We have to discuss this

KK, do you mean this squared off section at the top right hand corner?

 

Koldkase,

It took me several tries but I found it too. And yes, it looks like it could be the cord from the lamp that is partially in view. Sometimes lamps have a clear cord so as not to detract from the furnishings. That is why it so hard to see. And like River Rat I too, hate to look at those golf clubs!

 

KK wrote:

The cord on the left is gold trimming.

The cord on the right is a light colour and almost looks like it still has the wrapping in the centre (?). I wish I could enlarge it better KK, but it goes blurry.

Which area are you seeing this long white cord? Left or right?

P.S. By any chance, KK, could you be talking about the long white strip above the actual cellar door? THis I can see and thought it might by some type of cable wire; the type we use for TV sets etc.

 

Okay, here's the tally: cord from lamp; cord from printer/computer/whatev; cord similar to garrote cord...?

I have no idea. But I just noticed there is GOLF BAG NUMBER 2, lying behind that counter, partially hidden with "Ramsey" printed on it in gold.

I don't believe for one minute that the paint brush tip, duct tape, and any remainder of cord, if there was any, couldn't have been hidden by the perp and missed by LE in that mess. I also suspect that JB's correct size Bloomies, soiled or bloody, were also spirited away in hiding.

I mean we KNOW that the Ramseys managed to get the size 12-14 Bloomies out of the house easily enough, either by hiding them in their other possessions or by LE just missing them for some unknown reason. We know that because Wood turned them over to Lacy some five years later, with a suspect story about how the Ramseys had them in their packing and they were found eventually, probably by the Ramsey investigator from Atlanta named Gene something or other, who found the "Santa Bear" in the Ramsey boxes they'd never unpacked. That was the "mysterious Santa Bear" the RST had made such a big deal out of being brought in by the INTRUDER. Knowing their import to the investigation, the Ramseys still held on to that CASE EVIDENCE until something happened and they felt compelled to turn it over--to RST alumnus Mary Lacy, of course.

Oh well. back to the other pics I'm looking at again. It's the pics Smit discussed with JR, taken from JR's camera, of the hallway where Patsy's writing tablet can be seen. JR changed his story about those snapshots, and there are supposed to be two with the pad not in one, but I can only find one online. Still looking.

 

Oh good grief, I would think that sister Pam took care of this lot wearing her police jacket KK What a fiasco that was. Assisted by the Boulder Police, she sure went to town on what came out of the Ramsey home, and according to Steve Thomas, several trips were made through the house.

Pam spent several hours going through the crime scene hauling boxes and suitcases and packing them into the police car. Unbelievable!

Paper Back - PAGE 56- 57 -58 STEVE THOMAS "Jonbenét'

 

Yes, Elle, Aunt Pam went a long way toward spreading misinformation for years on TV, and her little scortched earth raid of the home within days of the murder could easily have included something containing the "missing" items.

The "jute" hanging on the wall on the right you boxed in is another example of the Ramsey lies: Patsy said no, she hadn't seen anything LIKE the "rope" found in JAR's room. Yet we know there are a number of items in the home made of various types of jute/rope, not to mention a lariat-type noose seen in a pic of the decorations she designed in her own home with other school children and their parents for the "Roundup" festival.

But I agree that the "obscured cord" in the lower left of the pic I posted is too wide/large to be the same cord found on JonBenet's neck. If it is a lamp cord, it's definitely not related. I didn't notice the lampshade as connected, though, so it occurred to me that it could be a similar cord, and we've seen a picture of a clear plastic box in the basement with other types of "cords" tied neatly in it, probably for wrapping or crafts. So I thought I'd bring it here for input, and as usual, the sharp eyes here have good ideas about it.

 

It's good you have the patience to delve into this KK. This is one of the things I'm hoping will happen, that someone will spot something that was missed, but the sad thing about this is, how many missing clues are amongst the items Pam Paugh removed from the crime scene, where she had no right to be, with the consent of Boulder Law Enforcement wearing a police jacket (?).

