Lone Star State
    Posts
    827

    Default oh

    Let's think about this. Bloomies come in three sizes - Small (4/6), Medium (8/10) and Large (12/14). The reports (which no-one has ever disputed UNTIL NOW!) have said she was found in size 12 - which is large. Patsy bought the knickers for her niece - whom she claimed in the Atlanta interviews was 12 when she bought them. OK - bear with me.

    Patsy was also asked in those interviews what size she normally bought for JonBenet and she said "size 8-10".

    Are we to believe that Patsy bought size 8-10 for her 12 year old niece ... and size 8-10 for 6 year old Jonbenet?


    So Patsy bought JB size 8-10 panties but she had a drawer full of size 6. Patsy didn't even try to lie in a believable manner. Probably she was so tired of trying to keep track of her lies and because some people were willing to buy into whatever lies she spewed forth that she simply stopped trying to make her lies sound logical.
    Last edited by Texan; August 11, 2006, 7:50 am at Fri Aug 11 7:50:17 UTC 2006. Reason: number clarification

  5. #137

    Default

    Thanks for the very good pictures and modeling of the Bloomies.

    I have some experience that might help here.
    I have a disabled daughter who was 10 when JB was killed. My daughter wore pull-ups because she was incontinent. Since she wore them during the day, we did put panties (knickers, I guess to the British) over the top of the pull ups under her trousers. I don't remember what the largest available size of pull-ups was, but my daughter was larger than the weight on the package, but could wear that size because she is fairly slim. The large size panties in the photos are way too big to fit over pullups for a child who would fit in the smaller panties.
    We actually used the same size panties as would fit our daughter without the pull-ups to put over her pull-up. The panties stretched and fit snugly, but were not uncomfortable. The pull-ups, even back 10 years ago were not very thick - maybe a 1/2 inch thick at the most when wet. So, you are talking about the same size or maybe one size larger panties than would normally be worn by someone that size.
    Current Goodnights (pull-ups in larger sizes for people up to 125 pounds) are less than 1/8 inch thick.

  6. #138

    Default

    Thank you for sharing this information with us, sue. I think we can all agree that these 12/14 Bloomies are in no way explained by anything we can rationally imagine.

    I just wish the press would get hold of this during this media mess going on right now. Maybe they'd be willing to ask why Karr would hunt down one pair of undies that were obviously too large and redress the child in them.

    And why Patsy would lie about it, 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.

  7. #139

    Question

    This is very interesting.

    I have a question, and i hope someone can answer it.

    Was PR ever asked about the bloomies when she took the lie detector test? And what kind of medication was she on when she took it?? (if any?)

    IT would be very interesting to know if PR had her own 'day' of the week bloomies....

  8. #140

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by adair
    This is very interesting.

    I have a question, and i hope someone can answer it.

    Was PR ever asked about the bloomies when she took the lie detector test? And what kind of medication was she on when she took it?? (if any?)

    IT would be very interesting to know if PR had her own 'day' of the week bloomies....
    As far as the polygraph tests we KNOW about, no, Patsy was not asked about anything in detail. The tests are very strange, if you read how they are carried out and what is asked. But this does seem to be how they are carried out in general. Would the FBI have done it differently? We'll never know.

    Adair, here is a link to a press conference the Ramseys held after their second self-sponsored polygrapher, ED Gelb, completed tests with them that they passed. If you go about 1/4 way down the scroll bar, you'll get to the part of the conference where Gelb speaks and tells exactly what he asked them, each, and the results.

    http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIP.../24/se.02.html

    However, we don't know what their first polygrapher asked them. Or how many times. What Wood told us, as you can see, is that those tests were "inconclusive." The guy who gave those, alas, was unvailable for this press conference.

    "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. #141

    Default

    And KoldKase, there was a polygrapher before those 2. He gave the Ramseys a list of his requirements for them to sign or something. One item on the list was that the Ramseys take drug tests before the polygraph. They refused the drug test and were told to move on.

    Asking what drugs they were on is a very fair question. I'm afraid it's one that will probably never be answered.
    JMO
    Cheb

  10. #142
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Candyland
    Posts
    5,132

    Default KoldKase

    It should be noted that at the time of discovery Jon Benet Ramsey at the lower level of her residence, she was in fact attired in light colored pajamas and oversized underwear designed for a twelve to fourteen year old female. The underwear bore the day name of "Wednesday".
    So now we have it from an official source that the Bloomies she wore were size 12-14 as illustrated in the model experiment?

    Many thanks for that. After I did the experiment and posted about it, Rainsong from over yonder pointed out that the only source we had for the large Bloomies being size 12 was a tabloid report. Rainsong reckoned they might actually have been size 8-10. It had been my intention to have a friend obtain a packet of size 8-10 Bloomies when she travels to new York in a couple of weeks in order to repeat the experiment, but there's no need for that now.

    Source for Bloomies being size 12-14 is page 62 of the Boulder Affadavit for the arrest of John Mark Karr. The Bloomie images are therefore fairly accurate.
    This is my opinion and it may not be copied in whole or in part without my written permission

  11. #143

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Jayelles
    So now we have it from an official source that the Bloomies she wore were size 12-14 as illustrated in the model experiment?

    Many thanks for that. After I did the experiment and posted about it, Rainsong from over yonder pointed out that the only source we had for the large Bloomies being size 12 was a tabloid report. Rainsong reckoned they might actually have been size 8-10. It had been my intention to have a friend obtain a packet of size 8-10 Bloomies when she travels to new York in a couple of weeks in order to repeat the experiment, but there's no need for that now.

    Source for Bloomies being size 12-14 is page 62 of the Boulder Affadavit for the arrest of John Mark Karr. The Bloomie images are therefore fairly accurate.
    Jayelles, on this very thread, I have quoted about half a dozen times the following, from a transcript of the 2000 Atlanta interviews:

    http://www.jonbenetindexguide.com/20...w-Complete.htm

    (This transcript is transcribed by a qualified court reporter, released by Lin Wood, I believe, and located now at ACandyRose's website.)

    In the Atlanta interviews in 2000 the following Boulder LE questioned Patsy Ramsey for some time about these Bloomies:

    10 On behalf of The United States:

    11 MICHAEL KANE, Esq.

    12 BRUCE LEVIN, Esq.

    13 MITCH MORRISSEY, Esq.

    14 MARK R. BECKNER

    15 TOM WICKMAN

    16 TOM TRUJILLO

    17 JANE HARMER
    THESE DA LAWYERS AND MEMBERS OFTHE BPD said several times that the Bloomies found on JonBenet were size 12/14.

    So that's TWO sources.

    They also said the 15 pair of undies found in JonBenet's underwear drawer were size 4/6.

    Rainsong doesn't know the facts about this case. She only knows what John Douglas tells her. He only knows what the RST told him. And for $30K he duly came to the conclusion the prime suspects for whom he worked are innocent.

    After telling the press that the Ramseys are innocent and trying to interject himself into the BPD investigation on the Ramseys' behalf and being rebuked, Douglas began dissing the BPD because they just wouldn't listen to him. Finally realizing that being on the Ramsey payroll might appear to compromise his opinion, Douglas tried giving the money back later to the Ramseys as if somehow that would retroactively make him MORE credible. That didn't erase that he did work for them when he put his reputation on the line by saying they are innocent, based on a couple of hours worth of an interview with John Ramsey. It's not rocket science to figure out Douglas is NOT going to go back then and say, oh, gee, I gave the money back...and now I can say I WAS WRONG--Ramseys, guilty!

    These people. How gullible and starstruck do you have to be to not see the logical fallacies in Douglas' own argument? It just disappoints immensely because so many of us actually respected Douglas for years. Now he can't even admit what is obvious to anyone with a working brain?

    I hope Douglas and Rainsong are living happily ever after. A murdered child is not.

    "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.

  12. #144
    Join Date
    Nov 2003
    Location
    Candyland
    Posts
    5,132

    Default

    And so we see the RST attempting once again to put spin on the size 12-14 Bloomies as though they were just a myth.

    OEJ reckons they were probably more like a size 10-12. Rainsong echoes her previous claims that there is no official source for them being size 12-14.

    YES THERE IS - page 62 of Karr's arrest warrant. We've been saying it for years and it has been repeatedly dismissed as "BORG" misinformation but we have it for the record now. No misinformation. Just pure fact.

    The bottom line is that the huge Bloomies are yet another bugaboo and the RST simply cannot accept the FACT that JonBenet was wearing massive, uncomfortable knickers which would have been hanging down almost at her knees. I am firmly of the belief that there is not a bat's chance in H*ell that Patsy would have allowed her to go out in them OR that JonBenet would have wanted to wear them. More and more, I believe they must have been placed on her after she died. The problem is that Patsy acknowledged that she knew about them - that JonBenet had opened the package and they had decided "just to use them".

    Here's another bugaboo. JonBenet couldn't read scripted handwriting and the labels on her presents had to be read to her. Well my Tootsie who is 6 is the same. She can read book print but she requires assistance in reading the Bloomies waistbands. I believe that JonBenet may also have struggled in reading the Bloomies waistbands and that someone would have had to help her.

    The RST tried to dismiss the outsized knickers as not being too bad - that maybe they were very slightly big for her - until the photographic evidence was produced showing just how massive they are compared to the size 4-6 which was the correct size for Jonbenet's height and build. The photos show just how ridiculous it was for Patsy to have condoned them or for Jonbenet to have accepted them. At first the RST ignored the experiment - a thread about them was deleted. Then jameson started another thread - to spindoctor and minimise the importance of this particular fact. Then they decided that the size must be wrong - that the "BORG" was lying about the size. Thanks to Karr, we had our claims confirmed but yet again, they've decided to forget the whole thing and ignore the facts.

    Why would any serious sleuth want to ignore evidence? Unlike the Hi-Tec bootprint and packing peanut, the Bloomies ARE real evidence because they can be dated - the victim was wearing them when her body was found (we don't know if she was wearing them when she died though).

    The facts about the Bloomies are as follows:-

    1) They are novelty knickers sold only by Bloomingdales in New York. They are a souvenir item and the store has them displayed around the department and at the tills etc.
    2) They do NOT come in different styles (i.e. high cut legs etc) - there is just one style - the plain full brief.
    3) They come in small, medium and large sizes - 4-6, 8-10 and 12-14.
    4) They are generously cut, the 4-6 fits my almost 7 year old comfortably now. The size 12-14 are more my size.
    5) The size 12-14 would have hung on Jonbenet's hips with the crotch reaching down to her knees.
    6) The leg holes of the 12-14 are so massive that if the garment twisted , her entire backside and frontside would have been fully exposed.
    7) They would have been most uncomfortable to wear and I cannot believe that any intelligent 6 year old would have contemplated wearing them.
    8) They look so ridiculous that I cannot imagine any self-respecting mother ALLOWING her child to wear them.

    So how did JonBenet Ramsey end up wearing them in death? Who put them on her? Why was Justice Seeker to nervous about even asking about the oversized knickers ?.... And why are the RST so desperate to minimise the above?

    I'm curious. Actually, I have been for a very long time but am
    a bit nervous about making an inquiry
    concerning
    Patsy and whether she noticed that JonBenet was
    wearing the oversized,.....
    http://www.webbsleuths.org/dcforum/D...ID61/2379.html
    Last edited by Jayelles; October 28, 2006, 6:17 am at Sat Oct 28 6:17:34 UTC 2006.
    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
  •