tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post7390828410881303134..comments2024-02-23T18:09:21.379-05:00Comments on Solving the JonBenet Ramsey Case: Seeing is BelievingDocGhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17359004200002936544noreply@blogger.comBlogger233125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-26363633504234359482016-04-20T03:31:42.215-04:002016-04-20T03:31:42.215-04:00I was wondering if the ransom note instructions to...I was wondering if the ransom note instructions to bring "an adequate sized attache case to the bank" was his plan to get the body out of the house. (Think those double wide business cases). Otherwise, why bring a large attache case to the bank - and then put the money in a paper bag? You thoughts?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-36001819399099880222015-11-22T11:43:00.556-05:002015-11-22T11:43:00.556-05:00OMG! Thank you so much for the video. It really pi...OMG! Thank you so much for the video. It really pisses me of that so much fuel was added to the fire because of what was referred to as "SOURCES" and innuendo.<br /><br />TexasTuffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11815851565390627675noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-49320231577995016322015-08-29T13:58:31.215-04:002015-08-29T13:58:31.215-04:00head* not sidehead* not sideAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-67576735675383604922015-08-29T13:57:11.101-04:002015-08-29T13:57:11.101-04:00Notice at 2:54 where the interviewer asks: "D...Notice at 2:54 where the interviewer asks: "Did you have anything to do with the death of Jonbenet?", Patsy shakes her side without hesitating, whereas John takes in a sharp breath (hesitating), nods (subconsciously), and his eyes shift away (as recalling the lie vs the truth is cognitively effortful) BEFORE shaking his head and giving an answer. I think that's quite chilling.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-62104425250179484302015-08-24T06:31:28.536-04:002015-08-24T06:31:28.536-04:00Let's please not forget that WITHIN 30 MINUTES...Let's please not forget that WITHIN 30 MINUTES of discovering the body JR was on the phone making arrangements to fly to Atlanta. His impulse, as with most criminals, was to physically distance himself from his crime. When that failed he distanced himself with a drugged wife incapable of being interviewed and a legal team. Hardly the response of an innocent man desperate to learn what's happened to his daughter. Contrast JR's behavior with that of John Walsh when Adam was kidnapped. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-50758121267024985592015-08-21T16:04:40.267-04:002015-08-21T16:04:40.267-04:00M.E. I have a reply to your post on the open threa...M.E. I have a reply to your post on the open thread part 4. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-85050817449601844642015-08-20T16:07:16.847-04:002015-08-20T16:07:16.847-04:00What exactly do you see in her testimony that repr...What exactly do you see in her testimony that represents a lie? To me she just seems confused. She never says JonBenet was wearing the oversize panties. If she were covering for John or herself she could easily have said "yes, she insisted so I get her wear the big panties that night." But she says nothing like that. She appears to agree that JonBenet might have worn the larger panties at some point, but she sounds awfully tentative on that score.<br /><br />For myself, I can't imagine why a kid would want to wear panties far too large to be comfortable. It's one thing to put on Mommy's shoes, but Mommy's panties? Well maybe just for fun to try on. But to actually wear? For hours at a time? Sorry but I have a hard time buying that. Looks to me like someone changed her after the assault. <br /><br />And yes, oversize panties would look suspicious. But John would have had much on his mind at that point and very little time to worry over every single detail. The fact is that they do look suspicious and there is a good reason they look suspicious, because an intruder would not have been able to find that oversize pair and Patsy would have known better than to use them -- leaving our friend John, who -- yes indeed -- looks very suspicious, and for many reasons, including that one.DocGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17359004200002936544noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-66875742839023139682015-08-20T15:54:00.990-04:002015-08-20T15:54:00.990-04:00You see no reason why PR would lie about the panti...You see no reason why PR would lie about the panties if the panties were an issue she knew would be discussed? IF she were covering for herself and JR (supposing that they both covered up the death), then she would have to figure out an excuse as to why JBR wore the larger panties. PR giving the answer to that question points in the direction that they both covered up the crime....because really, how would JR be privy to the knowledge that JBR wore large panties? PR knew this. She would be more inclined to know her daughter's underwear preference rather than her husband. JR, if he grabbed extra panties to put onto JBR, would get normal size panties to make everything look as kosher as possible. Kids themselves put on larger clothing for whatever reason, adults would not choose larger sizes for their kids to wear...they would want them to wear fitting clothing, not something that is too big. <br /><br />So, basically what I am saying is that either JBR was wearing those large panties all along or they were replaced and PR was involved in the cover up. <br /><br />(i'll start naming my posts with M.E.)