Judith Phillips transcript part 3 http://www.justicewatch.com/cgi-bin/jw/dcboard.cgi?az=show_thread&om=10674&forum=jonbenet Justice Watch Support JW "Judith Phillips transcript part 3" [ Main ] [ Post New Thread ] [ Help ] [ Search ] Table of Contents ................................................................... Judith Phillips transcript part 3, ayelean, 19:17:40, 3/17/2001 Some of you are going on like Judith..., Dunvegan, 20:16:27, 3/17/2001, (#1) Dunvegan, ayelean, 20:34:50, 3/17/2001, (#2) bump, ayelean, 05:15:09, 3/18/2001, (#3) Yes., Holly, 07:09:05, 3/18/2001, (#4) Thanks Dunvegan and Ayelean., Florida, 07:12:01, 3/18/2001, (#5) Fly, ayelean, 07:20:59, 3/19/2001, (#6) reposting from #2, fly, 07:38:56, 3/19/2001, (#7) Beating a dead horse, Ayeka, 12:25:50, 3/19/2001, (#8) JP, doScubie, 12:44:55, 3/19/2001, (#9) I can't help but think..., LurkerXIV, 13:44:39, 3/19/2001, (#10) LurkerXIV, fly, 13:54:24, 3/19/2001, (#11) Fly, ayelean, 14:48:03, 3/19/2001, (#12) ayelean, fly, 15:12:22, 3/19/2001, (#13) Right On Ayelean, except ..., Mandarin, 16:30:44, 3/19/2001, (#14) BINGO, ayelean and mandarin..., LurkerXIV, 19:49:02, 3/19/2001, (#15) Mandarin, RiverRat, 20:23:21, 3/19/2001, (#16) RR, LurkerXIV, 21:10:45, 3/19/2001, (#17) Hello River ..., Mandarin, 21:20:47, 3/19/2001, (#18) I Know You Do ..., Mandarin, 21:35:29, 3/19/2001, (#20) Mandarin:, LurkerXIV, 21:33:23, 3/19/2001, (#19) Lurker ... , Mandarin, 21:40:10, 3/19/2001, (#21) Mandarin, RiverRat, 06:42:26, 3/20/2001, (#22) Your Right River, Mandarin, 11:10:09, 3/20/2001, (#23) Ayeka.., Nedthan Johns, 12:51:13, 3/20/2001, (#24) Ned, Ayeka, 13:30:45, 3/20/2001, (#27) Nobody dyed Shirley Temple's hair!, Edie Pratt, 12:59:22, 3/20/2001, (#26) Ayelean, Nedthan Johns, 12:59:18, 3/20/2001, (#25) whoops, hair dying isn't illegal, mary99, 13:57:52, 3/20/2001, (#28) whoops!, Ayeka, 14:21:48, 3/20/2001, (#29) Have to admit I agree with Ned , Mini, 15:25:53, 3/20/2001, (#31) Ned, Gemini, 15:22:33, 3/20/2001, (#30) Dying to Kill..., Dunvegan, 20:33:05, 3/20/2001, (#32) Double Wow Dunv ..., Mandarin, 22:26:34, 3/20/2001, (#33) Patsy not only dyed JonBenet's hair..., Dunvegan, 23:26:18, 3/20/2001, (#34) Contacts, DunV, Mandarin, 23:40:34, 3/20/2001, (#35) Forgot Dunv ..., Mandarin, 23:44:03, 3/20/2001, (#36) Good thread!, A.K., 02:01:43, 3/21/2001, (#37) Hmmm, Holly, 06:54:55, 3/21/2001, (#39) Gloves , v_p, 06:50:39, 3/21/2001, (#38) almost certain, fly, 07:32:06, 3/21/2001, (#40) AK, Morgan, 07:43:28, 3/21/2001, (#42) v-p, gaiabetsy, 07:39:56, 3/21/2001, (#41) VP...., rose, 10:52:20, 3/21/2001, (#43) Hair coloring, Mini, 12:04:38, 3/21/2001, (#45) I...., Ayeka, 11:55:49, 3/21/2001, (#44) to dye for, mary99, 12:54:33, 3/21/2001, (#47) the news, Edie Pratt, 13:14:31, 3/21/2001, (#48) I believe , momo, 08:28:05, 3/22/2001, (#51) Frosting, DuBois, 12:46:28, 3/21/2001, (#46) Kiddie Paintbrush, janphi, 16:40:34, 3/21/2001, (#49) Asian paintbrush?, gaiabetsy, 07:04:01, 3/22/2001, (#50) Sounds like..., Ayeka, 11:59:26, 3/22/2001, (#52) Not sure, ayeka, janphi, 08:22:25, 3/23/2001, (#54) Mini, A.K., 03:35:14, 3/23/2001, (#53) Holy Loose-Cannon, BatBabe! (Edie)..., Dunvegan, 08:28:49, 3/23/2001, (#55) Janphi..., Ayeka, 11:18:57, 3/23/2001, (#56) ................................................................... "Judith Phillips transcript part 3" Posted by ayelean on 19:17:40 3/17/2001 I can't load the number 2 thread from post 77 on. Anyone else having a problem? [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 1. "Some of you are going on like Judith..." Posted by Dunvegan on 20:24:19 3/17/2001 NOTE: This message was last edited 20:24:19, 3/17/2001 ...was going to put nothing on her site but pictures of JonBenet. My understanding is that she is a photographer. She hasn't been exactly idle in the last four years...she's been taking pictures and continuing to build her portfolio. Although somewhere in the many, many pictures that Judith will make available there MAY be a shot or two of JonBenet and Patsy...that is but a small (yet valid) part of what Judith shot as an artist. I cannot think of any New York or Left Coast photographer that would withdraw part of their collection because something happened, after the pictures were taken, to some of the people that were photographed as part of a exhibit, or oeuvre. I guess we should go destroy that self-portrait of Van Gogh because shortly thereafter he killed himself. Bad taste, showing a man going mad like that, cutting off his ear...etc., etc. Sorry. But, that's art. I think some of those who are slamming Judith should wait to see what her site looks like. It's a little early to bewailing the bad taste of all the photos of JBR that their imagination tells them that Judith is going to display...we don't know that any JBR pictures will be shown on Judith's site. Let's just wait and see what JP presents with at her site...K'? I hardly believe Judith is creating a site to exploit JonBenet (like anyone could do exploitation better than Patsy.) I do not believe that Judith has any shots of that unbelievable paragon of Bad Taste, the Las Vegas showgirl outfit...that's Patsy's style...not Judith's. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 2. "Dunvegan" Posted by ayelean on 20:34:50 3/17/2001 I think the only one bemoaning Judith's coming web site has an assignment to do so. Never has the mention of a name been met with so much hostility with so little provacation. Something is off kilter on the scale of this response. Almost comical if it weren't for a person at the other end of it. Very revealing though in the scheme of things. I am sure there will be more taste on one page of her website than we have seen the entire Ramsey site. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 3. "bump" Posted by ayelean on 05:15:09 3/18/2001 . [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 4. "Yes." Posted by Holly on 07:09:05 3/18/2001 Who cares if JP has a website? How would her website suggest she is exploiting JB? How would anyone other than case watchers even make a connection? Even if she uses photos of JB, that is her work product and of public interest. Big deal. TeamRam is just soooooo frightened of JP. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 5. "Thanks Dunvegan and Ayelean." Posted by Florida on 07:12:01 3/18/2001 You both said it perfectly! Amazing hostility... [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 6. "Fly" Posted by ayelean on 07:20:59 3/19/2001 please post on this thread, the other one is too long to load. thanx [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 7. "reposting from #2" Posted by fly on 07:38:56 3/19/2001 ayelean - Sorry. Here's my post and Pedro's for reference. 93. "Ok..." Posted by Pedro on 01:06:00 3/18/2001 I am confused here. I read that there's no enough quantity of DNA to run the tests properly, regardless of the state of contamination and/or degradation of it. I read that the results were no conclusive, I imply that they can't reach the percentage required by law to consider it a match with someone or even to compare the sequences. . I read that the tissues couldn't be identified, how do we know if those tissues under JBR's nails are defensive or not without knowing what kind of tissues they are?. How do we define DNA defensive? What's the difference between DNA from skin tissue or DNA from saliva in a same individual? Pedro 94. "with Pedro here" Posted by fly on 07:10:00 3/19/2001 Like Pedro, I'm sensing some inconsistencies concerning things we've heard about the DNA and the story according to mame's top investigative reporter. We've heard repeatedly in the past that the DNA is contaminated, possibly the result of the coroner using clippers with cells picked up from a prior autopsy. Also that the fingernail DNA is "old" - which would fit the coroner contamination story. Also that the DNA was very limited. If the fingernail DNA were "defensive" DNA due to "tissue" being under the nails, the amount of DNA isn't likely to be small, and the idea of the dirty clippers wouldn't fit. Whether the error/confusion is in the previous information we have had, or in mame's version, is impossible to know for sure. Somebody has it wrong, however. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 8. "Beating a dead horse" Posted by Ayeka on 12:25:50 3/19/2001 Nedd, for the zillionth time, please, only include in your reply the relevant parts that you're replying to!! It gets VERY tedious trying to weed out your additions, and if we forget the context, we can always scroll up. I would suggest you spend some of your off time between slides looking for hard evidence of this male, non-Ramsey DNA. :) You wrote: I don't see the relation, but It clearly defines the publics idioticy concerning this case, to think bleaching ones child's hair equates with murder. Go figure. and How does bleaching a child's hair equate with child abuse? I don't understand how to make the relationship more clear to you. You are aware, yes, that hair dye, especially that which produces blonde, is extremely harsh to the point of producing chemical burns (which I have personally experienced)? And this, on a SIX YEAR OLD'S skin? Do you not see how this is ABUSIVE? If you don't, then I worry for your kids. Now, I didn't say I thought bleaching a kid's hair "equated" murder. I didn't say it was a motive for murder. Did you even READ what I wrote? IT SPEAKS OF A DEEPER PATHOLOGY. It speaks to me how little Patsy cared about JonBenet's welfare -- and how much she DID care about her 'image'. Bleaching your kid's hair doesn't even live in the same UNIVERSE as allowing them to put glitter or Sun-In in their hair. (Though I doubt I would allow my kids to use Sun-In at the age of 6!) You also said: If I am so naive Ayeka, why haven't they been labled as suspects? Answer me that? No, they're not "suspects" -- but they do happen to be the only ones under that weirdly termed "umbrella of suspicion". BPD don't have the balls to say SUSPECTS. MHO, Ayeka [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 9. "JP" Posted by doScubie on 12:44:55 3/19/2001 I for one welcome Judith's pictures to the internet, even if they are ALL JB. She can't be blamed for taking pictures of JB, when Pats was the one who dressed her so sexy, and dragged her to the studio and made her pose. Afterall, JP only took the pictures. I am behind her 100%, no matter what her site shows, mainly because she is on JB's side. If I were a photographer, I would put pictures of JB on my site for sure. Her 'mommy dearest' is who brought her in, requested the photos and paid for them. JP has every right to show her work, even if some of the subjects are deceased. It isn't like she took pictures of her after she was dead and is trying to post that. Looking forward to the site. JP you have my support. You were only doing your job. I never get tired of looking at JonBenet, she was so pretty. I stare at her and try to figure this all out. I do get tired of her parents NOT being in jail. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 10. "I can't help but think..." Posted by LurkerXIV on 13:44:39 3/19/2001 ...that there is a lot of jealousy on Patsy's part regarding JP. This may be the underlying motive for the virulent attacks against Judith by the RST. Judith has gone on to develop quite an interesting and successful career as a professional photographer. What has Patsy accomplished in the past four years, other than a poorly written dog of a book and several whiny TV appearances? Nothing of substance, at all. Perhaps this is why we see over-reaction on all threads mentioning JP and her work. BTW, ayeka...we had other members of the RST who did the "post the post and then the reply" thingy. lake was one of them. He was a notorious Ramspinner. After he disappeared, Nedthan showed up. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 11. "LurkerXIV" Posted by fly on 13:54:24 3/19/2001 LXIV - Why do you think that just because somebody has strong feelings (or just an opinion) that tends to be anything other than anti-Ram, that that person is part of the RST? You have strong feelings about the case, but nobody has accused you of being a flunky of ST (or other anti-Ram). Some folks can use their brains independently and come to a different conclusion than you. And feel just a strongly that they are right as you feel you are right. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 12. "Fly" Posted by ayelean on 14:48:03 3/19/2001 You spoke too soon re Ned posting on the Reasonable Doubt thread. LOL Ned's method is unique, he usually only picks on one thread, maybe two. His posting start and then follows, boom, boom, boom. The time between his posts is hardly enough time to copy and paste the poster's part and enter his lengthy comments. He says he is doing all this while he is working. I am glad I am not paying him. LOL. If I find out he works for the federal government and I may be paying him I'll chit. I suspect he posts from the west coast because of the usual time of his posts. I am going to go out on a limb here, and say, I think someone on the RST team reads here, copies all the posts, prepare the responses then emails them to Ned and he copies and pastes them as posts on the thread. All of Ned's posts are in response to posts made the day before. The general pattern is never to answer a post directed to him on the day it is posted, that is, 'off the top of his head'. Someone already stated that other RST posters in the past have made a habit of reprinting all the posts when commenting on one or two points. I see a distinct pattern in this type of post. In fact, when Ned posts a straight post e.g. not commenting to a previous post his writing style is different. The posts under Ned's hat have a way of fudging and enlarging, example, dna becomes MALE then becomes BLOOD then it is referred to as MALE DNA FROM BLOOD from there on out. It is like an advertisement, if the public hears it repeated enough they will believe it. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 13. "ayelean" Posted by fly on 15:12:22 3/19/2001 ayelean - Sorry, but I still don't buy it. I've seen lots of cases here where information gets enlarged and otherwise distorted, over and over again (all those suspicious vaginal exams and vaginal infections ring a bell?). Ned hardly has a lock on the distortion tiara. And as to reposting stuff... several of us do that (even Greanleaf). It provides an immediate context for our comments so that people don't have to hunt back for the relevant posts. That does not provide good support for the Ned as RST theory, IMO. I'll stick by my comments to Britt. Sure, I could predict Ned's reactions to some of the posts, too, but it is only fair to wait until s/he does give that reaction, rather than attributing things to him/her in advance. Afterall, Ned was NOT the one to introduce the idea of "tissue" under her nails. In fact, as I read Ned's posts, s/he seems to be downplaying the idea that a lot of cells (i.e., tissue) would necessarily be deposited by a kid's defensive actions. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 14. "Right On Ayelean, except ..." Posted by Mandarin on 16:30:44 3/19/2001 I do think the "Ned Creature" on the threads is comprised of more than one poster. You can tell by the posts that not ALL of them are coming from just one person. Just watch, the creature will appear her shortly, mark my words. It's really a shame, because I do like listening to people with a reasonable argument, but to go on and on and on and on in such a neurotic state blasts any credibility this poster has (or ever had for that matter). It is simply no longer working and my guess is that a new tactic is already in the works. Thank God, for posters like yourself. From time to time, I forget about Jonbenet but you and so many others are genuinely dedicated to Chris and her Justice Watch forum - and that is what makes me come back every now and again. Hope you never leave, I'd miss you, RiverRat, Lacey (where is she these days?), Dunvegan, Greenie, Watching You, and so many others that I apologize for not mentioning. Regards, Mandarin [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 15. "BINGO, ayelean and mandarin..." Posted by LurkerXIV on 19:49:02 3/19/2001 This is also reminiscent of "lake". Many different styles; sometimes perfect spelling-other times very poor grammar, syntax and spelling. My personal opinion is that "Nedthan" is a community RST hat, just as "lake" was. We even had "mrs. lake" showing up in chat. When will "mrs.nedthan" make her appearance? ;0) [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 16. "Mandarin" Posted by RiverRat on 20:23:21 3/19/2001 Stay around and help out more, this is just a heads-up, everybody on their toes, things are finally moving, RST just wants to see what they are going to be up against and that let's us sharpen out skills (teeth) as we await the summer trial(s?). I have trust in our tried and true borg, we are not closed off to new information that is different that what we had not been made aware of. I have just as much trust that should the powers that be decide that we should be informed of new evidence or correcting prior erronious reports/leaks, the information would not be delivered to us by someone that would immediatly set off red flags. BTW - I care. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 17. "RR" Posted by LurkerXIV on 21:10:45 3/19/2001 I have trust in our tried and true borg, we are not closed off to new information that is different that what we had not been made aware of. I have just as much trust that should the powers that be decide that we should be informed of new evidence or correcting prior erroneous reports/leaks, the information would not be delivered to us by someone that would immediatly set off red flags. Yup! We borgsleuths weren't born yesterday. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 18. "Hello River ..." Posted by Mandarin on 21:20:47 3/19/2001 Someone deleted my thread - SPAM ON THREAD SOS? And there appears to be another thread deleted? What happened??? Regards, Mandarin [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 20. "I Know You Do ..." Posted by Mandarin on 21:35:29 3/19/2001 Sorry River, I missed your last sentence. I definitely do know that you do care but what I like is your saucy sense of humour and the hat, well that goes without saying. Any one of us could play "devil's advocate" and be productive to boot. But constant nagging by a particular group of posters comes under the heading of "Impostor" in my books. Worse yet, the impostor is like lightening in a bottle that's suddenly been uncorked after laying in a dusty wine cellar for too long, know what I mean? Obviously though, the Nedheads have some clout here, at least that's what I'm starting to think. If the forum is going to be taken over by this sort of interraction, there won't be many genuine posters left and that would be very SAD. Thanks for the heads up! Regards, Mandarin [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 19. "Mandarin:" Posted by LurkerXIV on 21:33:23 3/19/2001 Look in the Workout Room Forum (accessible in the Lobby). Your thread is alive and well, and still going strong. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 21. "Lurker ... " Posted by Mandarin on 21:40:10 3/19/2001 Merci, gratias! That's all, because if I don't stop posting on the JP thread, people will start to think I'm related to Ned. BTW, I like the idea of JP having her own web site - why not she sure appears to have talent and I will definitely make a point of visiting her web site. I can at least do that for her. After all, I lowered my self to purchase the DOI paperback for 10 bucks, which by the way was a total waste of money. Thanks again, Lurker! Regards, Mandarin [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 22. "Mandarin" Posted by RiverRat on 06:42:26 3/20/2001 Look what happened when you ventured out from the WOR for the first time in ages! I was nauseous when I bought and read the rams book but the added insight you get from reading their words is invaluable. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 23. "Your Right River" Posted by Mandarin on 11:10:09 3/20/2001 It actually wasn't a TOTAL waste. For someone with a trained eye (certainly not me) it may prove to be invaluable and who know's, maybe even the Ram's undoing. Regards, Mandarin [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 24. "Ayeka.." Posted by Nedthan Johns on 12:51:13 3/20/2001 Ayeka: Nedd, for the zillionth time, please, only include in your reply the relevant parts that you're replying to!! It gets VERY tedious trying to weed out your additions, and if we forget the context, we can always scroll up. I would suggest you spend some of your off time between slides looking for hard evidence of this male, non-Ramsey DNA. :) Nedd: I do this for the reasoning that I am responding word for word as you addressed me and I don't mis-quote anyone. There's nothing worse then hearing someone yell, "I didn't say that." I am searching hard for the identity of this DNA. And in fact I have my thoughts on who it belongs to. I have only until recently taken a slight active roll researching this case, I am ready to play a much larger roll, including tracking down suspects whom I feel are related to this crime. You wrote: I don't see the relation, but It clearly defines the publics idioticy concerning this case, to think bleaching ones child's hair equates with murder. Go figure. and How does bleaching a child's hair equate with child abuse? I don't understand how to make the relationship more clear to you. You are aware, yes, that hair dye, especially that which produces blonde, is extremely harsh to the point of producing chemical burns (which I have personally experienced)? And this, on a SIX YEAR OLD'S skin? Nedd: This hardly equates to murder Ayeka. I could bet you there are many many cases of children out there that dye their hair. Heck, they were dying Shirley Temple's hair from the time she was 4 years old to perform in movies. Do you not see how this is ABUSIVE? Nedd: It's not, plain and simple Now, I didn't say I thought bleaching a kid's hair "equated" murder. I didn't say it was a motive for murder. Did you even READ what I wrote? IT SPEAKS OF A DEEPER PATHOLOGY. It speaks to me how little Patsy cared about JonBenet's welfare -- and how much she DID care about her 'image'. Nedd: I am not arguing the point that Patsy most certainly cared about JB's image. That just more so tells me this child was bathed, clean and very presentable going to the White's home for Christmas dinner, even more of a reason for the unidentifable DNA NOT to have been there. Bleaching your kid's hair doesn't even live in the same UNIVERSE as allowing them to put glitter or Sun-In in their hair. (Though I doubt I would allow my kids to use Sun-In at the age of 6!) Nedd: You haven't been around show biz kids much, have you? You also said: If I am so naive Ayeka, why haven't they been labled as suspects? Answer me that? No, they're not "suspects" -- but they do happen to be the only ones under that weirdly termed "umbrella of suspicion". BPD don't have the balls to say SUSPECTS. Nedd: To label them as such, they need to support it with evidence, they don't have it. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 27. "Ned" Posted by Ayeka on 13:30:45 3/20/2001 Nedd: I do this for the reasoning that I am responding word for word as you addressed me and I don't mis-quote anyone. I can understand that, but it really is ok to prune down what you're quoting to specifically what you are replying to. That's what I do. :) I don't care if "many" children have their hair dyed, or if it's done in show biz, or what. Colorado saw fit to make it illegal, and yet, Patsy did it anyway. If you choose to believe it's not abusive to put corrosive chemicals on a six year old's skin, not much I can do to convince you otherwise. In this case, I do wholeheartedly disagree with you. Nedd: You haven't been around show biz kids much, have you? Doesn't make it RIGHT. Nedd: To label them as such, they need to support it with evidence, they don't have it. It's semantics. Umbrella of suspicion all by their lonesome, suspects. They might as well be the same thing. :) Ayeka [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 26. "Nobody dyed Shirley Temple's hair!" Posted by Edie Pratt on 12:59:22 3/20/2001 from blond to brown, Nedd? Please, that little wonderkin was a brunette, ALWAYS. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 25. "Ayelean" Posted by Nedthan Johns on 12:59:18 3/20/2001 Ayelean: You spoke too soon re Ned posting on the Reasonable Doubt thread. LOL Ned's method is unique, he usually only picks on one thread, maybe two. His posting start and then follows, boom, boom, boom. The time between his posts is hardly enough time to copy and paste the poster's part and enter his lengthy comments. He says he is doing all this while he is working. I am glad I am not paying him. LOL. If I find out he works for the federal government and I may be paying him I'll chit. I suspect he posts from the west coast because of the usual time of his posts. I am going to go out on a limb here, and say, I think someone on the RST team reads here, copies all the posts, prepare the responses then emails them to Ned and he copies and pastes them as posts on the thread. All of Ned's posts are in response to posts made the day before. The general pattern is never to answer a post directed to him on the day it is posted, that is, 'off the top of his head'. Nedd: Ha that is funny Ayelean. But your wrong. Just ask Chris, I respond to each and every post I feel the need to respond to. No one pays me and I was on a forum with