The Pineapple Issue

[KingCoyote]

I'm back-tracking just a little. Was it John or Patsy's mother than said JB would scream?

It was Nedra Paugh in ST P 102 (Paperback). "She (JBR) didn't like you pulling her out of her bed...She would scream bloody murder."

KingCoyote

[Zoey]

I forgot about that detail that this girl and JB were in the same dance school. Where did you find info on this?
I only heard about it when I saw the victims father on some crime show (recently) complaining about the BPD. He, the father, seems to think that his daughters molestation and the murder of JB are related. He had a bunch of reasons for believing this...including the dance class association. Unfortunately I can't google him because he did not want the family last name publized since his daughter was a minor and was a victim of sexual assault.


From the link I provided:

Before going to bed, Amy's mother turned on the burglar alarm. Around midnight, Amy woke up to find a man standing over her bed, his hand over her mouth. "She remembered the intruder addressing her by her name," says Peterson. "He said, 'I know who you are.' He repeated those things a few times, apparently. 'I'll knock you out. Shut up.'"

[elvislives]

It was Nedra Paugh in ST P 102 (Paperback). "She (JBR) didn't like you pulling her out of her bed...She would scream bloody murder."

KingCoyote

the following is from Tober's post #79.

When Lou asks if someone could have gotten her up and fed her pineapple, John replies "I can't imagine that somebody could have gotten her up, fed her pineapple, and she wouldn't have screamed bloody murder." When Lou aks "What if it was a stranger?" Lou then says "Well, it was." to which John replies "Had to be." John is denying that anyone in the home could have gotten JonBenet the pineapple, and denying that she could have gotten it for herself, while at the same time implying that she ate it at the Whites and that a stranger (intruder) had to have given it to her.
__________________

[Tober]

Can we really infer anything about the teabag?

Based on the police line of questioning (among other things) concerning the glass with the tea bag and the bowl of pineapple, it can be inferred that the police were able to eliminate the potential that anyone other than a Ramsey placed the glass, tea bag, and bowl of pineapple there.

[shill]

Based on the police line of questioning (among other things) concerning the glass with the tea bag and the bowl of pineapple, it can be inferred that the police were able to eliminate the potential that anyone other than a Ramsey placed the glass, tea bag, and bowl of pineapple there.
Then JB most likely got up on her own and found the bowl of pineapple, which would mean she was most likely killed after Midnight.

[bullmoose]

Based on the police line of questioning (among other things) concerning the glass with the tea bag and the bowl of pineapple, it can be inferred that the police were able to eliminate the potential that anyone other than a Ramsey placed the glass, tea bag, and bowl of pineapple there.
But can it be inferred by a knowledgeable inferer that the police questioning truly inferred the inference that you infer about the elimination of inferred potential? To me, this infers the inference that you either infer that you have a secret, inside knowledge of the police investigation; or that it can be inferred that you have access to, by inference, somebodies' notes which infers such an inherantly inferrant conclusion.:biggrin:

[Kor]

How about this perp from Australia?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mr_Cruel
He's an example to how perps can easily prevaricate against the police and how they become more caution after every crime they committed. After reading Cruel’s case, I can understand why the wipe down with cloth on JB, the ransom note, or the other activities inside the house by the killer. I am still not sure if the killer had been stalking JB or just acquaintance to Ramsey and their house. Somehow, I think it might help us some on understanding JB’s killer by learning the profiles of Mr. Cruel’s crimes.

[Tober]

IMO, the pineapple proves absolutely, beyond any shadow of doubt, that JonBenet was awake and out of bed at a time when John and Patsy insist (yes, they insist this, John even guarantees it) she was sound asleep in bed. JonBenet absolutely consumed that pineapple sometime after they arrived home. A relatively short time later she was bludgeoned in the head. Notice that John and Patsy don't want anything at all to do with this pineapple except what of it might benefit them, e.g. it's mysterious so an intruder must have given it to her or she ate it at the Whites. Classic criminal distancing at its finest. Deny it, but seize upon the opportunity it presents. We know JonBenet didn't eat it at the Whites. Are we really supposed to believe an intruder gave it to her? Seriously, are we? Did the intruder bring it with him on Dec. 25? Did he bring it in on Dec. 23, planning to use it to "lure" JonBenet on Dec. 25? Did he feed it to her and then wait for partial digestion before killing her? If he brought it in, it had to be in its own container, right? Why did he put it in the Ramsey's bowl? To set them up? Why did he put their serving spoon in it? To mess with them? Ha-ha, look at this big serving spoon I put in here? Did he enjoy a cup of tea while waiting for the pineapple to partially digest? Did he bring in the tea bag, too? Patsy "distanced" herself from that as well. As one can see, the "story options" John and Patsy give us for the pineapple just don't fly. IMO, JonBenet was awake to eat the pineapple shortly (relatively) after they arrived home. What happened relatively shortly after that, say, approximately around midnight, that John and Patsy are trying to hide? I think anyone willing to look at the pineapple issue objectively knows the answer. (IMO)

[shill]

IMO, the pineapple proves absolutely, beyond any shadow of doubt, that JonBenet was awake and out of bed at a time when John and Patsy insist (yes, they insist this, John even guarantees it) she was sound asleep in bed. JonBenet absolutely consumed that pineapple sometime after they arrived home. A relatively short time later she was bludgeoned in the head. Notice that John and Patsy don't want anything at all to do with this pineapple except what of it might benefit them, e.g. it's mysterious so an intruder must have given it to her or she ate it at the Whites. Classic criminal distancing at its finest. Deny it, but seize upon the opportunity it presents. We know JonBenet didn't eat it at the Whites. Are we really supposed to believe an intruder gave it to her? Seriously, are we? Did the intruder bring it with him on Dec. 25? Did he bring it in on Dec. 23, planning to use it to "lure" JonBenet on Dec. 25? Did he feed it to her and then wait for partial digestion before killing her? If he brought it in, it had to be in its own container, right? Why did he put it in the Ramsey's bowl? To set them up? Why did he put their serving spoon in it? To mess with them? Ha-ha, look at this big serving spoon I put in here? Did he enjoy a cup of tea while waiting for the pineapple to partially digest? Did he bring in the tea bag, too? Patsy "distanced" herself from that as well. As one can see, the "story options" John and Patsy give us for the pineapple just don't fly. IMO, JonBenet was awake to eat the pineapple shortly (relatively) after they arrived home. What happened relatively shortly after that, say, approximately around midnight, that John and Patsy are trying to hide? I think anyone willing to look at the pineapple issue objectively knows the answer. (IMO)
You don't know when she ate the pineapple and neither do John and Patsy.
JB knows when she ate the pineapple and she knows who killed her. You don't know anything Tober and your speculation is biased because you believe the Ramseys did it.
The evidence points to Burke getting the pineapple out after P&J went to bed. The lack of JB fingerprints point to her helping herself to the pineapple with her hands after P&R went to bed.

[bullmoose]

IMO, the pineapple proves absolutely, beyond any shadow of doubt, that JonBenet was awake and out of bed at a time when John and Patsy insist (yes, they insist this, John even guarantees it) she was sound asleep in bed. JonBenet absolutely consumed that pineapple sometime after they arrived home. A relatively short time later she was bludgeoned in the head. Notice that John and Patsy don't want anything at all to do with this pineapple except what of it might benefit them, e.g. it's mysterious so an intruder must have given it to her or she ate it at the Whites. Classic criminal distancing at its finest. Deny it, but seize upon the opportunity it presents. We know JonBenet didn't eat it at the Whites. Are we really supposed to believe an intruder gave it to her? Seriously, are we? Did the intruder bring it with him on Dec. 25? Did he bring it in on Dec. 23, planning to use it to "lure" JonBenet on Dec. 25? Did he feed it to her and then wait for partial digestion before killing her? If he brought it in, it had to be in its own container, right? Why did he put it in the Ramsey's bowl? To set them up? Why did he put their serving spoon in it? To mess with them? Ha-ha, look at this big serving spoon I put in here? Did he enjoy a cup of tea while waiting for the pineapple to partially digest? Did he bring in the tea bag, too? Patsy "distanced" herself from that as well. As one can see, the "story options" John and Patsy give us for the pineapple just don't fly. IMO, JonBenet was awake to eat the pineapple shortly (relatively) after they arrived home. What happened relatively shortly after that, say, approximately around midnight, that John and Patsy are trying to hide? I think anyone willing to look at the pineapple issue objectively knows the answer. (IMO) Tober, you say things that are very hard to explain unless you were there in the thick of the investigation; it almost seems like you are reading from a detectives working notes. Either that or you have an extraordinary imagination, putting yourself there and making unsupported statements right and left. Come on, Tober,come clean, inquiring minds want to know,is it notes, imagination,or what? How do we bona fide your statements? Can we?

[Zoey]

Why not? He did everything else to set the Ramseys' up, why not this as well?

And Tober, you are the one that has gone on and on about how you know for a fact that Burke made himself a glass of tea and drank it in is his usual setting at the table, so I thought this was settled because you said it was fact.

But still, IMO, the tea bag has nothing to do with the murder. It came about to be the next morning (the 26th) when everyone was wandering in and out of that kitchen.

[nuisanceposter]

But still, IMO, the tea bag has nothing to do with the murder. It came about to be the next morning (the 26th) when everyone was wandering in and out of that kitchen.

Then why, in all of these years with all of this discussion about the items on the breakfast table, has no one ever claimed it to answer the speculation?

[Zoey]

Then why, in all of these years with all of this discussion about the items on the breakfast table, has no one ever claimed it to answer the speculation?


IMO, I can think of two things:

A. Because all the blame had been put on the Ramsey's, no one came forward because they figured, why bother?

B. Because they were afraid to come forward, as in, if I admit to having tea, will I then become a suspect?

I understand these may be far off base, but IMO, they do make sense.

And to be honest, it has just been in that last little while that I even heard about these things being out on the table, and I have followed this for a very long time.

[Tober]

It is my opinion that Burke placed the tea bag there. That doesn't mean I'm correct and I'm not stating it as absolute. There's just as much a chance that Patsy placed it there, having had a cup of tea while perpetrating the psychologically (and physically) exhausting staging. I think it can certainly be reasonably inferred, based on the police line of questioning about the items on the breakfast table, that the police were able to eliminate the potential that anyone other than a Ramsey placed those items there. That then begs the fair question: Why are John and Patsy being deceptive about the items? Remember, and this is very important, if the Ramseys are lying about giving JonBenet pineapple, then that means they are also lying about a sound asleep JonBenet being put to bed and not awakening. Why is it so very important to them for her to have been asleep? Why is it so important to them to deny that JonBenet could have gotten the pineapple herself? Why is it so important to them to deny that anyone in the home could have given her the pineapple? Why is it so important to them to not admit that they had the pineapple on hand and to act as if it's mysterious and they don't know where it came from? The pineapple issue must be squared. John and Patsy were given opportunity to do just that, but were unable to do so, only offering us two options for how JonBenet got it: Either she ate it at the Whites (we know that wasn't the case) or an intruder gave it to her (logic-defying and contradictory to the fingerprint evidence, etc.). This post is my opinion.

[shill]

It is my opinion that Burke placed the tea bag there. That doesn't mean I'm correct and I'm not stating it as absolute. There's just as much a chance that Patsy placed it there, having had a cup of tea while perpetrating the psychologically (and physically) exhausting staging. I think it can certainly be reasonably inferred, based on the police line of questioning about the items on the breakfast table, that the police were able to eliminate the potential that anyone other than a Ramsey placed those items there. That then begs the fair question: Why are John and Patsy being deceptive about the items? Remember, and this is very important, if the Ramseys are lying about giving JonBenet pineapple, then that means they are also lying about a sound asleep JonBenet being put to bed and not awakening. Why is it so very important to them for her to have been asleep? Why is it so important to them to deny that JonBenet could have gotten the pineapple herself? Why is it so important to them to deny that anyone in the home could have given her the pineapple? Why is it so important to them to not admit that they had the pineapple on hand and to act as if it's mysterious and they don't know where it came from? The pineapple issue must be squared. John and Patsy were given opportunity to do just that, but were unable to do so, only offering us two options for how JonBenet got it: Either she ate it at the Whites (we know that wasn't the case) or an intruder gave it to her (logic-defying and contradictory to the fingerprint evidence, etc.). This post is my opinion.

Patsy or John did not put the glass there. Burke did and since his fingerprints are on the bowl, it's a 50/50 chance he put that there too
It's important for you to make the Rs liars for your theory to work. There is no proof they are lying about how the bowl of pineapple got there and that they didn't feed it to JB.
Just because Patsy doesn't think JB would get pineapple for herself doesn't make it so and it doesn't mean Patsy was trying to make it look like an intruder fed her. It just means Patsy answered the question. In Her Opinion, JB would not get pineapple for herself. I argue Patsy was wrong about JB getting pineapple herself.

[KingCoyote]

I have another 2 cents to throw into this discussion.

Assuming PR/JR are telling the truth about JBR being zonked and put straight to bed I have this idea about what happened. (I have mentioned it before with the issue of how the pineapple got into the house: a caterer who just left it, but now I add another idea)

Burke and a friend, who likes pineapple have a mid afternoon snack on Christmas day. Burke concocts his "iced tea" while his friend uses the oversized spoon to munch on the pineapple. They leave both on the table in early to mid afternoon and the glass/bowl are just overlooked.

JBR must get up at around 11PM or so and go downstairs for some reason. She sees the bowl and glass and gets up on a chair to pluck a piece of pineapple out of the bowl with her fingers without touching the bowl. But she only eats a small amount...maybe a piece or two...but she is known to like pineapple. So...either the small amount satisfies her (maybe) or she is interrupted by the killer (but remember we need an hour or two for the pineapple to digest) or she doesn't like the taste of the pineapple because it has been sitting out for about 8-9 hours warming up and getting a little acid tasting so she only eats one piece and goes "yuck" and goes on about her business for about an hour or so before she does encounter the killer. (You choose the killer and their motive)

Just an idea or two.....not saying it is fact...just trying to work with what we have.

KingCoyote

[thewhitewitch1]

I have another 2 cents to throw into this discussion.

Assuming PR/JR are telling the truth about JBR being zonked and put straight to bed I have this idea about what happened. (I have mentioned it before with the issue of how the pineapple got into the house: a caterer who just left it, but now I add another idea)

Burke and a friend, who likes pineapple have a mid afternoon snack on Christmas day. Burke concocts his "iced tea" while his friend uses the oversized spoon to munch on the pineapple. They leave both on the table in early to mid afternoon and the glass/bowl are just overlooked.

JBR must get up at around 11PM or so and go downstairs for some reason. She sees the bowl and glass and gets up on a chair to pluck a piece of pineapple out of the bowl with her fingers without touching the bowl. But she only eats a small amount...maybe a piece or two...but she is known to like pineapple. So...either the small amount satisfies her (maybe) or she is interrupted by the killer (but remember we need an hour or two for the pineapple to digest) or she doesn't like the taste of the pineapple because it has been sitting out for about 8-9 hours warming up and getting a little acid tasting so she only eats one piece and goes "yuck" and goes on about her business for about an hour or so before she does encounter the killer. (You choose the killer and their motive)

Just an idea or two.....not saying it is fact...just trying to work with what we have.

KingCoyote

I guess I am just a bit curious about why Patsy couldn't have suggested the caterers bringing the pineapple in and was so adamant about JB not getting up in the night to get a snack. She wouldn't even allow for the possibility.
I feel that she absolutely did not want anyone to know that JB had gotten up at all that night, for whatever reason. IMO

[KingCoyote]

I guess I am just a bit curious about why Patsy couldn't have suggested the caterers bringing the pineapple in and was so adamant about JB not getting up in the night to get a snack. She wouldn't even allow for the possibility.
I feel that she absolutely did not want anyone to know that JB had gotten up at all that night, for whatever reason. IMO

tww1:

I am as puzzled as you are.....:shrug: :confused:

Sometimes this case makes me think I live in the GREAT STATE OF CONFUSION

KC

[Zoey]

I guess I am just a bit curious about why Patsy couldn't have suggested the caterers bringing the pineapple in and was so adamant about JB not getting up in the night to get a snack. She wouldn't even allow for the possibility.
I feel that she absolutely did not want anyone to know that JB had gotten up at all that night, for whatever reason. IMO


I have never had the benefits of having anything catered so I not real sure how it works, but don't you call in and place an order and they bring what you have ordered? Could the caterers have made a mistake and brought in a pineapple dish, and when they realized the error, put the pineapple in the fridge, and hence, Patsy would not have any idea that it was there?

[bullmoose]

I guess I am just a bit curious about why Patsy couldn't have suggested the caterers bringing the pineapple in and was so adamant about JB not getting up in the night to get a snack. She wouldn't even allow for the possibility.
I feel that she absolutely did not want anyone to know that JB had gotten up at all that night, for whatever reason. IMOIsn't it just possible that she was telling the truth and knew nothing of the pineapple? I feel that she absolutely did not know what happened that night. Isn't it odd, if the caterers brought the pineapple to the Ramsey's house, that no one has come forth from the catering company to clear the matter up? Or maybe thats not what happened. And the BPD which went to such great lengths and to great expense in order to try toconnect Patsy to the duct tape and cord[unsuccessfully, as it turned out]didn't seem to do anything to try pin down where the pineapple came from. Did it come from the catering company? Did it come from where Patsy shopped? Surely with fresh pineapple it wouldn't have been beyond their detective skills to go to Safeway and check the itemized sales receipts for Christmas week? They did it with the hardware stores, in Boulder and in Atlanta, didn't they? It seems easy enough, so why not? Maybe Tober can give us some idea as to why he is so sure that it can be reasonably inferred that the Ramseys are lying about the pineapple based on the police questioning. What questioning do you speak of? Are you using detective notes, again? If the police were or are sure they were lying, why didn't they track down the origin of the pineapple to prove them liars? I'm just curious, this is JMHO.:rolleyes:

[Tober]

During the 2000 Atlanta interviews, Michael Kane asks Patsy "Do you recall, during the interviews in June of 1998, being told there was, in fact, pineapple in her system?" Patsy answers "I don't remember the specific discussion. I believe someone said there may have been something that looked like pineapple. I'm not - no one has told me that it was definitively pineapple." Kane then asks "Did John--so John never told you that Lou Smit told him it was definitely pineapple?" Patsy answers "No." Remember, that when Lou told John it was definitely pineapple John asked "Are you sure?" to which Lou replied "Yes." John then asked "No question?" to which Lou replied "No question." So Patsy expects us to believe that she has never been told it was definitely pineapple in JonBenet's upper intestine, even though Lou told John it definitely was? We're expected to believe that John wouldn't have told Patsy something so important? We're expected to believe that John and Patsy wouldn't have discussed the pineapple? Come on, we're being taken for a ride with this pineapple issue and the Ramseys are doing the driving. This post is my opinion.

[Tober]

Maybe Tober can give us some idea as to why he is so sure that it can be reasonably inferred that the Ramseys are lying about the pineapple based on the police questioning.

I said it can be reasonably inferred, based on the police line of questioning about the items on the breakfast table, that the police were able to eliminate the potential that anyone other than a Ramsey placed those items there. (IMO)

[bullmoose]

Still, why not track the pineapple's origin down with as much energy as was expended on the cord and duct tape? The reasonable fact that you would tell your wife in the same circumstances about the pineapple does not mean John Ramsey would have discussed the pineapple with Patsy; how can anyone know how many of the horrible details about the autopsy were shared by John? Her state of mind was probably fragile; IMO John was probably protecting her by not telling her something that would have been confusing and very upsetting; since as both Ramseys have said any pineapple was not from them having it.I am an IDI, this is JMHO. So I believe the Ramseys weren't lying, and didn't put the pineapple out, so I totally disagree with your inference.

[elvislives]

[QUOTE=bullmoose;8804353]Still, why not track the pineapple's origin down with as much energy as was expended on the cord and duct tape?
QUOTE]

IMO the BPD DID try to track down the origin of the pineapple. Supermarkets itemize everything, so I assume they did not find any evidence of Patsy buying pineapple in the week or so before Christmas. If she had bought pineapple, they would have found evidence of that and imo it would have leaked.

[elvislives]

I have never had the benefits of having anything catered so I not real sure how it works, but don't you call in and place an order and they bring what you have ordered? Could the caterers have made a mistake and brought in a pineapple dish, and when they realized the error, put the pineapple in the fridge, and hence, Patsy would not have any idea that it was there?

My experience with caterers is that they bring the foods you order plus lots of extras. All the leftovers end up your frig, in your containers. My suspicion is that the caterers brought the pineapple which ended up in Patsy's frig. I doubt she bought it--BPD would have found evidence of that. And I think its ludicrous to assume that an intruder would have brought a snack for his victim.

[andU]

Thank goodness John and Barbara Fernie, and the Rev. were there to help them too. The more the merrier.
Nothing like having a bunch of people over after your daughter has been "kidnapped" to add to the confusion and mess up the crime scene; especially when you've been repeatedly warned not to tell anyone or your child will be beheaded. Whatever FW did, just remember....he was asked to be there. He did not come there on his own to "tamper with the crime scene."

Perhaps he had already done so....

[andU]

There was very similar crime in the Ramsey neighborhood. I saw the father of the victim interviewed on some crime show. His wife and daughter were home alone (he was traveling for business) and someone broke into the house at night to molest the daughter. The mother basically caught him in the act and he fled. The victims father is angry at the BPD because he felt they didn't do too much to solve the crime. He was also pissed because he thought after the Ramsey murder the BPD should have re-interviewed his daughter to see if the crimes were related.

One thing that always puzzles me about kids and crime...why didn't this girl scream, knowing that her mother was in the next room? Same with Elizabeth Smart...why would she allow some intruder to take her out of the house without screaming bloody murder? Ditto for the kidnapped kid in Missouri...why not call out for help. I just don't understand that behaviour, but for some reason it happens all the time.

Maybe they are so frightened that they can't scream?

[bullmoose]

[QUOTE=bullmoose;8804353]Still, why not track the pineapple's origin down with as much energy as was expended on the cord and duct tape?
QUOTE]

IMO the BPD DID try to track down the origin of the pineapple. Supermarkets itemize everything, so I assume they did not find any evidence of Patsy buying pineapple in the week or so before Christmas. If she had bought pineapple, they would have found evidence of that and imo it would have leaked.Do you remember what a big deal Steve Thomas made about finding cord and duct tape at the hardware store where Patsy had purchased items with the same price on them as was charged to Patsy buying things at the store? McGuicken's, unfortunately for Steve, didn't itemize what was bought, and of course, as we all know, there were hundreds, even thousands of items with the same price tags on them at that store. If Steve Thomas did try to track the pineapple down at Safeway, which itemizes everything, he apparently found nothing. If the catering company had been in the habit of bringing pineapple out to catered affairs, it should have been easy to verify; thus placing pineapple irrefutably at the Ramseys. But, do you hear crickets chirping on the subject among those who insist the Ramseys knew about and/or put that pineapple out. We don't even have a Steve Thomas' account about flying to Atlanta to check out a lead that a store employee remembered Patsy buying the pineapple, just the one about the cord and tape. But, again a dry hole, no match. About tracking down and proving how the pineapple got there, as far as I can tell, outside of the Ramseys being continuously called liars, there is just the sound of crickets. As they say on the Antique Road Show; where is the provenance, the line of linking evidence?JMHO:biggrin:

[elvislives]

[QUOTE=elvislives;8804373]Do you remember what a big deal Steve Thomas made about finding cord and duct tape at the hardware store where Patsy had purchased items with the same price on them as was charged to Patsy buying things at the store? McGuicken's, unfortunately for Steve, didn't itemize what was bought, and of course, as we all know, there were hundreds, even thousands of items with the same price tags on them at that store. If Steve Thomas did try to track the pineapple down at Safeway, which itemizes everything, he apparently found nothing. If the catering company had been in the habit of bringing pineapple out to catered affairs, it should have been easy to verify; thus placing pineapple irrefutably at the Ramseys. But, do you hear crickets chirping on the subject among those who insist the Ramseys knew about and/or put that pineapple out. We don't even have a Steve Thomas' account about flying to Atlanta to check out a lead that a store employee remembered Patsy buying the pineapple, just the one about the cord and tape. But, again a dry hole, no match. About tracking down and proving how the pineapple got there, as far as I can tell, outside of the Ramseys being continuously called liars, there is just the sound of crickets. As they say on the Antique Road Show; where is the provenance, the line of linking evidence?JMHO:biggrin:

I do remember ST trying to prove that Patsy bought cord and duct tape. I never understood his reasoning here. Does he think Patsy premeditated JBs murder by buying the murder supplies weeks (I think, maybe it was days) before the murder?
Was he suggesting that Patsy planned the murder of JB? Or am I just inferring too much from this?

[Zoey]

[QUOTE=bullmoose;8804447]

I do remember ST trying to prove that Patsy bought cord and duct tape. I never understood his reasoning here. Does he think Patsy premeditated JBs murder by buying the murder supplies weeks (I think, maybe it was days) before the murder?
Was he suggesting that Patsy planned the murder of JB? Or am I just inferring too much from this?


Which kind of shoots the whole accidental killing down, doesn't it? If you buy things that are used in a crime such as this, IMO, that is not an accident, it is premeditated murder.

[bullmoose]

[QUOTE=elvislives;8804454]


Which kind of shoots the whole accidental killing down, doesn't it? If you buy things that are used in a crime such as this, IMO, that is not an accident, it is premeditated murder.I remember watching a Larry King interview from 2000 or so, I'm not sure; where Steve Thomas faced off with the Ramseys. He was obnoxiously insistent that Patsy was guilty as hell; rude beyond belief, IMO, yet towards the end of the program, when he stopped for air, Alan Dershowitz pointed out to him that the case he insisted was what happened in its entirety was, in Dershowitz's mind no more than a case of accidental death, or manslaughter. Steve was already worked up and didn't seem pleased to hear this. Obvious to me, in any case, was the firm conviction by Steve Thomas that this was a case of premeditated murder.I think that is why he went to such lengths to connect Patsy to the Cord and tape. But in the end, all I heard was the sound of lonesome crickets; IMO he did not make his case. I will give him this: I believe he is totally sincere in thinking he has this case figured out. Of course I don't.

[elvislives]

Maybe they are so frightened that they can't scream?

Probably...who knows? But again, I think its risky to try and draw conclusions based on someones behavior under stressful circumstances. If JB had JRs shirt fibers in her underwear, THAT is evidence of his guilt. His checking the mail or not consoling Patsy or not seeming as upset as others thought he should is not evidence of guilt imo.

[Tober]

Still, why not track the pineapple's origin down with as much energy as was expended on the cord and duct tape?

How do you know this wasn't done? Even though the Ramseys wanted the police to reveal every little detail about what they knew to them, the police most certainly were not going to do this. Though the Ramseys demanded (through their lawyers) copies of the police reports and were given some, they weren't given all. Due to the Ramseys aggressive manipulation of the investigation, the police had to be certain that particular information was held back from the Ramseys, so that the police could maintain a certain threshold of evidentiary integrity. Based on the police line of questioning about the pineapple, the reasonable inference can be made that the police were able to eliminate the potential for anyone other than a Ramsey to have given JonBenet the pineapple. This post is my opinion.

[elvislives]

How do you know this wasn't done? Even though the Ramseys wanted the police to reveal every little detail about what they knew to them, the police most certainly were not going to do this. Though the Ramseys demanded (through their lawyers) copies of the police reports and were given some, they weren't given all. Due to the Ramseys aggressive manipulation of the investigation, the police had to be certain that particular information was held back from the Ramseys, so that the police could maintain a certain threshold of evidentiary integrity. Based on the police line of questioning about the pineapple, the reasonable inferrence can be made that the police were able to eliminate the potential for anyone other than a Ramsey to have given JonBenet the pineapple. This post is my opinion.

I don't think that's a reasonable inferrence at all. I would infer that since no evidence of Patsy buying pineapple was shown or even leaked, that they have no evidence of her buying pineapple. It would have been very easy for them to contradict her statements that she knew nothing about the pineapple by producing and itemized receipt from Safeway. They didn't imo because they didnt find one. If they had, it would have ended up in ST's book. jmo

[Tober]

I do remember ST trying to prove that Patsy bought cord and duct tape. I never understood his reasoning here. Does he think Patsy premeditated JBs murder by buying the murder supplies weeks (I think, maybe it was days) before the murder?

No. This post is my opinion.

[Tober]

Even though the pineapple was the same type that Patsy would buy at Safeway, and even though it was on their table in a bowl owned by them, with only Patsy's and Burke's fingerprints on the bowl, and even though their spoon was in the bowl, and even though JonBenet consumed it sometime after they arrived home, some are of the opinion that the pineapple was in the Ramsey's refrigerator unbeknownst to Patsy and John. Granted, Patsy was a little ditsy at times, but are we really supposed to believe that this pineapple was in her refrigerator unbeknownst to her and John? Don't you think that's a stretch? This post is my opinion.

[Zoey]

Even though the pineapple was the same type that Patsy would buy at Safeway, and even though it was on their table in a bowl owned by them, with only Patsy's and Burke's fingerprints on the bowl, and even though their spoon was in the bowl, and even though JonBenet consumed it sometime after they arrived home, some are of the opinion that the pineapple was in the Ramsey's refrigerator unbeknownst to Patsy and John. Granted, Patsy was a little ditsy at times, but are we really supposed to believe that this pineapple was in her refrigerator unbeknownst to her and John? Don't you think that's a stretch? This post is my opinion.


No. Of course, this is just my opinion.

[LindaA]

[QUOTE=bullmoose;8804447]

I do remember ST trying to prove that Patsy bought cord and duct tape. I never understood his reasoning here. Does he think Patsy premeditated JBs murder by buying the murder supplies weeks (I think, maybe it was days) before the murder?
Was he suggesting that Patsy planned the murder of JB? Or am I just inferring too much from this?

FWIW, that's the way I interpreted it. However, I guess it could be used to prove that the items came from the Ramsey home. And that betgs the question, "what happened to the rest of it?"

[shill]

[QUOTE=bullmoose;8804447]

I do remember ST trying to prove that Patsy bought cord and duct tape. I never understood his reasoning here. Does he think Patsy premeditated JBs murder by buying the murder supplies weeks (I think, maybe it was days) before the murder?
Was he suggesting that Patsy planned the murder of JB? Or am I just inferring too much from this?

I've argued the premeditation point in the past.

And the cord appears to be Parachute Chord bought at an Amy Surplus store, not the hardware store as ST theorized.

[elvislives]

Even though the pineapple was the same type that Patsy would buy at Safeway, and even though it was on their table in a bowl owned by them, with only Patsy's and Burke's fingerprints on the bowl, and even though their spoon was in the bowl, and even though JonBenet consumed it sometime after they arrived home, some are of the opinion that the pineapple was in the Ramsey's refrigerator unbeknownst to Patsy and John. Granted, Patsy was a little ditsy at times, but are we really supposed to believe that this pineapple was in her refrigerator unbeknownst to her and John? Don't you think that's a stretch? This post is my opinion.

I dont think thats a stretch at all. They had just had a party catered and had all the leftovers in their frig. I have used caterers before and found all sorts of mystery foods over the next week or so. Now that you've jostled my memory, the caterers I use always wear latex gloves.
IF the caterers brought the pineapple, they would put any leftovers in Patsy's frig, in Patsy's containers. The lack of any caterers prints on the bowl could be because they wore gloves. Patsy's prints on the bowl could be because she moved the bowl in the frig to get to something else...or she washed and dried the bowl thus leaving her prints. Burkes could be on it if he got the bowl out of the frig.
So I dont think that J&P not knowing whats in their frig is at all unusual. I couldnt tell you whats in my frig right now. IMO there is an innocuous explanation for the pineapple issue.

[bullmoose]

There are dishes in my fridge right now that I have no clue as to their origin, my wife says they are leftovers,but I don't know from what. I want to clear the fridge out but I fear that some of the dishes may have sentient life forms growing in them, so I just leave them alone.:biggrin:

[andU]

I think we should go back to the plantation where the pineapple originated and follow it from there.... huh? Someone must have a logical explaination of how that stuff that was of pineapple consistancy got in JB's intestine. :cool:

[sweetcharlotte]

Does anyone know when they first asked Patsy (and John) about the pineapple? How long after 12/26/96?

[Tober]

They had just had a party catered and had all the leftovers in their frig.

Those who contend that caterers left the pineapple in the Ramseys refrigerator are offering an "excuse" for the pineapple on behalf of the Ramseys that they themselves were unwilling to give. John and Patsy had much time to think about the pineapple and numerous opportunities to offer a reasonable explanation for it, and not once did they suggest that caterers left it. You're asking me to take "your" word for it when the "caterers left it" scenario is beyond the scope of possibilities offered by John and Patsy, is beyond the physical evidence (Patsy's and Burke's fingerprints the only ones on the bowl), and beyond the circumstantial evidence (it's in the Ramsey's bowl on their table with their spoon in it, JonBenet consumed it within a relatively short time after they arrived home). Add to that the fact that no caterers have come forward saying they left the pineapple. When considering this case I have two things to work with, the evidence and what the Ramseys give me (comments, statements, actions, reactions). Every time I stray from the most utterly obvious and logical explanation for the pineapple, I end up right back at the most utterly obvious and logical explanation for it. The "caterers left it" scenario is not supported by the physical and circumstantial evidence connected to the pineapple, nor is it supported by the Ramseys. If you don't believe me, contact John and tell him that you think the caterers left it, and see what he has to say. Remember, even though Lou Smit told John it was definitely pineapple in JonBenet's upper intestine, the Ramseys want to "distance" themselves from the pineapple so much that they go so far as to call it an "urban legend" in DOI. This post is my opinion.

[nuisanceposter]

I think you've hit upon the crux of the pineapple bugaboo, Tober. It's not so much the fact that it's in JonBenet's intestine as the fact that the Rs disavow any knowledge of it, right down to it even being in their house. I'm sure the caterer aspect would have been checked, and I assume, like the teabag, if anyone other than the Rs was responsible for it, then that person(s) would have come forward by now to claim it rather than allow the investigation to flounder and the Rs be suspected unfairly.

Occam's razor - Patsy's and Burke's prints are on the bowl because one or both of them handled it, and the pineapple was out that night because one of them set it out. The pineapple is in JB's system because she ate it that night. To explain away the pineapple as caterer-brought and lack of prints as being the result of caterers wearing gloves is really reaching for any explanation other than the most obvious one. Also IMO.

[Zoey]

Those who contend that caterers left the pineapple in the Ramseys refrigerator are offering an "excuse" for the pineapple on behalf of the Ramseys that they themselves were unwilling to give. John and Patsy had much time to think about the pineapple and numerous opportunities to offer a reasonable explanation for it, and not once did they suggest that caterers left it. You're asking me to take "your" word for it when the "caterers left it" scenario is beyond the scope of possibilities offered by John and Patsy, is beyond the physical evidence (Patsy's and Burke's fingerprints the only ones on the bowl), and beyond the circumstantial evidence (it's in the Ramsey's bowl on their table with their spoon in it, JonBenet consumed it within a relatively short time after they arrived home). Add to that the fact that no caterers have come forward saying they left the pineapple. When considering this case I have two things to work with, the evidence and what the Ramseys give me (comments, statements, actions, reactions). Every time I stray from the most utterly obvious and logical explanation for the pineapple, I end up right back at the most utterly obvious and logical explanation for it. The "caterers left it" scenario is not supported by the physical and circumstantial evidence connected to the pineapple, nor is it supported by the Ramseys. If you don't believe me, contact John and tell him that you think the caterers left it, and see what he has to say. Remember, even though Lou Smit told John it was definitely pineapple in JonBenet's upper intestine, the Ramseys want to "distance" themselves from the pineapple so much that they go so far as to call it an "urban legend" in DOI. This post is my opinion.

And you are asking "us" to take "your" word that Patsy Ramsey bought the pineapple, brought it into the house, put it in a bowl and served it to her daughter hours before brutally murdering her. What a nice gesture on Patsy's part. IMO, it just didn't happen that way.

Tober, you have had a least 4-5 people post that they have had caterers bring food that they had no idea that it was ever brought in the house. Why do you find this impossible to comprehend?

IMO, the utterly obvioius explanation is the one that has been given by the 4-5 people that have had caterers.

And I would love to speak to John Ramsey, and ask him about the caterers, and about a zillion other things. You seem to have all the other ins and outs of the Ramseys as if you knew them personally. Got his phone number handy????

[createthis]

I think you've hit upon the crux of the pineapple bugaboo, Tober. It's not so much the fact that it's in JonBenet's intestine as the fact that the Rs disavow any knowledge of it, right down to it even being in their house. I'm sure the caterer aspect would have been checked, and I assume, like the teabag, if anyone other than the Rs was responsible for it, then that person(s) would have come forward by now to claim it rather than allow the investigation to flounder and the Rs be suspected unfairly.

Occam's razor - Patsy's and Burke's prints are on the bowl because one or both of them handled it, and the pineapple was out that night because one of them set it out. The pineapple is in JB's system because she ate it that night. To explain away the pineapple as caterer-brought and lack of prints as being the result of caterers wearing gloves is really reaching for any explanation other than the most obvious one. Also IMO.

I strongly agree nuisanceposter. The bowl was taken out. It had Patsy's prints on it. Jonbenet's intestines had pineapple in them. These are facts not opinions for once.

[bullmoose]

I strongly agree nuisanceposter. The bowl was taken out. It had Patsy's prints on it. Jonbenet's intestines had pineapple in them. These are facts not opinions for once.But did the pineapple have prints on it? I keep waiting in vain for the proof definitely linking the pineapple to Patsy; yes it was in a bowl with Patsy's print on it, but since I would assume that Patsy washed and dried the bowl and put it away when it got used,it doesn't prove anything to me unless the pineapple can be linked to her; yet no link from Safeway or anywhere appears. It is intriguing but inconclusive; that is a fact and not just my conclusion. If the BPD couldn't show that Patsy bought the pineapple, and I bet they tried to, and if there is no proven link to the caterers, and I haven't seen one, then it is just opinion that connects Patsy to the pineapple. IMO :rolleyes:

[shill]

Those who contend that caterers left the pineapple in the Ramseys refrigerator are offering an "excuse" for the pineapple on behalf of the Ramseys that they themselves were unwilling to give. John and Patsy had much time to think about the pineapple and numerous opportunities to offer a reasonable explanation for it, and not once did they suggest that caterers left it. You're asking me to take "your" word for it when the "caterers left it" scenario is beyond the scope of possibilities offered by John and Patsy, is beyond the physical evidence (Patsy's and Burke's fingerprints the only ones on the bowl), and beyond the circumstantial evidence (it's in the Ramsey's bowl on their table with their spoon in it, JonBenet consumed it within a relatively short time after they arrived home). Add to that the fact that no caterers have come forward saying they left the pineapple. When considering this case I have two things to work with, the evidence and what the Ramseys give me (comments, statements, actions, reactions). Every time I stray from the most utterly obvious and logical explanation for the pineapple, I end up right back at the most utterly obvious and logical explanation for it. The "caterers left it" scenario is not supported by the physical and circumstantial evidence connected to the pineapple, nor is it supported by the Ramseys. If you don't believe me, contact John and tell him that you think the caterers left it, and see what he has to say. Remember, even though Lou Smit told John it was definitely pineapple in JonBenet's upper intestine, the Ramseys want to "distance" themselves from the pineapple so much that they go so far as to call it an "urban legend" in DOI. This post is my opinion.

I don't understand the logic here.
The claim that the P or J had to have fed JB the pineapple, would mean the LE checked every possibility of its source, concluded the only explanation is P or R fed JB the pineapple and even though the bowl of pineapple is sitting out in plain view and in photographs, P&R stare the LE in the face and lie saying "we don’t know where that came from" when they bought it, got it out for JB, and then fed it to JB, and LE just rolls over.

[shill]

I strongly agree nuisanceposter. The bowl was taken out. It had Patsy's prints on it. Jonbenet's intestines had pineapple in them. These are facts not opinions for once.
The bowl and the glass had Burke's prints on them.
Burkes testimony to the GJ is sealed.
I have not seen anything about the pineapple being pursued as a question of doubt by the prosecution after the GJ dissolved.

IMO Burke got the bowl of pineapple out and LE tracked the pineapples origin, and that was presented to the GJ, end of pineapple story.

[Tober]

How much more "connected" to Patsy do you need the pineapple to be? 1) It was the same type she would buy at Safeway; 2) It was in her bowl; 3) The bowl with the pineapple in it was on Patsy's table with her spoon in the bowl; 4) Patsy's fingerprints were on the bowl; 5) The pineapple had to have been stored in Patsy's refrigerator before being placed on the table; 6) Patsy herself said JonBenet would have needed someone to get the pineapple for her; 7) JonBenet consumed the very pineapple from that very bowl a relatively short time after they arrived home (more on that later); 8) The pineapple was still on Patsy's table the morning of Dec. 26. Patsy did not report this as odd, unusual, or out-of-place; 9) Based on the fingerprint evidence we know that either Burke or Patsy placed the bowl of pineapple there. The most logical scenario fits with the physical and circumstantial evidence perfectly. "Caterers left it there" or any number of similar excuses require a "force-fit" to the evidence. This post is my opinion.

[shill]

How much more "connected" to Patsy do you need the pineapple to be? 1) It was the same type she would buy at Safeway; 2) It was in her bowl; 3) The bowl with the pineapple in it was on Patsy's table with her spoon in the bowl; 4) Patsy's fingerprints were on the bowl; 5) The pineapple had to have been stored in Patsy's refrigerator before being placed on the table; 6) Patsy herself said JonBenet would have needed someone to get the pineapple for her; 7) JonBenet consumed the very pineapple from that very bowl a relatively short time after they arrived home (more on that later); 8) The pineapple was still on Patsy's table the morning of Dec. 26. Patsy did not report this as odd, unusual, or out-of-place; 9) Based on the fingerprint evidence we know that either Burke or Patsy placed the bowl of pineapple there. The most logical scenario fits with the physical and circumstantial evidence perfectly. "Caterers left it there" or any number of similar excuses require a "force-fit" to the evidence. This post is my opinion.How many Safeways do you think where in Boulder 1996, it's a small town?
Are you saying caterers couldn't have gotten pineapple from Safeway?
Are you saying the caterers didn't clean up and put leftovers in the refrigerator?
Are you saying that Burke couldn't have gotten the bowl of pineapple out by himself?

[bullmoose]

1 This must be a real weak spot in the Great Pineapple Caper; when all that can be said is that it was the same type that Patsy would buy at Safeway: I wouldn't be surprised to find that many hours were spent checking security camera tapes and the itemized store receipts and the credit card charges by the BPD to try to show that Patsy actually bought pineapple there within a believable time frame. Apparently unsuccessful, IMO.8 Isn't it fair to say that Patsy had good reason to be distracted on12/26/96? Sorry, Tober, no sale, at Safeway or to me, unless you link that pineapple with a paper trail to Patsy.

[createthis]

The bowl and the glass had Burke's prints on them.
Burkes testimony to the GJ is sealed.
I have not seen anything about the pineapple being pursued as a question of doubt by the prosecution after the GJ dissolved.

IMO Burke got the bowl of pineapple out and LE tracked the pineapples origin, and that was presented to the GJ, end of pineapple story.

No Shill, I disagree about Burke's prints on the bowl...I believe it was just the glass.

[createthis]

But did the pineapple have prints on it? I keep waiting in vain for the proof definitely linking the pineapple to Patsy; yes it was in a bowl with Patsy's print on it, but since I would assume that Patsy washed and dried the bowl and put it away when it got used,it doesn't prove anything to me unless the pineapple can be linked to her; yet no link from Safeway or anywhere appears. It is intriguing but inconclusive; that is a fact and not just my conclusion. If the BPD couldn't show that Patsy bought the pineapple, and I bet they tried to, and if there is no proven link to the caterers, and I haven't seen one, then it is just opinion that connects Patsy to the pineapple. IMO :rolleyes:

I think it's a far stretch about her washing and hand drying the bowl and leaving her prints on it and then someone else taking out the bowl leaving "no" prints on it and giving Jonbenet pineapple. Was this mystery person wearing gloves? Did an intruder give her pineapple? Highly unlikely. And if she got up by herself in the middle of the night to get a snack..then Jonbenet's prints would have been on the bowl as well.

[sweetcharlotte]

I have read that both Burke's and Patsy's fingerprints were on the bowl, but only Burke's on the glass. We never heard anything about the spoon that was supposedly in the bowl.
:shrug:

[createthis]

I have read that both Burke's and Patsy's fingerprints were on the bowl, but only Burke's on the glass. We never heard anything about the spoon that was supposedly in the bowl.
:shrug:

Yes-I am speculating...what I heard or thought I heard. I wonder what police reports say. But I think you are right. Burke and Patsy's prints on the bowl and only Burke's prints on the glass.

[LindaA]

Are you folks aware that there are DOCTORS who say that it is highly likely that Jonbenet ate the pineapple as early as the day before or maybe even before they went to the Whites? Why is everyone so certain that Patsy fed it to her--do you know more than the experts?


Some of us here think we do. ;)

Welcome to the forum.

As for the no fingerprints thing, isn't it possible that plastic wrap could have prevented fingerprints from being left?

[sweetcharlotte]

I'm believe there is a possiblity JonBenet ate the pineapple before they went to the Whites' party. I question if she ate any of the cracked crab Priscilla saved for her because according to PM/PT JonBenet had not been feeling well that afternoon. That would account for the pineapple being the last thing she ate.

Also, the autopsy was performed on 12/27. The last time J & P were interviewed prior to JB's funeral was 12/28. Did the police know about the "pineapple" and did the questioned John and Patsy about it then? OR was the first time they were questioned about the pineapple in April 1997?

Did they question John about the pineapple at all or was Patsy the only one questioned because by April it had already been determined that Patsy was "good for it."

JMO

[Tober]

Are you folks aware that there are DOCTORS who say that it is highly likely that Jonbenet ate the pineapple as early as the day before or maybe even before they went to the Whites?

Not so. Here's why: Its position in her digestive tract. It can be inferred (quite obviously) that the green fecal material present in her large intestine was the crab she ate at the White's. She had to have consumed the pineapple a relatively short time after they arrived home (more on that later). This post is my opinion.

[sweetcharlotte]

What is it that infers the green fecal matter was the cracked crab?

If she ate the pineapple prior to going to the Whites' and ate nothing at the Whites' the green fecal matter wouldn't be crab, would it?

JMO

[Tober]

If she ate the pineapple prior to going to the Whites' and ate nothing at the Whites' the green fecal matter wouldn't be crab, would it?
Why are so many IDIs in dispute with the Ramseys themselves? For example, not once did John or Patsy suggest that caterers could have left the pineapple, but some IDIs contend that caterers could have. Likewise, John and Patsy don't dispute that JonBenet ate crab at the White's. There were also other witnesses there who saw her eat the crab. That she ate the crab is not in dispute, so why would an IDI suggest that she may not have? This post is my opinion.

[sweetcharlotte]

Why are so many IDIs in dispute with the Ramseys themselves? For example, not once did John or Patsy suggest that caterers could have left the pineapple, but some IDIs contend that caterers could have. Likewise, John and Patsy don't dispute that JonBenet ate crab at the White's. There were also other witnesses there who saw her eat the crab. That she ate the crab is not in dispute, so why would an IDI suggest that she may not have? This post is my opinion.


Perhaps you can help educate all of us by providing a "link" where John & Patsy were questioned about the crab........and one that provides info re: "other witnesses who saw her eat the crab." Thanks.

[Zoey]

Perhaps you can help educate all of us by providing a "link" where John & Patsy were questioned about the crab........and one that provides info re: "other witnesses who saw her eat the crab." Thanks.

Sweetcharlotte;
Tober does not provide any links, and now that he has added IMO to all of his posts, we are just to infer that everything is a fact based on his opinion.

According to DOI, both Patsy and John found it odd that Priscilla had made JB a special plate of the cracked crab. They do not infer that they saw her eat it, nor does it state that anyone at the party can infer that she ate it.

[bullmoose]

Sweetcharlotte;
Tober does not provide any links, and now that he has added IMO to all of his posts, we are just to infer that everything is a fact based on his opinion.

According to DOI, both Patsy and John found it odd that Priscilla had made JB a special plate of the cracked crab. They do not infer that they saw her eat it, nor does it state that anyone at the party can infer that she ate it.The inferer has inferred! How can any of us IDI's infer any inferrence other than the inferrment inferred by the inherently inferrential inferer himself? IMO, he is inferring the inferrence of inside inferers inferring inside knowledge ; or at least the inferrence of inside knowledge. What else can be inferred? I infer this to be JMHO, of course.:biggrin:

[Zoey]

Not so. Here's why: Its position in her digestive tract. It can be inferred (quite obviously) that the green fecal material present in her large intestine was the crab she ate at the White's. She had to have consumed the pineapple a relatively short time after they arrived home (more on that later). This post is my opinion.


How can it quite obviously be inferred that the green fecal material in her large intestine is the cracked crab meat that she may or may not have eaten at the White's? I have not read anything that substantiates your claim that it is.

Granted you have put IMO at the end of your post, but I am asking for a link to your information, please.

[thewhitewitch1]

Sweetcharlotte;
Tober does not provide any links, and now that he has added IMO to all of his posts, we are just to infer that everything is a fact based on his opinion.

According to DOI, both Patsy and John found it odd that Priscilla had made JB a special plate of the cracked crab. They do not infer that they saw her eat it, nor does it state that anyone at the party can infer that she ate it.


Why did Patsy and John think it was "odd" that Priscilla made a special plate of the cracked crab for JB? I keep hearing that JB didn't feel well that day so geeze, is it just possible that Priscilla really just wanted to make sure she got some?
Can someone enlighten me and give me a link proving that JB "didn't feel well" that day, as I have never come across one yet. Is this in Steve Thomas's book? (which I haven't read)
IMO Patsy and John told LE they found it "odd" because they were trying to point the finger at the Whites.
The "green fecal matter" could have been anything, I suppose, but the pineapple and it's location in her digestive tract were positively identified, were they not? Forensic science can determine a time frame for when certain foods are eaten and in this case, that has been done. I'll take the word over a forensic expert over a "doctor" any day. IMO

[Zoey]

Why did Patsy and John think it was "odd" that Priscilla made a special plate of the cracked crab for JB? I keep hearing that JB didn't feel well that day so geeze, is it just possible that Priscilla really just wanted to make sure she got some?
Can someone enlighten me and give me a link proving that JB "didn't feel well" that day, as I have never come across one yet. Is this in Steve Thomas's book? (which I haven't read)
IMO Patsy and John told LE they found it "odd" because they were trying to point the finger at the Whites.
The "green fecal matter" could have been anything, I suppose, but the pineapple and it's location in her digestive tract were positively identified, were they not? Forensic science can determine a time frame for when certain foods are eaten and in this case, that has been done. I'll take the word over a forensic expert over a "doctor" any day. IMO


Sorry tww, but having never personally spoken to John nor Patsy, I do not know why they found this odd. I just know they stated it as such in their book. Perhaps it was odd because if you are sick all day, you would not expect someone to hand you a plate of smelly fish, you would expect something lite, IMO. I haven't read Thomas' book, so I cannot quote from that book on anything. Perhaps you could ask Tober??

I agree 100% that the green fecal matter could be anything. Tober states as fact that is was cracked crab. Again, please ask Tober. He seems to have all the facts wherein the rest of us are relying on second, third, and perhaps even fourth hand information, IMO.

[nuisanceposter]

Patsy seems to think JonBenet ate crab over at the White's.

From PR '98 interview...

TOM HANEY: Is there some way to account for the pineapple in her body?
PATSY RAMSEY: Not to my knowledge, unless she -- you know, I can't remember what was served over at the White's. Does anybody know? Except there was crab. I remember crab.
TOM HANEY: That seems to be the only thing you recall that she ate.
PATSY RAMSEY: Yeah.


I'd say if her mom recalls her eating crab, and that was the last thing she was served before she ate what we know is the pineapple, then the soft green fecal matter is the crab.

[sweetcharlotte]

I read in PM/PT that JonBenet had not felt well that afternoon, but I have no way of knowing if Priscilla knew that. Also, I read somewhere that Priscilla knew that JonBenet liked cracked crab and that was why she fixed JonBenet a special plate.

I have never read that the Ramsey didn't deny JonBenet ate the crab, nor have I read that other witnesses saw her eating said crab.

That is why I asked for a link.

[thewhitewitch1]

I read in PM/PT that JonBenet had not felt well that afternoon, but I have no way of knowing if Priscilla knew that. Also, I read somewhere that Priscilla knew that JonBenet liked cracked crab and that was why she fixed JonBenet a special plate.

I have never read that the Ramsey didn't deny JonBenet ate the crab, nor have I read that other witnesses saw her eating said crab.

That is why I asked for a link.


If JB didn't feel well, you'd think Patsy would have told Priscilla that or Priscilla may have seen it for herself. I was under the impression that she made the plate up for JB to eat later, as in, perhaps when she felt better. :shrug:

[sweetcharlotte]

If JB didn't feel well, you'd think Patsy would have told Priscilla that or Priscilla may have seen it for herself. I was under the impression that she made the plate up for JB to eat later, as in, perhaps when she felt better. :shrug:

Maybe Priscilla didn't know JonBenet wasn't feeling well and fixed the plate before she arrived, or maybe upon arrival she saw or someone told her JonBenet didn't feel well so she fixed the plate for JonBenet to have later. I don't know.

I'm curious to read when/where Patsy and John "didn't deny" that JonBenet ate the crab, but ever more curious to read the witnesses' statements that they saw JonBenet eat the crab.

[KingCoyote]

I read in PM/PT that JonBenet had not felt well that afternoon, but I have no way of knowing if Priscilla knew that. Also, I read somewhere that Priscilla knew that JonBenet liked cracked crab and that was why she fixed JonBenet a special plate.

I have never read that the Ramsey didn't deny JonBenet ate the crab, nor have I read that other witnesses saw her eating said crab.

That is why I asked for a link.

SweetCharlotte:

Do you have a page reference in PMPT (or anywhere)to JBR feeling ill on any day....23rd, 24th or 25th?????....I have been looking for that ever since my feeble mind tried to remember where I read that. That issue may make a difference in some of my analyses.

Thanks in Advance

KingCoyote
:read:

[sweetcharlotte]

No, and I don't have a copy of PM/PT. However, I am going out in a little while and will stop by the library to see if a copy is available. I commented months ago that my librarian has started looking at me strangely when I lay the book on the counter. I keep hoping they just give me the book. :) It was mentioned that she didn't feel well on Christmas Day and only rode her new bike for a while on the back deck/patio.

[elvislives]

Are you folks aware that there are DOCTORS who say that it is highly likely that Jonbenet ate the pineapple as early as the day before or maybe even before they went to the Whites? Why is everyone so certain that Patsy fed it to her--do you know more than the experts?

You can find A doctor to say just about anything, that is why you have to go with the consensus of the medical community.
The pineapple was found in the PROXIMAL portion of her small intestine, meaning that it had JUST left her stomach.
This was not a person with a metabolic disorder---those are the people who may take 12-24 hrs or so for their food to move from the stomach to the proximal small intestine.
JB was a healthy six year old. The pineapple would have taken about 1-2 hours to move from her stomach to small intestine PLUS there was a bowl of pineapple on the Ramsey kitchen table (what a coincidence!!).
Conclusion: she ate the pineapple within a few hours of her death.

[nuisanceposter]

Here's what I've found about JonBenet being sick and riding her bike on Christmas Day (haven't perused my own copy of PMPT - I'll do it after dinner):

http://www.geocities.com/Area51/nebula/9337/unexplained.html

Not much is known of Christmas Day before the White's dinner. The Ramseys tell us they spent a quiet day at home. The neighbors saw Burke riding his new Christmas bicycle around the neighborhood. John Ramsey retrieved JonBenet's bike from the home of neighbor, Mr. Barnhill, the night before, but JonBenet was nowhere to be seen riding her bike on that Christmas Day.

Much later John Ramsey announced to the world on television that JonBenet ask that he take her out with her new bike. One of his most painful regrets is that he did not do that. Are we to believe him? Are we to believe a statement made by a father more than a year after her death when he knew of the whispered doubts and the unanswered questions about his daughters condition and whereabouts on Christmas day?

Patsy Ramsey told us that JonBenet was not feeling well on Christmas Day. She was confined to her bedroom to rest. We hear rumors that JonBenet had guests in her "sick room" that day. Her friends were allowed to visit her in her room. Is it true? It has never been confirmed. What was wrong with JonBenet during Christmas day that seemed to be cleared enough to attend the White's Christmas dinner that night?
The Ramseys aren't telling and JonBenet can't tell us.


Now read post #52 by koldkase on this thread, talking about the article posted at ACR relating comments from a friend of Patsy's, Shirley Brady:

http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/showthread.php?t=6413&page=5&pp=12


Please note in DOI, pb, page 8, JR says:

"As we were leaving for the Whites' house, JonBenet begged me to help her ride her new bike, which she had managed to bring outside. She was a tad wobbly because this bike was quite a bit bigger than her other one, but she soon steadied herself.

"Daddy, please help me ride my bike around the block, just once."

We didn't have much time before we were due at the Whites', so I promised we'd go around the block some other time. She looked disappointed, but agreed. Later I wished I had taken those extra few minutes. I wish I had remembered the oft-quoted axiom that children spell love T-I-M-E. I would never again be able to watch her ride a bike. The new bike was later donated to a church without her ever having enjoyed it."



So what's going on? Was JonBenet sick or not? The Rs make no mention of it in DOI. JR said the neighbor kids came over and he went off to the airport and when he got back, Burke and JB were "playing outside with the neighborhood gang." (DOI, pb, pgs 5 & 7)

Did JonBenet ride her bike around or not? According to JR, she didn't. If not, why did Shirley Brady say Patsy told her JR was cleaning off the sidewalk so she could ride her bike?

[Louisadelmar]

1998 Patsy interview:

22 PATSY RAMSEY: And these, the one
23 little girl had a kind of darker complexion and
24 the other little girl was a little heavier set.
25 I think one of them's name was Mary, but that's
0172
1 the first time we really met them.
2 THOMAS HANEY: But they were over
3 sometime on Christmas --
4 PATSY RAMSEY: Right.
5 THOMAS HANEY: -- to play.
6 Who else did JonBenet play with on
7 Christmas in the daytime, just kind of
8 separating time frames here?
9 PATSY RAMSEY: Well, she and Burke
10 played, Burke played with the Coby kids and
11 these little girls. And then of course we went
12 to the Whites and she and Daphne played with
13 Burke.
14 TRIP DeMUTH: Okay, but before you
15 went to the Whites.
16 PATSY RAMSEY: Went to the Whites?
17 Well, it would have been, you know, mostly --
18 TRIP DeMUTH: The Coby kids?
19 PATSY RAMSEY: -- the Coby kids.
20 TRIP DeMUTH: Which ones?
21 PATSY RAMSEY: Kai and Evan.
22 TRIP DeMUTH: And these two little
23 girls from up the street?
24 PATSY RAMSEY: That were in the
25 house that Fleet and Priscilla used to live.
0173
1 TRIP DeMUTH: So that's -- what
2 about Luke Vermiere, or Luke from across the
3 street?
4 PATSY RAMSEY: Big Luke? No.
5 TRIP DeMUTH: He didn't come over
6 that day.
7 Can you remember any other kids
8 that day, Christmas Day, before you go to the
9 Whites?
10 PATSY RAMSEY: No.
11 TRIP DeMUTH: I imagine they are
12 playing with their toys and showing each other
13 what they got?
14 PATSY RAMSEY: Right. Most of the
15 little kids around were Burke's friends.
16 TRIP DeMUTH: So pretty much that's
17 who you remember?
18 PATSY RAMSEY: Uh-hum.
19 TRIP DeMUTH: And who did JonBenet
20 play with of those kids?
21 PATSY RAMSEY: With -- well, they
22 were all kind of playing together. You know,
23 they were outside. Then they would all come in
24 and she was making little jewelry things and I
25 sat and played with her doing the jewelry
0174
1 things. And she was in her room, she was making
2 a little pot holder kind of thing, I think.
3 Those little moving kind of things, you know.
4 TRIP DeMUTH: Another thing that
5 happens sometimes is people might drop by on
6 Christmas Day to say hi, bring a basket by. See
7 the kids, friends, other people. Think about
8 Christmas Day, if you could, before you go to
9 the Whites. Anybody drop in?
10 John went to the airport, right?
11 PATSY RAMSEY: I was wrapping more
12 gifts to take to the Whites.
13 TRIP DeMUTH: Right. And the kids
14 were playing. You might have been there, a
15 relative, somebody came by. Wrapping, right,
16 maybe nobody came by. You don't remember?
17 PATSY RAMSEY: No, I don't.
18 TRIP DeMUTH: You don't remember
19 anybody coming by, anything like that?
20 PATSY RAMSEY: (No response.)
21 TRIP DeMUTH: Okay.

[Tober]

Patsy seems to think JonBenet ate crab over at the White's.

From PR '98 interview...

TOM HANEY: Is there some way to account for the pineapple in her body?
PATSY RAMSEY: Not to my knowledge, unless she -- you know, I can't remember what was served over at the White's. Does anybody know? Except there was crab. I remember crab.
TOM HANEY: That seems to be the only thing you recall that she ate.
PATSY RAMSEY: Yeah.


I'd say if her mom recalls her eating crab, and that was the last thing she was served before she ate what we know is the pineapple, then the soft green fecal matter is the crab.

Thanks for posting that, NP. I guess some would rather dispute well-known facts of the case than face and deal with them. This post is my opinion.

[Tober]

I have never read that the Ramsey didn't deny JonBenet ate the crab, nor have I read that other witnesses saw her eating said crab.

Now Charlotte, how do you think investigators were able to determine that JonBenet ate crab at the White's? This post is my opinion.

[Louisadelmar]

My guess would be the soft green fecal matter in her large intestine was what she ate much earlier in the day and not the crab.

[Tober]

My guess would be the soft green fecal matter in her large intestine was what she ate much earlier in the day and not the crab.

That can't be. If that were the case, the crab would have been between the pineapple and the green fecal material in her digestive tract, but it wasn't. This post is my opinion.

[Louisadelmar]

We'll have to see what Elvislives says.

[Tober]

Louisa, if the green fecal material in JonBenet's large intestine was what she ate earlier in the day and not the crab, then the crab would had to have been between the pineapple and green fecal material within her digestive tract. It wasn't. The only inference that can be made is that the green fecal material was the crab she ate at the White's. There is no other option. This post is my opinion.

[sweetcharlotte]

Now Charlotte, how do you think investigators were able to determine that JonBenet ate crab at the White's? This post is my opinion.

I'd say nusianceposter has provided some information, but I'm still waiting for those links from you.

[Louisadelmar]

Louisa, if the green fecal material in JonBenet's large intestine was what she ate earlier in the day and not the crab, then the crab would had to have been between the pineapple and green fecal material within her digestive tract. It wasn't. The only inference that can be made is that the green fecal material was the crab she ate at the White's. There is no other option. This post is my opinion.

Why couldn't the crab still be in the small intestine?

[Tober]

Why couldn't the crab still be in the small intestine?

From the autopsy report: "The proximal portion of the small intestine contains fragmented pieces of yellow to light green-tan apparant vegetable or fruit material which may represent pineapple. No hemorrhage is identified. The remainder of the small intestine is unremarkable. The large intestine contains soft green fecal material." - Notice that Dr. Meyer states that the remainder of the small intestine is unremarkable. That means nothing else was present there. The green fecal material in JonBenet's large intestine can only be the crab she ate at the White's, as the crab wasn't anywhere else in her digestive tract. This post is my opinion.

[shill]

From the autopsy report: "The proximal portion of the small intestine contains fragmented pieces of yellow to light green-tan apparant vegetable or fruit material which may represent pineapple. No hemorrhage is identified. The remainder of the small intestine is unremarkable. The large intestine contains soft green fecal material." - Notice that Dr. Meyer states that the remainder of the small intestine is unremarkable. That means nothing else was present there. The green fecal material in JonBenet's large intestine can only be the crab she ate at the White's, as the crab wasn't anywhere else in her digestive tract. This post is my opinion.

I'm tired of this argument over the pineapple from both sides.
IMO she ate pineapple from that bowl. It proves nothing about how she got around to eating it.

Bluecrab posted on WebSleuths what I've been saying. JB was up with Burke after the Ramseys went to bed and she ate the pineapple.

[Louisadelmar]

From the autopsy report: "The proximal portion of the small intestine contains fragmented pieces of yellow to light green-tan apparant vegetable or fruit material which may represent pineapple. No hemorrhage is identified. The remainder of the small intestine is unremarkable. The large intestine contains soft green fecal material." - Notice that Dr. Meyer states that the remainder of the small intestine is unremarkable. That means nothing else was present there. The green fecal material in JonBenet's large intestine can only be the crab she ate at the White's, as the crab wasn't anywhere else in her digestive tract. This post is my opinion.

You're saying that other than the pineapple her small intestine was empty? I don't think that's what unremarkable means in an autopsy.

[Tober]

You're saying that other than the pineapple her small intestine was empty? I don't think that's what unremarkable means in an autopsy.
Since Dr. Meyer noted what was later determined to be the pineapple in the proximal portion of JonBenet's small intestine, and noted the soft green fecal material in her large intestine, the inference can be made that no other food material was present in her digestive tract. Had there been, he would have noted it, as he did in the other two cases (the pineapple, the green fecal material). In this context, in addition to meaning without trauma, abnormality, or deformity, "unremarkable" also means containing no other food material. This post is my opinion.

[sweetcharlotte]

SweetCharlotte:

Do you have a page reference in PMPT (or anywhere)to JBR feeling ill on any day....23rd, 24th or 25th?????....I have been looking for that ever since my feeble mind tried to remember where I read that. That issue may make a difference in some of my analyses.

Thanks in Advance

KingCoyote
:read:

Good morning. Can you see that egg on my face? Went to the library - looked through PM/PT twice and cannot find what I could have swore was in there about JonBenet not feeling well. My next try will be DOI. I've also read "Cases That Haunt Us"- John Douglas, "Presumed Guilty" - Steven Singular, "Cracking More Cases" - Dr. Henry Lee so I'll look through DOI next.
I'm almost positive I didn't dream it. :shrug:

[Louisadelmar]

It was a rumor that traveled around for a while. Supposedly the source was Shirley Brady (former nanny in GA) but I've never (as far as I can recall) seen it confirmed by her. The Ramseys don't mention it nor have I ever seen reference to the Whites or anyone at the party saying anything about it.

[andU]

Here's what I've found about JonBenet being sick and riding her bike on Christmas Day (haven't perused my own copy of PMPT - I'll do it after dinner):

http://www.geocities.com/Area51/nebula/9337/unexplained.html

Not much is known of Christmas Day before the White's dinner. The Ramseys tell us they spent a quiet day at home. The neighbors saw Burke riding his new Christmas bicycle around the neighborhood. John Ramsey retrieved JonBenet's bike from the home of neighbor, Mr. Barnhill, the night before, but JonBenet was nowhere to be seen riding her bike on that Christmas Day.

Much later John Ramsey announced to the world on television that JonBenet ask that he take her out with her new bike. One of his most painful regrets is that he did not do that. Are we to believe him? Are we to believe a statement made by a father more than a year after her death when he knew of the whispered doubts and the unanswered questions about his daughters condition and whereabouts on Christmas day?

Patsy Ramsey told us that JonBenet was not feeling well on Christmas Day. She was confined to her bedroom to rest. We hear rumors that JonBenet had guests in her "sick room" that day. Her friends were allowed to visit her in her room. Is it true? It has never been confirmed. What was wrong with JonBenet during Christmas day that seemed to be cleared enough to attend the White's Christmas dinner that night?
The Ramseys aren't telling and JonBenet can't tell us.


Now read post #52 by koldkase on this thread, talking about the article posted at ACR relating comments from a friend of Patsy's, Shirley Brady:

http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/showthread.php?t=6413&page=5&pp=12


Please note in DOI, pb, page 8, JR says:

"As we were leaving for the Whites' house, JonBenet begged me to help her ride her new bike, which she had managed to bring outside. She was a tad wobbly because this bike was quite a bit bigger than her other one, but she soon steadied herself.

"Daddy, please help me ride my bike around the block, just once."

We didn't have much time before we were due at the Whites', so I promised we'd go around the block some other time. She looked disappointed, but agreed. Later I wished I had taken those extra few minutes. I wish I had remembered the oft-quoted axiom that children spell love T-I-M-E. I would never again be able to watch her ride a bike. The new bike was later donated to a church without her ever having enjoyed it."



So what's going on? Was JonBenet sick or not? The Rs make no mention of it in DOI. JR said the neighbor kids came over and he went off to the airport and when he got back, Burke and JB were "playing outside with the neighborhood gang." (DOI, pb, pgs 5 & 7)

Did JonBenet ride her bike around or not? According to JR, she didn't. If not, why did Shirley Brady say Patsy told her JR was cleaning off the sidewalk so she could ride her bike?

In the above quote, it sounds like JB is described riding the bike. How would he know that she was wobbly while riding it if he hadn't seen her? Or had she been riding inside the house?

[Tober]

IMO she ate pineapple from that bowl. It proves nothing about how she got around to eating it.

What it proves is that JonBenet was awake and out of bed at a time when John and Patsy claim she was asleep and in bed. Based on John's and Patsy's own statements, JonBenet would have needed someone to get the pineapple for her. Only Burke's and Patsy's fingerprints were on the bowl. JonBenet consumed pineapple from that bowl a relatively short time after they arrived home, which means someone got the pineapple for her a relatively short time after they arrived home. Based on the fingerprint evidence, we have two options: 1) Burke got it for her; or 2) Patsy got it for her. Based on Patsy's own statements we can eliminate option number one, as Patsy states that Burke wouldn't have gotten it for JonBenet. Who does that leave us with? (This post is my opinion.)

[thewhitewitch1]

What it proves is that JonBenet was awake and out of bed at a time when John and Patsy claim she was asleep and in bed. Based on John's and Patsy's own statements, JonBenet would have needed someone to get the pineapple for her. Only Burke's and Patsy's fingerprints were on the bowl. JonBenet consumed pineapple from that bowl a relatively short time after they arrived home, which means someone got the pineapple for her a relatively short time after they arrived home. Based on the fingerprint evidence, we have two options: 1) Burke got it for her; or 2) Patsy got it for her. Based on Patsy's own statements we can eliminate option number one, as Patsy states that Burke wouldn't have gotten it for JonBenet. Who does that leave us with? (This post is my opinion.)

To those who think that JB got up by herself and got the pineapple, or that Burke and JB got up together...add this to the long line of "coincidences" in this case. Even though Patsy has said that the kids never did that, on this one night of all nights, they deviated from their regular habits.
And on this one night of all nights, Patsy didn't wake JB up to go to the bathroom and JB "coincidentally" woke herself up to go, even though her normal habit would have been to wet the bed if she wasn't awakened.
There are far too many "coincidences" involved in this to be believed. IMO

[sweetcharlotte]

Maybe because they were getting up early the next morning to go to the airport, Patsy didn't feel getting her up a midnight was necessary.

[andU]

I believe that there are times when, just as we adults do, children will deviate from their normal time and way of doing things. There were many times that I didn't hear my children up at night, but found evidence of it in the morning (toilet not flushed, cereal bowl, or glass left on the counter or table). Because we are human, behavior cannot be cemented. IMO...

[thewhitewitch1]

Maybe because they were getting up early the next morning to go to the airport, Patsy didn't feel getting her up a midnight was necessary.


Maybe so but then what are the odds that on this one night that JB would wake herself up to use the bathroom? It was not her "habit" to do so. She couldn't wake herself up, which is why she would wet the bed.
You can believe that she got up herself to go, which is highly unlikely, and that she and Burke or she alone got a midnight snack (also highly unlikely) but I don't. One of these things occuring alone might convince me that it could have happened, but not both. Was there a full moon that night that made these kids do things they normally wouldn't do? :shrug:

[Zoey]

Maybe so but then what are the odds that on this one night that JB would wake herself up to use the bathroom? It was not her "habit" to do so. She couldn't wake herself up, which is why she would wet the bed.
You can believe that she got up herself to go, which is highly unlikely, and that she and Burke or she alone got a midnight snack (also highly unlikely) but I don't. One of these things occuring alone might convince me that it could have happened, but not both. Was there a full moon that night that made these kids do things they normally wouldn't do? :shrug:


IMO, just because Patsy says she never got up to go to the bathroom herself and never went downstairs to get a snack does not make her a liar when this could have very easily happened without her knowledge. Kids can be very sneaky and quiet and do things that parents have no idea.

Look at how many kids are found outside early in the morning by their parents who claim their kid would never get up without them knowing about it. It happens and parents have no idea how many times their kids have done this.

[elvislives]

Your making a lot of assumptions. Most doctors and forensic examiners dont agree with you.

Sorry but my BS detector's going off here.
There was ONE doctor (maybe he was a forensics guy) who said that it is possible that she ate the pineapple the day before. The majority of doctors would disagree with this, as it would be very abnormal.

There was also ONE doctor who said that the head wound could have come 20-60 minutes before JB's death (turns out this guy was misquoted). The majority of doctors would disagree with this.

[elvislives]

We'll have to see what Elvislives says.

I agree with Tober's inference on part of this. IMO the pineapple was in her proximal small intestine because she ate it about 1-2 hours before she died. Whatever she consumed at the Whites (crab etc)would have been the green fecal matter in her large intestine. The food she ate at the Whites should have been in her large intestine by about midnight so thats what makes sense to me.
However, Tober then infers from this that therefore the Ramseys killed her. I dont think you can make such a leap. There IS an innocent explanation for JB eating pineapple at home, and Patsy being unaware of it. This of course is jmo.

[Louisadelmar]

Thank you. I'll take your word on this because you are the only person I 'know' who has the medical knowledge to offer a legitimate opinion while not pushing one theory or the other.

[Tober]

I agree with Tober's inference on part of this. IMO the pineapple was in her proximal small intestine because she ate it about 1-2 hours before she died. Whatever she consumed at the Whites (crab etc)would have been the green fecal matter in her large intestine. The food she ate at the Whites should have been in her large intestine by about midnight so thats what makes sense to me.

You've touched on something I've been meaning to discuss. The crab JonBenet ate at the White's would have been in her large intestine approximately midnight. That means she would have consumed the pineapple, which she needed someone to get for her, approximately 10 p.m. This coincides perfectly with JonBenet having the pineapple as a snack shortly after they arrived home, which contradicts John's and Patsy's claims that a sleeping JonBenet was put to bed and didn't awake. The crab being in her large intestine appoximately midnight coincides perfectly with the early part of the time estimation Melody Stanton alleges to have heard the scream. It also coincides perfectly with the time Patsy would routinely awaken JonBenet to go to the bathroom so that she wouldn't wet the bed. This post is my opinion.

[Louisadelmar]

[...] It also coincides perfectly with the time Patsy would routinely awaken JonBenet to go to the bathroom so that she wouldn't wet the bed. This post is my opinion.

Do you have that quote from Patsy? I was thinking this morning about that and while (when my kids were growing) I might say I wanted them to eat healthy meals; it didn't mean I never said "It's been a long day and tonight we're having hot dogs and chips for dinner." Was Patsy religious about waking her? Was it something she did when it was convenient? Did she really care one way or another?

[thewhitewitch1]

IMO, just because Patsy says she never got up to go to the bathroom herself and never went downstairs to get a snack does not make her a liar when this could have very easily happened without her knowledge. Kids can be very sneaky and quiet and do things that parents have no idea.

Look at how many kids are found outside early in the morning by their parents who claim their kid would never get up without them knowing about it. It happens and parents have no idea how many times their kids have done this.


Patsy said that if she didn't wake JB up to use the bathroom, she would wet the bed. I guess that means that JB never got up herself to go, doesn't it?
Either Patsy did get her up that night or JB wet the bed. I don't think either of these assumptions are any more unlikely than you assuming JB; on this one night only, woke herself up to use the bathroom. IMO

[thewhitewitch1]

Do you have that quote from Patsy? I was thinking this morning about that and while (when my kids were growing) I might say I wanted them to eat healthy meals; it didn't mean I never said "It's been a long day and tonight we're having hot dogs and chips for dinner." Was Patsy religious about waking her? Was it something she did when it was convenient? Did she really care one way or another?

Yes, she did say that. I will try to find you the link. She said she usually woke JB up at midnight to use the bathroom because if she didn't, JB would wet the bed.
She was even going to take some of those Pull-Ups on the Big Red Boat so JB wouldn't ruin the mattress. This indicates pretty well that JB wet the bed frequently.

[elvislives]

You've touched on something I've been meaning to discuss. The crab JonBenet ate at the White's would have been in her large intestine approximately midnight. That means she would have consumed the pineapple, which she needed someone to get for her, approximately 10 p.m. This coincides perfectly with JonBenet having the pineapple as a snack shortly after they arrived home, which contradicts John's and Patsy's claims that a sleeping JonBenet was put to bed and didn't awake. The crab being in her large intestine appoximately midnight coincides perfectly with the early part of the time estimation Melody Stanton alleges to have heard the scream. It also coincides perfectly with the time Patsy would routinely awaken JonBenet to go to the bathroom so that she wouldn't wet the bed. This post is my opinion.

Tober, there is a fairly wide range of normal in terms of digestion. For example, the normal time frame for food to travel from the stomach to the proximal small intestine is 1-3 hours. I estimate that the pineapple took about 1-2 hours for JB because pineapple is fibrous (fibrous foods travel more quickly thru the system) and JB was a healthy six year old (children generally metabolize on the faster side).
But the crab is a protein rich food--protein rich foods tend to travel more slowly thru the system. So the crab, and anything else consumed at the Whites, would have reached her LI anytime between 11-5am depending on what time she ate, what she ate, and her personal metabolic rate. JMO

[nuisanceposter]

PMPT, hb, pg 93 - 94:


Patsy enjoyed visiting Pam griffin’s simple home in Longmont. She would walk in, kick off her shoes, and watch several seamstresses assemble costumes in Pam’s basement workshop. Sometimes Patsy would bring lunch for everyone. Other times she would sit out on the about her battle with cancer of her worries over JonBenet’s incontinence. Patsy told Pam that JonBenet often waited until an emergency was imminent and as a result was still having accidents. Pam said that when her own daughter, Kristine, was small, she also used to wait until the last possible second and sometimes miscalculated. Patsy complained that JonBenet had frequent infections that were hard to clear up because her underpants were always wet. JonBenet would often fall asleep in her bedroom in front of the TV set, she said, and Patsy would wake her up at around midnight to make sure she used the bathroom. Sometimes Pasty was just in the nick of time, but sometimes she was too late. Pam understood how aggravating this could be for a mother.


There is also a direct quote from Patsy in DOI where she says something like Christmas night was the one night she didn't wake JB up. I'll get the page number tomorrow.

[thewhitewitch1]

PMPT, hb, pg 93 - 94:


Patsy enjoyed visiting Pam griffin’s simple home in Longmont. She would walk in, kick off her shoes, and watch several seamstresses assemble costumes in Pam’s basement workshop. Sometimes Patsy would bring lunch for everyone. Other times she would sit out on the about her battle with cancer of her worries over JonBenet’s incontinence. Patsy told Pam that JonBenet often waited until an emergency was imminent and as a result was still having accidents. Pam said that when her own daughter, Kristine, was small, she also used to wait until the last possible second and sometimes miscalculated. Patsy complained that JonBenet had frequent infections that were hard to clear up because her underpants were always wet. JonBenet would often fall asleep in her bedroom in front of the TV set, she said, and Patsy would wake her up at around midnight to make sure she used the bathroom. Sometimes Pasty was just in the nick of time, but sometimes she was too late. Pam understood how aggravating this could be for a mother.


There is also a direct quote from Patsy in DOI where she says something like Christmas night was the one night she didn't wake JB up. I'll get the page number tomorrow.

Thanks for providing this, NP. She states these things in at least one of her interviews, as well.

[KingCoyote]

Nuisance Poster and TWW1:

My first post on the Pam Griffin Factor...Section 3 has a list of the statements PR and Pam Griffin and LHP made regarding bedwetting and date of sheets changed, etc. It also has the page numbers of PMPT, ST and PR's 98 Interview if you want a quick reference. I use the paperback editions.

KingCoyote

[shill]

Maybe so but then what are the odds that on this one night that JB would wake herself up to use the bathroom? It was not her "habit" to do so. She couldn't wake herself up, which is why she would wet the bed.
You can believe that she got up herself to go, which is highly unlikely, and that she and Burke or she alone got a midnight snack (also highly unlikely) but I don't. One of these things occuring alone might convince me that it could have happened, but not both. Was there a full moon that night that made these kids do things they normally wouldn't do? :shrug:

It was Christmas day. It had a whole different chain of events then their normal agenda.
It seems that JB ate almost nothing that day, a little crabmeat at the Fleet's.
So maybe hunger was the catalyst that woke her to pee this time.

Patsy was either wrong to assume Burke didn't get up or the bowl of pineapple and the glass with the tea bag were out before they left for the party. There is a glass with his Burkes fingerprints on it, which means if the glass appeared that night, it was because Burke was up and got the glass. If you want to argue that the glass did not appear that night, then the bowl of pineapple did not appear that night with it.

[shill]

Based on the fingerprint evidence, we have two options: 1) Burke got it for her; or 2) Patsy got it for her. Based on Patsy's own statements we can eliminate option number one, as Patsy states that Burke wouldn't have gotten it for JonBenet. Who does that leave us with? (This post is my opinion.)
Based on Patsy's statement, Patsy says she didn't get JB the pineapple.
As for her statement about Burke, it is an assumption. She does not know for a fact what Burke was doing at that time. She does know for a fact what she was doing at that time. So why do you credit her assumption about Burke's unknown actions and not credit her known actions of herself?

STANDARD EXPLANATION #1: "She's lying".

Isn't that what this pineapple argument is about? R's are lying about this and that.

[thewhitewitch1]

It was Christmas day. It had a whole different chain of events then their normal agenda.
It seems that JB ate almost nothing that day, a little crabmeat at the Fleet's.
So maybe hunger was the catalyst that woke her to pee this time.

Patsy was either wrong to assume Burke didn't get up or the bowl of pineapple and the glass with the tea bag were out before they left for the party. There is a glass with his Burkes fingerprints on it, which means if the glass appeared that night, it was because Burke was up and got the glass. If you want to argue that the glass did not appear that night, then the bowl of pineapple did not appear that night with it.

I don't know why you would think that Christmas Day had a "whole different chain of events". The Ramseys and family had a series of events going on virtually all the time and especially before Christmas. For instance, their Dec.23 party could be considered out of the ordinary.
We don't know what JB ate throughout the day either. There is nothing specific that says she only ate a "little crabmeat". The Rs "don't remember if they gave the kids lunch". I find it peculiar that JB was so "zonked" that she didn't even wake up after being taken out of the car (that had to be awkward) and then carried up the stairs, but then hunger woke her up very shortly after? You can believe that if you'd like.
It would seem that JB, Burke and Patsy were all up at the same time. It is entirely possible that JB was awake when they got home and that this would be the time the pineapple was eaten and the tea was made. It certainly fits in the time frame for the digestion of the pineapple and the scream heard around midnight or shortly afterwards, and the lights seen in the kitchen area.
If this is the case, Patsy had to have lied about the pineapple, or Burke did or both. What reason would there have been for either to lie about it? What reason would there have been for them to have lied about JB being asleep when they got home?
Any way you look at it, someone lied about the pineapple. I don't see how you can reach any other conclusion. IMO

[Louisadelmar]

PMPT, hb, pg 93 - 94:


Patsy enjoyed visiting Pam griffin’s simple home in Longmont. She would walk in, kick off her shoes, and watch several seamstresses assemble costumes in Pam’s basement workshop. Sometimes Patsy would bring lunch for everyone. Other times she would sit out on the about her battle with cancer of her worries over JonBenet’s incontinence. Patsy told Pam that JonBenet often waited until an emergency was imminent and as a result was still having accidents. Pam said that when her own daughter, Kristine, was small, she also used to wait until the last possible second and sometimes miscalculated. Patsy complained that JonBenet had frequent infections that were hard to clear up because her underpants were always wet. JonBenet would often fall asleep in her bedroom in front of the TV set, she said, and Patsy would wake her up at around midnight to make sure she used the bathroom. Sometimes Pasty was just in the nick of time, but sometimes she was too late. Pam understood how aggravating this could be for a mother.


There is also a direct quote from Patsy in DOI where she says something like Christmas night was the one night she didn't wake JB up. I'll get the page number tomorrow.

Thanks for the quote NP. I'll check DOI too as I'd still like to get a sense of how religious Patsy was about this since the bedwetting didn't seem to be a huge issue with her.

[thewhitewitch1]

Thanks for the quote NP. I'll check DOI too as I'd still like to get a sense of how religious Patsy was about this since the bedwetting didn't seem to be a huge issue with her.


Louisa, just as important as how "religious" Patsy was about waking JB to go to the bathroom, is how frequently JB would wet the bed if she didn't wake her to go. I believe Patsy said something along the lines that "more often than not, if she wasn't wakened, she would wet the bed".
I would also like to add that of course Patsy would tell LE that the bedwetting wasn't a big issue. What else was she going to say..."It really pissed me off?" :shrug:

[sweetcharlotte]

Page 181, PM/PT ISBN 0-06-019153-8

"In the summer of '96, JonBenet started wearing those diaper-type underpants - Pull-Ups. She even wore them to 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. Then JonBenet started wetting the bed again. Almost every day I was there, there was a wet bed. Patsy said she wasn't going to use Pull-Ups again. She just put a plastic cover on the bed. No big deal to her. By the time I'd come in the morning, Patsy would have all the sheets off the bed and in the laundry. JonBenet's white blanket would already be in the dryer." -Linda Hoffmann-Pugh

In Linda's words, "No big deal to her."

[thewhitewitch1]

Page 181, PM/PT ISBN 0-06-019153-8

"In the summer of '96, JonBenet started wearing those diaper-type underpants - Pull-Ups. She even wore them to 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. Then JonBenet started wetting the bed again. Almost every day I was there, there was a wet bed. Patsy said she wasn't going to use Pull-Ups again. She just put a plastic cover on the bed. No big deal to her. By the time I'd come in the morning, Patsy would have all the sheets off the bed and in the laundry. JonBenet's white blanket would already be in the dryer." -Linda Hoffmann-Pugh

In Linda's words, "No big deal to her."

Maybe "no big deal" to her, but this proves that JB would wet the bed if not woken up....and it also seems pretty likely that her white blanket was in the dryer that night (judging from the picture of the bed taken that morning).

[sweetcharlotte]

Louisa, just as important as how "religious" Patsy was about waking JB to go to the bathroom, is how frequently JB would wet the bed if she didn't wake her to go. I believe Patsy said something along the lines that "more often than not, if she wasn't wakened, she would wet the bed".
I would also like to add that of course Patsy would tell LE that the bedwetting wasn't a big issue. What else was she going to say..."It really pissed me off?" :shrug:

The "no big deal to her" was LHP's opinion. So why shouldn't Patsy tell LE that the bedwetting wasn't a big issue if it wasn't. :shrug:

[sweetcharlotte]

Maybe "no big deal" to her, but this proves that JB would wet the bed if not woken up....and it also seems pretty likely that her white blanket was in the dryer that night (judging from the picture of the bed taken that morning).

I didn't know that there was any doubt that JonBenet would wet the bed. I thought that was a given. That Patsy got up every night? I don't know that and neither does anyone else.

That her blanket was in the dryer that night is just speculation.

IMO

[LindaA]

Can you provide a link that proves that the majority of doctors agree with you?

And if you really are a doctor you should know that doctors are not always right. Ever heard of a second opinion?? Why would anyone ever need a second opinion if doctors were always right? Unless of course you think you know everything

That's really rude.:no:

[elvislives]

Can you provide a link that proves that the majority of doctors agree with you?

And if you really are a doctor you should know that doctors are not always right. Ever heard of a second opinion?? Why would anyone ever need a second opinion if doctors were always right? Unless of course you think you know everything

If I thought that my providing a link would help educate you, I might go to the trouble. But I am sure that even if I had a link that showed that every md on the face of earth believed that JB ate the pineapple shortly before death, you would then reply "well doctors are wrong all the time...wtf do you know???'
So I'm sure I could find a link on digestion rates, but I'm not going to bother. If you are truly interested in digestion rates, go to the library or try google.

My experience with this board is that there are 2 types of posters: those who are genuinely interested in discussing the facts of this case, where ever they may lead...and those who arrive with a theory etched in stone, and are unwilling to accept anything that conflicts with that theory. You fall into group B.

Louisadelmar had asked my opinion, I gave her it. I also noted that in my belief the fact that JB had pineapple in her si does not in any way implicate the parents. I usually keep a bowl of grapes or cherries or something on my breakfast table. Often my kids will walk by and grab one and eat it. They neither touch the bowl leaving their prints nor do they ask my permission. I am sure this happens all the time when I am not looking. IMO there is a very innocent explanation for JB having pineapple in her si and Patsy being unaware of it.
But if you want to cling to the ONE md who says she ate it the day before, go right ahead, its a free country. By the same token, those who so stubornly insist that JB having pineapple in her si proves her parents murdered her will stay with their theory as well.

[elvislives]

That's really rude.:no:

Thanks, Linda. Thankfully bullmoose recently turned me on to crying towels and I had a whole stack handy to mop up the tears after that verbal attack...;)

[Louisadelmar]

Thanks, Linda. Thankfully bullmoose recently turned me on to crying towels and I had a whole stack handy to mop up the tears after that verbal attack...;)

I'm glad you are able to sit up and take nourishment now. I was going to say ignore this person they obviously aren't interested in a discussion.

[Tober]

Maybe "no big deal" to her, but this proves that JB would wet the bed if not woken up....and it also seems pretty likely that her white blanket was in the dryer that night (judging from the picture of the bed taken that morning).

Excellent points, often overlooked by some. This post is my opinion.

[thewhitewitch1]

I didn't know that there was any doubt that JonBenet would wet the bed. I thought that was a given. That Patsy got up every night? I don't know that and neither does anyone else.

That her blanket was in the dryer that night is just speculation.

IMO

Of course it's speculation. This is like fitting pieces of a puzzle together. Now, LHP stated that if the blanket wasn't on the bed, it would be in the dryer. If the blanket was on the bed, it would have been under the comforter and tucked in (Patsys words). We see the picture of the bed neatly turned down...and no blanket. If the blanket had been pulled off the bed, it would have pulled the comforter off with it. Either it wasn't on the bed at all that night (which would place it in the dryer; which means JB had wet the bed some time after LHPs last cleaning job on the 23rd) or it was on the bed and someone neatly replaced the comforter after taking the blanket off. Would an intruder neaten the bed? Why? Would an intruder know the blanket would be in the dryer? Even if they did, why would they take the risk of removing it? How would they even know it was JBs blanket? Why did they need a blanket anyway? Why not any blanket from just anywhere, if they felt the need to cover her? Why would an intruder want to cover her?
The Barbie nightgown was "stuck to" the blanket, was it not? There was no purpose for that nightgown to be there. It was not JBs "pageant" nightgown and it was not her "favorite" either. My conclusion is that it was stuck by static to the blanket when the blanket was taken out of the dryer.
And I can just see the eye rolls now but I still think JR made a slip when he said "That should not be there" regarding the nightgown. IMO

[shill]

Of course it's speculation. This is like fitting pieces of a puzzle together. Now, LHP stated that if the blanket wasn't on the bed, it would be in the dryer. If the blanket was on the bed, it would have been under the comforter and tucked in (Patsys words). We see the picture of the bed neatly turned down...and no blanket. If the blanket had been pulled off the bed, it would have pulled the comforter off with it. Either it wasn't on the bed at all that night (which would place it in the dryer; which means JB had wet the bed some time after LHPs last cleaning job on the 23rd) or it was on the bed and someone neatly replaced the comforter after taking the blanket off. Would an intruder neaten the bed? Why? Would an intruder know the blanket would be in the dryer? Even if they did, why would they take the risk of removing it? How would they even know it was JBs blanket? Why did they need a blanket anyway? Why not any blanket from just anywhere, if they felt the need to cover her? Why would an intruder want to cover her?
The Barbie nightgown was "stuck to" the blanket, was it not? There was no purpose for that nightgown to be there. It was not JBs "pageant" nightgown and it was not her "favorite" either. My conclusion is that it was stuck by static to the blanket when the blanket was taken out of the dryer.
And I can just see the eye rolls now but I still think JR made a slip when he said "That should not be there" regarding the nightgown. IMO

I don't get it. Why do they put the blanket on her bed if she doesn’t use it, and by use it, I mean sleeping with it covering her.
From what I can gather from your argument is that she would sleep on top of the blanket and it would still be tucked in place, unless someone untucked it and scooped it up with JB on top of it.


So was there a blanket on the bed like there is suppose to be and that's why the blanket she was wrapped in couldn't be the blanket from her bed?

Please help me clear up my confusion.

[shill]

If this is the case, Patsy had to have lied about the pineapple, or Burke did or both. What reason would there have been for either to lie about it? What reason would there have been for them to have lied about JB being asleep when they got home?
Any way you look at it, someone lied about the pineapple. I don't see how you can reach any other conclusion. IMO

We don't have Burkes testimony or interviews.

My money is on Burke being in error. Something must have led ST to disregard some of Burkes statements, that should indicate something.

[Jayelles]

The reason that Lou Smit referred to the pineapple as "the bugaboo", is because it does not support the Ramsey version of events.

jameson says she was told that JonBenet probably ate the pineapple before she went to the Whites and she accepts this as being the most likely scenario. However, that suggests that jonBenet died VERY shortly after coming home from the Whites and not some time after the Ramseys all went to bed.

It is indeed a puzzle.

[Tober]

I find it peculiar that JB was so "zonked" that she didn't even wake up after being taken out of the car (that had to be awkward)

I find that odd, too. Especially since John said he almost dropped her. This post is my opinion.

[aussiesheila]

Still, why not track the pineapple's origin down with as much energy as was expended on the cord and duct tape? The reasonable fact that you would tell your wife in the same circumstances about the pineapple does not mean John Ramsey would have discussed the pineapple with Patsy; how can anyone know how many of the horrible details about the autopsy were shared by John? Her state of mind was probably fragile; IMO John was probably protecting her by not telling her something that would have been confusing and very upsetting; since as both Ramseys have said any pineapple was not from them having it.I am an IDI, this is JMHO. So I believe the Ramseys weren't lying, and didn't put the pineapple out, so I totally disagree with your inference.I totally agree with what bullmoose has said here, and I don't see why people discount the idea that an intruder could have fed the pineapple to JonBenet. So what, if Patsy's prints were on the bowl and Burke's were on the cup? They could have been left there on previous occasions and if the intruder was a Santa wearing gloves who drank the tea and put the pineapple in the bowl then you wouldn't expect to find prints from the intruder. JonBenet adored Santa and would do anything he asked her to IMO. Pineapple was one of her favorite foods, a fact that IMO, Santa would have made it his business to find out in order to be able to use it as a vehicle for getting a drug into JonBenet to render her more amenable to being sexually abused.

[aussiesheila]

And I think its ludicrous to assume that an intruder would have brought a snack for his victim.How can you say this elvislives? What if the intruder had a purpose in bringing a snack for JonBenet? What if the intruder was a sexual predator known to JonBenet whom she adored and trusted and he knew she liked fresh pineapple and he knew he could use it as a vehicle for getting some drug(s) into her to render her more amenable to his being able to sexually abuse her in the basement once Patsy was asleep? As I think did actually happen.

[aussiesheila]

IMO there is an innocuous explanation for the pineapple issue.IMO the explanation for the pineapple issue will be anything but innocuous.

[sweetcharlotte]

<snip>

jameson says she was told that JonBenet probably ate the pineapple before she went to the Whites and she accepts this as being the most likely scenario. However, that suggests that jonBenet died VERY shortly after coming home from the Whites and not some time after the Ramseys all went to bed.

<snip>



Please comment on jameson's theory. Thanks.

[Jayelles]

Please comment on jameson's theory. Thanks.

Comment? Do you mean give my opinion about her theory?

[thewhitewitch1]

I don't get it. Why do they put the blanket on her bed if she doesn’t use it, and by use it, I mean sleeping with it covering her.
From what I can gather from your argument is that she would sleep on top of the blanket and it would still be tucked in place, unless someone untucked it and scooped it up with JB on top of it.


So was there a blanket on the bed like there is suppose to be and that's why the blanket she was wrapped in couldn't be the blanket from her bed?

Please help me clear up my confusion.

Her bed was normally made as such: Bottom sheet, top sheet, blanket, comforter. The blanket was an "oversized" twin blanket which was long enough to be tucked under the mattress. She would sleep with the top sheet, blanket and comforter covering her. If the blanket was on her bed that night, it would have had to have been pulled off of the bed in order to wrap her in it. Pulling it off the bed (because it was tucked in) would have pulled the comforter (and possibly the top sheet) off with it. Even if it wasn't tucked in, it would have pulled the comforter up, unless the person who took it off was Houdini. You can see by the pictures that the comforter is neatly folded back on the bed. This indicates that either the blanket was never on the bed that night, or the intruder took the time to straighten the comforter and fold it back. Why would an intruder; or even the Ramseys, for that matter, bother to take the time or have the thought to do that? It seems logical to conclude that the blanket was not on the bed; which would have placed it in the dryer...the only other place it was always in when not on the bed. This indicates that JB had wet the bed either the Monday when LHP was there and changed the bed, or Christmas night. We can exclude the 24th because JB was wearing the same pjs Christmas morning that she went to bed in on the night of the 24th. We could also assume that if she had wet the bed on the 23rd, the blanket would probably have been put back on her bed before Christmas night; though maybe it was forgotten with all of the activities going on. Remember, LHP also stated that the sheets on JBs bed had been changed since the Monday she was last there. Christmas was two days later.
Hope that made sense and cleared up for you what I was trying to say. And yes, it was the blanket from her bed that she was wrapped in.
I am asking how an intruder would know her blanket was in the dryer and why would they bother anyway to risk making the noise getting it out? And why did they need that blanket when they could have taken any blanket in the house? Why did they need a blanket at all?

[thewhitewitch1]

How can you say this elvislives? What if the intruder had a purpose in bringing a snack for JonBenet? What if the intruder was a sexual predator known to JonBenet whom she adored and trusted and he knew she liked fresh pineapple and he knew he could use it as a vehicle for getting some drug(s) into her to render her more amenable to his being able to sexually abuse her in the basement once Patsy was asleep? As I think did actually happen.

I take it you don't believe a stun gun was used.

[Zoey]

The reason that Lou Smit referred to the pineapple as "the bugaboo", is because it does not support the Ramsey version of events.

jameson says she was told that JonBenet probably ate the pineapple before she went to the Whites and she accepts this as being the most likely scenario. However, that suggests that jonBenet died VERY shortly after coming home from the Whites and not some time after the Ramseys all went to bed.

It is indeed a puzzle.

If JB ate the pineapple prior to going to the White's, doesn't this blow the whole theory behind how fast the pineapple would have digested and ended up in her small intestine? If, according to many, the pineapple travels to the SI in 1-2 hours, that would mean she would have had to have been killed at approx. 7:00 or 8:00 the 25th, when they were at the White's house.

Taking Jameson's word for something, IMO, is like taking Steve Thomas'.

[LindaA]

Good post, TWW1, good questions. Why would anyone "need" the blanket, Ramsey or intruder. An intruder could have noted the blanket in the dryer during the time he was in the house when the Rs were at the party. (IMO he was there quite some time during that period.) Wasn't there some association with Burke's knife and the area around the dryer? Was that where LHP "stashed" it? Or was it found there? Pleae refresh my memory.

[Zoey]

Her bed was normally made as such: Bottom sheet, top sheet, blanket, comforter. The blanket was an "oversized" twin blanket which was long enough to be tucked under the mattress. She would sleep with the top sheet, blanket and comforter covering her. If the blanket was on her bed that night, it would have had to have been pulled off of the bed in order to wrap her in it. Pulling it off the bed (because it was tucked in) would have pulled the comforter (and possibly the top sheet) off with it. Even if it wasn't tucked in, it would have pulled the comforter up, unless the person who took it off was Houdini. You can see by the pictures that the comforter is neatly folded back on the bed. This indicates that either the blanket was never on the bed that night, or the intruder took the time to straighten the comforter and fold it back. Why would an intruder; or even the Ramseys, for that matter, bother to take the time or have the thought to do that? It seems logical to conclude that the blanket was not on the bed; which would have placed it in the dryer...the only other place it was always in when not on the bed. This indicates that JB had wet the bed either the Monday when LHP was there and changed the bed, or Christmas night. We can exclude the 24th because JB was wearing the same pjs Christmas morning that she went to bed in on the night of the 24th. We could also assume that if she had wet the bed on the 23rd, the blanket would probably have been put back on her bed before Christmas night; though maybe it was forgotten with all of the activities going on. Remember, LHP also stated that the sheets on JBs bed had been changed since the Monday she was last there. Christmas was two days later.
Hope that made sense and cleared up for you what I was trying to say. And yes, it was the blanket from her bed that she was wrapped in.
I am asking how an intruder would know her blanket was in the dryer and why would they bother anyway to risk making the noise getting it out? And why did they need that blanket when they could have taken any blanket in the house? Why did they need a blanket at all?

Didn't Patsy say that she did the sheets in the washer upstairs, but any other bedding would have been washed in the big washer downstairs? If the blanket was in the dryer downstairs, who would have heard anyone getting it out? IMO, the intruder could very easily have looked in the dryer downstairs for something to cover her up with. Where were other blankets kept that would have been anymore readily available than one that was in a dryer in a place where the intruder was? IMO, of course.

[Zoey]

Good post, TWW1, good questions. Why would anyone "need" the blanket, Ramsey or intruder. An intruder could have noted the blanket in the dryer during the time he was in the house when the Rs were at the party. (IMO he was there quite some time during that period.) Wasn't there some association with Burke's knife and the area around the dryer? Was that where LHP "stashed" it? Or was it found there? Pleae refresh my memory.


LHP claims she stashed the knife in the cupboard above the stackable washer and dryer. According to the search warrant, a swiss army knife was removed from the home. I do not know if it was indeed the same knife.

[thewhitewitch1]

Didn't Patsy say that she did the sheets in the washer upstairs, but any other bedding would have been washed in the big washer downstairs? If the blanket was in the dryer downstairs, who would have heard anyone getting it out? IMO, the intruder could very easily have looked in the dryer downstairs for something to cover her up with. Where were other blankets kept that would have been anymore readily available than one that was in a dryer in a place where the intruder was? IMO, of course.


There were blankets all over the house. JB had an extra bed in her room too. Why didn't the "intruder" just take the comforter off of her bed and use that? Why did the intruder need to cover her?
I think JBs bed didn't even look like it had been slept in. The pjs she wore from the night before were still laying on it, even.
You can believe an intruder got the blanket out of the dryer if you want, but to me that's just grasping at more straws.
What about the change of sheets? Couple that with the blanket being in the dryer certainly implies that JB had wet the bed one of those times I mentioned in my previous post. What a coincidence that JBs blanket just happened to be in the dryer and that the intruder managed to grab that very blanket, no matter which dryer it was in. I still don't understand why an intruder would need a blanket so much that he searched one out...and it just happened to belong to JB.

[sweetcharlotte]

Comment? Do you mean give my opinion about her theory?

Actually, I was asking elvislives for his comment. Maybe I didn't make that clear. :)

[Jayelles]

Actually, I was asking elvislives for his comment. Maybe I didn't make that clear. :)

Oh right. Since you quoted me, I thought you were addressing me! Yes, if Elvislives is a doctor, I'd be interested in his comment too. Of course, the one thing that is consistent in this case is the fact that the experts disagree on practically everything but I like to hear everyone out anyway.

[Zoey]

There were blankets all over the house. JB had an extra bed in her room too. Why didn't the "intruder" just take the comforter off of her bed and use that? Why did the intruder need to cover her?
I think JBs bed didn't even look like it had been slept in. The pjs she wore from the night before were still laying on it, even.
You can believe an intruder got the blanket out of the dryer if you want, but to me that's just grasping at more straws.
What about the change of sheets? Couple that with the blanket being in the dryer certainly implies that JB had wet the bed one of those times I mentioned in my previous post. What a coincidence that JBs blanket just happened to be in the dryer and that the intruder managed to grab that very blanket, no matter which dryer it was in. I still don't understand why an intruder would need a blanket so much that he searched one out...and it just happened to belong to JB.


I don't understand either why the blanket was needed. I had thought that perhaps the blanket was used to "soften" the head blow. It also could, at that point, be used to mask any fingerprints. After using it for that purpose, it was then placed over JB's body. IMO.

[thewhitewitch1]

I don't understand either why the blanket was needed. I had thought that perhaps the blanket was used to "soften" the head blow. It also could, at that point, be used to mask any fingerprints. After using it for that purpose, it was then placed over JB's body. IMO.

I think for lack of any "strangers" fingerprints anywhere on anything (or lack of prints period) we may as well assume that the "intruder" wore gloves.
Why would a killer want to "soften" a head blow? The blanket wasn't just "placed" over her body. She was wrapped in it "pappoose" style; which indicates a caring, loving gesture. I don't think an intruder would brutally murder her and then lovingly wrap her up in her blanket. Of course now everyone is going to say he did that to "frame" the Ramseys. Did he neaten up her bed to frame them too? This guy must have done this before if he is so smart he can think of all of these details to make it look like the Ramseys did it. I'm not believing it. IMO

[LindaA]

TWW1, you speak of the absence of fingerprints. We know the R's prints were on the bowl and tea glass, but weren't prints found on the ransome note? Does anyone know ?

[Zoey]

I think for lack of any "strangers" fingerprints anywhere on anything (or lack of prints period) we may as well assume that the "intruder" wore gloves.
Why would a killer want to "soften" a head blow? The blanket wasn't just "placed" over her body. She was wrapped in it "pappoose" style; which indicates a caring, loving gesture. I don't think an intruder would brutally murder her and then lovingly wrap her up in her blanket. Of course now everyone is going to say he did that to "frame" the Ramseys. Did he neaten up her bed to frame them too? This guy must have done this before if he is so smart he can think of all of these details to make it look like the Ramseys did it. I'm not believing it. IMO

I meant fingerprints on the item used to cause the damage to her head.

Was it JR who said she was covered pappoose style? Can anyone direct me to that statement?

Perhaps "soften" was not the correct term. I can picture what I am trying to say, just can't type it. I meant as something to cover the murder weapon, to prevent blood splatter, and to yes, soften the blow so as to prevent it from splitting wide open. Perhaps this is not even possible or feasible, but I was just trying to put my opinion out there.

Straightening up beds in the Ramsey home seems to be the norm. Burke's bed was made before he was taken to the White's. IMO.

[aussiesheila]

I take it you don't believe a stun gun was used.Actually white witch, I do think a stungun was used but I think that was brought along later by another pedophile who had been tipped off about the planned abuse session. I think it was Santa who was the prime mover in the organisation of the event and I don't think he or any of the others knew ahead of time that a stungun would be brought along.

[Xainia]

Show of hands...

Who puts their crockery away after wiping off all their finger prints.... ??

Just Curious.

[aussiesheila]

Her bed was normally made as such: Bottom sheet, top sheet, blanket, comforter. The blanket was an "oversized" twin blanket which was long enough to be tucked under the mattress. She would sleep with the top sheet, blanket and comforter covering her. If the blanket was on her bed that night, it would have had to have been pulled off of the bed in order to wrap her in it. Pulling it off the bed (because it was tucked in) would have pulled the comforter (and possibly the top sheet) off with it. Even if it wasn't tucked in, it would have pulled the comforter up, unless the person who took it off was Houdini. You can see by the pictures that the comforter is neatly folded back on the bed. This indicates that either the blanket was never on the bed that night, or the intruder took the time to straighten the comforter and fold it back. Why would an intruder; or even the Ramseys, for that matter, bother to take the time or have the thought to do that? It seems logical to conclude that the blanket was not on the bed; which would have placed it in the dryer...the only other place it was always in when not on the bed. This indicates that JB had wet the bed either the Monday when LHP was there and changed the bed, or Christmas night. We can exclude the 24th because JB was wearing the same pjs Christmas morning that she went to bed in on the night of the 24th. We could also assume that if she had wet the bed on the 23rd, the blanket would probably have been put back on her bed before Christmas night; though maybe it was forgotten with all of the activities going on. Remember, LHP also stated that the sheets on JBs bed had been changed since the Monday she was last there. Christmas was two days later.
Hope that made sense and cleared up for you what I was trying to say. And yes, it was the blanket from her bed that she was wrapped in.
I am asking how an intruder would know her blanket was in the dryer and why would they bother anyway to risk making the noise getting it out? And why did they need that blanket when they could have taken any blanket in the house? Why did they need a blanket at all?I'm not so sure that you can draw the conclusion that the way JonBenet's bed appears in the photographic evidence is the state the bed was in at 5.52 am. I don't know the time the photographers came in but I don't think it could have been all that early. It certainly wasn't before the Whites arrived. I read, I think in PMPT that Burke's bed was already remade apparently by FW before he took Burke to his house, so maybe he slipped into JonBenet's room unbeknown to anyone and remade her bed too?

[Zoey]

I'm not so sure that you can draw the conclusion that the way JonBenet's bed appears in the photographic evidence is the state the bed was in at 5.52 am. I don't know the time the photographers came in but I don't think it could have been all that early. It certainly wasn't before the Whites arrived. I read, I think in PMPT that Burke's bed was already remade apparently by FW before he took Burke to his house, so maybe he slipped into JonBenet's room unbeknown to anyone and remade her bed too?


Aussie, I was just getting ready to post this same thing!

[Tober]

The idea that an intruder "lured" JonBenet with the pineapple isn't just far-out, it ignores the evidence: The pineapple was in the Ramsey's bowl, only Burke's and Patsy's fingerprints were on the bowl, etc. Keep in mind, too, that JonBenet consumed the pineapple a relatively short time after they arrived home, which makes it even less likely that an intruder gave it to her. Just because people go to bed (allegedly), doesn't mean they immediately fall asleep. The earlier an intruder would be interacting with JonBenet, the more likely it is that someone would have heard them. I find it hard to believe that JonBenet wouldn't wake up when being taken out of the car (very awkward, John says he almost dropped her) or when Patsy changed her, yet she'd not only wake up for an intruder, but she'd go eat pineapple with him at a time she would have known wouldn't have been appropriate for him to be in their home (she was 6, not 2). This intruder didn't write the ransom note prior to entering the home, didn't bring the items necessary to perpetrate the crime, but brought in pineapple? The intruder would then wait for the pineapple to partially digest before killing her? Why would the intruder need to use the pineapple if his goal was to kidnap her? Why not just grab her and leave? She was 6 years old, it wouldn't have been that hard to overpower her. If his goal was to sexually abuse her, why use the pineapple as a means to get her to comply, when he could have just taken her out of the home to a place he felt safe and sexually abused her all he wanted to there? The most logical explanation for the pineapple fits perfectly with the evidence and the circumstances. Pretty much any other pineapple scenario is a force-fit to the evidence and ignores the circumstances. This post is my opinion.

[elvislives]

How can you say this elvislives? What if the intruder had a purpose in bringing a snack for JonBenet? What if the intruder was a sexual predator known to JonBenet whom she adored and trusted and he knew she liked fresh pineapple and he knew he could use it as a vehicle for getting some drug(s) into her to render her more amenable to his being able to sexually abuse her in the basement once Patsy was asleep? As I think did actually happen.


In all fairness, Aussie, I do admit that your theory is possible. I just think that it's way Way WAY out there.
Specifically to the pineapple, did this intruder bring the pineapple in a bag and dump it into the R bowl? If so why are Burkes and PRs prints on the bowl? Why didn't the intruder bring the pineapple in a tupperware--since he had to season it first with drugs anyway--and just pull off the top and say...here, JB have some pineapple. Why did this/these intruders who were so careful not to leave any evidence, leave the bowl of pineapple at the crime scene? Also he/they would have to have had a drug that flew under the radar of the toxicology panel, which btw were very advanced in 1996.
I am not saying your theory is impossible, just highly highly improbable imo.

[elvislives]

Please comment on jameson's theory. Thanks.

Sorry I do not know who jameson is or what his/her theory entails.

[Zoey]

The idea that an intruder "lured" JonBenet with the pineapple isn't just far-out, it ignores the evidence: The pineapple was in the Ramsey's bowl, only Burke's and Patsy's fingerprints were on the bowl, etc. Keep in mind, too, that JonBenet consumed the pineapple a relatively short time after they arrived home, which makes it even less likely that an intruder gave it to her. Just because people go to bed (allegedly), doesn't mean they immediately fall asleep. The earlier an intruder would be interacting with JonBenet, the more likely it is that someone would have heard them. I find it hard to believe that JonBenet wouldn't wake up when being taken out of the car (very awkward, John says he almost dropped her) or when Patsy changed her, yet she'd not only wake up for an intruder, but she'd go eat pineapple with him at a time she would have known wouldn't have been appropriate for him to be in their home (she was 6, not 2). This intruder didn't write the ransom note prior to entering the home, didn't bring the items necessary to perpetrate the crime, but brought in pineapple? The intruder would then wait for the pineapple to partially digest before killing her? Why would the intruder need to use the pineapple if his goal was to kidnap her? Why not just grab her and leave? She was 6 years old, it wouldn't have been that hard to overpower her. If his goal was to sexually abuse her, why use the pineapple as a means to get her to comply, when he could have just taken her out of the home to a place he felt safe and sexually abused her all he wanted to there? The most logical explanation for the pineapple fits perfectly with the evidence and the circumstances. Pretty much any other pineapple scenario is a force-fit to the evidence and ignores the circumstances. This post is my opinion.


Apparently you don't have kids? I have had my kids fall asleep at a concert, carried them to the car, driven home, carried them in the house, changed them in to their jammies, had them wake up in the morning and be so upset because they missed the concert, with no recollection of being taken from the concert and taken home to their beds. When kids are out, they can be out for the count. IMO, it is not hard at all for me to picture little JB being zonked. It was Christmas. Early morning, playing hard, staying up later than normal, dinner party. This post is my own personal experience and opinion.

[elvislives]

Show of hands...

Who puts their crockery away after wiping off all their finger prints.... ??

Just Curious.

I just unloaded my dishwasher and was thinking, 'my prints are on every dish in these cabinets!'
Apparently I am the only one in my family with the skill set to unload the dishwasher. I am also the only one skilled enough to replace the toilet paper rolls when they run out, so my prints are all over those as well...;)

[elvislives]

The idea that an intruder "lured" JonBenet with the pineapple isn't just far-out, it ignores the evidence: The pineapple was in the Ramsey's bowl, only Burke's and Patsy's fingerprints were on the bowl, etc. Keep in mind, too, that JonBenet consumed the pineapple a relatively short time after they arrived home, which makes it even less likely that an intruder gave it to her. Just because people go to bed (allegedly), doesn't mean they immediately fall asleep. The earlier an intruder would be interacting with JonBenet, the more likely it is that someone would have heard them. I find it hard to believe that JonBenet wouldn't wake up when being taken out of the car (very awkward, John says he almost dropped her) or when Patsy changed her, yet she'd not only wake up for an intruder, but she'd go eat pineapple with him at a time she would have known wouldn't have been appropriate for him to be in their home (she was 6, not 2). This intruder didn't write the ransom note prior to entering the home, didn't bring the items necessary to perpetrate the crime, but brought in pineapple? The intruder would then wait for the pineapple to partially digest before killing her? Why would the intruder need to use the pineapple if his goal was to kidnap her? Why not just grab her and leave? She was 6 years old, it wouldn't have been that hard to overpower her. If his goal was to sexually abuse her, why use the pineapple as a means to get her to comply, when he could have just taken her out of the home to a place he felt safe and sexually abused her all he wanted to there? The most logical explanation for the pineapple fits perfectly with the evidence and the circumstances. Pretty much any other pineapple scenario is a force-fit to the evidence and ignores the circumstances. This post is my opinion.

AND if the pineapple she ate was drugged, what drug was used?? It must have been odorless, tasteless and extremely potent. SHe only had a small portion of pineapple in her system. Way to out there imo.

[Tober]

John's and Patsy's claims that a sleeping JonBenet was put to bed and didn't awake don't square with the evidence. Plus, Burke first said JonBenet was awake when they arrived home, but later changed his story to match that of his parents. This post is my opinion.

[Zoey]

John's and Patsy's claims that a sleeping JonBenet was put to bed and didn't awake don't square with the evidence. Plus, Burke first said JonBenet was awake when they arrived home, but later changed his story to match that of his parents. This post is my opinion.

Even Steve Thomas claims Burke was "confused" about this. Could you please provide the link that states Burke changed his story about this.

[shill]

Hope that made sense and cleared up for you what I was trying to say. And yes, it was the blanket from her bed that she was wrapped in.
Thank you, that helped me see your point.


I am asking how an intruder would know her blanket was in the dryer and why would they bother anyway to risk making the noise getting it out? And why did they need that blanket when they could have taken any blanket in the house? Why did they need a blanket at all?
I understand the comforter being in place as suspicious, but there seems to be more to it.
Were the sheets removed and washed too? If not, why not?
Yes, why that blanket? IMO it would be logical to say that blanket was on the bed and taken at the same time JB was. Maybe JB was lying on top of the blanket and she was scooped up with it. But then why wasn't the comforter taken when she was removed from the bed instead?

Wrapping the dead in a white blanket is a Muslim tradition performed for the proper burial of their dead. That's part of my Muslim Did It theory. It's a answer to the white blanket question, but I doubt anyone will buy it.

On a footnote, in Patsy's interview, it is implied that LE have photos of JB in the laundry room. No time reference to when the photos where taken, but it would seem to only matter if they thought they were taken that night.

[Louisadelmar]

[...]On a footnote, in Patsy's interview, it is implied that LE have photos of JB in the laundry room. No time reference to when the photos where taken, but it would seem to only matter if they thought they were taken that night.

I think the photos were located in the laundry room. Not that they were taken in the laundry room. Even Patsy seemed confused.

21 THOMAS HANEY: Did you take some
22 photographs of JonBenet in the basement laundry
23 room?
24 PATSY RAMSEY: No.
25 TRIP DeMUTH: You had presents in
0186
1 the basement laundry room, right?
2 PATSY RAMSEY: Right.
3 TRIP DeMUTH: So you wrapped
4 presents in the basement laundry room, right?
5 PATSY RAMSEY: Right.
6 TRIP DeMUTH: So you were down in
7 the basement laundry room pretty often?
8 PATSY RAMSEY: Depending on what
9 time of year it was, yeah, uh-hum.
10 TRIP DeMUTH: And do you remember
11 photographs being -- photographs of JonBenet
12 being in there?
13 PATSY RAMSEY: Taken of her in the
14 laundry room?
15 TRIP DeMUTH: No, no. Photographs
16 of her located in the laundry room?17 PATSY RAMSEY: Oh, in the laundry
18 room, oh. I don't know, there was a bunch of
19 stuff, I mean wrapping stuff and everything. I
20 don't remember any photographs.

[thewhitewitch1]

I'm not so sure that you can draw the conclusion that the way JonBenet's bed appears in the photographic evidence is the state the bed was in at 5.52 am. I don't know the time the photographers came in but I don't think it could have been all that early. It certainly wasn't before the Whites arrived. I read, I think in PMPT that Burke's bed was already remade apparently by FW before he took Burke to his house, so maybe he slipped into JonBenet's room unbeknown to anyone and remade her bed too?


It wasn't "remade". The comforter was folded down but the rest of the bed was unmade. I believe the photos shown of the bed was how it was found that a.m. Neither of the Ramseys have said otherwise.

[shill]

It wasn't "remade". The comforter was folded down but the rest of the bed was unmade. I believe the photos shown of the bed was how it was found that a.m. Neither of the Ramseys have said otherwise.

Were those photos of the bed taken after FW went up to Burke's room?
I'm implying he had an opportunity to once again mess with the crime scene on the way to Burkes room.

[aussiesheila]

The idea that an intruder "lured" JonBenet with the pineapple isn't just far-out, it ignores the evidence: The pineapple was in the Ramsey's bowl, only Burke's and Patsy's fingerprints were on the bowl, etc. Keep in mind, too, that JonBenet consumed the pineapple a relatively short time after they arrived home, which makes it even less likely that an intruder gave it to her. Just because people go to bed (allegedly), doesn't mean they immediately fall asleep. The earlier an intruder would be interacting with JonBenet, the more likely it is that someone would have heard them. I find it hard to believe that JonBenet wouldn't wake up when being taken out of the car (very awkward, John says he almost dropped her) or when Patsy changed her, yet she'd not only wake up for an intruder, but she'd go eat pineapple with him at a time she would have known wouldn't have been appropriate for him to be in their home (she was 6, not 2). This intruder didn't write the ransom note prior to entering the home, didn't bring the items necessary to perpetrate the crime, but brought in pineapple? The intruder would then wait for the pineapple to partially digest before killing her? Why would the intruder need to use the pineapple if his goal was to kidnap her? Why not just grab her and leave? She was 6 years old, it wouldn't have been that hard to overpower her. If his goal was to sexually abuse her, why use the pineapple as a means to get her to comply, when he could have just taken her out of the home to a place he felt safe and sexually abused her all he wanted to there? The most logical explanation for the pineapple fits perfectly with the evidence and the circumstances. Pretty much any other pineapple scenario is a force-fit to the evidence and ignores the circumstances. This post is my opinion.I'm not sure that you are referring to my post Tober, as I didn't say the intruder "lured" JonBenet with the pineapple, but I'll answer your post anyway.

I don't think the idea that the intruder fed JonBenet pineapple ignores any evidence. That Patsy's and Burke's fingerprints might have been on the bowl is not evidence related to the pineapple being in the bowl, they could have easily gotten there at some other time. The absence of an intruder's fingerprints means nothing as well. The intruder I hypothesize is a Santa and they all wear white gloves.

You may find it hard to believe that JonBenet wouldn't wake up when being taken out of the car and changed for bed but thousands of parents wouldn't.

I think John's estimate of the time he fell asleep was 10.30. So Patsy gets out of bed at 10.45 and lets Santa in around 11.00. Patsy falls asleep by 11.45. By the time Santa goes up to JonBenet's bedroom at 11.45 she has had over 2 hours sleep and is wildly excited to see him IMO. So I don't find it hard to believe that she became fully awake, after all she was expecting him since he had promised her a secret visit after Christmas, as some evidence would indicate.

By all accounts JonBenet adored Santa and I imagine would have trusted him as well, so I believe she would have happily eaten the (drugged) pineapple he fed her. Her having eaten it around midnight fits in with the evidence as far as I can tell. The drugs would have begun to be absorbed into the bloodstream by the time the pineapple hit the stomach, long before the pineapple began to be digested in the small intestine.

His intention was not to kill her or kidnap her IMO, but to sexually abuse her for a while. An abuser who wants to be able to abuse the same child again needs to do it surreptitiously so that no-one suspects it ever happened. Removing her from the house is not surreptitious, keeping her in the house and returning her to her bed is. A drug to quieten her down and another to inhibit the laying down of a short term memory of the event is what is called for and that was what was delivered in the pineapple IMO.

What do you mean, the intruder didn't bring the items necessary to perpetrate the crime? Couldn't the cord for the neck and the hands have been brought in by the intruder? There were even animal hairs that could not be traced to anything in the house found on JonBenet's hands. That suggests to me that an animal was brought in as well, probably to be used as part of the abuse by the intruder.

And no, the intruder didn't write the ransom note before the murder or after IMO. I don't think he wrote it at all, I think Patsy wrote the ransom note and she was forced to by an interested party after the murder, which I think was unintentional and carried out in panic.

[aussiesheila]

In all fairness, Aussie, I do admit that your theory is possible. I just think that it's way Way WAY out there.
Specifically to the pineapple, did this intruder bring the pineapple in a bag and dump it into the R bowl? If so why are Burkes and PRs prints on the bowl? Why didn't the intruder bring the pineapple in a tupperware--since he had to season it first with drugs anyway--and just pull off the top and say...here, JB have some pineapple. Why did this/these intruders who were so careful not to leave any evidence, leave the bowl of pineapple at the crime scene? Also he/they would have to have had a drug that flew under the radar of the toxicology panel, which btw were very advanced in 1996.
I am not saying your theory is impossible, just highly highly improbable imo.That's OK elvis, I know it's way out there, but the way in theories haven't got us very far have they?

Why is it not possible for Patsy and Burke's prints to have gotten there at some earlier time? Maybe Burke even touched the bowl the morning of the 26th, he might have been hungry once he got up and was looking for something to eat.

Maybe transferring pineapple to a Tupperware bowl would have made Mrs Santa suspicious, so he kept it in the original plastic bag it came in from the supermarket. I think it would be just as easy to add a few mls to a plastic bag as it would be to add it to a Tupperware container. It might even be easier to mix it in by squishing the bag around.

I think Santa intended to dispose of the pineapple after his little session with JonBenet, which I do not think included killing her, just a little bit of molestation, then return her to bed, clean up and go home.

I think the murder was unintentional and the coverup was done in complete panic and Santa managed to forget the pineapple. Even that was not such a disaster because Patsy knew Santa had come to the house, she had let him in IMO. So if JonBenet had not been murdered and Santa had left the pineapple behind, he could have told Patsy that he had fed JonBenet her favorite snack while they were waiting for the photographer and Patsy would have gone on about what a thoughtful man he was.

As for drug toxicology tests, they might have been very advanced in 1996 in some parts of the US, but what about the coroner's laboratory in Boulder Coorado?

I have never seen the lab report so I don't know what drugs were tested for other that ethanol. I don't even know what lab did the testing. So, yes I am going out on a limb here. But what if there exists a pedophile underground that puts out information on new drugs that no test has been developed for. I would think they would have ways of getting hold of drugs such as these.

There is also the possibility that the drug(s) that were used (if indeed there were some) were ones that were metabolised quickly and were pretty much out of her system by the time the tests were done. TOD 2.00 am, autopsy began 8.30 am the next day, 30 hours later.

Actually, I think they must have frozen the remains of the pineapple in the bowl, because recently there was some talk about Klonopin (go to Websleuths and look for the thread with this name in the heading). I am wondering if years later someone decided to test the pineapple and they did find something.

[aussiesheila]

Even Steve Thomas claims Burke was "confused" about this. Could you please provide the link that states Burke changed his story about this.And while you are at it Tober, could you please provide the link the what he said in the first place.

[aussiesheila]

I think the photos were located in the laundry room. Not that they were taken in the laundry room. Even Patsy seemed confused.

21 THOMAS HANEY: Did you take some
22 photographs of JonBenet in the basement laundry
23 room?
24 PATSY RAMSEY: No.
25 TRIP DeMUTH: You had presents in
0186
1 the basement laundry room, right?
2 PATSY RAMSEY: Right.
3 TRIP DeMUTH: So you wrapped
4 presents in the basement laundry room, right?
5 PATSY RAMSEY: Right.
6 TRIP DeMUTH: So you were down in
7 the basement laundry room pretty often?
8 PATSY RAMSEY: Depending on what
9 time of year it was, yeah, uh-hum.
10 TRIP DeMUTH: And do you remember
11 photographs being -- photographs of JonBenet
12 being in there?
13 PATSY RAMSEY: Taken of her in the
14 laundry room?
15 TRIP DeMUTH: No, no. Photographs
16 of her located in the laundry room?17 PATSY RAMSEY: Oh, in the laundry
18 room, oh. I don't know, there was a bunch of
19 stuff, I mean wrapping stuff and everything. I
20 don't remember any photographs.So was Tom Haney.

Shows how well informed BPD were and what a professional investigation they conducted.

[aussiesheila]

AND if the pineapple she ate was drugged, what drug was used?? It must have been odorless, tasteless and extremely potent. SHe only had a small portion of pineapple in her system. Way to out there imo.I don't see why it had to be odorless and tasteless, Santa could just have told her he was adding something special to give her special powers or something, she would have swallowed the story as well as the odd tasting pineapple IMO.

Maybe he even added the drug to the pineapple right there in front of her, one ml on each of 10 spoonsfuls.

[LindaA]

Why is it not possible for Patsy and Burke's prints to have gotten there at some earlier time? Maybe Burke even touched the bowl the morning of the 26th, he might have been hungry once he got up and was looking for something to eat.

I'd say quite possible, probable even, except I don't think Burke was up and walking around the house on the morning of the 26th. I certaily think he could have touched it at any time on Christmas Day, however.

I think it would be just as easy to add a few mls to a plastic bag as it would be to add it to a Tupperware container. It might even be easier to mix it in by squishing the bag around.

I've always had the impression that this was fresh pineapple sealed in a vacuum bag. He would have to have broken the seal in order to add anything, then place the pineapple in something else in order for it not to leak. Sounds too complicated.

As for drug toxicology tests, they might have been very advanced in 1996 in some parts of the US, but what about the coroner's laboratory in Boulder Coorado?

Not sure about this, but we discussed two things earlier: 1.) You don't find what you don't test for and 2.) What about so-called date- rape drugs? My understanding is that they are almost undetectable. What were they like in '96? I'd like to hear what Elvislives has to say on this one.

The interesting thing about your theory is that it fits the evidence, and taken piece by piece it makes sense. But taken as a whole, it just doesn't seem likely. Why would McSanta be so hell-bent on having his way with JBR that night that he has to go to such extreme measures? And then we've already discussed the idea that PR would never have gone to sleep and allowed JBR to be photographed. She was just too much the stage mother!

But I have to hand it to you, it's the most thorough theory I've seen posted!

[aussiesheila]

It wasn't "remade". The comforter was folded down but the rest of the bed was unmade. I believe the photos shown of the bed was how it was found that a.m. Neither of the Ramseys have said otherwise.OK, so the bed wasn't "remade". That doesn't rule out the possibility that it could have been "readjusted" IMO.

I don't think you can take anything that Patsy says as the truth, IMO she lies constantly. As for John I don't think he would have a clue as to what JonBenet's bed would normally look like in the morning.

So I don't think you can conclude that the photos shown of the bed was how it was found that a.m.

[aussiesheila]

I'd say quite possible, probable even, except I don't think Burke was up and walking around the house on the morning of the 26th. I certaily think he could have touched it at any time on Christmas Day, however.I appreciate your input LindaA and you do raise valid points.


I've always had the impression that this was fresh pineapple sealed in a vacuum bag. He would have to have broken the seal in order to add anything, then place the pineapple in something else in order for it not to leak. Sounds too complicated. Really, you can get it vacuum sealed? Not just dolloped into the bag and sealed with and open and close seal? Anyway, I've changed this a bit after reading what elvis had to say about how much pineapple was found in Jonbenet's intestine. I'm now going with the idea that Santa added the drug mix bit by bit to each spoonful of pineapple as Jonbenet ate it.



Not sure about this, but we discussed two things earlier: 1.) You don't find what you don't test for and 2.) What about so-called date- rape drugs? My understanding is that they are almost undetectable. What were they like in '96? I'd like to hear what Elvislives has to say on this one.Me too.

The interesting thing about your theory is that it fits the evidence, and taken piece by piece it makes sense. But taken as a whole, it just doesn't seem likely. Why would McSanta be so hell-bent on having his way with JBR that night that he has to go to such extreme measures?Don't you get the impression that he was obsessed with her? I'm afraid I do and I think he had been for a long time, but had never once got the opportunity to have his way. I'm just not sure that he could necessarily have found a more appropriate time for his event and I think he would have been keen for it to be ASAP. I think he hatched the idea at the Ramseys' Christmas party where he discussed his plan with the likes of CG and GM who were present. He also needed transport which I think CW was going to provide and maybe he wasn't going to be available for that much longer. Then again, he might have needed to provide Mrs Santa with a good reason why he had to go into Boulder without her. As Santa he would only have a good reason until the 25th, after that he would have to wait another 12 months.

And then we've already discussed the idea that PR would never have gone to sleep and allowed JBR to be photographed. She was just too much the stage mother!But what if Santa had promised he would wake her as soon as the photographer arrived. And besides sometimes you have no choice about staying awake, well I don't.

As Louisadelmar pointed out to me Charles Kuralt didn't take glamour photographs, he was more into the homespun, applepiesie kinds of shots. So I think Patsy would have been happy to have JonBenet photographed in her Barbie nightgown with her little white blanket draped around her. I would love to know whether there was a hairbrush lying around in the kitchen, one that I imagine Patsy would have brought down ready to make JonBenet's hair more presentable. Maybe Santa had said that Kuralt would do an article about the beautiful daughter with the tragically ill former beauty queen mother. I can imagine this would have appealed to Patsy's sense of vanity.

[Tober]

What do you mean, the intruder didn't bring the items necessary to perpetrate the crime?

It can be inferred that all the items used to carry out the crime were already in the home. This post is my opinion.

[thewhitewitch1]

Were those photos of the bed taken after FW went up to Burke's room?
I'm implying he had an opportunity to once again mess with the crime scene on the way to Burkes room.

I doubt that FW "messed with the crime scene" (i.e. JBs bed). Also, I believe JR was with FW when they went to get Burke up. Neither Ramsey has said that JBs bed looked any different than when they went to see if she was in her room. You know you are just grasping at straws here. :) IMO

[bullmoose]

It can be inferred that all the items used to carry out the crime were already in the home. This post is my opinion.I think that it can be equally inferred that the items used to carry out the crime had to be in the home at the time of the crime so as to be used in the crime, but were brought into the home by the killer/s. I think that it can be reasonably inferred that the users of these items were not the Ramseys, as no link connecting the Ramseys to the tape or cord were ever found. This post is my opinion.

[User615]

How can we infer that Burke made the tea, drank it, and left the glass there sometime after they arrived home but before he went to bed? 1) Patsy said she cleaned the table off after breakfast; 2) Patsy said they didn't eat lunch that day because they had a big breakfast and were going to the White's around 4 or 5 o'clock; 3) The victim advocates didn't place the tea bag there; 4) None of the Ramsey's guests of Dec. 26 have come forward saying they placed the tea bag there; 5) Burke liked tea; 6) The glass with the tea bag was at the seat position of the table where Burke normally sat; 7) Only Burke's fingerprints were on the glass with the tea bag; 8) The glass with the tea bag was in proximity to a bowl of pineapple that contained only Patsy's and Burke's fingerprints; 9) JonBenet ate some of the pineapple from the bowl sometime after they arrived home; 10) Both the bowl which contained only Patsy's and Burke's fingerprints and the glass which contained only Burke's fingerprints were left out after JonBenet consumed the pineapple; 11) The setting is typical of a before-bedtime children's snack; 12) Burke didn't have the tea in the morning because he was awoken and then taken to the White's; 13) It can be inferred that Burke made the tea and drank it after they arrived home either before, during, or after working on his model. It can be inferred that after Burke drank the tea he left the glass there and sometime after that he went to bed.
I ran across this and it made me wonder.....


13 This is a photograph of 417. what does that
14 represent there?
15 JOHN RAMSEY: Well, it's a large spoon, not
16 a teaspoon. It looks like Patsy's good silver. I
17 guess that could be pineapple, I can't tell. But
18 it could be. Some people (INAUDIBLE) pineapple to
19 make it old and there's this teabag in an empty
20 glass. I can't tell, but it looks like there is
21 some milk or something.
22 LOU SMIT: Who do you know would eat
23 pineapple like that? Do you have any idea?
24 JOHN RAMSEY: Well the kids like pineapple,
25 but that's a big bowl and this is a big spoon and
0208
1 I can't imagine that the kids would have something
2 like that at any time. Certainly not with iced
3 tea, I don't think. They don't even drink iced
4 tea. I think they do not.

And later....

1 MIKE KANE: Any other tea drinkers in the
2 house?
3 JOHN RAMSEY: Patsy drank tea. She likes
4 sweet ice tea.
5 MIKE KANE: (INAUDIBLE)?
6 JOHN RAMSEY: I believe, not much, once
7 in a while.
8 LOU SMIT: (INAUDIBLE) sweet ice tea, you
9 can put a tea bag (INAUDIBLE)?
10 JOHN RAMSEY: Oh, no. With sweet ice tea
11 you have to make the tea. And I don't know how you
12 do it, but she puts sugar in it or something. It's
13 a southern drink. But, no.
14 I mean, first of all, it was hot tea. You
15 wouldn't it in that kind of a glass, it was weird.
16 That doesn't make sense.

[Louisadelmar]

I ran across this and it made me wonder.....

[...]
Do you have any idea?
24 JOHN RAMSEY: Well the kids like pineapple,
25 but that's a big bowl and this is a big spoon and
0208
1 I can't imagine that the kids would have something
2 like that at any time. Certainly not with iced
3 tea, I don't think. They don't even drink iced
4 tea. I think they do not.

And later....

[...].
Your quote is missing an "(INAUDIBLE)" that is in this copy of the interview. I wonder how many slightly different versions are floating around?

http://www.jonbenetindexguide.com/1998BPD-John-Interview-Complete.htm

24 JOHN RAMSEY: Well the kids like pineapple,
25 but that's a big bowl and this is a big spoon and
0208
1 I can't imagine that the kids would have something
2 like that at any time. Certainly not with iced
3 tea, I don't think. They don't even drink iced
4 tea. I think they do not. (INAUDIBLE) yeah.
5 LOU SMIT: John, I just wanted to kind
6 of check back with you. Now these obviously are
7 crime scene photographs.

[User615]

Your quote is missing an "(INAUDIBLE)" that is in this copy of the interview. I wonder how many slightly different versions are floating around?

http://www.jonbenetindexguide.com/1998BPD-John-Interview-Complete.htm

24 JOHN RAMSEY: Well the kids like pineapple,
25 but that's a big bowl and this is a big spoon and
0208
1 I can't imagine that the kids would have something
2 like that at any time. Certainly not with iced
3 tea, I don't think. They don't even drink iced
4 tea. I think they do not. (INAUDIBLE) yeah.
5 LOU SMIT: John, I just wanted to kind
6 of check back with you. Now these obviously are
7 crime scene photographs.



This is where I got the interview from.
http://www.bestfreeforums.com/forums/johns-transcript---police-interview-jun-23-98-vt42-sanctuary2.html

[elvislives]

I

There is also the possibility that the drug(s) that were used (if indeed there were some) were ones that were metabolised quickly and were pretty much out of her system by the time the tests were done. TOD 2.00 am, autopsy began 8.30 am the next day, 30 hours later.

.

She would stop metabolizing anything in her system the minute she died. We know she died about 1-3 hours after eating the pineapple, so if drugs were on the pineapple there will still be some evidence of them regardless of when the autopsy was performed.
Yes there are some drugs that metabolize quickly, but that does not mean they escape the toxicology panel. Cocaine for example metabolizes very fast, so they test not only for the cocaine molecule, but for all of its metabolites (molecules break down into smaller metabolites, etc etc).

And yes, Boulder was a small town and if memory serves this was the first murder that year, BUT the great thing about drug testing is that they can and do save large amounts of a murder victims blood. And I guarantee that in a high profile case such as this, the blood was tested and retested and to this day, every time they make an advance in toxicology testing, they retest JBs blood. jmo

[andU]

Show of hands...

Who puts their crockery away after wiping off all their finger prints.... ??

Just Curious.

While I don't do it to wipe off finger prints, I do hand wash and dry my dishes and my crock pot. I think drying with a towel may wipe off the prints, or maybe not... at least some of them. I keep the towel in my hand to hold the crock dish while putting it back in its storage place.

[elvislives]

There were even animal hairs that could not be traced to anything in the house found on JonBenet's hands. That suggests to me that an animal was brought in as well, probably to be used as part of the abuse by the intruder.




Okay I thought it was beaver hairs that were found. DOes someone want to explain to me how beavers (the animal) are used in kinky sex :eek: . Actually maybe I dont want to know...

And Aussiesheila, when you are talking about Santa being the perpetrator, are you referring to Bill McSomething (they guy who played Santa at the Xmas party)? My understanding is that he had just had bypass surgery. People who have just had bypass surgery are usually in pain for quite some time, and kinky sex is usually the last thing on their mind. jmo

[Louisadelmar]

This is where I got the interview from.
http://www.bestfreeforums.com/forums/johns-transcript---police-interview-jun-23-98-vt42-sanctuary2.html

Weird. This is what I get from clicking on your link:

1 I can't imagine that the kids would have something
2 like that at any time. Certainly not with iced
3 tea, I don't think. They don't even drink iced
4 tea. I think they do not. (INAUDIBLE) yeah.

[Zoey]

Okay I thought it was beaver hairs that were found. DOes someone want to explain to me how beavers (the animal) are used in kinky sex :eek: . Actually maybe I dont want to know...

And Aussiesheila, when you are talking about Santa being the perpetrator, are you referring to Bill McSomething (they guy who played Santa at the Xmas party)? My understanding is that he had just had bypass surgery. People who have just had bypass surgery are usually in pain for quite some time, and kinky sex is usually the last thing on their mind. jmo

Speaking of Santa, does anyone have any information other than the search warrant as to why the Ramseys had a Santa suit in their basement? Was it theirs? Was it found in the duffle bag that they claim is not theirs? This would be the bag that was found stuffed underneath the stairs area. Anyone besides me read about this?

[bullmoose]

While I don't do it to wipe off finger prints, I do hand wash and dry my dishes and my crock pot. I think drying with a towel may wipe off the prints, or maybe not... at least some of them. I keep the towel in my hand to hold the crock dish while putting it back in its storage place.And yet in my house, I don't use the drying towel to put anything away; I do it by hand. If its coming out of the dishwasher, unless its still wet,all dishes, cups ,bowls, etc. are picked up by hand and put away, leaving visible prints, if you look for them; I did today.:biggrin:

[andU]

She would stop metabolizing anything in her system the minute she died. We know she died about 1-3 hours after eating the pineapple, so if drugs were on the pineapple there will still be some evidence of them regardless of when the autopsy was performed.
Yes there are some drugs that metabolize quickly, but that does not mean they escape the toxicology panel. Cocaine for example metabolizes very fast, so they test not only for the cocaine molecule, but for all of its metabolites (molecules break down into smaller metabolites, etc etc).

And yes, Boulder was a small town and if memory serves this was the first murder that year, BUT the great thing about drug testing is that they can and do save large amounts of a murder victims blood. And I guarantee that in a high profile case such as this, the blood was tested and retested and to this day, every time they make an advance in toxicology testing, they retest JBs blood. jmo

I still say it could also have been an over the counter herbal sleep assist medication, which would probably not have been tested for. I've mentioned several possibilities in the past so I won't repeat them.

[andU]

Speaking of Santa, does anyone have any information other than the search warrant as to why the Ramseys had a Santa suit in their basement? Was it theirs? Was it found in the duffle bag that they claim is not theirs? This would be the bag that was found stuffed underneath the stairs area. Anyone besides me read about this?

Yep, but it has been awhile since it was discussed, not sure if it was this board.

[thewhitewitch1]

I'm not sure that you are referring to my post Tober, as I didn't say the intruder "lured" JonBenet with the pineapple, but I'll answer your post anyway.

I don't think the idea that the intruder fed JonBenet pineapple ignores any evidence. That Patsy's and Burke's fingerprints might have been on the bowl is not evidence related to the pineapple being in the bowl, they could have easily gotten there at some other time. The absence of an intruder's fingerprints means nothing as well. The intruder I hypothesize is a Santa and they all wear white gloves.

You may find it hard to believe that JonBenet wouldn't wake up when being taken out of the car and changed for bed but thousands of parents wouldn't.

I think John's estimate of the time he fell asleep was 10.30. So Patsy gets out of bed at 10.45 and lets Santa in around 11.00. Patsy falls asleep by 11.45. By the time Santa goes up to JonBenet's bedroom at 11.45 she has had over 2 hours sleep and is wildly excited to see him IMO. So I don't find it hard to believe that she became fully awake, after all she was expecting him since he had promised her a secret visit after Christmas, as some evidence would indicate.

By all accounts JonBenet adored Santa and I imagine would have trusted him as well, so I believe she would have happily eaten the (drugged) pineapple he fed her. Her having eaten it around midnight fits in with the evidence as far as I can tell. The drugs would have begun to be absorbed into the bloodstream by the time the pineapple hit the stomach, long before the pineapple began to be digested in the small intestine.

His intention was not to kill her or kidnap her IMO, but to sexually abuse her for a while. An abuser who wants to be able to abuse the same child again needs to do it surreptitiously so that no-one suspects it ever happened. Removing her from the house is not surreptitious, keeping her in the house and returning her to her bed is. A drug to quieten her down and another to inhibit the laying down of a short term memory of the event is what is called for and that was what was delivered in the pineapple IMO.

What do you mean, the intruder didn't bring the items necessary to perpetrate the crime? Couldn't the cord for the neck and the hands have been brought in by the intruder? There were even animal hairs that could not be traced to anything in the house found on JonBenet's hands. That suggests to me that an animal was brought in as well, probably to be used as part of the abuse by the intruder.

And no, the intruder didn't write the ransom note before the murder or after IMO. I don't think he wrote it at all, I think Patsy wrote the ransom note and she was forced to by an interested party after the murder, which I think was unintentional and carried out in panic.

I'm sorry but I have to say it. Your theory is so far out there that you may as well incorporate Martians into it.
The "intruder" brought a beaver into the house to be used to abuse JB? You think Patsy allowed a horde of people in for a "photo session" at 11:00 at night when everyone had to be up early to leave on their trip? You think she just fell asleep during it? Patsy wrote the ransom note because she was forced into it? By who? For what reason? And you honestly believe she would do that for anyone? She was going to redress her dead child in a Barbie nightgown?
I think you would be better off as a detective novel writer than an actual detective. I'm really sorry but sometimes I actually laugh out loud when I read your theory. :)

Maybe the beaver was brought in to gnaw the paintbrush into thirds.

[bullmoose]

tww1: You don't understand what the beaver was brought to the house to do.; Beavers slap the water with their tails when they spot danger, to warn the other beavers[if any are present]. This beaver was used by the killers as a lookout; it was startled and scared by something in the night, and accidentally bopped Jonbenet with its lethally powerful tail as it was giving warning to the others there.:biggrin: Just kidding, IMHO

[shill]

Don't you get the impression that he was obsessed with her? I'm afraid I do and I think he had been for a long time, but had never once got the opportunity to have his way. I'm just not sure that he could necessarily have found a more appropriate time for his event and I think he would have been keen for it to be ASAP. I think he hatched the idea at the Ramseys' Christmas party where he discussed his plan with the likes of CG and GM who were present. He also needed transport which I think CW was going to provide and maybe he wasn't going to be available for that much longer. Then again, he might have needed to provide Mrs Santa with a good reason why he had to go into Boulder without her. As Santa he would only have a good reason until the 25th, after that he would have to wait another 12 months.


I get the impressions he was obsessed with JB and other little girls who died (What was involvement with these girls before they died?). And what happened to his daughter and her friend that Christmas day years earlier is a mystery. IMO he may have been the one who molested his daughters friend and he somehow escaped being pointed too as a suspect. And I feel that his wife (Mrs. Santa) may well be aware of his history and jealous of his longings for little girls and she put an end to it with JB.
Mrs. Santa being a writer and movie critic, would explain the ransom notes length and content. Defiling JB would make her no longer the perfect little angel her husband thought she was.
This post is my off the path opinion.

[Louisadelmar]

Don't be mean to Aussiesheila... Her theory may be somewhat far-out but she's always kind and polite when posting.

[LindaA]

Okay I thought it was beaver hairs that were found. DOes someone want to explain to me how beavers (the animal) are used in kinky sex :eek: . Actually maybe I dont want to know...

And Aussiesheila, when you are talking about Santa being the perpetrator, are you referring to Bill McSomething (they guy who played Santa at the Xmas party)? My understanding is that he had just had bypass surgery. People who have just had bypass surgery are usually in pain for quite some time, and kinky sex is usually the last thing on their mind. jmo

I didn't know that beavers were used in kinky sex. Gerbils, yes; beavers I don't think so.

I'd have toa gree about the heart surgery and the kinky sex, but it would depend on how long before he had had the surgery. After my husband had bypass surgery and fully recovered he was rejuvenated. ;)

[Zoey]

I didn't know that beavers were used in kinky sex. Gerbils, yes; beavers I don't think so.

I'd have toa gree about the heart surgery and the kinky sex, but it would depend on how long before he had had the surgery. After my husband had bypass surgery and fully recovered he was rejuvenated. ;)


McSanta had heart surgery in the summer of 1996.

[LindaA]

McSanta had heart surgery in the summer of 1996.
Given his age, I guess it's fair to assume that he had not fully recovered by that time, but it's hard to say. People do generally feel much better than they ahd in a long time once they recover from the operation itself.

[nuisanceposter]

My father had bypass surgery at age 48, and while he felt better, he was extremely weak for a long time afterwards. I doubt he could have managed to have picked up and carried around a six year old child just four months after his surgery, much less strangle her to death and bludgeon her head savagely. And this was when he was 48 years old, still so relatively young...what age was McReynolds when he had his bypass? 65? His writing didn't match, his DNA didn't match, they couldn't place him in the house that night through forensic evidence...imo, Santa Bill didn't kill JonBenet.

[Zoey]

My father had bypass surgery at age 48, and while he felt better, he was extremely weak for a long time afterwards. I doubt he could have managed to have picked up and carried around a six year old child just four months after his surgery, much less strangle her to death and bludgeon her head savagely. And this was when he was 48 years old, still so relatively young...what age was McReynolds when he had his bypass? 65? His writing didn't match, his DNA didn't match, they couldn't place him in the house that night through forensic evidence...imo, Santa Bill didn't kill JonBenet.


I will have to do some digging for the article, but I thought I had read where McSanta was one of the ones whose handwriting scored higher than Patsy's. I know I read it. Perhaps it was just on another forum, but I am sure I read that.

The reason I have always thought perhaps he had something to do with it is simply by association. He was at the Ramsey home on the 23rd. JB tells the neighbor lady that Santa told her he was going to come and see her on the
25th. Since he was the only Santa at the party, one can assume that it was he who told her this. This post is my opinion.

[Jayelles]

My father had bypass surgery at age 48, and while he felt better, he was extremely weak for a long time afterwards. I doubt he could have managed to have picked up and carried around a six year old child just four months after his surgery, much less strangle her to death and bludgeon her head savagely. And this was when he was 48 years old, still so relatively young...what age was McReynolds when he had his bypass? 65? His writing didn't match, his DNA didn't match, they couldn't place him in the house that night through forensic evidence...imo, Santa Bill didn't kill JonBenet.

Reasons why I don't think McSanta was involved:-

1. I agree with Nuisance poster about his health. It takes a good 6 months to recover from major surgery. Heart problems necessitating by-pass aren't usually acute and affecting people of good health. McSanta was probably not in the best of health prior to his surgery. Undoubtedly he would have felt the benefit of his surgery, but I sincerely doubt he would have been in peak fitness just months afterwards. SDIs like to mention the fact that he carried a suitcase shortly afterwarsd when he was going on vacation, but I don't think you can compare the two. Carrying out a child murder would have been a high stress situation. Going on vacation is usually a pleasant thing.

2) McSanta wasn't a keyholder - he would have had to break in.

3) McSanta was a big man, I doubt he could have gotten in through the basement window.

4) McSanta lived about 25-30 miles from the Ramseys and it was snowing that night.

I doubt he wold have run the risk of collapsing in the Ramsey house and being caught and I doubt he would have run the risk of venturing out in the snow and running the risk of getting stuck.

[andU]

Reasons why I don't think McSanta was involved:-

1. I agree with Nuisance poster about his health. It takes a good 6 months to recover from major surgery. Heart problems necessitating by-pass aren't usually acute and affecting people of good health. McSanta was probably not in the best of health prior to his surgery. Undoubtedly he would have felt the benefit of his surgery, but I sincerely doubt he would have been in peak fitness just months afterwards. SDIs like to mention the fact that he carried a suitcase shortly afterwarsd when he was going on vacation, but I don't think you can compare the two. Carrying out a child murder would have been a high stress situation. Going on vacation is usually a pleasant thing.

2) McSanta wasn't a keyholder - he would have had to break in.

3) McSanta was a big man, I doubt he could have gotten in through the basement window.

4) McSanta lived about 25-30 miles from the Ramseys and it was snowing that night.

I doubt he wold have run the risk of collapsing in the Ramsey house and being caught and I doubt he would have run the risk of venturing out in the snow and running the risk of getting stuck.

Is there a link or something that shows who has/had keys? I'd like to see that, if there is, please.

[andU]

FYI: I posted a link to the FBI website that contains information regarding fiber, hair and other crime scene info. I found it very interesting.

Sorry, I forgot to say that it was posted on the thread about Patsy's clothing.... (Geeze! the second Monday of this week already!)

[rashomon]

AND if the pineapple she ate was drugged, what drug was used?? It must have been odorless, tasteless and extremely potent. SHe only had a small portion of pineapple in her system. Way to out there imo.
Wasn't JB's body tested for the presence of drugs, and it proved negative?

[rashomon]

That suggests to me that an animal was brought in as well, probably to be used as part of the abuse by the intruder.
An animal was in it too? Too bad Rudolph the Rednosed Reindeer's alibi has never been checked - just another blunder by those bungling Boulder detectives, not to see the instant connection: Secret Santa being in this together with his accomplice Rudolph. ;)
The "intruder" brought a beaver into the house to be used to abuse JB? You think Patsy allowed a horde of people in for a "photo session" at 11:00 at night when everyone had to be up early to leave on their trip? You think she just fell asleep during it? Patsy wrote the ransom note because she was forced into it? By who? For what reason? And you honestly believe she would do that for anyone? She was going to redress her dead child in a Barbie nightgown?
I think you would be better off as a detective novel writer than an actual detective. I'm really sorry but sometimes I actually laugh out loud when I read your theory. :)

Maybe the beaver was brought in to gnaw the paintbrush into thirds.


LMBO TWW! Hilarious!

So it was actually beaver hair? Hmm, this of course exonerates Rudolph.
Thanks for pointing out the 'beaver connection'...!

tww1: You don't understand what the beaver was brought to the house to do.; Beavers slap the water with their tails when they spot danger, to warn the other beavers[if any are present]. This beaver was used by the killers as a lookout; it was startled and scared by something in the night, and accidentally bopped Jonbenet with its lethally powerful tail as it was giving warning to the others there. Just kidding, IMHO
Wow, Bulmoose, we hardly ever agree on anyting, but in terms of the beaver tail possibly being the lethal weapon which has never been found - I think you are on to something here, Sherlock! :D

But kidding aside: didn't Patsy Ramsey leave the home on Dec 26 wearing a fur coat? Does anyone know which kind of fur it was?

[Louisadelmar]

ST depo:

5 Q. You don't want me to go there.
6 The -- as I understand it, there was a
7 beaver hair, what was identified as a beaver
8 hair, found on the duct tape?
9 A. FBI lab identified a hair or fiber
10 from the adhesive side of the duct tape as a
11 beaver hair.
12 Q. Were you aware that Mr. Ainsworth,
13 Detective Ainsworth, went through the Ramseys'
14 closets in June of 1997 and taped all the
15 closets for hairs and that no beaver hair was
16 found?

[bullmoose]

There was a link up the other day showing Patsy Ramsey in a fur hat,boots and coat; however the picture was grainy and undated; it was not possible to even guess if it was faux fur or real; although I would assume it was of real fur. I have never heard of what kind of fur it might be; it could be of almost any kind, strangely enough, my daughter has several coats made of mink, one quite similar to the one in the picture of Patsy. The strange part of it is that my daughter was either given the coats[she likes fur] or paid very little for them. Out on the US west coast it apparently is almost out of fashion to have real fur; the coats are very warm, and my daughter has a 1940ish retro sense of style. Hopefully someone can ID the kind of coat Patsy was wearing.Incidentally, Rashoman, I really do have a lowbrow sense of humor, don't I?:biggrin:

[bullmoose]

ST depo:

5 Q. You don't want me to go there.
6 The -- as I understand it, there was a
7 beaver hair, what was identified as a beaver
8 hair, found on the duct tape?
9 A. FBI lab identified a hair or fiber
10 from the adhesive side of the duct tape as a
11 beaver hair.
12 Q. Were you aware that Mr. Ainsworth,
13 Detective Ainsworth, went through the Ramseys'
14 closets in June of 1997 and taped all the
15 closets for hairs and that no beaver hair was
16 found?
So it wasn't a beaverskin coat; its not surprising, I am certainly no expert on fur coats, but I never heard of one of beaver. JMHO

[shill]

Ooooohhh!! Beaver hair like the little furry creature that build dams. That makes a lot more sense then a pubic hair, my bad.:biggrin:

[elvislives]

Given his age, I guess it's fair to assume that he had not fully recovered by that time, but it's hard to say. People do generally feel much better than they ahd in a long time once they recover from the operation itself.

Actually I thought his surgery was more recent than the previous summer. By Christmas time he would probably be healthy enough, but I still dont think he did it.

And, Linda, I'm glad your husband is back in action...;)

[elvislives]

Wasn't JB's body tested for the presence of drugs, and it proved negative?

Yes but some seem to think that she was drugged and the drug went under the radar of the toxicology panel. Possible, but not at all likely imo.

[elvislives]

So it wasn't a beaverskin coat; its not surprising, I am certainly no expert on fur coats, but I never heard of one of beaver. JMHO

I've NEVER heard of anyone wearing a beaver fur coat!

[thewhitewitch1]

Ooooohhh!! Beaver hair like the little furry creature that build dams. That makes a lot more sense then a pubic hair, my bad.:biggrin:


:lol: Well, we knew that some of us were probably thinking that but leave it to you, Shill, to actually say it! :biggrin:

[elvislives]

I don't see why it had to be odorless and tasteless, Santa could just have told her he was adding something special to give her special powers or something, she would have swallowed the story as well as the odd tasting pineapple IMO.

Maybe he even added the drug to the pineapple right there in front of her, one ml on each of 10 spoonsfuls.

I'm not sure what drug you have in mind, Aussiesheila, but it would have to be very potent...only a small bit of pineapple was in her intestine...probably about 1 chunk.
But I have to say that as far out there as your theory may be, you definitely thought of everything...most theories out there are incomplete.

[elvislives]

:lol: Well, we knew that some of us were probably thinking that but leave it to you, Shill, to actually say it! :biggrin:

That's why I had to clarify that I was talking about the animal when I asked someone to explain to me how beavers are used in kinky sex...

But leave it to Shill...:)

[LindaA]

Actually I thought his surgery was more recent than the previous summer. By Christmas time he would probably be healthy enough, but I still dont think he did it.

And, Linda, I'm glad your husband is back in action...;)

Thanks, EL. Me, too. Even his eyesight improved after the surgery.

[Zoey]

I've NEVER heard of anyone wearing a beaver fur coat!



Beaver fur coats:

http://www.furcenter.com/furcenter_sea_beaver/

[Jayelles]

Years ago, we found paintbrushes which used beaver hair. There was a website selling them. I remember they were oriental paintbrushes.

[shill]

Years ago, we found paintbrushes which used beaver hair. There was a website selling them. I remember they were oriental paintbrushes.
They checked all the paintbrushes for Beaver hair and there was no match.

[Tober]

Some make-up brushes are made using beaver hair. This post is my opinion.

[Jayelles]

They checked all the paintbrushes for Beaver hair and there was no match.

Could have been removed and disposed off along with the duct tape and remaining cord (if any). One solitary beaver hair is a bit odd. Paintbrushes do tend to shed hairs one at a time. The fact that hair was on her hand is odd IMO. Hairs don't normally adhere to the hairless palms of people's hands for any length of time.

[shill]

Could have been removed and disposed off along with the duct tape and remaining cord (if any). One solitary beaver hair is a bit odd. Paintbrushes do tend to shed hairs one at a time. The fact that hair was on her hand is odd IMO. Hairs don't normally adhere to the hairless palms of people's hands for any length of time.
You must have missed the post just ahead of this one. Try #454 by Louisadelmar. The Beaver hair was on the tape.

Your implying a second brush was removed along with the broken piece of the garrote handle brush. What was the purpose of this second brush?

[shill]

Could have been removed and disposed off along with the duct tape and remaining cord (if any). One solitary beaver hair is a bit odd.
Or it could be from the fur trim of a Santa outfit, in which Beaver is used by some manufacturers to make those suits. Or it could be from Beaver lined gloves. I use to own beaver fur earmuffs that I bought in Colorado, they where wonderfully soft.

Bottom line, there was no match to the Ramsey’s property.

If you believe the four fibers matched to Patsy on the tape are proof that she is the killer, then you would have to believe an intruder that left the beaver hair on that tape helped her.

But I prefer to see this Beaver hair as evidence of an intruder and that Patsy’s fibers are going to naturally be everywhere.

[Jayelles]

Or it could be from the fur trim of a Santa outfit, in which Beaver is used by some manufacturers to make those suits. Or it could be from Beaver lined gloves. I use to own beaver fur earmuffs that I bought in Colorado, they where wonderfully soft.

Bottom line, there was no match to the Ramsey’s property.

If you believe the four fibers matched to Patsy on the tape are proof that she is the killer, then you would have to believe an intruder that left the beaver hair on that tape helped her.

But I prefer to see this Beaver hair as evidence of an intruder and that Patsy’s fibers are going to naturally be everywhere.


Do you have a link for the beaver trimmed santa suits? Do we know the beaver hair is white?

[nuisanceposter]

ST depo:

5 Q. You don't want me to go there.
6 The -- as I understand it, there was a
7 beaver hair, what was identified as a beaver
8 hair, found on the duct tape?
9 A. FBI lab identified a hair or fiber
10 from the adhesive side of the duct tape as a
11 beaver hair.
12 Q. Were you aware that Mr. Ainsworth,
13 Detective Ainsworth, went through the Ramseys'
14 closets in June of 1997 and taped all the
15 closets for hairs and that no beaver hair was
16 found?


And you're aware that as early as June of 97 the Ramsey house was being renovated? Carpets replaced, painting done, furniture and household items removed...how do we know that any beaver hair-bearing items hadn't already been removed and vacuumed behind?

[Louisadelmar]

And you're aware that as early as June of 97 the Ramsey house was being renovated? Carpets replaced, painting done, furniture and household items removed...how do we know that any beaver hair-bearing items hadn't already been removed and vacuumed behind?

I think the major renovations were done when they first bought the place. What was done in June '96? Source?

[nuisanceposter]

ST, hb, pg 189

"The smell of fresh paint was strong when I returned for another look on July 2, 1997, and with most of the furniture removed the place seemed much less gaudy than I had remembered."

<snip>

"There were no person effects or clothing, and the drawers were empty."

<snip>

"Half the top floor was taken up by the parents' individual dressing rooms and bathrooms. I took Lou Smit into the caverous closet that Patsy Ramsey had once filled with designer clothing and argued how unlikely it was for such a woman to wear the same outfit on two consecutive days. He shrugged."

<snip>

"JonBenet's bedroom had once been the fanciful canvas of a professional designer but now was only an empty space. The antique English burl walnut beds were gone, as was the corner cabinet that had been hand-carved on the theme of the cat and the fiddle and the cow jumping over the moon. A mural showing the child's love of hats had vanished beneath a new coat of cream-colored paint. The closets were empty, the trophies removed, the carpeting replaced."



So at least Patsy's closet and JonBenet's room had been cleared out, and new carpeting and paint was being put in, as noticed by Thomas on July 2, '97. Not everything is gone, because Thomas speaks of a grandfather clock and a spinning wheel and an antique rocker, plus appliances such as the washer-dryer combo outside JB's room. In order for there to already to be new paint and carpet and cleared out rooms, someone had been in the house during June of '97 to do so.

How do we know that whoever had been there to clear out the closets hadn't taken any beaver hair items the Rs owned and cleaned up behind them?

I wonder why the Rs were having JonBenet's room, or any part of the house for that matter, renovated so soon after the murder, when more forensic clues could possibly be found? Why would you tear out the carpet in the bedroom and paint the walls when you're still searching for the person who went in there and got her out of bed and killed her?

[Zoey]

ST, hb, pg 189

"The smell of fresh paint was strong when I returned for another look on July 2, 1997, and with most of the furniture removed the place seemed much less gaudy than I had remembered."

<snip>

"There were no person effects or clothing, and the drawers were empty."

<snip>

"Half the top floor was taken up by the parents' individual dressing rooms and bathrooms. I took Lou Smit into the caverous closet that Patsy Ramsey had once filled with designer clothing and argued how unlikely it was for such a woman to wear the same outfit on two consecutive days. He shrugged."

<snip>

"JonBenet's bedroom had once been the fanciful canvas of a professional designer but now was only an empty space. The antique English burl walnut beds were gone, as was the corner cabinet that had been hand-carved on the theme of the cat and the fiddle and the cow jumping over the moon. A mural showing the child's love of hats had vanished beneath a new coat of cream-colored paint. The closets were empty, the trophies removed, the carpeting replaced."



So at least Patsy's closet and JonBenet's room had been cleared out, and new carpeting and paint was being put in, as noticed by Thomas on July 2, '97. Not everything is gone, because Thomas speaks of a grandfather clock and a spinning wheel and an antique rocker, plus appliances such as the washer-dryer combo outside JB's room. In order for there to already to be new paint and carpet and cleared out rooms, someone had been in the house during June of '97 to do so.

How do we know that whoever had been there to clear out the closets hadn't taken any beaver hair items the Rs owned and cleaned up behind them?

I wonder why the Rs were having JonBenet's room, or any part of the house for that matter, renovated so soon after the murder, when more forensic clues could possibly be found? Why would you tear out the carpet in the bedroom and paint the walls when you're still searching for the person who went in there and got her out of bed and killed her?


I think that is very strange that 6 months after a brutal murder in a home, that they would have had it repainted and cleaned up. I am sure that they would have had to have permission from the LE or someone to do so, woudn't they? Wouldn't it still have been considered a crime scene?

Or was the home already on the market and in the process of being shown for sell and the realty company had it done? I dont' know how these things work as far as releasing a home after a crime.

[elvislives]

Beaver fur coats:

http://www.furcenter.com/furcenter_sea_beaver/

Dam! (pun intended). I learn something new here everyday!

[Zoey]

Some make-up brushes are made using beaver hair. This post is my opinion.


One can infer that Patsy's make-up brushes were taken and examined to determine if they were indeed made of beaver fur. This post is my opinion.

[thewhitewitch1]

They checked all the paintbrushes for Beaver hair and there was no match.


Once again I would like to see a link backing up this statement. I didn't know that some paintbrushes were made from beaver hair until I did a search for it on the net. As bungling as the BPD was, how do we know they even thought to check it?

[bullmoose]

Once again I would like to see a link backing up this statement. I didn't know that some paintbrushes were made from beaver hair until I did a search for it on the net. As bungling as the BPD was, how do we know they even thought to check it? I would sort of assume that they did, inasmuch as they spent hundreds of manhours and many thousands of dollars trying to connect the piece of duct tape it was found on to Patsy Ramsey. It would seem logical that even the bungling BPD would try to connect a beaver hair to the brushes in the painting box if they were in the same location, which they were. It can be clearly inferred that no match was found; because if one had been made, we would have read about the match in the Globe back in 1997, courtesy of the Twister. Of course, this is JMHO.:biggrin:

[thewhitewitch1]

I would sort of assume that they did, inasmuch as they spent hundreds of manhours and many thousands of dollars trying to connect the piece of duct tape it was found on to Patsy Ramsey. It would seem logical that even the bungling BPD would try to connect a beaver hair to the brushes in the painting box if they were in the same location, which they were. It can be clearly inferred that no match was found; because if one had been made, we would have read about the match in the Globe back in 1997, courtesy of the Twister. Of course, this is JMHO.:biggrin:

Assuming anything doesn't make it a fact. Even if the paintbrush wasn't the source, so many people were in that house not only that day but for the 3 days prior to it, it could have come from anyone and does not necessarily have anything to do with the murder. IMO

[bullmoose]

Oh, I get it! If something is found on the duct tape on Jonbenet's mouth that cant be used to try to incriminate the Ramseys in RDI eyes, then it probably doesn't have anything to do with the case, its just there by coincidence, right? If it doesn't incriminate, then just eliminate! Wow! That's a refreshing way of looking at evidence.Of course, this IJMHO:biggrin:

[thewhitewitch1]

Oh, I get it! If something is found on the duct tape on Jonbenet's mouth that cant be used to try to incriminate the Ramseys in RDI eyes, then it probably doesn't have anything to do with the case, its just there by coincidence, right? If it doesn't incriminate, then just eliminate! Wow! That's a refreshing way of looking at evidence.Of course, this IJMHO:biggrin:

Well, I guess if you can suggest that P's fibers were from transference, the same could be said for the beaver hair, right?
Notice I do not usually discuss the fiber evidence because I believe it leads nowhere.

[bullmoose]

Well, I guess if you can suggest that P's fibers were from transference, the same could be said for the beaver hair, right?
Notice I do not usually discuss the fiber evidence because I believe it leads nowhere.
I also think that the BPD's entire case leads there, too, at least the one that Synthroid Stevie came up with. At least he was able to get a book deal, so he got to vent his spleen to the world. JMHO:biggrin:

[thewhitewitch1]

I also think that the BPD's entire case leads there, too, at least the one that Synthroid Stevie came up with. At least he was able to get a book deal, so he got to vent his spleen to the world. JMHO:biggrin:

And Lou Smit is hell bent on proving it was an intruder...even if he has to invent evidence. How is he any better than Steve Thomas?

[bullmoose]

And Lou Smit is hell bent on proving it was an intruder...even if he has to invent evidence. How is he any better than Steve Thomas?Something that I very much admire in Lou Smit is that when he quit working for the DA's office over the direction of his investigation, he did not at that time have a close relationship with a tabloid, as did Steve Thomas. And he did not send a long sniveling boo-hoo letter of resignation to the press,complicating LE's investigation even further, as did Steve Thomas. He did not then sit down and write a Twisterpiece on the investigation, as did Steve Thomas. Finally, as a murder investigator, Smit has solved a lot of murder cases over the years, and has a good track record and has a reputation for honesty and integrity; Steve Thomas has a track record of one case, which remains unsolved. I know I bash Thomas continuously, but I do not take away from him his desire to see the case solved and justice done for Jonbenet; I believe that he totally believes in his scenario; its just that I don't agree with him. This case eats at me, how it must eat at him who was there, but couldn't resolve it. Sorry, I was being thoughtful for a moment, its all JMHO

[Louisadelmar]

And Lou Smit is hell bent on proving it was an intruder...even if he has to invent evidence. How is he any better than Steve Thomas?

What evidence did he invent? Everything I have read other LE people say about him is he is an experienced detective as well as an honorable, ethical man. Do you have information that he isn't?

[shill]

Do you have a link for the beaver trimmed santa suits? Do we know the beaver hair is white?
I once saw the link but I don't have it. You can just Google for Santa suits. Some Santa suits are trimmed in black fur.

[Jayelles]

Something that I very much admire in Lou Smit is that when he quit working for the DA's office over the direction of his investigation, he did not at that time have a close relationship with a tabloid, as did Steve Thomas. And he did not send a long sniveling boo-hoo letter of resignation to the press,complicating LE's investigation even further, as did Steve Thomas. He did not then sit down and write a Twisterpiece on the investigation, as did Steve Thomas. Finally, as a murder investigator, Smit has solved a lot of murder cases over the years, and has a good track record and has a reputation for honesty and integrity; Steve Thomas has a track record of one case, which remains unsolved. I know I bash Thomas continuously, but I do not take away from him his desire to see the case solved and justice done for Jonbenet; I believe that he totally believes in his scenario; its just that I don't agree with him. This case eats at me, how it must eat at him who was there, but couldn't resolve it. Sorry, I was being thoughtful for a moment, its all JMHO

You are kidding! Lou Smit went one step better than talking to tabloids. He went on national tv both in the US and the UK and spread misinformation about the case! I like Lou Smit, but he has exhibited little signs of buffoonery at times.

To his credit, he did back down on the misinformation. I am of course referring to the blue marks on her skin which he claimed on national tv were caused by the blue electrical arc of a stun gun. He also backed down on saying the stungun was an Air Taser when he saw that the prongs of an Air Taser didn't "fit".

[Jayelles]

I once saw the link but I don't have it. You can just Google for Santa suits. Some Santa suits are trimmed in black fur.

I did google and got nothing. We know from photos that McReynolds santa suit was trimmed with white.

[shill]

And you're aware that as early as June of 97 the Ramsey house was being renovated? Carpets replaced, painting done, furniture and household items removed...how do we know that any beaver hair-bearing items hadn't already been removed and vacuumed behind?


Don't be a hypocrite.
Everyone of you RDI's have argued until your blue in the face that the four red fibers from Patsy could only have gotten on the tape if she had killed JB.
Now you want to say that the Beaver hair on the tape was transferred there from second hand contact?
You want to have your cake and eat it too.

So typical of an RDI argument, you try and make the evidence fit your theory.

[shill]

Assuming anything doesn't make it a fact. Even if the paintbrush wasn't the source, so many people were in that house not only that day but for the 3 days prior to it, it could have come from anyone and does not necessarily have anything to do with the murder. IMO

And to you too.....
Don't be a hypocrite.
Everyone of you RDI's have argued until your blue in the face that the four red fibers from Patsy could only have gotten on the tape if she had killed JB.
Now you want to say that the Beaver hair on the tape was transferred there from second hand contact?
You want to have your cake and eat it too.

So typical of an RDI argument, you try and make the evidence fit your theory.

[shill]

And Lou Smit is hell bent on proving it was an intruder...even if he has to invent evidence. How is he any better than Steve Thomas?I will agree with you on this. The stun gun is a reach to start, but LS has way more street cred then ST.

[shill]

I did google and got nothing. We know from photos that McReynolds santa suit was trimmed with white.

Well then, check out Zoey's link to the white Beaver coats.

[nuisanceposter]

Don't be a hypocrite.
Everyone of you RDI's have argued until your blue in the face that the four red fibers from Patsy could only have gotten on the tape if she had killed JB.
Now you want to say that the Beaver hair on the tape was transferred there from second hand contact?
You want to have your cake and eat it too.

So typical of an RDI argument, you try and make the evidence fit your theory.

Just who are you calling a hypocrite, and why?

First off, those fibers, according to PMPT, hb, pages 471 and 505, were red and black, not just red.

Second off, please show me where I have said that those fibers could only be there if Patsy killed JonBenet. Quote my posts, please.

Third, I have made no comments at all as to whether the beaver hair could be there from transfer or otherwise. Again, quote my posts and show me where I said that.

Better yet, Shill, just don't even speak to me anymore.

As for LS and his "street cred", I hardly consider a man as biased as he is and with basic facts about this case wrong to have "street cred." History means nothing when you can't even get basic facts right. There was no blood or skin under JonBenet's nails, and like the blue line and claims of Air Taser, Smit needs to stop saying that.

[Jayelles]

Well then, check out Zoey's link to the white Beaver coats.

Oh I found the white ladies fashion beaver coats - not exactly Santa Wear though. I am particularly interested in your claim that some santa suits have beaver fur and would have been most interested in any link you could provide to back up your claim.

[thewhitewitch1]

And to you too.....
Don't be a hypocrite.
Everyone of you RDI's have argued until your blue in the face that the four red fibers from Patsy could only have gotten on the tape if she had killed JB.
Now you want to say that the Beaver hair on the tape was transferred there from second hand contact?
You want to have your cake and eat it too.

So typical of an RDI argument, you try and make the evidence fit your theory.

S'cuse me but I don't believe I have ever said that. If I did, it was a long time ago and I have since changed my view on it. Or am I not allowed to do that?

[LindaA]

Interesting that suddenly no RDI says they have ever posted that the red/red & black fibers had to have been placed on the tape when JB was murdered. I wonder where all the phantom RDIs have gone.

[nuisanceposter]

The fibers on the tape aren't as suspect because the tape was previously used before it was on JonBenet's face. It's the fibers from Patsy's clothes in the paint tray and in the ligature knot, as well as the RN and the inconsistent stories, combined with lack of forensic evidence of an intruder, that make me think Patsy had to have been there when JonBenet was killed. IMO.

[bullmoose]

The fibers on the tape aren't as suspect because the tape was previously used before it was on JonBenet's face. It's the fibers from Patsy's clothes in the paint tray and in the ligature knot, as well as the RN and the inconsistent stories, combined with lack of forensic evidence of an intruder, that make me think Patsy had to have been there when JonBenet was killed. IMO.This fascinating to me; the duct tape was used previously to being put on Jonbenet's face, wherever did you read that,?ie, link, please. You are saying then, that the tape didn't come from a roll directly, but was taken off something else to put on her face,right? Of course, there is fiber evidence on the tape from whatever it was stuck to, first, right? I'm sure I've just missed the unequivical proof of this somehow, right?:biggrin:

[shill]

This fascinating to me; the duct tape was used previously to being put on Jonbenet's face, wherever did you read that,?ie, link, please. You are saying then, that the tape didn't come from a roll directly, but was taken off something else to put on her face,right? Of course, there is fiber evidence on the tape from whatever it was stuck to, first, right? I'm sure I've just missed the unequivical proof of this somehow, right?:biggrin:
It's the doll story.

JB has special dolls. Manufacture suggests taping a string on them down with tape. Patsy's sister removes dolls allegedly so LE can't match fibers on tape, or find there are similar pieces of tape on the dolls.
And conveniently, RDI's can make this claim about the dolls because there is no way of challenging their claim.

But somehow I doubt they used a whole role of tape on these few dolls.

[bullmoose]

It's the doll story.

JB has special dolls. Manufacture suggests taping a string on them down with tape. Patsy's sister removes dolls allegedly so LE can't match fibers on tape, or find there are similar pieces of tape on the dolls.
And conveniently, RDI's can make this claim about the dolls because there is no way of challenging their claim.

But somehow I doubt they used a whole role of tape on these few dolls.But this is such an old dead horse to beat on; the tape on the dolls does not match the tape on Jonbenet's mouth; the Supersleuths led by Synthroid Stevie traced the tape back to the factory of manufacture; they could not link it to the Ramseys in any way, the tape used on the other dolls, although black duct tape, did not match. McGuicken's,the hardware store that Patsy shopped at, carried the right duct tape, but no link to Patsy was made,outside of Synthroid Stevie's imagination. Oh and maybe nuisanceposters, too. I have never heard before that the tape was used before being put on Jonbenets face till np tipped me off. I'm waiting for a link, though. JMHO:biggrin:

[nuisanceposter]

Both Steve Thomas and Dr Henry Lee said the tape had been used before.

That tape was manufactured in November of 96, right? Shurtape, wasn't it? Nedra Paugh bought a Molly doll for JonBenet in September of 96 and may have given it to her at Thanksgiving...which would be in November of 96.

http://jonbenetramsey.pbwiki.com/Fiber-Evidence


Pam Paugh was living in Atlanta when Nedra ordered the first Molly doll and was likely there for Thanksgiving 1996 when Nedra is suspected of presnted this doll to JonBenet.

http://www.topix.net/forum/news/jonbenet-ramsey/TLH2VNA0ASBGVEE8P



Uhhh, where's a source saying that the tape on the dolls was tested and did not match the tape over JB's face? Pam Paugh collected all of those dolls during her one-woman-raid in the Ramsey house. And then a new doll was ordered to AG in JonBenet's name, after JB was dead. Who ordered another Molly doll in her name to be sent to John's office?

And even if the tape on another one of the dolls didn't match the tape on her face, that doesn't meant the tape couldn't have come from one of the dolls. JonBenet didn't get all the dolls at the same time - you can hardly expect them to all have matching tape if she received them at different times and possibly in different locations.

[bullmoose]

Both Steve Thomas and Dr Henry Lee said the tape had been used before.

That tape was manufactured in November of 96, right? Shurtape, wasn't it? Nedra Paugh bought a Molly doll for JonBenet in September of 96 and may have given it to her at Thanksgiving...which would be in November of 96.

http://jonbenetramsey.pbwiki.com/Fiber-Evidence


Pam Paugh was living in Atlanta when Nedra ordered the first Molly doll and was likely there for Thanksgiving 1996 when Nedra is suspected of presnted this doll to JonBenet.

http://www.topix.net/forum/news/jonbenet-ramsey/TLH2VNA0ASBGVEE8P



Uhhh, where's a source saying that the tape on the dolls was tested and did not match the tape over JB's face? Pam Paugh collected all of those dolls during her one-woman-raid in the Ramsey house. And then a new doll was ordered to AG in JonBenet's name, after JB was dead. Who ordered another Molly doll in her name to be sent to John's office?

And even if the tape on another one of the dolls didn't match the tape on her face, that doesn't meant the tape couldn't have come from one of the dolls. JonBenet didn't get all the dolls at the same time - you can hardly expect them to all have matching tape if she received them at different times and possibly in different locations.Link? Steve Thomas? Henry Lee ? Link?
I asked you for where you got the used duct tape theory, didn't I? I didn't offer to prove that the tape didn't at all match or link the Ramseys to it. That is self evident; oh yeah, weren't the cops present during that one woman raid with a list?The links you gave are hardly unbiased--arrest Pam Paugh now, boy is that a bastion of innuendo and hate. If there is no links, the theory sinks; if Steve Thomas says its true and so does Lee, then I'd like to see where it is they say it, naturally.:biggrin:

[shill]

Uhhh, where's a source saying that the tape on the dolls was tested and did not match the tape over JB's face? Pam Paugh collected all of those dolls during her one-woman-raid in the Ramsey house. And then a new doll was ordered to AG in JonBenet's name, after JB was dead. Who ordered another Molly doll in her name to be sent to John's office? I thought she collected just some of the dolls, not all of them?

And even if the tape on another one of the dolls didn't match the tape on her face, that doesn't meant the tape couldn't have come from one of the dolls. JonBenet didn't get all the dolls at the same time - you can hardly expect them to all have matching tape if she received them at different times and possibly in different locations.They would need to find the doll that was missing tape for a fiber match.
That's a lot of rolls of duct tape they keep buying and throwing out.
Is there any proof at all that any of those dolls in the Ramseys house had tape on them?