Where in any other crime is there a story like this?

 

Yes, it is sad. And to me, the saddest was the removal of the bag of evidence... oops, I meant golf bag.

 

Hi all - question for Koldkase ?

KK:

"Some time ago, we determined that JonBenet had in fact had her hands bagged by LE before she was removed from the house. We found a picture of her still in the home, with the bags in view. I went back and it's in the autopsy report, as well. So that is THE explanation for the paper bag fibers in the body bag, of course. But how to explain those in the bed?"


This is from the first post in this thread..

Hi all (my first post here.. I've been on Topix)

KK, this 'we found a picture of her still in the home, with the bags in view.' -
I don't think I've ever seen that picture? Can you shed some more light on it?

Thanks..

 

Hey, WVSleuth, and welcome to the forum.

Two technical things first: you can "quote" the post to which you are referring by hitting "QUOTE" at the bottom of that post. That way, it's easier to tell which poster said what. Less confusing. Second--and I mention this in case you want to privately contact a poster--we have a feature here for private messages, which you can send to posters by clicking on their hats and finding "send a private message" or something like that in the drop box. Then the poster can respond once they come to the forum and find the private message in their "box".

About the "paper bags" on the hands: the picture is on the internet in various places, copied from various Lou Smit TV appearances where he "shared" crime scene pics he chose, some edited, some not. It's hard to see the bag on the hand in the one picture we have, but once you see it, you realize two things: the hands were not high above the head, but in fact were in "front" of the face almost, like a "sleeping" position of a child. We all got misled by the "drawing" in the tabs and on a TV movie, I believe.

Okay, the photo with the hands bagged is here, fourth row down on the left. The paper bag can be seen in the upper right corner.

WARNING!! GRAPHIC AUTOPSY PHOTOS!!

http://crimeshots.com/CrimeScene1.html

 

Thanks, kk.. Sure enough, the bag on the hands. I'd seen those pictures before, but I guess I really didn't get a good look at that one.

Yes, her hands were positioned in front of her face and not over her head.

 

I'd noticed long ago that the "drawing" of the body that we've all seen was misleading as far as the position of the arms. Linda Arndt also described her arms as being "over her head unsupported" when JR carried her up from the basement. But LA's description could also have sufficed for the way her arms really were, which is evidenced in the "bagged hand" photo- her arms WERE up in front of her unsupported, but more in a "boxer's pose" than extended straight up over her head.

 

Here's that drawing:

http://www.acandyrose.com/jonbenetbody1.jpg

 

I don't know where else to put this, so I'm sticking it here. It's two posts from the topix forum, and it's one of those "AHA" moments for me. But then I get kind of crazy trying to work it out, so maybe y'all could give me some feedback.

A long time poster on this case, Nelly at topix, but also from the other forums for many years with other hats, has a brilliant idea about why the Ramseys told LE they hadn't read the full ransom note before Patsy called 911. It made sense to me. But of course, I start worrying it to death, and then I get into some rather...NO WAY!...kind of stuff. See what you think:

PS Hope putting your post here is okay with you, Nelly. If not...talk me into taking it down.... :talk:

 

LOL ... we had a discussion about this either before you got here, KK, or after you left WS. I brought up the same idea Nelly had; the reason Patsy and John claimed they didn't read the note all the way through was to give them an excuse for calling 911 when the note said the kidnappers would behead JonBenet if they talked to a stray dog. Patsy and John HAD to say that or sane people would have asked, "why didn't you follow what the ransom note said?"

At the time of the discussion, we talked about how it was important that the "beheading" reference was included in the ransom note because the ligature/fake garrote was tied around her neck. The entire staging was directed at JonBenet's neck area and away from the fatal head wound. You'll notice the kidnappers did NOT say that if the Ramsey notified the police, they would bash JonBenet's head in.

If I get time, I'll try to do a search and see if I can come up with some of the posts from the previous discussion, but I'm glad you brought Nelly's post over here. I wish she would join us here at FFJ.

 

You guys got it.:yay:

 

You are right, KK. The thinking and planning of this staging seems to me beyond what any parent in the situation would be capable of. Unless said parent was a narcissist and didn't have any feelings for the dead child, and could play things out as if it were a John Douglas book...someone who could call his pilot to fly his wife, himself and son to Atlanta less than an hour after bringing that dead child up from his own basement...

But I still believe they had help from someone. Someone in law enforcement, someone high up in the "justice" system in Boulder. Maybe Hunter himself, eh?

I can't go to Lockheed Martin with you, KK. I don't think JR was that important to the company to take such a risk. His software wasn't that huge, was it? Critical to missile systems or the space shuttle? I think he was a small fish in a big pond.

I think HE may have been capable of doing the planning.

But great thinking overall!

 

I could swear that I read Lockheed wanted John to take a lie detector test and he refused.

I really believe that John's lawyers had very much to do with aiding and abetting in this in that they had well connected friends and lets not forget, wasn't it Bynum who was friends with Hunter?

 

Thanks everyone, for your feedback.

Chero, honestly, I may have read the discussion and just forgotten it. Someone asked me a question about Dr. Wecht's book yesterday and I drew a complete and total blank. I've been posting too much the last couple of days, I guess, and my brain is simply over-heated. (Dangit! I almost got away :yes: ...and then Lacy HAD to start her latest BS spin cycle.... :steamed: )

I know that it's hard to imagine Lockheed having anything to do with the cover up, but I guess one reason I can't let go of that is because John Ramsey should have contacted LM immediately when he found that "ransom note". As a former security executive of LM said after this case became such a media focus (his name escapes me but you all saw him speak many times; he is a lawyer--Norm Earl...y...?), LM had a definite protocol for any kidnapping involving any employee, and it was part of the company training. I believe Shadow spoke of this, as well.

So the question has always been, WITH A FOREIGN FACTION AND JOHN'S BUSINESS IN THE MIX, why wasn't LM even called? Why weren't the security heads informed?

I don't know. I guess now I'm wondering if this "protocol" might have been the reason for the "foreign faction" part of the kidnapping. What SHOULD have happened, had things gone that way? The FBI had jurisdiction as soon as it was considered a kidnapping, but they never took the case in seven hours. If it was so clear it wasn't a kidnapping, and the agent (Walker) said he told the BPD after reading the note twice that the child would be found dead, why weren't the Ramseys then arrested, ESPECIALLY when the body was found? WHO made that call? Eller. Hunter.

Back to the "lost" cell phone and blank record. WHY would Alex Hunter NEVER GET A SUBPOENA FOR THE PHONES OF A FAMILY WHO HAD A MURDERED CHILD IN THEIR BASEMENT AND NO EVIDENCE OF ANY INTRUDER IN SIGHT? Why would LACY not get those records? It may be too late, but HOW CAN ANY LE SAY THEY'RE REALLY TRYING TO SOLVE A CHILD MURDER CASE WITHOUT EVER GETTING A SUBPOENA FOR THE COMPLETE PHONE RECORDS OF THE FAMILY WHOSE HOME WAS THE CRIME SCENE?

I'm sorry, I'm "started" again.... Am I going to be lying on my death bed, whispering into the ears of my loved ones, "Why...wheez...cough...didn't Hunter...wheez, cough COUGH...get those phone records...aaaaahhhhhhhh hhhhhhh...."

 

That was a news report that was still online in 2000, when I first got here, sboyd. I think it might have been when LM sold Access Graphics to GE, but it's been so long ago, I'm fuzzy on the details. John was "let go" from the company when GE bought it, wasn't he?

Oh, yeah, Bynum was, like all the lawyers in Colorado seem to be, part of the Hot Tub Club.