Britt many months ago where I felt just as strongly regarding the Ramsey's guilt. I have just researched further and came up with a different conclusion. Someone already stated that other RST posters in the past have made a habit of reprinting all the posts when commenting on one or two points. I see a distinct pattern in this type of post. In fact, when Ned posts a straight post e.g. not commenting to a previous post his writing style is different. Nedd: Why can't you all just accept someone's point of view? My God, do you think that every person that believes the Ramseys' are innocent are being paid off? Boy the Ramsey's sure have a lot of money, I better start charging them time and a half LOL. The posts under Ned's hat have a way of fudging and enlarging, example, dna becomes MALE then becomes BLOOD then it is referred to as MALE DNA FROM BLOOD from there on out. It is like an advertisement, if the public hears it repeated enough they will believe it. Nedd: It's always been male, it's always been blood in her panties, skin under her nails and a hair said to be a primary hair, but nothing that confirms that later that I know of. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 28. "whoops, hair dying isn't illegal" Posted by mary99 on 13:57:52 3/20/2001 in Colorado for kids if done by a parent, it's beauty parlors that are banned from dying kid's hair. Just wanted to clear that up. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 29. "whoops!" Posted by Ayeka on 14:21:48 3/20/2001 I stand corrected then! Thanks, mary99. I still have to wonder about Patsy proceeding with it knowing that the pros wouldn't / couldn't touch her daughter. I've seen the difference. That ain't no sun-streaked hair. Ayeka who knows from sun-streaked hair [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 31. "Have to admit I agree with Ned " Posted by Mini on 15:25:53 3/20/2001 on hair lightening. Have been foiling my hair for many, MANY years and never found it to be the least bit irritating or even uncomfortable. Nor is there any kind of peroxide smell. Also have to admit putting Sun-In in my kids' hair when they were quite young and they liked it. My hairdresser even suggested I might want to have my daughters' hair foiled when they were about 10. I didn't because I thought they were too young and it was too expensive. Remember Jay North in Dennis the Menace? Ned, where did you get the information that the body hair had been tested and produced a DNA result? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 30. "Ned" Posted by Gemini on 15:22:33 3/20/2001 Nedd: Why can't you all just accept someone's point of view? My God, do you think that every person that believes the Ramseys' are innocent are being paid off? Boy the Ramsey's sure have a lot of money, I better start charging them time and a half LOL. I suspect there really are some posters who believe this. It may be what gives rise to the elaborate conspiracy theories. Nobody's dumb enough (surely) to think the Ramseys are paying all their supporters (and even those of us who have doubts about their guilt). If it's all a giant, evil conspiracy/cover-up, they can suggest the Illuminati's writing the checks : ) . [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 32. "Dying to Kill..." Posted by Dunvegan on 20:41:14 3/20/2001 NOTE: This message was last edited 20:41:14, 3/20/2001 In John Douglas' "The Cases That Haunt Us" he talks about JonBenet's hair.... From pg. 291, hc. "But regardless of any expliantion or decidedly unapologetic statements John or Patsy woud make, to countless millions of viewers around the world, the images spoke for thmselves. These were rich, arrogant parents who were alone in the house the night their daughter was killed, they refused to cooperate with police, they surrounded themselveswith lawyers, and they dressed up their little six-year-old girl with lipstick and rouge and tinted hair and glittery makeup in suggestive outfits that mad her look like a Vegas showgirl. What kind of people were these?" Seems to me that the way JonBenet's hair appears in the picture above is a good way to separate hair so that you can see the roots to paint on a touchup. (Thought: I color my hair...sometimes I only wish to do the roots, and my hair is unmanageablely fine...I separate several sections of hair and some times use the applicator, but i don't need to separate it into more than 2 or 3 sections due to how fine/thin it is. I could easily see using one of the art paintbrushes we have around the house to do the touch-up with instead of using the applicator. As a matter of fact, I'll probably try that technique next time I touch up my roots.) If Patsy lied about the hair...it only "shows to go you" that Patsy is willing to lie if she thinks that public opinion would go against her if she tells the truth. If every professional hair dresser turned her down to do JonBenet's hair, Patsy must have thought that the perception of her would be bad if it got out she was inflicting chemicals on JonBenet that were outlawed for licensed beauticians to use because of the health hazards for children. Telling that Patsy took JonBenet endlessly to the doctor, and after she was killed thanked God that JBR would never have to know cancer...but used health-endangering chemicals just to help her win beauty pagents. Can't say Patsy was unaware of the harm: licensed hairdressers had turned her down...probably told her it was illegal...may even have told her it was a health hazard. Also, if it is proven that Patsy did indeed dye JonBenet's hair, then Patsy has lied to cover up what she felt was her own "inapropriate behaviour". That would be a precedent establishing her as someone willing to lie to protect both their image and any wrongdoing attributed to them. (Linda H-P ought to know about this...empty blond Revlon boxes in the bathroom wastebasker, etc.) It may also say that Patsy would be willing to lie Big Time(r) to save her skin. I'd personally love to hear testimony the state of JonBenet's roots on Christmas Day from anyone that saw her at the White's party. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 33. "Double Wow Dunv ..." Posted by Mandarin on 22:26:34 3/20/2001 I've ALWAYS wondered why her hair was in 2 ponytails and separated like that. I'm almost certain she did not attend the White's party with THAT hairdo. Bingo ... (IMO) I've always thought that Patsy was trying to do a quick dye job before jetting off to Charlevoix. Jonbenet's Hawaiin Tropical Pageant was to be held immediately upon their return from the Red Boat (within 1 day I believe). On one of the earliest police reports it is noted that there was a strong smell of peroxide in the bath tub. And when you factor in the Police finding her red turtle neck sweater 'balled up' on the bathroom counter and clothes,etc. haphazardly strewn all over the fllor in Jonbenet's closet and other areas of the bedroom, it all starts to make perfect sense. The struggle to get her prepped for the fast approaching pageant, since Patsy would be unable to do this in front of everyone in Charlevoix and especially on the Red Boat. The yellow bathing suit and cape, etc. was already laid out in JAR's room that night, but this costume would not be for Charlevoix or the Red Boat, just the pageant. I think our little Jonbenet gave Mommy Dearest quite a struggle that night because she was too damn tired to get those telling roots done. The pageant was the most important item on Patsy's agenda, let's not kid ourselves. For whatever reason, I believe Patsy was only going along to Charlevoix reluctantly, and due to time constrains, her pageant prep time on the night of the 25th left her with a case of shattered nerves and a very, very tired little girl who simply would not cooperate this night. Again, Dunv, great post! Regards, Mandarin [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 34. "Patsy not only dyed JonBenet's hair..." Posted by Dunvegan on 23:26:18 3/20/2001 ...(even John Douglas call it "tinted")...but, I believe, "tinted" her eyes as well. Didn't JonBenet have brown or hazel eyes naturally? Don't most or all of her later publicity shots picture her with blue eyes? I'll bet they were not vision corrective contacts, either. "Just a couple of weekends.... [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 35. "Contacts, DunV" Posted by Mandarin on 23:40:34 3/20/2001 She not only wore contacts, but also thick mascara (how horrible is that for a 6 year old). You know, I believe Patsy wears contacts - it's a thing I can usually pick up. Many pageant contestants wear them, some for vision, but a lot for enhancement, eye colour change, etc. Patsy was into cosmetic surgery for herself and had a personal Doctor friend who was a plastic surgeon. If Jonbenet was alive today, Mama Bear would already be planning a visit with the surgeon to prep her for the biggest pageant of all, you know the one they named their boat after, Miss America. Gotto catch a few winks dunv ... catch ya tomorrow or the day after, if I get time. I'll be looking for you. Night! Regards, Mandarin [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 36. "Forgot Dunv ..." Posted by Mandarin on 23:44:03 3/20/2001 P.S. I loved your "spam experiment" on my thread that was moved to the WOR and even though I had said I would not post there again, I made an exception to post a note of appreciation to you. Regards, Mandarin [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 37. "Good thread!" Posted by A.K. on 03:33:49 3/21/2001 NOTE: This message was last edited 03:33:49, 3/21/2001 JB's eyes were green -- she didn't wear contacts. The blue color in photos was from photog touchups. And while no one mentioned it here, she never had a flipper for her teeth. There were none missing. Mandarin, can you direct me to the police report that mentioned peroxide? I know it's been discussed but I don't recall reading it. Dunvegan, that's freaky about the paintbrushes for hair coloring. Mini, IMHO, hair-dyeing is a stinky, barfy thing to do, at any age, but I'd imagine a child would suffer most. There are studies being done now on the link between kidney cancer and hair dyes (albeit, mostly re the higher incidence in hair colorists) -- and I think most folks would find peroxide harsh smelling. Has anyone confirmed that it's illegal for salons in CO to color a kid's hair? If so, at what age is it permitted? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 39. "Hmmm" Posted by Holly on 06:54:55 3/21/2001 "There are studies being done now on the link between kidney cancer and hair dyes (albeit, mostly re the higher incidence in hair colorists." There are? Can I find them on the internet? Maybe you could contact a science writer for details. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 38. "Gloves " Posted by v_p on 06:50:39 3/21/2001 are always worn when touching up, tinting and dying the hair. I don't believe, however, that Patsy would have used one of her paint brushes to touch up JB's hair. Those brushes are expensive. My mom paints, or used to, and she would thoroughly clean and treat the brushes after every use. Then again, Pats had enough money that it might not have mattered. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 40. "almost certain" Posted by fly on 07:32:06 3/21/2001 Dunvegan - Why are you "almost certain" JBR didn't wear her hair up in the multiple ponytails when she went to the Whites'? Several posters in the past have indicated that sort of hairstyle is pretty popular with little girls. Doesn't seem too much of a stretch that JBR might wear her hair like that. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 42. "AK" Posted by Morgan on 07:43:28 3/21/2001 I bet you'd have no problem locating some science/medical writers to lend some expertise to this discussion. Since AIDS became a big health issue, there would have to be 60 or more hacking away, sticking their noses into all kinds of issues, looking for angles to twist and exploit in the hopes of keeping their careers afloat. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 41. "v-p" Posted by gaiabetsy on 07:39:56 3/21/2001 Oh, I can see Patsy using her paintbrushes for hair dye. Oh yes. I paint, too, and I am well aware of how much good brushes cost, yet sometimes I will sacrifice one of them to paint wax or liquid latex on my pottery when I'm decorating them. Of course that destroys the paintbrush, so I try to use an old one, but I just do it anyway. DON'T GET ME WRONG. I'm not rich like Patsy, either, but she seems like the type who only painted on a whim anyway, so by the time she was into doing JB's hair, she probably couldn't have cared less about her brushes. That's my belief, anyway. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 43. "VP...." Posted by rose on 10:52:20 3/21/2001 questions I would love to have an answer to is did JonBenet have fresh shampooed hair when she attended the Whites party. Was her hair done up in hair ties at the Whites and if so were they the same colors that she was found wearing when she was dead? Did JonBenet misbehave or say something at the whites that would have angered her parents? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 45. "Hair coloring" Posted by Mini on 12:04:38 3/21/2001 AK, the only connection to hair coloring and cancer that I've heard of is the use of dark dyes. Didn't Jackie Kennedy wonder if there was any connection when she got cancer? I don't know what my hairdresser uses but the only annoyance is the time it takes--there's absolutely no smell or irritation and he didn't hestitate to suggest it for my twins. Perhaps the fact that we're already blonde but have to deal with the darkening that the gloom of the Northwest brings has something to do with it. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 44. "I...." Posted by Ayeka on 11:55:49 3/21/2001 ...like the way you think, Dunvegan. mini: I don't know what foiling is, exactly, but if it's anything like frosting (I remember SO vividly those stupid frosting caps that my mom used to use), then that is a lot different than actually covering your whole head with the stuff. I'm so intrigued to know more about that trip to Texas... I don't remember the source (JP, I think) but Patsy came back with a diamond and seemed different... and didn't JB come back a blonde? I want to know what that was about. Ayeka [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 47. "to dye for" Posted by mary99 on 12:54:33 3/21/2001 The reason for Colorado beauticians to be forbidden from using dye on children's hair, imo, is based on liability issues due to the possibility of injury if the product comes into contact with the eyes or causes a contact allergy; not because the products themnselves are unsafe. From personal experience, I watched a friend apply a double quantity of 40 volume developer w/ blonde coloring and her hair was literally hot to the touch and let off steam vapor from the chemical reaction. Lightening brown hair to platinum blonde requires as near complete removal of color as possible to reduce brassy overtones. Foiling is less destructive but requires many more partings than JB's hair had that night. Also, I know a hairdresser who cuts her own hair and her procedure is to separates it into several ponytails and trim each one individually. With all that said, I don't believe JBR's murder was prompted by a fight over haircoloring or cutting, but the staging may have included details which would point to a hair-related event. If that is the case, PR is definitely being targeted or framed as the murderer---so ironically, imo, that leaves me thinking she was not in fact the actual murderer, but somehow forced to let suspicion be pointed at her in lieu of the actual killer, motive and event. Confusing? You bet. Isn't the whole murder about fiendish feints, crosses and double-crosses, though? About hair dyes: Some studies have been done which indicate a possible link between hair dyes and leukemias, MDS, skin sensitivities and contact dermatitus. http://onhealth.webmd.com/conditions/resource/medlit/index.asp Cancer Invest 2000;18(4):366-80 Related Articles, Books, LinkOut Use of hair dyes, hematopoietic neoplasms, and lymphomas: a literature review. I. Leukemias and myelodysplastic syndromes. Correa A, Mohan A, Jackson L, Perry H, Helzlsouer K School of Hygiene and Public Health, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, USA. We review published epidemiologic studies on personal use of hair dyes and leukemias and myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS). A subsequent article will review studies on lymphomas and multiple myeloma. A computerized literature search for the years 1966 through 1996 was completed using MEDLINE. Data were extracted using a standardized form that recorded study design, study population, type of cases, comparison group, sources of data on personal exposure to hair dyes, method of data collection, type of exposure data collected, covariates, and results. The above search identified 13 epidemiologic studies on the possible association between personal use of hair dyes and leukemias and MDS. Although there are some reports of positive associations, overall the evidence linking personal use of hair dyes to various leukemia and MDS subgroups is weak. One cannot definitively rule out an association, however, because of the methodologic limitations, such as small numbers of exposed cases and lack of detailed exposure information. Any further research would need much better assessment of hair dye use, including product type, color frequency, duration, and changes in use over time, and adequate statistical power. Copyright 2000 Wiley-Liss, Inc. Publication Types: Review Review, tutorial Comment in: Cancer Invest. 2000 ;18(4):408 PMID: 10808373 -------------------------------------------------- http://onhealth.webmd.com/home/resource/medlit/item.asp?http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/PubMed/ 1: Contact Dermatitis 2000 May;42(5):270-5 Related Articles, Books, LinkOut Experimental study on skin sensitization potencies and cross-reactivities of hair-dye-related chemicals in guinea pigs. Xie Z, Hayakawa R, Sugiura M, Kojima H, Konishi H, Ichihara G, Takeuchi Y Department of Environmental Dermatology, Nagoya University School of Medicine, Japan. In screening patch testing of hairdressers with occupational contact dermatitis, multiple positive reactions to hair dye-related chemicals, such as p-phenylenediamine (PPD), p-toluenediamine x 2HCl (PTD) and p-aminophenol (PAP), a fabric dye p-aminoazobenzene (PAB), and a tar dye Sudan III, were frequently encountered. To investigate individual skin sensitization potency and the cross-reactivities among above chemicals, a guinea pig maximization test with the above 5 chemicals was performed. In each group, 6 animals were induced with one of the chemicals at 0.1% concentration by intradermal injection and at 1.0% by topical application. The animals were challenged with all 5 chemicals in concentrations of dilution by 10 from 0.1% to 0.001%. Under the conditions of 0.1% challenges, similar sensitization potencies were observed in PPD (6/6), PTD (6/6), PAP (5/6) and PAB (6/6) groups, but no positive reactions were elicited in the Sudan III group. The cross-reactivities to PPD were confirmed in the animals