Forensic Evidence 2: Bedwetting

Discussion in 'Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum' started by koldkase, Dec 31, 2006.

  1. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member

    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

    I'm trying to edit to make this clearer, so bear with me. If anyone notices where I got the quote thingies all mixed up, let me know so I can change them. This is harder than it looks!
     
  2. Barbara

    Barbara FFJ Senior Member

    This paragraph stands out for me personally. I always thought that the staging and cover-up went unpunished not because of brilliant criminal minds, but as is stated above, a jumbled mess that was messed up even more the day of the "crime scene".

    I believe the Ramseys purposefully assured the house full of people that morning, along with John purposefully tampering with the body, Patsy purposefully throwing herself on JonBenet, purposefully adding confusion to the crime scene overall in any way they could.

    Add that to the lawyering up IMO, before the police call, and the powerful attorneys that wealth will assure them, and there you have it:

    Ten years of no resolution to the case
    Ten years of us still being here, hypothesizing
    Ten years of spin
    Ten years of freedom for John Ramsey
    Patsy's death with no jail time for her role in all of it
    and likely, John's death at whatever point in time with no jail time for his role in all of it
    Ten years of Fleet White and his family suffering from the RST's finger pointing at him
    Ten years of innocent people being thrown under the bus, careers ruined, lives ruined, etc.
    Ten years of listening to the Ramseys having NO hard feelings or hatred for the person responsible for murdering their little "spark plug" and ruining their lives. At the very least, with their own self love, you would think that they would at least be angry with the murderer for the position they were put in as being suspect in their own daughter's murder.

    Their lack of anger for their own reputations, if nothing else, seems to go against the character traits we have seen when others point the finger at them (ruined lives and careers); yet they have never expressed anger at what the foreign faction has put them through. Nope, it's all Christian forgiveness for the murderer, but not for those who suspect them

    That says so very much!
     
  3. heymom

    heymom Member

    Not only do John and Patsy have forgiveness to offer JonBenet's killer, but John feels sympathy for a man who professed to have raped his daughter, killed her, and then cut her private parts and drank the blood! This freak also wasted the DA's time and money dedicated to finding the "real" killer, but John Ramsey is not angry about that. Of course, any money spent in any direction away from him is money well spent.

    If that isn't unbelievable, I don't know what is.

    The only way the Ramsey's behavior since JonBenet's death makes any sense at all is if they are guilty. Then, suddenly, the puzzle pieces fit.
     
    Last edited: Dec 31, 2006
  4. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member

    I wanted to start a new thread with this. It has some of the most important information we have ever had on the actual autopsy results and the sequence of events in the murder.

    First, I want to thank rashomon for finding this article and posting it, as it is no longer on the news site where it was originally published.

    This article, to me, was one of the key revelations for the public about what was done to JonBenet. It is clear, it is expert opinion that actually makes sense by INTERPRETING THE EVIDENCE straight out, rather than being wishy washy for fear of crossing powerful people in Colorado.

    First, Dr. Wright has the credentials to know of what he speaks:

    Next, here is what this experienced and eminent forensic expert concluded from the autopsy:

    As to the head blow, he stated this important information:

    Next he makes clear how long before she died she had eaten the pineapple found in her intestines:

    And then the information about the emptying of the bladder, which rashomon pointed out:

    Oh, I forgot to put this part of Dr. Wright's analysis in, about the inconsistency of the vaginal injury with what he normally sees with sexual molestation by a pedophile:


    So, what we see from this expert is:

    1. JonBenet was hit in the head first, 20 to 60 min's. before she was strangled.

    2. JonBenet died from strangulation, not the head blow.

    3. JonBenet's bladder wasn't full when she was strangled.

    4. JonBenet was sexually assaulted in an unusual manner from that usually seen by pedophiles.

    I know many of us already have seen enough evidence and read enough of the expert opinions, etc., to have come to these conclusions, but it's always good to have a refresher after 10 years of RST BS.

    Now, on to the bedwetting issue and something I was thinking about.

    Patsy's jacket fibers tied in the knots of the garrote.

    John's sweater fibers found in the crotch area, which was wiped down.

    I know about arguments for fiber transference, etc., and that's reasonable enough to discuss, but for the sake of argument, let's just pretend this fiber evidence is clearly proof that Patsy and John were with the body to get these fibers on JonBenet, that they didn't get there by transference.

    Stay with me, I have a reason for this.

    If this premise is followed, then what would that show us about the acts of the murder and cover-up?

    Would this indicate that Patsy was the one who made the garrote on JonBenet? And John was the one wiping down her genital area?

    LE was told by Patsy in Atlanta in 2000 she put the size 12-14 Bloomies package of Days of the Week undies in JonBenet's bathroom for her to use and that JonBenet put them on herself at some point before she was murdered. But LE never saw the package nor the undies, other than the Wednesday pair found on JonBenet, until Wood turned them in to Lacy in 2002. Turns out the Ramsey investigators had the remaining undies/package all those years, allegedly found by them AFTER LE turned the house back over to the Ramseys after 10 days of collecting evidence--including ALL the undies in JB's drawer. (There are so many reasons that whole "found by the RST" premise is suspect, it's laughable to imagine anyone trying to pass that off as more than obstruction of justice, pure and simple.)

