Tape? What tape?

I know what you mean, rashoman, but I'm just so cynical at this point when it comes to Boulder LE and this case, I firmly believe if they had found the Ramseys' DNA on that cord, we'd never hear word one, because it will never be tried and they don't want us to know the truth.

As for Thomas, he really didn't reveal much that we didn't already know, as far as all the accusations lobbed at him for "leaking" case info. What he did reveal was really whistleblower stuff about the corruption in Boulder that rendered the case "unsolvable." He still knows a lot of evidence he's never spoken about, of course. The recent CSILiar scam at topix highlighted even the simplest of questions we don't know the answers to which could be very important evidence.

I have never seen it said that LE did match the black duct tape with anything in the home, either. But then again, other than the passage I posted from the '98 interview, I have never seen any explanation for that "tape" in that drawer questioning. Team Ramsey doesn't wonder about that, do they?

 

Moab-

This might not be the place to discuss it but I think you will love your Nook so much. I debated also which to get but I think any of them are awesome and I'm so happy with what I have. Like zoomama, I have tons of books and hope to get them all on my kindle one of these days. Only one problem - I bought 3 books this week. I'm gonna seriously blow my budget. Will work for books!

 

Two photos of the duct tape combined for reference.

 

Very interesting pick up, kk. It sure looks as if Haney nailed her in a lie although Patsy was able to cover herself somewhat by blaming the black tape (in the drawer) on John. But what's the chance that Patsy didn't know there was black tape in that drawer? If she was telling the truth that she only bought clear tape and not duct tape, wouldn't she still have said something like: "No, I never buy duct tape, only clear tape, but John uses it once in a while."

 

I agree. It doesn't make any sense that Haney and DeMuth would pull that photo out and show it to Patsy on the last day of her interview, then question her about TAPE in the drawer if it wasn't either duct tape or black duct tape. What OTHER tape is relevent to this case?

Both Patsy AND John denied having any duct tape in the home. But what kind of tape is on those boxes in the NE book photo? It looks opaque and it looks like duct tape, albeit not black duct tape.

So why would the Ramseys be lying about duct tape? As Haney SAID to Patsy earlier, most homes in America have duct tape in them. What's the harm of admitting to LE THEY also had duct tape?

It just doesn't make sense if the Ramseys were innocent. Every single piece of evidence related to the crime, the Ramseys took extra pain to deny or obscure the truth about: the Maglite--can't tell if it's theirs, though it looks the same; duct tape--nope, it's too gooey; plain cord--nevah; Barbie nightgown--no idea; paintbrush from Patsy's paint tray--what paintbrush? Blanket--where'd that come from? Pineapple in a bowl--we don't got no stinking pineapple! Etc.

So if that tape in the drawer was important enough to ask Patsy about it, it must have been related to something in the case: either it was black duct tape that matched that on JB's mouth, or it was black duct tape that didn't match that on JB's mouth, or it was just duct tape, not black and not matching that on JB's mouth...right? It seems those are the only logical possibilities to me.

 

http://www.jonbenetindexguide.com/1997BPD-John-Interview-Complete.htm

JR: She was laying on the blanket, and the blanket was kind of folded around her legs. And her arms were tied behind her head, and there was some pieces of black tape (inaudible) on her legs, and her head was cocked to the side.




Can someone pls tell me what he's talking about?What tape on her legs?Or is it just a typo?TIA!(Maybe he said black tape on her mouth and something else on her legs?What?)

 

All I can figure is that the "(inaudible)" must contain some reference to something else about her legs, OR there is something else we don't know.

 

There was NO tape on her legs. That is just JR's babble. If there had been, there would be evidence of the sticky residue on her longjohns or skin, there would also be a much larger piece of tape that would have been taken into evidence and noted as such or left behind in the basement, where it would have been found along with the small piece that was on her mouth.
I think we can be certain her legs were not bound in any way.
FW was right behind JR going into the wineceller. He would have seen whatever JR claimed he had done. No one but JR ever said anything about her legs being bound with anything.
We do not have autopsy photos of her legs, but her body was in full rigor when she was brought up, and would have remained tight together even if the binding was removed. Det. Arndt made no mention of her legs seeming to have been bound.
This was simply more unfounded blather by JR to make it seem even more like a kidnapping.

 

Did she have any socks or slippers on when she was found?

This would be interesting to know.
If she was found barefoot then the "friendly intruder/Jb waited for him or even opened the door for him" theory goes down the toilet instantly.So goes the "she went to the kitchen by herself for some pineapple".imo
I really would like to know the answer.

 

DeeDee, my thinking is that maybe JR said something about the blanket on her legs, or the longjohns, or the gown...?

He could have even said, "I felt she was cold on her legs." Really, the possibilities are many.

We know she had no tape on her legs. The problem with the transcripts is sometimes, during critical answers, we have no idea what the Ramseys said--"inaudible." Very frustrating.

 

Yes, she was barefoot. Seems like I remember the bottom of her feet were dirty. I'm thinking I remember Smit talkiing about this, but I wouldn't swear to it. I often can't remember the references off the top of my head anymore. Time and memory makes it harder and harder to quote sources.

 

I think it was an error in the transcript and should have read "lips", not legs.

 

She was barefoot, and I have always wished the coroner would have tested the soles of her feet to see if there was any of the mold on the wineceller floor (where there was said to have been found a small child's bare footprint).

I simply cannot believe a coroner would fail to do that in a MURDER investigation where the child was found in a basement and a footprint was also found. Whether JB was ever standing up in that room plays a BIG part in this crime. It indicates, among other things, that she was probably bashed and strangled right there in the basement, that most or all of the criminal activity took place there, and that she was not carried unconscious or dead down the stairs.

 

I still think there are things we don't know and I've always believed we as the public never gained access to everything Dr. Meyer documented, even and possibly including the FULL autopsy report. Steve Thomas knows what's what and he is sticking to his hypothesis. Even though what is public knowledge is enough to figure out who the guilty party is, IMO I'm sure there is still more info unreleased to the public that ST already knows about. As a former police officer I'm sure he would not publish all the facts and evidence he knows to the public. And as for evidence that has come about since he left, well I have no doubt he still has some very good friends working there....and they talk.

Oh and Merry Christmas everybody!

 

I totally agree.
There are so many little details like these that we don't know and were missed by LE&co which would have helped solving the puzzle.....

 

very interesting that Smit himself mentions this........because imo this obviously means she wasn't stun gunned in her bed like he so loves to claim.