Steve Thomas had that one right in his book.

For those who are reading and know little to nothing of the history of the forum and the information published herein, I confirm Chewie's information. For years, Jameson has been insistent on saying that one indication of an intruder presence in JonBenet's death was the utter lack of concern for her body. Specifically, the phrases "she was just dumped" and "the blanket was thrown over her" have been the picture accepted as complete and utter truth. But now we have John's own words. For those who have not yet read the book, here is how John describes JonBenet's body as found in the windowless room.

Page 306: Well, I see a white blanket that's folded across her body neatly...she was laying on the blanket...the blanket was caught up around and crossed in front of her as if somebody was tucking her in.

Page 309: MK: ...Now, when you went inside to that room, you described the blanket. And you said it was folded like...

JR: It was like an Indian papoose...you know, the blanket was under her completely. It was brought up and folded over...at that time I didn't know the extent of the injuries--but it looked like somebody had just put her there comfortably, but tied up with her mouth gagged.

Page 309-310: MK: ...This is really important. That blanket--was it like there was care taken? It was neatly folded?

JR: I thought so, yeah.

MK: It wasn't like it was just barely thrown over her?

JR: No, it looked like somebody was trying to make her comfortable, because it was under her, completely under her head and brought up around her, as if you would wrap a...

MK: Papoose?

JR: A papoose.

And there you have it. No panicked head blow followed by a dead body thrown into the room and the blanket thrown in after her, accidentally landing on top of her body, by an intruder who was so scared he fled the scene upon JonBenet's final breath. No, we have someone who let go of JonBenet completely with both hands, to spend some time flapping the blanket out onto the floor, arranging it carefully, and then picking JonBenet's body up with utter care and placing her on the blanket in such a precise way that her killer made sure her head and hair were protected from the concrete dust of the floor, her body and clothing were protected from same, and then the sides of the blanket brought up along her sides and crossed in front to cover her and swaddle her, yes, swaddle her as the baby Jesus born on Christmas Day was swaddled in his miserable dark manger. With this scene so carefully in place, is it any wonder that the theory has such power that JonBenet's killer cared about her, and may have been an executioner, but not one filled with violence and hate for a child or the person who would find her?

Still, the description of how the body was laid onto the blanket, then the blanket folded up carefully over and tucked around the body, is different from previous descriptions I have read, so I am somewhat taken aback. The dead body of JonBenet, according to John Ramsey, was placed with care on the floor of that room and "comfortably" wrapped and "tucked in" with a blanket.

I looked up jameson's "companion reading" to Steve Thomas' book and saw that jameson disputed Steve Thomas' writing concerning the body being wrapped like a "papoose". Jameson should edit her remarks concerning that particular page of Steve Thomas' book and descriptions of the way the body was found.

No, Hal, look again at the quote from page 309, and not the following page 309-310. You will see that John brings up, for the first time, the phrase "Indian papoose." It is then Kane who brings it back as a phrase to confirm John's initial wording. John then does confirm that wording.

You can see in this illustration why the word came to John, as the blanket wrapped around the sides of these babies does expose their faces but comes up behind their heads, and does expose their feet, which in this case have separate coverings.

The flame posts that misrepresent my past posts will simply be deleted.

jameson, I do not understand your reference to "appeared to be sleeping". The body had tape over the mouth and hands tied together over the head. Did I miss someone's claim that the body was laid out in that room so as to appear sleeping?

The tape over the mouth and the hands above head rather than posed suggest indifference to the child's body but the wrapping of the body purposely and "comfortably" suggest the person who placed the body cared for the child and experienced remorse, a seeming contradiction.

To the readership who are not in a position to judge whether posts are being misrepresented, I present this sample from July 14, 2000 as an example of what I am drawing upon. The original thread was titled "New Page #2."

21 . "MM"
Posted by jameson on Jul-14-00 at 12:35 PM (EST)

You said, "Jameson, keeps saying that the body was "dumped" in the room, but actually the body was laid in there, wrapped in a blanket. She can't explain why the body was put in that room or why the door was closed and latched. Jameson doesn't understand this crime very well"

The body was not wrapped in the blanket - she was dumped on the floor and the blanket thrown over her - her feet were sticking out - she was not covered tenderly ot lovingly.

Why this insistence on love being demonstrated only by covering feet is beyond me in anything other than a fetishistic context. I can point anyone who cares to have proof presented to them to any number of sleepcams on the web, where all can see live images of people sleeping and coincidentally see that they sleep with their feet uncovered. The papoose picture I displayed above shows babies with their feet uncovered by their surrounding blanket. Feet are not a special part of children's bodies that are sacrosanct and must be covered at all times from prying eyes. Had JonBenet's body been found with her genitalia uncovered, there would be indications of lack of concern of her killer, but feet? JonBenet's feet were uncovered by blankets during the course of her happy life more than once, as anyone who is human can be sure. For them to be uncovered in death is of no more significance than her hair being uncovered.

OK so am I to understand that what you say, Jameson, is the truth? If so, then John Ramsey is lying? Just what is it you are trying to say. Or are you just on the defensive because you have been caught posting misinformation?

I think I will believe John when he says she was wrapped in the blanket, because he was there. Were you?

If JR says it was wrapped like a papoose, I believe him to be telling the truth - as he knows it. But I also have reason to believe that JR's recall of the ULTIMATE traumatizing sight any father could ever have to witness may be somewhat inaccurate. (He also has it in his mind's eye that the cord around JB's hands were tied so tightly there was swelling.) I really believe that the HORROR of the sight of his daughter, a victim of murder, has affected his recall of the details.

While reviewing the book, I certainly hope we are not going to have to endure an endless litany of references to Jameson's posts that may turn out to less than 100% accurate. Who cares? It is the overall sense of Jameson's knowledge of the case and careful collection of references that has helped her lead us through this case. There has been an endless amount of speculation on this case from everyone, including Jameson. None of them need singling out for targeting as misinformation. I doubt anyone is 100% in agreement with everything she says, but she deserves respect for a job well done.

I am not sure this will be handled as jameson has stated she will delete any misinformation or "flames" by anyone other than herself.

It should also be pointed out that there have been posts and even threads deleted in error lately (see Public Forum).

The bottom line is, she gets to do whatever she wants to do! I keep trying to make the analogy of Jameson as a referee. She gets to make the call. And, just like with a referee, the rest of us "gamers" may disagree. Someone has to moderate (referee) and overall a good job is being done. We can focus on the "calls" or we can watch and help the "game" unfold.

And, I have yet to see any evidence of that ever happening, not with Jameson, and not with me. We'll have to agree to disagree and agree to wait and see! There's no doubt many of us will be WRONG about this case. I just hope we get to FIND OUT!

Margoo

John Ramsey obviously loved his daughter, but he doesn't seem to have covered her feet when he placed the covering over her after she was placed upstairs in the living room.

When John took JonBenet up to the living room, he grabbed a different blanket and placed it over her so Patsy would not see JonBenet in that manner. There may be some confusion regarding the two different blankets.

What IS important about the way JonBenet was wrapped is the mindset of the killer. Let's not let error or confusion get in the way of the mindset of the killer. In between a lie and the truth there is a lot of grey matter. In order to sort out the grey matter we must use common sense and good judgment.

Jameson has and continues to do a more than dedicated service. We must also remember that no matter how snugly JonBenet was wrapped in that blanket, she was dead, and the same person who killed her also wrapped her "snugly" and "lovingly". Enuff said.

I will forever dispute the statement that anyone lovingly placed her body in that room - - I think she and the blanket were tossed in there, no love, no making her "comfortable" or staging her to look like she was sleeping. The garotte was around her neck, her hands thrown over her head, tape on her mouth, she was in urine soaked clothes and the blanket was not covering her feet - - and all of that was on a moldy basement floor. That doesn't spell love and parental involvement to me.

Then you are practicing simple projection. You are saying that because you cover your children's feet, the Ramseys must cover their children's feet, because they behave the same way you do. Obviously, that is not true. John says that according to his standards, JonBenet was made to appear comfortable. His standards are relevant. Yours are not. You have criticized posters for projection of their own parenting choices onto the Ramseys, yet here you are, on the record, doing the same thing.

Was she "wrapped?" I am not sure - and I don't think John is SURE.
Her feet were sticking out - - John was in a panic and I doubt he would be able to tell us if the blanket was just with her or carefully wrapped. He doesn't know where the pink nightgown was.

Page 306:
JR:Well, I see a white blanket that's folded across her body neatly...she was laying on the blanket...the blanket was caught up around and crossed in front of her as if somebody was tucking her in.

Page 309: MK: ...Now, when you went inside to that room, you described the blanket. And you said it was folded like...

JR: It was like an Indian papoose...you know, the blanket was under her completely. It was brought up and folded over...at that time I didn't know the extent of the injuries--but it looked like somebody had just put her there comfortably, but tied up with her mouth gagged.

Page 309-310: MK: ...This is really important. That blanket--was it like there was care taken? It was neatly folded?

JR: I thought so, yeah.

MK: It wasn't like it was just barely thrown over her?

JR: No, it looked like somebody was trying to make her comfortable, because it was under her, completely under her head and brought up around her, as if you would wrap a...

MK: Papoose?

JR: A papoose