The Huge (Girls Size 12-14) "Bloomies" Underwear on JonBenet, Modeled By Six-Year-Old

Here is a link to Patsy's 2000 Atlanta interview with Kane and Boulder LE, when she is questioned in depth about the KNICKERS. Wood is constantly interrupting and arguing, wasting valuable time, but more importantly, giving Patsy cues about her answers. You'll notice she gets into trouble early on, jumps to "we" rather than "I". She obfuscates, doesn't remember, and equivocates on the simplest of details, like how her 12 year old niece would have been larger than JonBenet, and of course, when JonBenet took a bath that day, changed her clothes, habits, etc. Patsy is very slippery, and Wood makes sure of it. He makes the most ridiculous arguments--so long, I'm going to edit them to remain focused on Patsy's answers.

http://www.jonbenetindexguide.com/2000ATL-Patsy-Interview-Complete.htm

 

Take this a step further...There was a washer and dryer available to wash the correct size panties and replace them, which begs the argument - why wasn't this done? Not enough time to wash them and dry them then redress JonBenét? Even if they had been hand washed and then dried? Or - not enough time to do this and allow the dryer to cool down so it would not be obvious it had been used during the night? Could the noise of the machines carry through the night to a neighbor or wake another family member?

Seems simpler to have washed and dried the correct size but if there was not time and one was frantic they might not think that having a size so obviously too large was going to raise such tough questions. Conversely, there are some men who are very oblivious and might not realize how odd this would look nor would a child of 9 say - so it raises the question of just who redressed JonBenét if in fact she had on the smaller panties to begin with, and it goes without saying that unless the larger size were over a pull-up that she would not have been the least bit comfortable wearing them. In fact the size is so out of proportion that she may as well have been wearing nothing when it comes to modesty.

Aside from the comfort and modesty factor, had JonBenét had on the larger size earlier in the evening without a pull-up under them, they would have bunched up under her pants (similar to tucking in your shirt and not getting it smooth) unless the pants themselves were too large. It's difficult to believe that Patsy would have allowed JonBenét to look less than adorably perfect for the party that evening.



Jay - we call them "Mollies" and "Hangards" (boxers) or "Tighty Whities" (briefs) but my mother called them "Unmentionables."

 

Excellent point, JR.

JonBenet DID NOT have size 12/14 panties on at the Whites under her black pants. There is no way. They would have bunched in all the wrong places, not covered the right places, and been extremely uncomfortable. She would have been constantly pulling at the seat of her pants trying to get the panties unbunched.

If JonBenet DID wear a pull-up to the Whites, it would have shown under her black pants as being a bulge because the shirt she supposedly wore would not have been long enough to cover her hind end. In addition, there would have been no need to add the extra layer of panties to the pull-up unless it was to help JonBenet psychologically get over the embarrassment of wearing the pull-ups because she was still getting to wear "big girl" panties over them.

As an aside to our overseas contingent, I'm sorry about your discomfort with our word for women's underwear, but maybe it will help if you just think of it as the diminuitive for the word "pants" ... i.e. little pants - panties.

Why_Nut is right. "Knickers" is our word for knee-length pants. What do you call THOSE?

 

... pantaloons?

ETA - or bloomers. Actually it would be pantaloons if they were for a bloke and bloomers for a woman. I thought that was where Bloomies came from.

 

OK, here are Patsy's stories in the 2000 interview about how the knickers got on JonBenet:

[Jayelles, do not read this, as the offensive word is used no less than two hundred times.]

Notice that JONBENET opened the package in this part of the story.

Now notice the change in pronoun in the next section...and also that "we" rather than Patsy/I collectively made the decision to use the too large panties rather than send them to Jenny. Does she mean "we" as in she and JonBenet, or "we" as in she and...? Because she says JonBenet opened the package, then she says "we" decided to use them. Yet Patsy also says SHE/PATSY put the PACKAGE in JonBenet's BATHROOM, and JonBenet opened it and put them on.