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-71808011839258135962015-08-20T15:33:57.022-04:002015-08-20T15:33:57.022-04:00It is easy to see why should would want to if she ...It is easy to see why should would want to if she liked the larger panties. I would wear my mom's shoes around the house even though they were too big. I mean, JBR was living in a world where she was made to look older/act older. She might have felt older wearing the larger pair but I think it would be uncomfortable to be honest because they'd bulk up or fall off. It is one thing to wear adult shoes for a few hours while playing dress up, another thing to wear large panties to bed. But, who knows. <br /><br />The large panties are very important. Either :<br /><br />1. JBR put them on in haste because they were all he could find and, as was mentioned, had to suffice with those (the question is why would he have to suffice with those? Where they the only pair in the basement? Was the washer/dryer in the basement? Did they store clothes in the basement? PR said the large panties were in JBR's room - does this mean JR went back upstairs to get the panties and he grabbed the large ones?)<br /><br />I don't believe JR put the panties on in haste - I think that would have been the FIRST thing he did once realizing he had to cover the death up. If he had planned to bring JBR's body outside, he still would have put a new pair of panties on her before putting her body somewhere. If his DNA were anywhere on her, it would be the first thing to go, not the last. As meticulous as everything else was, he would not leave JBR to be found with the large panties on by police and detectives - it would be something that he would probably think would be too much of a red flag and warrant further investigation. <br /><br />I'm starting to doubt the theory that JR molested and killed JBR. I just don't think he could decontaminate the scene perfectly. <br /><br />Did police/detectives ever go back to the house and check for dna (semen) in the basement where JBR was found? Or in her bedroom? <br /><br />With so much information missing it is interesting you say you consider this crime solved. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-58607574011684100752015-08-19T22:23:33.644-04:002015-08-19T22:23:33.644-04:00You say the oversize panties are suspicious. And I...You say the oversize panties are suspicious. And I agree.DocGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17359004200002936544noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-86967837031791581342015-08-19T16:59:34.096-04:002015-08-19T16:59:34.096-04:00I agree it's improbable she wore them to the p...I agree it's improbable she wore them to the party. Never suggested she did. <br /><br />I disagree its improbable that she changed into them herself after arriving home. Her correct size panties (that she wore to the party -minus LJs) needn't have been soiled in order for her to change. Again we have PR's statement that JBR did wear the big panties from time to time. So it seems there is nothing improbable about it at all. Why would PR have said this if it were not true? (If she was going to lie she surely could have come up with something better. And simple denial of knowing anything about the too big panties would have been better than what she did say, if it were not true) So, we have good reason to believe JBR did, on past occasions, wear the too big panties. What then, is improbable about her doing so that night? <br /><br />I agree that if JR had got semen on the correct size panties, he'd need to get rid of them. But since we know she must have been undressed why assume semen must have gotten on the panties ? Does it strike anyone else that it's more likely the panties were off before JR ejaculated? Although we have no basis for speculation in either direction, it does seem quite likely (far more than a mere possibility) that he'd have already undressed her before ejaculation (but certainly the opposite is possible too) <br /><br />" While it's true the police never actually checked under her lj's that morning, they certainly could have -- John would have had no way of knowing that. He also would have had no way of knowing whether Patsy would have been questioned about them, and she would have reported that her daughter had been wearing panties when she went to bed. So what happened to them? The police might well have searched the