challenged with PTD (6/6), PAP (6/6), PAB (6/6) and Sudan III (3/6). In the PTD-induced group, positive responses to cross-challenges were elicited by PPD (5/6), PAP (3/6), PAB (5/6) and Sudan III (1/6). The cross-reactivities to PAP were observed only with PPD (2/5) and PAB (5/5). PAB-induced animals responded only to PPD (1/6). The results indicate that all these chemicals except Sudan III are strong sensitizers. Their cross-reactivities are different in sensitized conditions, respectively. The cross-reactivities to PPD were higher than those to PTD, PAP and PAB. PMID: 10789841 [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 48. "the news" Posted by Edie Pratt on 13:14:31 3/21/2001 last week mentioned a study that found long term exposure to PERMANENT haircolor, caused kidney/liver failure. (one of those, but can't recall for sure, I was passing thru) I agree Patsy is the scapegoat, because no real harm afterall, it isn't true--and nobody can prove it is. Isn't it about time we see the Mod Squad (one Patsy, one John, and Linc)? Aren't they about due for another presentation? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 51. "I believe " Posted by momo on 08:28:05 3/22/2001 I saw the same news report about the long term effects of hair dyes and perm solutions on the kidneys and liver. The pungent odor alone is an indication that there are some effects, IMO. I think there was mention about the home kits being less harmful. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 46. "Frosting" Posted by DuBois on 12:46:28 3/21/2001 I use to use that frosting kit several years ago. It comes with a paintbrush type brush. You paint the hair to give it highlights. Patsy claims that she blended JB hair. I wonder if she used this type. Bottom line is that highlighting still involves bleach to change the color. but then again when you apply the highlights you don't put the dye on the scalp, it's about a inch from the scalp. Her hair looked like it was completely dyed. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 49. "Kiddie Paintbrush" Posted by janphi on 16:40:34 3/21/2001 You know, in the photo of the paint tote, there was one big fat paintbrush laid across the top that was completely different from most artists' brushes we would expect Patsy to have. It looked like a "kiddie paintbrush" to me. It was royal blue and short and stubby, but really wide in diameter/circumference. In the background of the tote, you could see that it was part of a set, as there was a red one and there may have been another primary-colored one, too. Maybe these were JBR's for painting alongside her mother or something. Anyway, if I were going to use one of the paint tote brushes for hair highlighting, I think I would've chosen one of those. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 50. "Asian paintbrush?" Posted by gaiabetsy on 07:04:01 3/22/2001 But wasn't the brush found that was broken in half and used on JB one that had some Asian writing on it? I use those types. Some of them are very inexpensive, but of course I have also bought ones like that I would never use for anything but my painting. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 52. "Sounds like..." Posted by Ayeka on 11:59:26 3/22/2001 You know, in the photo of the paint tote, there was one big fat paintbrush laid across the top that was completely different from most artists' brushes we would expect Patsy to have. It looked like a "kiddie paintbrush" to me. It was royal blue and short and stubby, but really wide in diameter/circumference. Never seen that picture, but that sounds like a stippling brush to me. (Hm, did you mean the bristles were short and stubby, or the whole paint brush? If the latter, never mind.) Ayeka [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 54. "Not sure, ayeka" Posted by janphi on 08:22:25 3/23/2001 Had to go back to the pic and do some math. First of all, life-size to my screen size of the pic is a factor of 3.467. (The real things are 3.467 times as big as they are in my screen pic. I measured one of my bigger tubes of acrylics like the one in the paint tote to arrive at that factor.) The brush I'm talking about would be 7.367" in length (in RealLife), with bristles that are 29% of the entire length of the brush, or 2.167" long (RL). All of the other brushes in the tote, which are partially hidden in the pic, are approx. 0.22" in width (RL), while the "fat" blue brush on top is approx. 3x that width at its widest part of the tapered handle, near the bristles, tapering from just larger than 0.43" to 0.65" (RL) where the bristles start. When I originally wrote my post, I almost added that it looked like a stenciling brush. But I changed my mind, because the bristles LOOK soft, not stiff. Also, there is a shadow obscuring the very tip end of the bristles, so I can't see if they are roundly tapered or if there is a circular blunt cut to the end. It doesn't LOOK like there is, but I'm not 100% clear on that. It ALMOST does, but not quite. The length of the bristles is what makes them appear soft. I'm not sure what a proper stippling brush looks like, but I have stippled before and I used a brush like a stencil cream daubing brush with fairly short, but very stiff, bristles. I'm not sure where to tell you to see the paint tote pic, as I just copied and pasted it from someone's post a long time ago and I don't think it was this forum, so even if I knew how to post pix, which I don't, it prolly wouldn't be kosher to do so. I believe it's a tab pic, actually. It's very grainy. Also, I don't see the other "fat" brushes in this pic, so there must have been more than one pic, but I only copied this one. Ha ha, does that answer it? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 53. "Mini" Posted by A.K. on 03:35:14 3/23/2001 Yes, Jackie O did mention that to her sister, I believe. I recall reading it. Morgan, I have no idea what you're talking about. Nor do I care. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 55. "Holy Loose-Cannon, BatBabe! (Edie)..." Posted by Dunvegan on 08:28:49 3/23/2001 ...looks like you were right about not hearing from the Ramz, and their being "over-due" for spewage.... [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 56. "Janphi..." Posted by Ayeka on 11:18:57 3/23/2001 Hard to envision, but you're right, doesn't sound like a stippling/stencilling brush. Curious... Ayeka [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ]