The Significance Of The Big Bloomies...

Discussion in 'Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum' started by Ploppy_Slopper, Aug 24, 2006.

  1. heymom

    heymom Member

    Wow. Seems as if that is a really sensitive area, given that fact that Lin Wood went to so much trouble stopping the question from being asked. That exchange really says a lot, doesn't it???

  2. Cherokee

    Cherokee FFJ Senior Member

    I agree, Sue. The way the maglight was placed in a conspicuous place on the kitchen counter out of its normal surroundings was exactly like a "red herring" shouting "Look at me! I'm the murder weapon! I'm right here in the kitchen ... nowhere NEAR the bathroom!" (wink, wink)
  3. sue

    sue Member

    This was before going to the White's house from Patsy Ramsey's 4/1997 interview with police from
    And another part about bathing from Patsy Ramsey police interview from June 1998 from a
    This goes on to talk about JB and the red heart drawn on her hand.
    later, it continues with this:
    This is what Patsy was wearing to the White's house from the 4/97 interview from the same source. It sounds very much like the sweater that was lying across JB's bed in the picture I posted earlier.
  4. Your idea about the BM and bath is brilliant Sue.

    Just one thing, if JB had slipped in the bathtub or just fallen acidentally, wouldn't Patsy have just called an ambulance?

    It always seemed like she covered it up because she felt guilty. If it had been just an innocent accident, I don't think she would've gone through that whole farse. I think the injury was a result of anger, not an accident. Patsy must have been the direct cause of it, otherwise she would not have embraced it as a murder and staged it as one, right?

  5. Cherokee

    Cherokee FFJ Senior Member

    But what if JonBenet was thrashing around resisting Patsy while Patsy tried to drag her to the bathtub? As I've said many times, I think JonBenet may have been partially strangled by her shirt collar (twisted in Patsy's hand) as Patsy tried to gain control over the struggling JonBenet.

    If JonBenet was exhausted and mad at being gotten up out of bed, and adamant about not getting a bath, it could have been a real donnybrook in that bathroom. Patsy could have been at her limit and in a rage, and if in the struggle, something happened to cause JonBenet's head to crack, Patsy would have felt responsible.

    A couple of years ago, I posted a picture of JonBenet's neck area where there is a bruise on the left side. It corresponds in size with the middle and fourth finger knuckles of a woman's hand. I theorized that the bruise could have been caused by Patsy trying to maintain a grip on JonBenet's shirt as JonBenet flung herself around while resisting Patsy. Concern for that bruise, and any other manual strangulation marks may have contributed to the idea for tying the fake garrote around JonBenet's neck.

    If Patsy had ahold of JonBenet's collar at the left side of JonBenet's neck, it would also correspond with an impact on the OPPOSITE side of JonBenet's head where the fatal injury occured ... the back upper right side of JonBenet's head ... if JonBenet was pulling downward and away from Patsy. (You've seen kids do the "60s peace protestor" where they try to go limp on the floor.)

    Patsy may have been shaking JonBenet from that angle, and if in the struggle, JonBenet's head cracked against the cement of the floor or the hard porcelain of the tub or sink, that may explain the contra coup injuries inside JonBenet's brain on the opposite side of the crack in her skull, BUT ON THE SAME SIDE as the bruise on her neck.
  6. sue

    sue Member

    I remember reading your comments a few years about the collar. They made a lot of sense then and still make sense now.

    It also makes sense that Patsy would not have called an ambulance with an accident like that.........
    - after all, JB may have appeared to be at or near death and calling an ambulance would not bring her back from the dead
    - if it occurred during the course of trying to bathe her because she had BM on her, that would have been embarrassing
    - it happened late at night, which makes explaining possible strangle marks and a skull fracture even more difficult (just WHY would anyone be bathing a small child that late at night?)
  7. sue

    sue Member

  8. I dunno Sue, those don't seem like sufficient motives for her to hide it, there had to be an element of anger in there that translated into guilt and made her make a conscious effort to conceal the truth.

    I know she was superficial, but I don't think she created this whole story just so nobody would know that JB pooped her pants. It wouldn't be that hard to explain the late night bath... "the kid was dirty and needed a washing" would be a perfectly acceptable reason.

    I think your theory on the douche, poop and bath is excellent, but i feel the only missing angle is the anger. She must have inflicted the injury out of anger in a clear attempt to hurt JB (not kill her), and after seeing the extreme damage, she felt responsible and knew she'd be in hot water for this. Her altered future must've flashed before her - she'd be called a bad mother, Burke would be taken away from her, John would leave her and the plans she'd made for herself would entirely disintegrate. She would go from being a somebody to being "that woman"...
    She obviously concocted this whole kidnapper story to protect herself because she felt she was in great danger of being held accountable. If it was an accident, Patsy would've staged it as an accident... but she chose to stage it as a murder because thats what she considered it to be.
  9. sue

    sue Member

    I think there was anger and guilt.
    She would feel guilty that her actions led to JB's death and making the death look like something else might have helped her to disassociate from it.
    Toilet training can be a tremendously frustrating experience and there are lots of articles pointing to frustration with toilet training being the root for a lot of cases of abuse (in fact, articles like this one point out that more child abuse occurs during toilet training than during any other developmental step). Here's another article that references "refusal to be toilet trained has been reported as a common precipitant of fatal child abuse". There are lots of other articles in professional publications that say the same thing.
    When I was a Public Health Nurse, I saw quite a few families who were court ordered to see me and a Social Worker because of abuse. For many of them, the abuse was largely centered around toilet training - it was one place where the child was in control and that was very difficult for some of the parents who had issues with control. Many of them didn't mean to hurt or abuse their children, but when frustrated, it's very easy to get rougher and forcefully grab an un-cooperative child's shirt (as Cherokee suggested) or push or handle a child roughly. Most of the parents I worked with loved their children and didn't mean to hurt the child, but they did. After seeing the result of their treatment, they felt guilty and tried to disassoiciate themselves from it. Some would talk about how the child was responsible for what had happened; others talked about themself like that part that abused was not part of them - my most interesting disassociation was a woman who had left her 3 year old grandchild alone as punishment while she went to the store - when I came to see her, she said "apparently, I left him home by himself and therefore Social Services was called by a neighbor and then they took him."

    Anyway, not only is toilet training frustrating, but JB had apparently been trained and then started wetting and soiling herself again. That would be even more frustrating.
    Here are some things I found from the Bonita Papers
    and more
    and another quote from the Bonita Papers
    I know there are some similar quotes from Steve Thomas's book, but I don't have a copy, so I can't quote from it.
  10. I just realized something interesting about those giant panties after re-reading some of the interview transcripts. Something caught my eye that I didn't notice before. In John Ramsey's 1998 interview with Lou Smit and Mike Kane, Smit says this...

    13 LOU SMIT: You notice how the packages seem
    14 to be partially opened. Can you explain this?
    15 JOHN RAMSEY: No, I can't.

    There were presents found in the basement that were apparently meant for Christmas gifts to be exchanged when they went to Michigan and for other people to be sent out before they left. Patsy had stated that she was trying to get together presents to be sent out to other people before they left on their trip and that she did that in the basement. Some of those presents were in the room where JBR was found. Patsy also in her interviews had said that she bought the size 12/14 bloomies as a Christmas gift for her niece, Jenny, and apparently, that was a present to be sent out before they left on their trip... so it stands to reason that the package of the large panties would be in the basement in a package ment to be sent to Jenny.

    I always thought it odd that the size 12/14 panties would ever have been put into JBR's panty drawer. Patsy also said that she couldn't remember whether or not she bought a package of the bloomies in size 12/14 for Jenny ONLY or if she ALSO bought a package of 4/6 ones for JBR. I think she did buy both.

