John and the notepad

Imagine the scene!

Can you imagine that scene, with all of them wearing those fine doctor type gloves?

 

Elle: Actually, wearing latex surgical gloves...

...<b>might</b> account for the birefringent found during the autopsy.

Somewhere I've got all this research about the types of powdered lubricant that is used to help slip on latex surgical gloves...and that powder can be (depending on the manufacturing and fabrication) dusted with materials that are birefringent.

I'd like a better description from the ME of exactly what he meant when he described "birefringent" materials found in the vaginal mucosa...and I'd like to know if the pad had any material on it consistant with that birefringent trace.

From the autopsy:<ol>Vaginal Mucosa: All of the sections contain vascular congestion and focal interstitial chronic inflammation. The samllest piece of tissur, from the 7:00 positionof 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.</ol>

A PDF copy of the autopsy can be found in the Evidence section of this forum's Ramsey case library.

 

Very observant

Dunvegan,

Good for you noticing this. I haven't read any reference to this lubricant until right this minute. A very good point. I would imagine these surgical gloves must have been worn during all this staging. They were sure covering their tracks.

I use these gloves myself, and they have this powdered lubricant for easier use. Can't understand why John Ramsey's prints are not on the ransom note when he moved them from the stairs to the floor. Quite a strange action. Actually lifting them up and then bending over and placing them on the floor to read them better. Who on earth spreads their letters on the floor for easier reading? This is absolutely ridiculous! I wonder why Ramsey wasn't questioned more about this action (?).

 

At the very least...

..that note should have had the Ram's prints.

Elle,

Which book did you get your info from? I am re-reading PMPT and on page 9 Schiller writes:

"When Detective Linda Arndt arrived at the Ramsey house at 8:10 A.M. with the fellow detective Fred Paterson, she found a crowd. Friends of the child's parents, Priscilla and Fleet White and Barbara and John Ferinie, were there, along with the family's minister, Reverend Roll Hoverstock. Patrol officers Rick French and Karl Veitech were also there with two victim advocates, Mary Lou Jedamus and Grace Morlock....<B>Arndt read the ransom note, which was written on white lined paper with a black felt-tipped pen. Then she ordered Officer Veitech to take it back to the police headquartes, show it to the FBI, and book it into Property.</B>

I have begun rereading the books since the details have become foggy over the years and I don't have the archives of J-7 or JW to draw from.

Schiller was wrong on a few details...I am trying to figure out which details are wrong and where the correct info is.

IF Schiller is right on this, then I would think several of the friends would have added their prints as the note was passed around, at least among those who weren't caring for Pats who was terribly upset.

Mels

 

Thank you, Mels

I thought I had remembered it that way.

 

birefringence and fingerprints

Having more info on the birefringent material would be nice, of course. Talc (or whatever) from gloves might be what was seen, but I don't think we have ever had any indication that such a substance was found. It is also possible that the birefringent material is the wood fragment that we know was found in her (cellulose is birefringent).

I don't have time to hunt for the news report explaining that a lack of fingerprints on the pad/note isn't terribly unusual, but there was one. Paper, it seems, is not the best surface for retaining fingerprints.

 

Mels, I believe Thomas says in his book that Arndt read the note at some point before she got to the Ram's house that morning. His account is that the note was taken out of the house by the officers that morning before Arndt got there, I believe.

 

Yes, fly...

...the birefringent material the ME mentioned in the autopsy could be anything...well, anything that is birefringent: powdered latex glove lubracant, cellulose...perhaps something else.

I would very much like to see further testimony regarding what exactly the ME saw and meant to describe when he wrote " birefringent".

 

MJenn,

This is an example of the discrepancies I am hoping to resolve. Schiller has one account, Thomas another. Can you tell me what page in Thomas's book this info comes from? I haven't started reading Thomas's book yet wanted to go back through PMPT first.

I wonder if Arndt is on record somewhere as to the wheres and whens of the Ransom Note that morning.

Mels

 

ransom note copy

Mels,
.
On [page 21 of Steve Thomas "JonBenét"]


The Reverend Rol Hoverstock, pastor of St. John's Episcopal Church, arrived as an officer left to take the ransom note to police headquarters. The minister was allowed into the home, adding to the crowd.


[page 22]

Detectives Patterson and Linda Arndt linked up at headquarters, where Arndt picked up a photocopy of the ransom note.

[page 23 - 24]

Detectives Arndt and Patterson arrived at the Ramsey house at 8:10 A.M. and Officer French gave them an updated briefing. Then, with detectives finally on the scene to handle the witnesses, French checked the garage and lower levels of the house, looking for places through which a kidnapper might have carried off the child. He found none. The house was messy, but he saw no sign of a struggle.

In the basement, he also came to the white door at the far end that was closed and secured at the top by the wooden block on a screw. French was looking for exit points from the house. and the door obviously was not one. No one could have gone through that door, clcosed it behind them and locked it on the opposite side by turning the wooden latch, so he did not open it.

When he went back upstairs, the patrolman noticed Patsy Ramsey watching him through parted fingers that covered her face. "Eyeballing" him, he would later recall.

Hope this helps you Mel ...typed word for word.

 

Thanks Elle,

Who's right, Schiller or Thomas? Do we know for sure? It's a small error, this one, but other issues aren't so easily dismissed.

It would seem at this late date, the misstatements would largely be corrected.

In one view Det. Arndt is in charge, giving orders, more or less calling the shots as she was directed to do...and yet according to Schiller, Arndt moves JB to the C'mas tree area after JR places her on the floor. This shows Arndt's flawed thinking at the scene.

If She walked into a setting that was already out of order, the ransom note something she had been briefed on rather than reading the original and making decisions about its aftercare, then we can almost understand her missteps.

A good while back there was a call by many posters to site a reference when making a statement so it could be determined what's what, truth from rumor, etc...I think that would be a good approach along with a Discrepancy Thread to detail the misstatements.

Think I'll start that and hope to gain some insight on the maximum amount of truth we can be reasonably certain of from all the posts, books, court cases, newsprint.

Mels

 

Police records

Mels,

Steve Thomas was writing his book from police reports which are usually pretty accurate ..written at the exact time the events were happening.

Keep in mind Lawrence Schiller was not a detective. Steve Thomas was.

As for Schiller. He was actually given Steve Thomas' reports by Alex Hunter, when he was writing PMPT. Thomas almost had a fit when he found this out. I will try and give you more information on this soon.

You're right about Arndt's flawed thinking. Even the ransom note was moved from the stairs to the floor by JR and then picked up by Officer French ...then placed on the stair again for photos to be taken. Unbelievable! A nightmare! All this evidence tampered with.

At CrimeNews2000 this is how we do it. We put page nos. and the title of the books urls for transcripts and news etc. Take a look there sometime. It's very important to give the source instead of reading postings that go all over the place with nothing to back them up.

 

Oh, so sorry....

I didn't mean to lower the standards of responsibility here. When I posted what Thomas had written in his book, I'd just finished posting for about two hours here and elsewhere. I was tired, and this happens to be the exact passage I posted here on another thread in the last couple of weeks, so I didn't take the time to repost all that again. I did say it was in Thomas' book. Just trying to help with a quick reference off the top of my head you could look up or someone else could help with if they had the time.

Would it be better to just ignore a question if I don't have time to do more? Right. That's what I'll do next time. Sure didn't mean to offend.

 

name not mentioned

Your name wasn't mentioned anywhere MJenn relating to this.
I'm replying to Mel's post:

A good while back there was a call by many posters to site a reference when making a statement so it could be determined what's what, truth from rumor, etc...I think that would be a good approach along with a Discrepancy Thread to detail the misstatements.

Think I'll start that and hope to gain some insight on the maximum amount of truth we can be reasonably certain of from all the posts, books, court cases, newsprint.