house looking for them, why not?" <br /><br />Even if the police had pulled down the LJs I see no reason they'd have assumed that a pair of panties were missing. Why is it necessary she must have had panties on under the LJs? Boys wear LJs w/o briefs all the time so I see no reason the police would have become suspicious. But if they had pulled down the LJs, and seen panties obviously too big, that would have been suspicious - in fact more suspicious than no panties at all. JR would have no way to know whether or not the police would question PR about the size of the panties either. And PR would say JBR was wearing correctly sized panties. With the LJs in place the size of the panties is a bigger red flag than no panties. <br /><br />The original pair would have been easy to get rid of, easier in fact than the glass. I know from experience (building maintenance) that panties will flush right down the toilet. Much easier than flushing glass (though glass to flushes, but may take more than one flush) <br /><br />To me my scenario is more reasonable than yours, since too big panties are at least as suspicious, if not more so, than no panties under LJs. My scenario is consistent with PR's statements and explains why the too big panties are on her- they were already on her, thus they were re-placed on her (or simply pulled back up) <br /><br />Your theory is that JR replaced the originals with bigger panties, ignoring that the size would be suspicious but fearing that not having two pairs of underwear on would lead the police to search for panties. Additionally all this is based on the idea that JR must have ejaculated on the panties, which at some point were removed (or pulled down) But, as you say, anything is possible. <br /><br />CH <br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-81845520134805573532015-08-19T16:16:52.900-04:002015-08-19T16:16:52.900-04:00There's a difference between what is possible ...There's a difference between what is possible and what is probable. As I see it, it's improbable that JBR was wearing the oversize panties to the party. They'd have been extremely uncomfortable and difficult to move around in. And Patsy would have noticed them when she put JBR to bed that night.<br /><br />It's also improbable that she'd have changed into these panties in the middle of the night. As I've already stated, if she'd soiled herself she'd have simply removed them, no need to replace them.<br /><br />If John's semen had gotten onto the original panties, he would certainly have wanted to remove them and get rid of them. Why bother to replace them? While it's true the police never actually checked under her lj's that morning, they certainly could have -- John would have had no way of knowing that. He also would have had no way of knowing whether Patsy would have been questioned about them, and she would have reported that her daughter had been wearing panties when she went to bed. So what happened to them? The police might well have searched the house looking for them, why not?<br /><br />I think John would therefore have had good reason to want to replace them with a fresh pair, especially since it would not have been that easy to get rid of the original pair. To me this seems the most reasonable scenario, but as CH continually reminds us, anything is possible.DocGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17359004200002936544noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-10357018147610695602015-08-19T15:37:25.178-04:002015-08-19T15:37:25.178-04:00PR stated, to the police, after having all the que...PR stated, to the police, after having all the questions in writing in advance and knowing the issue would be raised, that the big panties were placed in JBR's drawer and that JBR sometimes wore them. I see no reason she'd lie under these circumstances. <br /><br />So, JBR might simply have liked wearing the too big panties. Kids can be weird sometimes. <br /><br />What happened to the correct size panties? What if she put them back in the drawer? <br /><br />CHAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-48513710443507530042015-08-19T15:32:59.262-04:002015-08-19T15:32:59.262-04:00"How do they know for sure she WAS redressed?..."How do they know for sure she WAS redressed?" <br /><br />Well, we assume she was undressed otherwise how could the acute vaginal injuries occur? Included in "undressed" would be having her LJs and panties simply pulled down around her ankles, rather than completely removed. So "redressed" is being used to mean her clothes were put back on or that they were pulled back up. We don't know which happened. <br /><br />I don't think there is anything unlikely about JB having put the big panties on herself, prior to JR taking her down the basement. It's consistent with PR's statement that size 12 panties were placed in JBR's underwear drawer, and that JBR sometimes wore them. To me that offers a good explanation as to why JR put the panties back on her (or pulled them back up) I don't really see the need for JR to replace