jameson's Webbsleuths Forum

Full Version: Start here
You're currently viewing a stripped down version of our content. View the full version with proper formatting.
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Not even halfway through his story - sorry it is taking so long, real life happens.


Lou said Many significant hair and fibers associated with the crime didn't belong to either John or Patsy.

This post will deal with the suitcase fibers.

The suitcase is a mystery. It belonged to John Andrew - he was storing it at the house because he didn't need or want those things at the dorm. Inside there was a comforter,. a pillow sham and a Dr. Seuss book that all belonged to JAR. We know now there were bodily fluids on the comforter and sham that belonged to JAR, hardly important with a teenage boy.

Now there is a puzzle - ACCORDING TO THE CBI, there were fibers from that comforter and matching sham found in several places - - on JonBenet's shirt, on her vaginal area, on the tape and cord and in the body bag. Lou Smit had a theory the killer tried to put JonBenet in the suitcase so he might remove her from the house but when she didn't fit - or when he realized he couldn't get the suitcase out that window - he had to change his plan.
ACCORDING TO THE FBI, however, the FBI said those fibers were NOT from the comforter and sham - and the fibers matched nothing in the house.

So who should we believe? I personally differed from Lou on this one - if the killer took those items out and then couldn't fit the child in there, why would he take the time to return those items at all?

I think the fibers may have been from another article - something the killer took with him.

What could it have been? Did the killer keep it for 20 years?
Other hair and fibers - according to Lou Smit

Unsourced pubic/auxillary hair was found on the white blanket covering JonBenet - it is from a white male and does not belong to anyone in the Ramsey family.

LIGHT BROWN COTTON FIBERS were found on the wooden paintbrush, the duct tape, the nylon cord and on JonBenet's body. Nothing in the house was found to match the fibers and Lou and others feel the killer may have worn cotton gloves. (Hence the questions about gloves in the Ramsey interviews.)

RED FIBERS - red fibers found on JonBenet and the duct tape were identified as being from Patsy's jacket - but Lou asks why just the red would have fallen off and not the black as well. The police found this to be evidence pointing to the mother but others pointed out that Patsy had worn that jacket the night before and was in contact with the child so secondary transference is a clear possibility.
No lab report on this has been made public to date.

At the time of this interview/story, Lou said there was other hair and fiber evidence being withheld from the public.

Smit's Argument - Markes on JonBenet's face and back match those made by a stun gun (see stun gun thread for more detail). The photos of her taken on Christmas Day (including those taken at the Whites') clearly prove those marks were put on her late Christmas night). There is no evidence the parents owned a stun gun but Lou asked why would parents need to use a stun gun on their own child. (An intruder might use one to silence a kidnap victim or witness).

http://www.jameson245.com/doc2usa.htm - images and discussion took place on this documentary - link to transcript.

Police can't explain why a stun gun was used and not found or linked to the family, so they simply deny one was used. They call the marks "unexplained abrasions" and suggest they came from a button, snap or child's toy.


 There were unidentified prints found in the mold in the basement room where the body was found.  The fast growing mold would diffuse footprints rather quickly so it is believed the footprints were fresh.

One print was made by a Hi-Tec boot and that boot has yet to be identified.  There is no evidence the Ramseyowned Hi-Tec footwear and the boots were not found in the house.  It is a key pievce of information according to Lou and other investigators.  

Of course the police don't have much to say about that.  Just that it doesn't match any suspect they have investigated.

A second print was also found but they could not sort out the brand - again, nothing in the house matched that print.

A third print may be from the small bare foot of JonBenet.


Melody Stanton reported hearing a child scream the night of the murder between midnight and 2 am.  "..the most terrifying child's scream I have ever heard."  She didn't report it to the police right away but to a neighbor - then told police she hesitated to report it because she didn't want to get involved.  Later, after media attention she was not happy with, she did all she could to disassociate herself from the Ramsey case, at one point saying maybe it was just "negative energy".  Still, she had insisted to police the scream was audible and that is  what is accepted as truth now.

Noise tests showed that she certainly could have heard a scream from the basement - carried from a vent to the front of the house (and she slept with her window partially opened).  
The Ramsey third floor, however, has no windows on tht side of the house and the three carpeted, furnished floors between the basement and the parent's bedroom would have blocked and muffled any noise from that basement area.

CONCRETE ON STEEL -   Melody Stanton's husband also heard a sound that night, shortly after she heard a scream.  He said he heard something like steel hitting concrete.    Lou and others feel he may have heard the sound of the grate falling back into place as an intruder fled.

Police have not released their tests but Steve Thomas said the Ramseys would have been able to hear the scream.

My comment - I was with producers from CBS 48 Hours when sound tests were done by them - - there was no way anyone could hear basement screams from the upstairs bedroom.  We all tried and found it was impossible.  But when the same producers were in the street in front of the house they could clearly hear a normal conversation taking place between me and Erin Moriarty of the show.


First, Lou pointed out that the garrote is the weapon of a "sexual sadist", constructed precisely and expertly.  he said, "It almost looks like a lawnmower starting (handle)... Someone really knew what they were doing when they did it and somebody has done this before."    

Lou Smit noted that as of that date there was no record "in the annals of crime" where a parent had used a garrote on their own child.

There was evidence the garrote was made right there in the basement - Strands of JonBenet's hair were caught up in the knot.  

BORG - The police had not made any comment on that issue when the article was written.  Later the BORG faction said they believed the child was felled by the blow to the head and the garrote was simply staging, but Lou said to me that was impossible because there is evidence JonBenet fought to remove that ligature.

As with all these posts, there are threads elsewhere on the forum with more information and detail.

BRUTAL INJURIES - - in a few parts  

Lou Smit:  "This is a brutal murder - this is not a kid knocked out and her death staged."

Lou felt the injuries went beyond what even an enraged parent might be capable of.

The marks on her neck proves she fought to remove the ligature - she struggled to live.  Lou: "She is not knocked out.  She is not near death, she is fighting to stay alive."

The ligature was deep into her neck.  Lou: "That was brutally, forcibly, deeply dug into the furrows of her neck.  This was not an easy strangulation.  This was a brutal strangulation."

Note the color of the marks.

Lou: "If you put a rope around a kid's neck after she's dead, you're not going to get a red mark like that at all.  You're going to get a white mark."  Other abrasions on her shoulders and leg also left red marks.  Lou: "That means she was alive and struggling, she was not dead.  This is not staging."


If a pereson is alive when strangled, small blood vessels in their eyes and eye lids burst - and that was found during JonBenet's autopsy.  Lou - "It will not happen unless a person is alive."

First a comment by me.  I can hear Lou telling me this man was a pedophile - that there was no reason for anyone to put their hands on or in her private places unless he was predisposed to do such a thing.  The evidence in this case, according to Lou, pointed to a sadistic sexual predator who hurt this child while she was living - - there was no way the injuries were inflicted after death as some kind of cover  up because DEAD PEOPLE DON'T BLEED.

With only one vaginal tear found and no evidence of any prior abuse, Lou was sure a sexual predator had harmed JonBenet that night and not before.

The head injury resulted in a minimum of bleediing, about two tablespoons of blood.  There was no cut on the scalp, no obvious swelling, the injury wasn't even noticed until well into the autopsy. 

Lou Smit:  "So when this happened, she was near death.  I believe the garrote was in place and huge pressure had been put on there.... That's why I believe the head blow came last, not first.... This was the coup de grace on the job.'

Police who are BORG (and their paid experts who did not do the autopsy) simply say that isn't true, that the blow to the head could have come up to an hour before the garrote was placed as staging.

Others, like Steve Thomas, simply say they think her mother was capable of the worst possible crime.

MY COMMENT - I have seen my kids get hit in the head and head wounds bleed a LOT - if the scalf isn't torn, there is a huge knot for a while as the blood tried to escape.  With tht head wound, if the garrote was not cutting off the blood supply to her head, there would have been massive internal bleeding resulting in blood coming out from her ears, nose, and/or mouth.


Back in the day, the police suggested JonBenet may have traded panties with a friend.  But that doesn't explain the unsourced male DNA that was found mixed with JonBenet's blood that was left in those panties - the result of the sexual assault she endured that night!
Pages: 1 2 3 4