LAST EDITED ON Mar-20-02 AT 06:22 AM (EST)>LAST EDITED ON May-06-01 AT 11:20 AM (EST)A
>pillow sham, blanket and Dr. Suess
>book were found inside the suitcase.
> The bed linen belonged to
>JAR and had some of his
>semen stains on it.
>At some point that night, JonBenét came
>into contact with the material in
>the suitcase - fibers were found
>on her hand, hand ligature, on
>her shirt, on her vaginal area
>and in the body bag.
>The CBI said those fibers were from
>the comforter and pillow sham.
>Lou Smit feels that the killer may
>have tried to put the child
>in the suitcase at some point.
>
>Interesting - - and means that forensic
>tests done on the suitcase could
>be very revealing.
> NEED TO SAY - - the
>FBI examiner says that the blanket
>and pillow are NOT the source
>of those fibers -- but they
>couldn't match the fibers to anything
>in the house and that means
>if the FBI is right, we
>have more totally unexplained fibers in
>some very important places.
I just read on an archived thread where you mentioned that one thing stood out as very strange whether regardless if it was either a parent or an intruder. You said you wouldn't mention it but here is one of the anomolies I see.
The normally unused suitcase is what is strange to me. Since the suitcase was in a position to be used as a step, and it seemed as if there were fibers from inside it on JBR (even tho I read now the FBI said they wern't the same), I would say the perp put the items inside of it. But why? It doesn't make any sense unless he had intended on taking it (and her) someplace, and of course the note doesnt reflect that. A pillow sham, a blanket and a kids book. In the suitcase sat by the window.
Of course had the perp been orginally trying to make it look like it was a put-up kidnapping job, he could have first put those things in the suitcase left by the window and then forgot about them later when he changed his mind. There is no indication that he wrote the RN note in ONE sitting, is there? In fact I seem to remember something about the style 'changing' someplace, almost as if it HAD been written in more than one sitting. That was my thought at the time however the part about the style changing might have meant WITHIN a sentance or paragraph rather than from one page to the next. And of course since there are many pages missing, who knows that that WAS the first note written? The perp may have actually been there a long time after she was dead although I doubt it.
We imagine the perp went out the basement window because of the grating sound heard by a neighbor, but if so then why was the butler door "open"? If there was a door "open" then why did the perp have to go through a basement window??? Or did the grate make noise and he then heard something outside which led him to beleive that someone 'out there' might have seen him had he have gone that way, thus he left by some other means?
That word "open" gets me sometimes because I wonder if they mean "open" as in the door is standing open, or "open" as in it was shut but unlocked? When I hear "open" I think of it as the door is standing open; not shut all the way; something like that.
Another thing I wonder about is the time of year and the open things. If there was a window with a broken out place in it and it was still broken out in the winter time and open besides, wouldn't that make that part of the basement ice cold? Especially since cold air flows down. And if the butler door was actually standing open rather than just unlocked, that too would've made the house cold and someone should have known it before then.
Printer-friendly copy
Email this topic to a friend