So, next we hear: Patsy and someone made the decision to keep the larger panties for JonBenet. Putting that with what she just stated, JonBenet then OPENED the package AND PUT THEM ON HERSELF, but Patsy put them in JonBenet's drawer. Let's see what else Patsy says about the panties.

Notice also Patsy's speech pattern in the following answer: it's choppy, she switches to PASSIVE VOICE--it happened indirectly, again, directing credit for the action elsewhere, now away from JonBenet having committing the action: "the package had been opened." Then Patsy says "I GUESS" and uses a "group" pronoun, we, to share responsibility rather than take it as solely hers.

Patsy did not want to tie herself to these size 12/14 panties. She was also avoiding the topic of how they were opened, changing that story as well. I believe the panties were a painful and/or damaging association to JonBenet's murder, after going through this carefully again.

OK, notice that Patsy establishes it was JonBenet's idea to keep the panties and that she wanted them because they were special. Now Patsy has stated SHE/PATSY put the clean panties in the panty drawer with all the clean panties. But Det. Harmer picks up on the discrepancy here and follows up:

So now Patsy suddenly isn't clear why or when she/we decided to put the panties in the drawer. Patsy also CHANGES THE STORY here: PATSY is the one who decided not to send the panties, so she just put them in JonBenet's drawer.

Patsy has already said JonBenet opened the package, and she has said that she put the TOO LARGE panties in the drawer. But remember, jams has said many times, THE PACKAGE OF PANTIES WAS NOT IN THE DRAWER, THAT THE RAMSEY'S PRIVATE DETECTIVES FOUND THEM AND TOOK CUSTODY OF THEM. Is jams saying the panties were LEFT in the drawer, that LE/forensics didn't take them? That would be strange because here is what LE said about that during this interview:

So...Patsy says clearly SHE PUT THE PANTIES IN THE DRAWER. LE says clearly THEY TOOK 15 PAIRS OUT, AND NONE WERE SIZE 12/14.

Jams says the Ramsey PIs ended up with the panties. If jams can be believed...heh...she has stated more than once that LE LEFT THE REST OF THE PACKAGE OF SIZE 12/14 PANTIES BEHIND AT THE HOME, where the Ramsey PIs found them and confiscated them.

So...did LE only take PART of the panties in the drawer? I doubt that very much. Where then did the rest of that 12/14 package go, that LE missed them entirely, in 10 days of scouring the house for evidence? But how convenient, the Ramsey PIs found them!

I smell more STAGING OF EVIDENCE here, I believe.

Obviously from this interview, LE did NOT have the rest of the szie 12/14 package of panties. So that PACKAGE of size 12/14 panties DID GO MISSING, and that's why LE didn't find them. Then they turned up for the Ramsey PIs to find so conveniently. Blame it on careless LE. But we never heard anything about this until jams told us. Why did jams give out this info? Because this interview transcript was released and revealed that THE REMAINING PAIRS OF SIZE 12/14 PANTIES WERE NEVER FOUND BY LE?

Where did they go?

Did Aunt Pam get them?

Did they go the way of the roll of duct tape and cord?

But then HOW did they end up at the Ramsey house for the PIs to find? (If jams can be believed, which she can't, but maybe she is telling this RST story as it was told to her, because they wanted to get out the information that the MISSING SIZE 12/14 PANTIES were in fact just MISSED BY LE.

But this doesn't necessarily make sense, because we do not know if LE ever found the new Bloomies that FIT JonBenet, do we? If they were in that drawer, did LE find the WEDNESDAY pair, as well? Were those the soiled panties on the floor?

And two more questions come to mind: first, why would Patsy have the remaining larger-sized panties disappear? Was she hoping LE wouldn't notice they were not part of the same set of size JonBenet actually wore? And thus not start looking for the CORRECT size panties...which were incriminating in some way?

Second, why would Patsy put an UNOPENED package of panties in JonBenet's drawer, for the child to open with scissors or a knife--as Why Nut pointed out leads to the question of the kitchen knife on the washing machine? Patsy said JonBenet opened the package. Patsy said she put them in the drawer. But they weren't found in the drawer.

Once again, Patsy's story falls apart.

No wonder Lin Wood was about to bust a gut interrupting and preaching and leading Patsy's answers in the process.

 

Thanks for that KK. My response is:-

NOPE, NOPE, NOPE.

Patsy says they "made the decision" to "just go ahead and use them"...

There is NO WAY I would ever "just go ahead and use them" with these KNICKERS (can we have a panty icon please for me to use?). For starters, they are UNUSABLE. They don't fit. It would be bordering on child abuse to put these on a sweet little girl because the crotch is either down at the knees - or if you pull the waistband up to the armpits so that the crotch is actually un place - then the child's sheuchties are on full display through the gaping leg holes.

NO way, no way, no way. I've had these KNICKERS on my daughter and they are baggy and unwearable - they don't fit. There is just NO WAY that any self-respecting mother would "just go ahead and use them". They would practically fit me.

Also - my daughter laughed when I showed her the BIG KNICKERS for the first time. I called her into my study and held out one pair to watch her reaction. She looked at them and started giggling. I asked her "what have I got here?" and she said "They are huge - like your pants". She was giggling because they were identical in design to a pair she already owns. There is no way she would ever mistake these for her own.

When I asked her to try them on she found it hilarious - a big joke. I can assure you that there is no way she would wear them. They look ridiculous and would be extemely uncomfortable. Because of the size of the legholes, the crotch is way to long for a little girl and because the waistband is so slack, they would tend to swivel round and slip down and her sheuchties would either be on full display - back and front or the loose crotch would be stuck half way up her backside in no time.

Also - there is no way my daughter could have opened the packet herself without scissors and she's not allowed to use real scissors without supervision. I am absolutely certain Jonbenet would have had to ask someone to open that packet. The little tie is made of nylon and it cannot be pulled apart.

As you can all see from my photo - there is a significant difference in size between the size 4/6 and 12/14 - it is wrong to say "there is not too much difference in the size".

It was important to me to watch my daughter's reactions carefully on this because she's the same age, height and weight as Jonbenet was when she died and I knew I wouldn't get another opportunity to try this experiment out with any degree of validity.

 

I agree, Jayelles. I don't think for a minute JonBenet wanted to wear the knickers. She might have opened them, not knowing they were too large, and then found out when she put them on. It would have been dangerous for her to use a knife to do so. Would she have done that on her own? Sometimes kids wander into things like that without thinking they're doing something wrong. I don't think we'll know, because I went back in my post and did some more in depth evaluation of Patsy's speech pattern during her telling of this, and I think she was lying, covering up what really happened with that package, IMO. To repeat the gist of it, if you missed it before my edit:

Patsy did not want to tie herself to these size 12/14 panties. She was also avoiding the topic of how they were opened, changing that story as well. I believe the panties were a painful and/or damaging association to JonBenet's murder, after going through this carefully again.

 

Yes, yes. I don't believe that Patsy would have put the package in JonBenet's bathroom or drawer for her to use without opening it first. She states in the interview JonBenet would dress herself.

And again, because it's SO important, I CAN'T BELIEVE WE'VE MISSED THIS! Where were the OTHER pairs of size 12/14 knickers from that package, as it appears Boulder LE did not find them in JonBenet's drawer with those of her size?

They didn't just jump out of the drawer, did they? Patsy put them in the drawer...LE never found them in the drawer. Did the intruder only pic out the Bloomies to cart off with the duct tape and cord? Or did take the package? And then return it so the Ramsey PIs could find it in the house?

This story won't wash...no pun intended.

And again, thank you, Jayelles, for getting these samples and photographing them and posting them for us. You also put the lie to something else Patsy stated in this interview: that the panties were not that different in size.

It's so obvious she was trying to cover up why JonBenet had those panties on. I agree that she needed the "Wednesday" print on them, in case someone at the party noticed earlier that night. Then she put the remainders somewhere else, probably along with the correct size of Wednesdays, which must have been soiled in some way, to take out of the house. Enter millionaire Aunt Pam with her list of items to remove from the house. And LE gives her a police jacket, transportation, and lunch to boot.

VICTORY!

 

I am trying to figure a way to show you just how baggy they are when worn. I wouldn't photograph my daughter wearing them beause I think that would be demeaning and wrong. However, I'm wondering if I could make a model of her. We could make a game of it even. I have a tailor's dummy which i use for my dressmaking and I've made about half a dozen adult dummies in the past (one of my daughter's friends was the model!). I know how to do this - I've just never made one with legs! It wouldn't need to have lower legs or feet - or even an upper chest.

I could paint the dummy in a dark colour so that the contrast between the "skin" and the BKs (big knickers) would be obvious. Tootsie would love that - she can "help".

 

That's what leaped out at me as well ... Patsy's lie that the panties were not that different in size. As anyone can see, there is a HUGE difference in size and fit.

Size 6 is supposed fit six year old girl of average size. Size 12-14 is supposed to fit a 12-14 year old girl of average size. There is a big difference in the two sizes.

Patsy is a liar ... but we already knew that.

 

Sorry, but this is typical Ramsey spin. I am a full grown woman approximately 5'1" in height. In the past due to a health problem my weight dropped from my normal 110-115 pounds to about 90 pounds. At that weight, I wore a little girls size 12 in clothes. JonBenét's weight and height were both about half of that. These panties would have been absolutely huge on her.

 

Well Stage II of the experiment is ready to start. I went into the art store today and bought the necessary materials to make a model of my Tootsie. I've agreed that she can make one of me too....

When the model is made, I'll photograph it wearing the little bloomies and the big ones and everyone can see how unlikely it is that JonBenet chose to wore them - or that Patsy would have let her.

 

I have a grandson, and he's never let me put clothes on him that don't FEEL RIGHT. I just bought him some underwear in the next up size because the ones he has seemed to be getting a bit tight to me. Now, the next up size really is not that much difference in boys' underwear. I had washed them as well. You know what he said? "These look like granddaddy's." When he put them on, I couldn't tell they were bigger at all. But he sure knew. He's 10. JonBenet spent her life being dressed to the nines. I was looking at a video of pics of her someone made up on youtube.com, one BobC posted a link to, and I was thinking, her REGULAR clothes must have cost quite a penny. They were the best. Her pageant cloths must have cost a small fortune. She was used to being dressed to the nth degree. WHY would she put on baggy panties like that and keep them on?

Nope, didn't happen. And I think that the part of Patsy's interview in 2000 I posted really tells the tale: Patsy did NOT want to admit how those baggy panties got on her. Patsy's story went from here to there and back again: she bought them to send to Jennie, but that didn't happen. She didn't remember. JonBenet did it. Patsy put them in the drawer. She didn't notice. She couldn't remember.

WHERE DID THE REMAINING 12/14 PANTIES GO BETWEEN THE TIME SOMEONE OPENED THE PACKAGE AND PUT THE WEDNESDAY PAIR ON JONBENET AND WHEN TEAM RAMSEY ENDED UP WITH THEM?

I think the answer to this question is critical. 10 days LE spent going over that home with a forensic team. They took 15 pairs of panties out of the panty drawer. Patsy is on the record stating she put the 12/14 Bloomies in that drawer. LE does not find them there. Jams states years later that SOMEONE GAVE THEM TO THE RAMSEY LAWYERS.

I say to jams, looks to me like if she wants to find that old intruder, she need look no further, because IT APPEARS SOMEONE TOOK THOSE PANTIES OUT OF THE HOME THE NIGHT JONBENET WAS MURDERED. THAT SOMEONE THEN GAVE THEM TO THE RAMSEY LAWYERS. VOILA! CHILD KILLER!

Seems logical to me. I'm open for arguments or information to prove otherwise. Did jams lie? If not, then she should NAME THE PERSON who gave those underwear to the Ramsey investigators.

If the Ramsey investigators FOUND those panties lying around the home, as I think jams once spun on this topic, after LE had turned it back over to the family, then the question has to be, WHO WENT BACK INSIDE AND PUT THEM BACK? VOILA! CHILD KILLER!

Didn't LE put a CAMERA in the home for awhile? THIS SHOULD BE ON CAMERA! VOILA! CHILD KILLER!

IF NO ONE WAS CAUGHT ON CAMERA ENTERING THE HOME WHO WASN'T SUPPOSED TO BE THERE, THEN THOSE WHO WERE EXPECTED TO BE THERE...VOILA! CHILD KILLER!

NONE OF THEM PAN OUT? DNA DOESN'T MATCH? THEN...back to the people in the home that night--or maybe Pam Paugh, the people who had opportunity to remove the other panties, and who then either gave them straight out to the Ramsey investigators, or who came back in and planted them after LE left.

It's not rocket science. I can't believe LE just ignored this. They knew, or they wouldn't have been asking Patsy all about it. But then, maybe they didn't know that the Ramsey lawyers had the original panties in their possession. Wonder if they ever found this out?

So, jams, exactly who found those panties and when? But she won't tell. Because she knows as we all do that LE didn't just miss those panties lying around, not after the autopsy, when JonBenet was undressed and these too large panties were found on her. Day of the week? That's a HUGE clue that would NOT have been overlooked. Obviously redressed, since the blood stains on the panties where none corresponded on the body proved that JonBenet had been wiped down after being molested, rather than before.

LE clearly asks Patsy about those panties and STATES because THEY WANT TO MAKE SURE THE KILLER DID NOT BRING THE PANTIES IN WITH HIM. Duh! And also they wanted to find out WHERE WERE THE REMAINING PANTIES! If the remaining 12/14 panties were IN THE DRAWER, then why did LE state in that interview ALL THE PANTIES WERE SIZE 4/6? The only reason I can see is that THE 12/14 DAY OF THE WEEK PANTIES WERE NOT THERE.

I'm sure they'll fiind a way to try to slip out of this, and how Ramsey of them. But it's high time people who claim to want to solve this case and find this killer start asking THE HARD QUESTIONS, and answering some, as well.

But they won't. Because they know where the answers lead, and they won't go there, PAL!

 

Is it true that the size six panties/drawers JB wore to the Whites' Christmas party have not been found?
In terms of the size 12 panties: as one poster pointed out on the Websleuths forum: it may have been important to the perp that 'Wednesday' was written on her underwear, which should make people believe she was abducted after being put to bed on Christmas night, wearing her Wednesday [= Dec 25th, 1996] underwear.

 

If anyone has ever stated anywhere that JonBenet's regular size 6 Bloomies Wednesday panties were found in the home, I have not seen that.

Remember that it was reported that Arndt put a bag of clothes in the closet downstairs that morning to get them out of the way.

Also remember that Patsy herself, in one version of the events of that morning, said she was putting clothes together to take to Charlevoix in a black trash bag, I believe. We made fun of that black trash bag for years. I wonder now...where did it go? Is there a black bag in a crime scene picture of the bottom of the spiral staircase, now that I'm thinking about it? Wonder where it went?

Patsy also mentioned washing some stains out of a red jump suit of JonBenet's in the wash area outside JB's room that morning, I believe. Maybe she was telling as much of the truth as she could, in case LE noticed something there, like that the sink was still wet. Like the diapers hanging out of that cabinet.

Just throwing out ideas here.

 

OK, I'm sure y'all are getting tired of my repeating this, but either I'm completely out in left field, or this could be critical:

Someone, please whack me on the head or tell me that this doesn't seem to be LE stating that the OTHER size 12/14 panties WERE NOT FOUND IN THE HOUSE. :rs:

 

Koldkase,
I've read that many times and that went right over my head. I think you've made a brilliant discovery. The size 12/14 panties were NOT found in the house. So who took them????
According to the snippet below taken from your above post:

 

Yes, KK, this is what it seems like to me. Patsy does confirm they were definitely in the house. I'm sure most of us remember the larger set of underwear was bought for a niece, with JonBenét liking them, and Patsy letting her keep them. Doesn't make much sense. We all know she couldn't have worn those large panties, not under a skirt, for sure.

I think JonBenét had to be still wearing those pull-ups. They take up too much space in a cupboard if not needed.

Perfect Murder Perfect Town - Lawrence Schiller PB 236-237

According to Linda Hoffman Pugh, in the summer of 1996 JonBenét Ramsey started wearing the diaper-type pull-ups. She even wore them to her bed. There was always a wet one in the trash. By the end of the summer Patsy was trying to get her to do without them. JonBenét started wetting the bed again. LHP says that there was a wet bed almost every day she was there, and that was about three days a week.

Patsy then decided to use a plastic cover, and no more pull-ups. By the time Linda arrived the sheets and JB's white blanket were in the dryer.

Linda stated the children dressed themselves, and all their underwear was marked with the days of the week.

PMPT page 337
While researching this, I also came across Schiller's interview with Linda Wilcox, who talks about Burke wearing pull-ups until he was six. Wilcox states that JonBenét always wore them. Wilcox told the police that she noticed Burke stopped wetting the bed when he was no longer the focus of Patsy's attention, and JonBenét became a chronic bedwetter, but stated that both of them were still wetting the bed when she left in September, 1995

 

This has, indeed, been a most interesting discussion.

- When Patsy stated "We made the decision to use them (the size 12/14 underwear), I highly doubt she's referring to herself and JonBenet. Nope. No way.

- I never realized the remaining size 12/14s weren't there to be gathered up with the 4/6s. Wow. Just wow.

- Regarding Det. Arndt and the bag of clothes... Sometime that morning, Detective Arndt found a paper bag with children's clothing next to the den door, and she moved it intothe cloakroom. (PMPT, pp.79-80, pb version)


-Tea

 

As driven as Patsy was to be the best at everything she did, I can only imagine how hard she was to please.

When I look at pictures of JonBenet, wearing lipstick so young, I can't imagine what Patsy was thinking doing this to a small child. It's just SICK: hair dyed BLOND AT SIX, hair extentions and teasing, manicures, literally scores of professional photos, dance lessons, singing lessons, costume fittings, performance after performance, rehearsals--the child was SIX YEARS OLD! I cannot imagine how much pressure she lived under.

Tylin, I have read this part of the interview, and I mean with a fine toothed comb, many times. It just never sunk in before with me, either.

And to their credit, I am in awe of how fast those interviewing Patsy JUMPED on her discrepancies and plied her for details. She hanged herself...except that there was no DA to prosecute.

Because I am telling you, this one passage says it all to me now. Wood wasn't about to wet his pants for nothing. Patsy was nailed here. She bought the 12/14 panties, she put them in the drawer, ONE PAIR was found on JonBenet's murdered body, and NONE OF THE OTHERS WERE FOUND IN THE HOME.

And the fact that jams gave away the farm is just priceless.

I guess Schiller is now going to argue that the intruder went through the drawer to find ALL the Bloomies panties too large for his victim, which she'd never worn, chose one pair to put on her, and then took the rest for souvenirs...after he tied her up in her bed and took her downstairs and fed her pineapple...leaving the bag of rope...but taking panties, duct tape and cord...leaving the body and ransom note...but taking Monday, Tuesday, Thursday, Friday, Saturday, and Sunday undies, which must have fit HIM. I DON'T THINK SO....

Yeah, Why Nut, they aren't going to ever talk about evidence which they don't like at the swamp. Why waste time denyingdenyingdenying reality when it's just as easy to ignore it to begin with?