    Patsy's story is suspect because she claimed not to have noticed the too large pair on JonBenet when Patsy changed JonBenet's black velvet pants to the white longjohns while JonBenet lay sleeping in the bed after they returned from the Whites'. Yet JonBenet was found wearing the large Bloomies, which Jayelles' experiment demonstrates would not function on a living, moving child (see my avatar and signature for details). If they had been on JonBenet when Patsy pulled down the fitted velvet pants, while JonBenet was dead weight, asleep in bed, it stands to reason the undies, had they been on JonBenet, would have come down with the pants. If they had, Patsy surely wouldn't have put them back on, and surely not without noticing how huge they were, at least.

    So from there, logic says that either Patsy was lying about the Bloomies at some point in her story, or the killer put them on JonBenet. But either scenario doesn't explain why?

    One reason discussed has been that the killer needed "Wednesday" panties, as that was the last pair JonBenet had on, but in her own size. Another, that the killer just grabbed a pair and didn't notice how large they were because he wasn't thinking about them being too large if they were in her room. Yet a third theory is that the Bloomies package was in the basement, where some other presents that hadn't been wrapped were left, and that they were grabbed because they were conveniently close at hand. Etc.

    I am wondering, if John's sweater fibers were found in the genital area, where JonBenet was wiped down, does this mean that John was the one doing the wiping down? And Patsy did the garrote tying?

    Did one of them decide to put a fresh pair of undies on JonBenet at that point? Earlier? Why? And why the too large pair?

    And why would John and Patsy still be wearing their sweater and jacket while all this was going on? Or were they NOT wearing them, but their shirts underneath were covered in fibers shed while wearing them and then got on JonBenet? Remember, Patsy had a sweater lying on JonBenet's bed, identified by John. I always thought that was a bit off.

    Do we know if John had already gone to bed, and Patsy hadn't, if the bed had only had one person sleep in it, as the police officer noticed? How do we know that wasn't from the night before, never made up? Maybe Patsy slept in another bed in the home Christmas Eve. We only have the Ramseys' word for any of this.

    And did LE EVER find the black velvet pants JonBenet wore that night to the Whites'? Did they find the Wednesday size 6 Bloomies that belonged to JonBenet? Or did those disappear, along with the 12-14 Bloomies...until the RST decided to turn them over to Lacy?

    Questions, questions, never any answers....
     
    Last edited: Jan 1, 2007
  5. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member

    I think John Ramsey has relaxed to the point of giving himself away in the last interviews he has allowed.

    In Hawaii, he stated THEY WEREN'T READY for the killer to be caught.

    On LKL, he looked so happy he fairly glowed, without Patsy around to make him nervous with all her chattering. And then he stated to a caller he was fine with the killer never being caught. He stuck with the "sparkplug" image of JonBenet when asked if he thought about what JonBenet would be like today, stating she would be "a hand-full." Not a clear compliment, by any means. I detected a bit of resentment, IMO.

    John rained compliments down on Patsy, however, about how she always just GOT ON WITH IT, in the midst of adversity. He was relating her cancer struggle, but it rang true with the murder of JonBenet, as well. He admitted that Patsy was STRONGER than he.

    But most telling, and I think this has been true from the moment Hunter announced NO INDICTMENTS and has become more obvious through the years, John knows he can say pretty much anything he wants now, because there will never BE an indictment with his name on it, and there will never be a trial of anyone else, either, even if Lacy is too incomptent as a lawyer to figure that out except one innocent bus victim at a time. So John isn't worried and says whatever he wants. Nobody but US is going to scrutinize what he says, does, nothing. He's free and clear de facto, and he knows it. This is one happy man.

    They got away with murder.
     
    Last edited: Jan 1, 2007
  6. heymom

    heymom Member

    Thank you for starting this new thread, KK. Forensic evidence thread was getting very unwieldy.

    Yep, they did get away with murder, and unless John spouts a confession, he isn't going to see the inside of a jail cell. :curses:
     
  7. Cranberry

    Cranberry Member

    Black velvet pants

    Great post KK, re black vevlet pants: The 2nd search warrant 12/27/96 had Black tights (62)
    Black red green Christmas sweater (63)
    Black & gray girls pants (64)
    Black velvet vest (65)
    Black shirt (66)
    Black trousers (67)

    I don't think there's enough info to know for sure.

    Thank you ACandyRose.
     
  8. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member

    That's interesting, Cranberry. Could it be the "black trousers"? Det. Haney asked Patsy about a pair of pants with dirty underwear still in them on the floor of JB's room. He had a crime scene photo he showed to Patsy for identification of those. Surprise! She knew NOTHING about them. Didn't remember. D'oh!

    But now that I'm recalling this line of questioning in the '98 interview with Patsy, I think Haney asked her if those pants in the floor were ones JonBenet had won to play in that afternoon. Since Patsy said that JonBenet changed clothes to go to the Whites--remember the argument about what JonBenet was going to wear, it would seem those pants Haney asked about in the floor were NOT the black velvet pants worn to the Whites' party.

    Like you said, guess we won't know unless someone who does finally gives it up. Since the people who seem to have the inside info are always the RST, thanks to Hunter, Smit, Tracey, and Lacy, we don't know. They won't tell, and it's a short jump to why: if they don't spill it, it doesn't CLEAR the Ramseys or it looks bad for them, IMO.
     
  9. Elle

    Elle Member

    You sure have started off the New Year with a BANG KK. Thank you for taking the time to put this all together, and thanks to rashomon again, for coming across this interesting article on forensic evidence by Dr. Ronald Wright, Forensic Pathologist.

    What makes me angry is going over all of the above, and yet Alex Hunter had the audacity to guide the jury "not to indict" the Ramseys (?). Just doesn't make sense, does it?
     
  10. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member

    It makes sense to Hunter, a man walking a tightrope between pretending to do his job, in a media firestorm of publicity about how he wasn't, and in reality working to make sure he never had to face the Ramseys in a trial.
     
  11. tylin

    tylin Banned

    Thanks to Rashomom and KK for the info on this thread.
    There must be a ton of info I've overlooked or forgotten over the years :blush: because for the life of me...I don't ever remember hearing/reading this:
    20-60 minutes between the skull fracture and the strangulation? That's a longggggggg time. Time needed to set up the staging of the crimescene.
     
  12. Texan

    Texan FFJ Senior Member

    a little logic

    A little logic is all it takes to realize that no intruder is going to give a terrific whack to a poor little girl's head and then spend at least another twenty minutes staging. They would get the heck out of dodge just in case someone heard that whack. Anyway, a pedophile, a kidnapper, or a terrorist has no need to stage a crime like this. Only a family member would need to, or take the time to. It's really quite simple. But then I guess I'm preachin' to the choir here. :D
     
  13. Kangatruth

    Kangatruth Member

    what possibility is there...that the vaginal penetration is also part of some seriously whacko thinking camouflage of the scene ??..all par tof the cover up..?

    my mind is bent just thinking this through...but we arent dealing with 'people' just monsters !!
     
  14. heymom

    heymom Member

    My question is, what the he11 were you doing up at 4 a.m., Texan!!

    Of course there is no logic applied to the case, because it would have meant arrests and trials, and Boulder couldn't handle that. Even now, we can only hear that the police were biased and that John and Patsy were victimized by the press, when the reality is that in the circumstances JonBenet was found in, the parents are almost always responsible. They are the ones who should have been investigaged BEFORE anyone else, and longer than anyone else. But the spotlight shone away from them immediately, thanks to the lawyers who I believe were called before anyone else that night. And that is why we could never see the phone records.

    Anyway, nothing new. Happy New Year!
     
  15. heymom

    heymom Member

    The vaginal trauma was partly done that night, but also there was older vaginal damage. JonBenet had been molested prior to that night, and I believe that was the reason that no ambulance was called in the first place. I think the original blow on the head was either an accident or done in rage, impulsively, then a panic, calls to lawyers, staging, and 911 call. But the molestation had to be explained somehow, and was most of the reason for the staging.
     
  16. Kangatruth

    Kangatruth Member

    ta..thats right...rememebr that now...thanks for clearing that ..cheers
     
  17. BluesStrat

    BluesStrat BANNED !!!!!

    If it wasn't for the molestation, 911 would have been called, and an accident reported. The only other possible reason for not calling 911 would have been strangle marks on her neck - but the open dictionary tells us it was the molestation.
     
  18. sboyd

    sboyd Member

    Open Dictionary

    undefined

    Can you tell me more about the open dictionary and why you think it points to them. Why would either of them open a dictionary up to the reference "incest'. Just need some clarification on this one. Anyone? Thanks.
     
  19. heymom

    heymom Member

    Some of us have different theories on the dictionary. I believe that one of the people in that house wanted to leave a clue for whoever came after...and was afraid to bring up the subject. I don't know if it was Patsy or maybe Burke. I think there was a lot of fear in that disclosure. I have even wondered if someone who came to the house that morning tried to leave a clue, like the Whites. Maybe they suspected something and didn't want to speak it, hoped the police would pick up the clue.

    The BDI people think that Patsy or John looked the term up, perhaps to try to understand whether and how Burke was legally culpable. Your guess is as good as anyone's.
     
  20. Elle

    Elle Member

    This is what many of us thought happened, Kanga. I believe, if I remember correctly, part of the reason for the Grand Jury not indicting was because they couldn't believe parents could do something like this to their own child, but FBI Ron Walker said he had seen it all, and much worse, just what parents could do to their own children. Of course, Alex Hunter guided the Grand Jury into the "Not enough evidence slot." Idiot!

    The Ramseys were banking on the public arriving at this conclusion, that they could never have gone to these lengths of staging with their own little girl.
    Wrong. They could, to save their own skins, and with the RST's help, they did.
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice