So I bought a copy of "Mind Hunter"

For the people who say John didn't know about the murder, how do you explain the fact that Patsy called 911? Wouldn't John have taken over at that point and called LE himself? If he really didn't know that his daughter was in the house, why would HE not have called, instead of having Patsy act her way through the phone call? For she was certainly acting, you can hear it clearly in her voice. IF she were acting for his benefit, wouldn't he still have taken over at that point since she would have been acting hysterical??

The elements just won't add up, no matter how we try and try to make them.

 

The way I see it, it wasn't adding up for John. When he saw Patsy on the landing he realized she hadn't been to bed so did a kidnapper really sneak in and kidnap JonBenet? Why did the ransom note look and sound like Patsy had written it? He was still trying to figure things out. How did Fleet White describe John that morning? Upset and confused? What was John so confused about?

Patsy's not going to hang around and get quizzed by him. She needed to get police and friends there fast to provide a buffer.

 

Assume that they were both involved in the staging, then why was it only John who changed clothes (and showered) that morning? If he was involved, then he realized that it was important to have a normal appearing morning because that's what he had.

He would've made sure that Patsy was without makeup and wearing different clothes from the day before. He would've made sure that she went to bed at least briefly and got up, that she brushed her teeth. Because that's what he did.

 

JR may have been the one who cleaned up the blood. Remember, the coroner had provided evidence that her thighs and pelvic area had been wiped of blood (her own). There was also some dark blue fiber evidence found in that same area that MAY have come from a dark blue terry robe belonging to JR (which was found in the den, of all places, not in the bedroom, bath or dressing room, where you'd expect to see it.) Possibly that is why JR showered and dressed in fresh clothes.

 

I think there was only a very tiny amount of blood, but it's true she had been wiped with something which shed dark fibers, probably the Israeli wool shirt John had been wearing on Christmas night.

The police checked the drains. One of the things they check for is blood. If there had been any of JonBenet's blood in the shower, I think John would have been arrested forthwith.

If there had been two brains working on her story that night, I think Patsy's wouldn't have been so out of kilter. She didn't look like she'd been to bed and if you go by one version of the times she gives, she was still fussing with JonBenet's red jumpsuit long after 6am. We know that's impossible.

 

There was a tiny amount of blood found INTERNALLY. We do not know how much blood there actually was on her pelvic area and thighs. We do know there was enough to warrant being wiped off what really is an extensive area. For her thighs to be bloody, there was enough blood to run down from her vagina onto her thighs. And to me, that means it wasn't a tiny amount.

 

Thomas says there was a smear of blood on her thigh and we know there were spots on her underwear. Isn't it possible that the smear was caused by wiping the paintbrush off on her thigh?

We don't really know why she was wiped down. Maybe it was to wipe off urine. Or it might just have been part of the staging.

I don't remember reading anything that says that the blood on her thighs was extensive, but my memory isn't the greatest. I wouldn't expect a deluge of blood, though. Her brain was hemorrhaging and her blood pressure was probably low.

 

No, I also doubt there was a deluge of blood. But there was enough to require wiping. I believe the urine release was post-mortem. We do know that she was lying prone, on her stomach, when she released her urine. The garrote knot was also tied at the nape of her neck. Yet she was found lying on her back. If she released the urine as she died, (maybe as she was strangled, already dying from the massive skull fracture), she was moved into the position she was found in (on her back in the wineceller) VERY soon after death, because her body showed only one livor mortis pattern. And by the time livor became fixed, LE as well as the Rs' friends and pastor, were there. She couldn't have been moved then. There was not an opportunity to move her body from some other place until JR "disappeared" around 10 am.
The problem with that is by that time, rigor mortis had begun, and if she'd been in a different position (like folded into the freezer) that position would have been frozen in place and apparent when she was brought up. For these 2 reasons (the single livor pattern and the straight-legged rigor position) I feel she was placed into the wineceller right after she died and remained there till she was "found". The only other factor is FW being unable to see her when he looked into the dark room that morning (unbeknownst to JR). But the reason for that may be that she WAS in the room, but maybe deeper into the room (which required someone looking into the doorway to step INSIDE the room to see all the way into it). Possibly JR did go to the wineceller during his 2-hour "disappearance" and simply move her up closer to the doorway.
She bled when she was alive. (the dead don't bleed). She may have been alive when she was wiped down. But I think the urine release happened at the moment of death, with primary flaccidity.

 

I don't really follow your argument. How do we know that she "required" wiping or that what required wiping was blood?

It seems more likely to me that John originally found JonBenet after he went into the cellar the first time and turned on the light, but maybe he could see her as soon as he opened the door. He might've had some idea what he was looking for. I don't know. I doubt that John moved her closer to the doorway. What would be the point of that?

 

The coroner checked her body with a black light (standard procedure to detect body fluids such as sperm, urine, blood) and found traces of what was originally thought to be sperm and later proved to be JB's blood. The coroner stated there was evidence that it had been wiped from her thighs with a dark cotton cloth.
It seems as if you think I just make this stuff up. FACT- blood was found to have been wiped from her pubic area and thighs with a cloth. This was stated in front of all who were present at the autopsy, including Det. Arndt.
This isn't new material. This has been discussed and known here for years. I know you are a recent member, so you obviously were not here then.
That's how I know what required wiping, as you put it, was blood. It was tested. For something to "require wiping" is has to be present in amounts that "require wiping".

 

I'm actually pretty familiar with what you're talking about in the first paragraph. Thomas describes it this way:

"Colorado Bureau of Investigation technicians gave us some bad news when they determined that the substance found on JonBenet's leg during the ultraviolet light examination at the autopsy, initially thought to be semen, was just a smear of blood."

So I guess you're right.

 

Right. Enough to have run down her thighs. Not a huge amount. There would have been blood elsewhere, especially on the surface she was lying on (or standing on, if she was conscious and standing when whatever caused the bleeding in the first place happened). Today's forensics teams would have checked for that (blood splatters, etc). Not then, and not THERE.

Off-topic in a way, but I was reading an article in Consumer Reports about infection rates in hospitals. States are required to make the information public, most do not, but Colorado does. Of the several Colorado hospitals listed, all but ONE had 0% infections. Guess which one had the infections? Boulder Community Hospital had 129 TIMES the average infection rate for in-hospital infections as the national average. Other Colorado hospital seem to comply with infection prevention procedures, but there in loosey-goosey Boulder, it is probably considered politically incorrect to ask medical professionals to wash their hands.

 

For those interested, this is a transcript of Malcolm Gladwell debating John Douglas on NPR:
http://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?storyId=16117564

And this is an article Gladwell wrote for The New Yorker:
http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2007/11/12/071112fa_fact_gladwell?printable=true

Gladwell doesn't think much of profiling--or of Douglas.

 

Thank you for posting this interesting information FB. Looks very interesting. Will read it later. Family visiting prevents extra time at my computer. I appreciate the extra mile you have walked here. I know it takes time to research and find good information relating to the JonBenét Ramsey Case.

 

You're giving me too much credit. I just happened across the profiling article in What the Dog Saw.