contaminated panties under the LJs. <br /><br />Doc says that if the police had found her w/o panties they'd have searched the house, for the missing panties, but I respectfully disagree. There is really no reason -as far as I can see- why the police would assume she needed to be wearing panties under the LJs. It seem to me one pair of underwear is enough. Additionally, the police shouldn't touch her LJs to see what, if anything, is underneath. (And in fact the police didn't touch the LJs) Had she been naked the police would have searched for missing underwear, but with the LJs on I see no reason for the police to assume a pair of panties must be missing. <br /><br />Since the panties must have been removed/pulled down at some point, I'm not sure we need to assume any semen got on them. It's certainly a possibility. <br /><br />CHAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-81897181837765707292015-08-19T15:14:31.500-04:002015-08-19T15:14:31.500-04:00Also if she had changed them herself, then what ha...Also if she had changed them herself, then what happened to the original pair? You'd think she'd have left them sitting on the floor, but nothing like that has ever been reported.DocGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17359004200002936544noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-83144997971988896542015-08-19T15:10:06.201-04:002015-08-19T15:10:06.201-04:00I think it possible John could have said something...I think it possible John could have said something to Burke early on, to keep him quiet. A 9 year old isn't that hard to intimidate. The police should certainly have questioned Burke in any case and their failure to do so is just one of their many failures both that morning and thereafter.DocGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17359004200002936544noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-63021450178260923832015-08-19T15:03:28.492-04:002015-08-19T15:03:28.492-04:00It isn't. It's assumed. It's a fair...It isn't. It's assumed. It's a fairly reasonable assumption I think. <br /><br />CH Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-25897459841495076832015-08-19T15:02:53.499-04:002015-08-19T15:02:53.499-04:00It's a reasonable assumption, but can't be...It's a reasonable assumption, but can't be proven of course. It's hard to imagine why JonBenet would have wanted to change to a fresh pair of panties in the middle of the night. If she'd soiled the ones she was in, she could easily have removed them and pulled back her longjohns. DocGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17359004200002936544noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-46757378533042736132015-08-19T14:45:06.166-04:002015-08-19T14:45:06.166-04:00If you've read everything I've written and...If you've read everything I've written and you're still not convinced then it looks like there's nothing more I can do for you. All I'll say is that just about everyone in law enforcement who's followed this case in any detail seriously doubts the intruder theory. And my impression is that the great majority of the public at large who have followed the case agrees. Though everyone seems to have a different idea of who did what when, almost all agree there could have been no intruder. Which tells me that a typical jury would most likely come to the came conclusion.<br /><br />Even someone with a key would have thought to prepare his note in advance, not take the time to write it while in the house. And we would certainly expect to find some trace of this intruder's presence that would be conclusive -- footprints in the lawn, debris in the basement from damp, muddy shoes, displacement of the thick layer of grime on the windowsill, some item the intruder might have left behind, some missing item he may have stolen. An intruder wearing gloves would have left no touch DNA at all and an intruder not wearing gloves would have left fingerprints and DNA all over the place.<br /><br />While it's always possible to concoct some fantastic intruder scenario tailor made to fit the evidence, I've never seen one that made any sense and stood up to scrutiny.<br /><br />And by the way, it isn't necessary to prove that no intruder could possibly have done this crime. As I've argued, there is a huge difference between reasonable doubt and any doubt at all. Just because something is technically possible, does not make it a reasonable hypothesis. There is a difference between a reasonable interpretation of the evidence and the sort of thing any defense lawyer can conjure up out of thin air in a desperate attempt to get his client off. Most juries can catch on pretty quickly to this sort of ploy.DocGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17359004200002936544noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-38143445474323636632015-08-19T14:23:28.154-04:002015-08-19T14:23:28.154-04:00Outside of outright spam, which I very rarely enco...Outside of outright spam, which I very rarely encounter here, I never delete comments. You can see your original comment above, if you know where to look. Unfortunately, the blog software has problems with displaying too many comments on one page, so after a certain point you need to look down at the bottom of the page where you'll see a link labeled "Load More." That's where we are now, and if you can't find it then you won't be able to read the more recent comments. I'll be opening up a new thread soon to deal with that.DocGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17359004200002936544noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-83896565212165781532015-08-19T14:19:18.358-04:002015-08-19T14:19:18.358-04:00Anything is possible. Which is why I prefer to foc...Anything is possible. Which is why I prefer to focus on incontrovertible facts. Nevertheless, the evidence does point to her having been wiped down -- they found cloth residue on the body. Why she was wiped down isn't that clear and you could be right. She could also have changed to the larger panties herself, though it's very hard to see why she'd want to do that.DocGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17359004200002936544noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-26261943490698007322015-08-19T10:30:19.789-04:002015-08-19T10:30:19.789-04:00@bb - not only did the ramseys get him out of the ...@bb - not only did the ramseys get him out of the house quickly, but they brought over the pediatrician to the house that morning. This is very speculative, but I wonder if that was done not only because he was a family friend, but to administer something to Burke before the police arrived. <br /><br />There is such a significant lack of any notice of Burke that morning, even from the detective Arndt who took notice of everything. I just find it extremely odd that there is nothing much about him that day and we all don't question it. <br /><br />There is a 911 call where some think Burke is talking in the background, and the Ramseys said he was not in the room at the time. Lots of inconsistencies when there shouldn't be. <br /><br />BR is untouchable and always has been from day one. Don't think it isn't possible for a child to want to protect his parents if the parents tell him/her to not say anything or "mommy and daddy will go away forever" or if he did do something and doesn't want to get in trouble. I know he was interviewed at some point and nothing came of it, but from what I remember of the very little information that was released, BR said some things that were very questionable and cryptic. <br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-68572750083114944742015-08-19T10:01:27.215-04:002015-08-19T10:01:27.215-04:00Couldn't she have been wiped down for other re...Couldn't she have been wiped down for other reasons? Such as she wet herself or soiled herself? <br /><br />If it was determined she was wiped down, couldn't they have found out when she was wiped down - such as finding any cloth debris on her night gown or underwear? How was it that they could tell she was wiped down? I can't imaging if she was wiped down in haste (post attack) that it would have been such a perfect job that no DNA would be found anywhere. This to me seems that she might have been washed in the bathtub (was the bathtub/bathroom even checked?) more thoroughly than just simply being wiped down while lying on the ground. <br /><br />An adult is more finely astute to what fits and what doesn't fit so if JBR was wearing oversized panties, I bet she put them on herself. (if everyone sure that the panties were changed from another pair she was wearing earlier in the night or is that just speculation since she had on a larger pair and was wiped down? Could it be she had those on all along?). Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-10783244113123137372015-08-19T09:49:29.385-04:002015-08-19T09:49:29.385-04:00How was it known that the panties were replaced by...How was it known that the panties were replaced by someone else other than JBR? <br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-4738350247691425772015-08-19T02:51:34.140-04:002015-08-19T02:51:34.140-04:00So DocG keeps deleting my comments..I must have hi...So DocG keeps deleting my comments..I must have hit a nerve.<br /><br />DocG said:<br />It's really very simple: no intruder theory is consistent with a 2 1/2 page hand printed note written on a pad from the house; no intruder theory is consistent with the body being hidden in a remote room in the basement.<br /><br />This is simply not true. I've read every blog on here and pretty much every reply and you still haven't given me a good enough explanation. There is most definitely intruder theories which match both of those statements above.<br /><br />No one can arrest JR...plan and simple. There isn't enough evidence. An intruder who knew the family had motive to write the letter (with the pad from the house) and to hide the body in the basement. So unless you can prove that didn't happen, JR will always be innocent.<br /><br />ZJAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com