Urine Stain, blood stains and Wipe Down
First Prev
of 15
Next Last

“If life gives you melons”

Since: Nov 06

You might be dyslexic

#329 Apr 3, 2014
Just Wondering wrote:
If your scenario is accurate, then how do you account for the same foreign DNA being found on both the panties and the waist of the long johns? Were they dirty clothing that had been pulled from the hamper or even from Jonbenet's bedroom floor? The DNA has to accounted for. That could only mean that the clothing had been worn prior to the staging. Right?
Or DNA transfer.

Since: Jan 09

Location hidden

#330 Apr 3, 2014
Thanks for taking the time to write all this out, Jimmy. I have to spend some time thinking on all of this. I would say, right off the bat, that I've always felt there was a good chance the "stager" didn't realize JBR was still alive when the garrote was tightened.

I have another theory I would like you to comment upon. It's based upon one comment made by ST in his book. He stated that the coroner noted that he observed dust and lint on JBRs feet when he pronounced her dead in the home. I, always, thought this meant something to him, and to the detectives, otherwise it would not have been noted.

I've always wanted to know more about the amount of dust and lint. Dust and lint would tend to stick more to the soles of the feet if the feet were somewhat moist as when the shoes have been recently removed. Secondly, I believe the dust and lint indicate (if it were a significant amount) that the longjohns were never removed or put back on after the head blow. This would mean that JBR's panties were not removed and new ones put on after the head blow. My theory, based on the dust and lint, is as follows:

JBR was standing in a place, shortly before being struck, where there was considerable dust and lint on the floor. It could have been in the laundry room downstairs but it could have been a dirty bathroom floor, etc. There were pics, of JBR, found in that basement laundry room by detectives, pics that interested the detectives. She couldn't have walked around much longer after picking up that dust and lint on the soles of her feet because she would have knocked and rubbed it off. I think it possible she might have run into a dirty room to escape an attack but that's not important.

She ate pineapple anywhere from 15-30 minutes before head being struck. I believe she had pullups on with the large pair of underwear and the longjohns over them. After the head blow, JBR would never have stood again thereby leaving the dust and lint on the soles of her feet. She would have been carried if moved after head blow. After sexual assault, whether it came before or after the head blow, the longjohns and oversized panties were pulled down only to the lower legs. The pullup was cut or torn off and flushed. There was probably blood on the pullup. The legs and crotch were cleaned and then the panties and longjohns were pulled back up. The child was turned on her stomach and ligature tightened thereby releasing the bladder residual onto the front of the panties, longjohns and floor.

I'd be interested in your comments.

“Hey”

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#331 Apr 4, 2014
I've thought about the lint and dust a lot myself. The thing is we don't know when she picked it up. Obviously we know she was in the kitchen at some point and Patsy wasn't the best cleaner so who knows if her soles were dirty just from walking around the second and first floors of the home. I really don't think she was ever on her feet in that wine cellar unless John had her upright during the discovery phase and her rigor laden feet brushed the floor of the cellar. Another scenario is that she may have been dragged into the cellar by her arms which explains the position her arms were in and also explaining why there was dust on her feet. I guess it would really matter where the dust was found. If the dust and lint was found closer to her soles and more found near her heels and Achilles area its plausible that she might have been dragged. If the dust and lint was found on the bottom of her feet or near her toes we know she picked it up when she was standing upright. If she were in a chair she would not have picked up anything being that a six year olds feet wouldn't touch the ground while sitting in a chair because her legs wouldn't be long enough to touch the ground. In any event I don't think the dust and lint are very conclusive until we establish where on her feet said dust and lint was found.
learnin wrote:
Thanks for taking the time to write all this out, Jimmy. I have to spend some time thinking on all of this. I would say, right off the bat, that I've always felt there was a good chance the "stager" didn't realize JBR was still alive when the garrote was tightened.
I have another theory I would like you to comment upon. It's based upon one comment made by ST in his book. He stated that the coroner noted that he observed dust and lint on JBRs feet when he pronounced her dead in the home. I, always, thought this meant something to him, and to the detectives, otherwise it would not have been noted.
I've always wanted to know more about the amount of dust and lint. Dust and lint would tend to stick more to the soles of the feet if the feet were somewhat moist as when the shoes have been recently removed. Secondly, I believe the dust and lint indicate (if it were a significant amount) that the longjohns were never removed or put back on after the head blow. This would mean that JBR's panties were not removed and new ones put on after the head blow. My theory, based on the dust and lint, is as follows:
JBR was standing in a place, shortly before being struck, where there was considerable dust and lint on the floor. It could have been in the laundry room downstairs but it could have been a dirty bathroom floor, etc. There were pics, of JBR, found in that basement laundry room by detectives, pics that interested the detectives. She couldn't have walked around much longer after picking up that dust and lint on the soles of her feet because she would have knocked and rubbed it off. I think it possible she might have run into a dirty room to escape an attack but that's not important.
She ate pineapple anywhere from 15-30 minutes before head being struck. I believe she had pullups on with the large pair of underwear and the longjohns over them. After the head blow, JBR would never have stood again thereby leaving the dust and lint on the soles of her feet. She would have been carried if moved after head blow. After sexual assault, whether it came before or after the head blow, the longjohns and oversized panties were pulled down only to the lower legs. The pullup was cut or torn off and flushed. There was probably blood on the pullup. The legs and crotch were cleaned and then the panties and longjohns were pulled back up. The child was turned on her stomach and ligature tightened thereby releasing the bladder residual onto the front of the panties, longjohns and floor.
I'd be interested in your comments.
candy

East Lansing, MI

#332 Apr 4, 2014
Very well stated Jimmy and learning. Some comments on what Jimmy said:

"Here's my epiphany: They thought she was dead already before the garrote."

That's right. All the killer knows is JonBenet is unconscious from a blow to the head. There is no blood. That's where the train tracks come in, to poke her on the back with something that IF SHE WERE ALIVE, she would at least have some involuntary movement. But there is panic because she never regained consciousness after the head blow.

Re: " the wiping down of the body." I don't know if I'm with you on the cause for that, if it's not staging of some sort, OR, as you know as a cop, real rapists DO wipe down victims, make them take showers, especially ones that have done time in prison, they want to get rid of the DNA and the evidence that inculpates THEM in the crime. I don't have such a strong, certain belief about what the wiping down was for that you have.

"the condition of JBR's bedroom as far as the hair ties, diapers, and the messy bed area."

Male cops like you thought those were hair ties. They are actually LOOM FABRIC, to make potholders, etc. You can see the child's loom in one of the crime scene photographs. Ruthie, a poster from the early years, had a "loom theory", theorizing the marks on the loom were what made the "stun gun" marks. That got a lot of posters thinking about what could have made those marks, some of the best theories were sent to the police.

candy

East Lansing, MI

#333 Apr 4, 2014
The loom found on the floor of JonBenet's bedroom on 12/26/96:

http://crimeshots.com/000loom.jpeg
candy

East Lansing, MI

#334 Apr 4, 2014
I'd be interested in anyone's comments on JonBenet's hair being caught up in the ligature from around her neck that was left at the crime scene. It's always bothered me. It's not something I can see a woman killer (Patsy) doing.

Since: Jan 09

Location hidden

#335 Apr 4, 2014
JimmyWells wrote:
I've thought about the lint and dust a lot myself. The thing is we don't know when she picked it up. Obviously we know she was in the kitchen at some point and Patsy wasn't the best cleaner so who knows if her soles were dirty just from walking around the second and first floors of the home. I really don't think she was ever on her feet in that wine cellar unless John had her upright during the discovery phase and her rigor laden feet brushed the floor of the cellar. Another scenario is that she may have been dragged into the cellar by her arms which explains the position her arms were in and also explaining why there was dust on her feet. I guess it would really matter where the dust was found. If the dust and lint was found closer to her soles and more found near her heels and Achilles area its plausible that she might have been dragged. If the dust and lint was found on the bottom of her feet or near her toes we know she picked it up when she was standing upright. If she were in a chair she would not have picked up anything being that a six year olds feet wouldn't touch the ground while sitting in a chair because her legs wouldn't be long enough to touch the ground. In any event I don't think the dust and lint are very conclusive until we establish where on her feet said dust and lint was found. <quoted text>
I always assumed, Jimmy, that the dust and lint were on the soles of her feet because it seemed significant to the coroner. Of course, it's just an assumption. I wish someone could ask Kolar about the location and how much was on her feet.

“Hey”

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#336 Apr 5, 2014
I know Kolar brought the train tracks into the whole scenario but I think its kind of a reach. Those were three prong tracks and if indeed she was poked with one that one would have to me missing the middle prong. We know whoever killed her went into the train room that morning so it is possible but it really doesn't fit. There are several hundred other ways to check if someone is responsive other than jabbing them in the back with toy railroad tracks from another room. Besides that there was a whole paint tray full of brushes to jab her with if that was the intent. The lower back injury does not fit into a staging scenario whatsoever so we have to think that particular injury was unintentional. I see only three possibilities and they are as follows: This happened upstairs during the initial struggle, she might have fell out of her bed onto a toy or the aforementioned loom thing, who knows? Secondly, she could have incurred that injury as she incurred the head injury, falling backward into something. The injuries to her head and back were both posterior. So if she were pushed or shoved in her bathroom or whatever the head and back could have been injured at the same time by something protruding from the wall or a cabinet. And finally, something could have been caught between her and whoever was straddling her during the garroting. Even a shard or two could have been caught on the perps inner thigh and jabbed her in the back a couple times. Could have been something as simple as a golf tee that was lying on the floor and got caught up in the blanket and the perp didn't realize it at the time.
Rapists and murders do wipe down victims at times obviously. My point was they usually do it after the raping. JBR was wiped down before the paint brush entered her vaginal area IMO. The wiping covered up prior intrusion. And I only brought up the hair ties because, being the pimp that I am, I haven't noticed too many of my ladies wearing pony tails to bed. I was always under the assumption that women just let it down at bedtime.
But going back to the marks on her back I knew they weren't stun gun injuries, that is with absolute certainty. Stun guns are loud as hell and between that and the subject screaming would wake up an entire household. And the whole train track thing doesn't fly with me. This was accidental, not sadism.
candy wrote:
Very well stated Jimmy and learning. Some comments on what Jimmy said:
"Here's my epiphany: They thought she was dead already before the garrote."
That's right. All the killer knows is JonBenet is unconscious from a blow to the head. There is no blood. That's where the train tracks come in, to poke her on the back with something that IF SHE WERE ALIVE, she would at least have some involuntary movement. But there is panic because she never regained consciousness after the head blow.
Re: " the wiping down of the body." I don't know if I'm with you on the cause for that, if it's not staging of some sort, OR, as you know as a cop, real rapists DO wipe down victims, make them take showers, especially ones that have done time in prison, they want to get rid of the DNA and the evidence that inculpates THEM in the crime. I don't have such a strong, certain belief about what the wiping down was for that you have.
"the condition of JBR's bedroom as far as the hair ties, diapers, and the messy bed area."
Male cops like you thought those were hair ties. They are actually LOOM FABRIC, to make potholders, etc. You can see the child's loom in one of the crime scene photographs. Ruthie, a poster from the early years, had a "loom theory", theorizing the marks on the loom were what made the "stun gun" marks. That got a lot of posters thinking about what could have made those marks, some of the best theories were sent to the police.

“Hey”

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#337 Apr 5, 2014
That isn't even what is so significant about the ligature. It was tied when it didn't have to be. This is tantamount to stabbing someone in the heart and then leaving the knife without withdrawing it. Pure staging. If you strangled someone and they died you don't leave the murder weapon. So the Ramseys needed the furrow, needed the overkill, and needed a fancy garrote to take the emphasis off that head wound. And she probably was choked before the garrote as well. So why do you need a CIA silent kill utensil when a shoelace would have been as effective? And then leave the garrote imbedded in her neck when the risk of leaving a murder weapon is colossal? And here's another thing. Garrote's don't "Tie off" per se. They twist and kill and then either the killer takes it or the tension is released when the grip is released. This literally might be the one and only case where a garrote was used and then tied. They just don't function that way.
candy wrote:
I'd be interested in anyone's comments on JonBenet's hair being caught up in the ligature from around her neck that was left at the crime scene. It's always bothered me. It's not something I can see a woman killer (Patsy) doing.

“Hey”

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#338 Apr 5, 2014
He will respond to you. He's been beyond cool anytime I had a question for him.
learnin wrote:
<quoted text>
I always assumed, Jimmy, that the dust and lint were on the soles of her feet because it seemed significant to the coroner. Of course, it's just an assumption. I wish someone could ask Kolar about the location and how much was on her feet.

“Hey”

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#339 Apr 5, 2014
Too many prongs. We can disregard that as the instrument for the back injury.
candy wrote:
The loom found on the floor of JonBenet's bedroom on 12/26/96:
http://crimeshots.com/000loom.jpeg
Just Wondering

Beckley, WV

#340 Apr 5, 2014
Lint as in sock lint or perhaps lint as from their dryer? Perhaps Jonbenet was standing close by when her blanket and night gown were removed from the dryer that night after they returned from the party.

As for the loom making the marks, if she fell on the corner of the loom that might possibly account for only two marks. The two corner pegs are fairly far apart as are the marks on her throat and back.
candy

East Lansing, MI

#341 Apr 5, 2014
The significance of the "loom theory" was, a) explaining those were not hair ties in JonBenet's room (they were too big for that) and b) Ruthie was the first one on our side that came up with an alternate explanation for those NOT "stun gun" marks. As I said, it started many posters to think about the subject, and come up with their own theories, which were not posted on deliberately, but sent to the police. That's why I don't mention the ones I know of, what they are. But I am completely in the "train tracks" corner. Those train tracks were all over the place, in Burke's bedroom, downstairs, easily obtainable to grab to see if JB responds.

We don't have Dr. Spitz's report, but Kolar has seen it, and is sold on what he said in it. Spitz said he believed the red turtleneck was twisted in the front. That may have occurred shortly before or at the time of the head wound, where JonBenet ended up unconscious, and the ligature would be staging to cover up that attempted strangulation with the turtleneck on.

“Hey”

Since: Jan 10

Location hidden

#342 Apr 6, 2014
We also cannot discount the possibility that if indeed she was choked with her own turtleneck that she was swung around by it as well thus causing the head injury.
candy wrote:
The significance of the "loom theory" was, a) explaining those were not hair ties in JonBenet's room (they were too big for that) and b) Ruthie was the first one on our side that came up with an alternate explanation for those NOT "stun gun" marks. As I said, it started many posters to think about the subject, and come up with their own theories, which were not posted on deliberately, but sent to the police. That's why I don't mention the ones I know of, what they are. But I am completely in the "train tracks" corner. Those train tracks were all over the place, in Burke's bedroom, downstairs, easily obtainable to grab to see if JB responds.
We don't have Dr. Spitz's report, but Kolar has seen it, and is sold on what he said in it. Spitz said he believed the red turtleneck was twisted in the front. That may have occurred shortly before or at the time of the head wound, where JonBenet ended up unconscious, and the ligature would be staging to cover up that attempted strangulation with the turtleneck on.
Sushshaf

Granville, Australia

#343 Oct 31, 2014
Old South wrote:
<quoted text>
learnin, are you discounting what might be blood evidence on the carpet in her bedroom? There was a plug of carpet removed from beside her bed and from questioning of Patsy, there possibly was blood on JB's pillow case. So if the linens on the bed were changed, surely her pillow case would have been changed, too.
I just can't reconcile the possiblity of blood in her bedroom with any possibility. Her head wound wasn't bleeding openly. And I can't visualize any sexual attack or violation in the bedroom, not so close to Burke and the parents.
What do you make of the evidence in her bedroom?
Just to clarify,(not a true follower of this case) they found the changed sheets with proof she wet the bed that night? My daughter wets the bed and unless you have a mattress protector it will go through to the mattress. There was definitely urine found in the basement and there was pieces of wood supossedly from the garrotte.
Just Wondering

Oak Hill, WV

#344 Nov 1, 2014
JimmyWells wrote:
We also cannot discount the possibility that if indeed she was choked with her own turtleneck that she was swung around by it as well thus causing the head injury. <quoted text>
As in her arms and body were pulled out of the sweater, but the sweater had not been lifted past her head? The sweater was then grabbed and twisted around her neck and the assailant used the sweater to sling her down causing her to strike her head against a bathroom fixture or furniture? Sounds extremely plausible! Something an enraged adult might do? An excellent explanation.
Just Wondering

Oak Hill, WV

#345 Nov 1, 2014
That could account for the fact that the strangulation marks did not exactly point to the marks a garrote would have inflicted.
berrytea333

Saint Louis, MO

#346 Nov 1, 2014
Sushshaf wrote:
<quoted text>
Just to clarify,(not a true follower of this case) they found the changed sheets with proof she wet the bed that night? My daughter wets the bed and unless you have a mattress protector it will go through to the mattress. There was definitely urine found in the basement and there was pieces of wood supossedly from the garrotte.
Wasn't there something about the housekeeper being shown a picture of an open dryer and she commented the sheets in it had been on JonBenet's bed the last time she was there on Dec 23?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 15
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

JonBenet Ramsey Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
A staged crime scene leaves only two real possi... 57 min LI_Mom 26
What I believe is close to what happened 5 hr undrtheradar 266
Do you think that... 6 hr Just Wondering 21
For the BDI's 6 hr Just Wondering 19
News Laurence L Smith Releases Updated Version of 'T... 14 hr california_demon 51
Do intruder theorists accept the ransom note at... 19 hr Sig Turner 111
Ramsey vs Duggar 20 hr robert 29
More from around the web