    The housekeeper remembers seeing a package of the bloomies in JBR's panty drawer, but I think those were the size 4/6 ones meant for JBR, and the size 12/14 package was in the basement in a package ready to be sent to Jenny for Christmas. Patsy was the one who was wrapping the gifts in the basement and would have known that the size 12/14 bloomies were there. That's why I think Smit brought up the fact that one or more of the presents in the basement were partially opened. I think part of the reason to use the size 12/14 panties was because they were there in the basement where the staging took place.

    It's important that Patsy not state that there were two packages of bloomies and one of them was in JBR's drawer because an intruder wanting to put a different pair of panties on JBR would not have used panties that came out of a present in the basement... an intruder would have no idea that childrens panties were in a wrapped package in the basement. Only PATSY knew there was childrens panties in a wrapped present in the basement.

    Smit doesn't say that those presents were partially wrapped, he says they were partially OPENED. No one puts wrapping paper on a package that isn't already closed up, so these presents weren't just partially wrapped... they were wrapped and then partially unwrapped and partially OPENED to get something out.

    I think the reason that Patsy "doesn't remember" whether or not she bought two packages of the panties because if she said she remembered buying one package for JBR and one for her older niece, Jenny, it would be deduced by LE that what the housekeeper saw in the JBR's panty drawer were the size 4/6 panties purchased for JBR and the size 12/14 panties came out of one of those presents in the basement... pointing right at Patsy. Patsy was the only one who knew for certain where those size 12/14 bloomies were, and I think they were in the basement in one of those partially opened presents Smit mentioned.
  11. sue

    sue Member

    very interesting.
  12. sue

    sue Member

    I thought of some other things today as I was driving to work.

    There wouldn't have to be anger for an accident to happen. All it would take is a parent who is trying to get a child to do something and a child who doesn't want to do it. If the parent is pulling in one direction and the child is pulling in another, all it takes to make an accident is for the parent to let go or lose hold of the child. The child would 'slingshot' away from the parent and would keep moving in the direction she was pulling until she hit something that stopped her (possible a bedpost or a tub).

    And, why would the parent not just say it was an accident?
    I think for a parent like Patsy, who was really all for appearances, that would be a very bad thing because it would reflect poorly on Patsy as a parent and would go against the 'image' of JB as a beauty queen.
    For a 'normal' parent, an explanation of "the child was dirty" would fly, but I do thnk it would cause problems for Patsy. What does a child do at midnight to get dirty enough to need a bath right away?

    If she knew JB was dying or appeared dead, an injury that bad would get on the news. She was not known nationally then, but had been in a parade recently, so she would be newsworthy. I can image there might be headlines "Little Beauty Queen dies in poopy pants accident" sort of thing. That sort of lurid stuff makes people tune into news and read newspapers.
    An accident bad enough to have a child die would also bring police and social workers, and lots of questions. Over and over.
    "Exactly what were you doing when the accident happened? What happened next? What was she doing at the time? Why did you do _____? What was the reason you were bathing her at midnight?"
    I imagine people would look at Patsy with suspicion and wondering what kind of mother she was. And, with all the questions, Patsy would have to be reliving it over and over again.

    And, if Patsy staged an accident, the accident would have to be close enough to what really happened to explain the injuries, but make sure it didn't put blame on anyone else. It would be difficult (maybe impossible) to think of an accident where JB could have injured herself that badly.

    By staging a 'kidnapping' and a 'murder', Patsy would not have to answer any questions or think about whatever really happened. She could answer "I was asleep. I never heard anything. I don't know why the kidnapped did what he did." Easier on all standpoints.
    And, if people believed the 'kidnapping', people would look at Patsy as a victim and a very brave woman for going on with life after such a loss (or from Patsy's description of why she wanted to wear a black veil for the funeral - like Jacqueline Kennedy).
  13. heymom

    heymom Member

    So do you think that JR knew or didn't know about the accident and the staging? I have considered that both of them needed the staging - perhaps the accident happened and Patsy had reason to cover it up, she was scared, etc. If John had been abusing JBR, he would also have a compelling reason to keep her body away from scrutiny, as an autopsy would have happened if they'd called the ambulance/police. But then, when I read about his disappearance that morning, and when he came back he was very disturbed, I wonder if he didn't find her body for the first time then. He even told his son (JAR) that he'd found JonBenet at 11 a.m., not 1 p.m. If he didn't know, why did he continue the charade to protect Patsy? Was he sure at all at that point, or did he only suspect? If he only suspected, how could he have called lawyers immediately or even before the 911 call?

  14. wombat

    wombat Member

    Heymom, (hey, Mom :hiya: ) I've thought that John might have not "known" until his 11 AM disappearing act, but IMO if he had found JonBenet then, he would have screamed. Also, he read that ransom letter, he states, on the floor in his skivvies (ew) and had to see his wife's handwriting then - so he would have known something was up at that point. The incoming phone when the patrolman had just arrived means they called somebody before the cop arrived, maybe before the 911 call, like you say.

    I think his "disturbed" state when he came back from his "disappearance" was due to seeing his dead daughter again, and the condition she was in. He may have moved her at that time so that she could be seen from the door to the wine cellar/coal room. Having touched her, he would have felt that the life was out of her body, rigor was setting in, and decay was starting. This is the stuff of horror movies, and it upset him. Poor guy (not).
  15. heymom

    heymom Member

    I always use Hey Mom as my hat because that is what I hear, 90 gazillion times every day, and have since my kids were old enough to want my attention. "Hey, Mom, can I watch TV?" "Hey, Mom, what's for dinner?" "Hey, Mom, I need $7.00 for a field trip tomorrow!" etc. etc. etc.

    Anyway, back to the point...("Hey, Mom, you got sidetracked again!") (edited to close parenthesis)

    Your comments make sense to me. Especially about his having seen the ransom note and knowing it was Patsy's writing. If he wasn't in on the actual staging to that point, he must have known it then. I still lean toward him being involved from the beginning, and phone calls being made before the early hours of 12/26. I wish to goodness LE could get hold of those records! That would tell the tale, at least to prove there was no intruder!.
  16. adair

    adair Member

    I do not have any children...but if i had a child with bed wetting issues, i would make sure she was awaken to use the bathroom before putting her to bed.

    It being Christmas, and parties and eating alot of different foods (ones she was not used to eating, may have caused a bout of diarrhea....and eating the pineapple may have increase the need for her need go) I totally agree with who ever posted that earlier.

  17. heymom

    heymom Member

    My kids only wet the bed a couple of times, but it's my understanding that using the bathroom before bed rarely helps solve the problem. I think it's that the kid's bladder just isn't ready to go that long without emptying. There can also be a reaction to stress and/or abuse, as well as some physical causes like bladder infections. Nothing works for everyone, except time for maturation, and removal of other factors.
  18. Kangatruth

    Kangatruth Member

    there is a myriad of reasons kids wet beds... some simply alleviated with a before bed wee.. many others aren't so simple..
  19. adair

    adair Member

    Thanks for the info.....

    Like i said, i dont have kid's. But i do make sure the dogs go out right before we go to bed. LOL

  20. Watching You

    Watching You Superior Bee Admin

    Oooooh, I never thought about this, but it makes perfect sense. The size 12 underwear were wrapped as a gift in the basement, which is what Patsy said was the reason they were purchased in the first place, but someone needed a clean pair of underwear quickly to replace the size 6 JB was most likely already wearing. There was something on the size 6 underwear that this person didn't want anyone to see, and rather than go back upstairs to get clean underwear, the perp opened the package with the new panties inside and took out the Wednesday pair and put them on JB. Perhaps in the panic of the moment, this person never stopped to consider that anyone would notice the difference in size, but, if anyone did, this person would be ready with an answer.

    Patsy was the only one who wrapped presents, and she was the only one who knew where those panties were.

    Makes sense to me.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice