Normal Hymenal Configuration

[Rainsong]

Probably more than you wanted to know, but necessary to clarify some misunderstandings in regard to Meyer's description of JonBenet's hymen.

"Surrounding the mouth of the vaginal orifice is the rim of tissue called the hymen. The once thick, redundant hymen becomes thin and translucent with varying configurations. The hymen may be annular, crescent-shaped, redundant, and irregular or teardrop-shaped[1] (Fig. 5). Some less common variations of the hymen include the imperforate hymen, microperforate, and the septated hymen. In most instances, correction of these variations is not necessary until the girl reaches puberty."
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/468258_print


"Many people are under the impression that the hymen is located within the vagina. It is not. It’s part of the vulva, the external genital organs. It’s located outside the vagina. The hymen is a layer of tissue, just like the tissue around the opening of your vagina that partially conceals the vaginal orifice. You may or may not have one, most females do. The hymen is named after the Greek God Hymenaeus -- the God of marriage and weddings, FYI.

During the early stages of fetal development there is no opening into the vagina at all. The thin layer of tissue that conceals the vagina at this time usually divides incompletely prior to birth, forming the hymen. The size and shape of this opening (or openings) varies greatly from person to person.

Sometimes this formation of an opening does not occur, resulting in an imperforated hymen (it lacks the more common opening). Some females have no hymen at birth at all, since the tissue divided completely while they were still in the womb."
http://www.coolnurse.com/hymen.htm

Rainsong

[sissi]

Several instigating factors that can contribute to nonspecific vulvovaginitis include:

Poor hygiene practices at home or daycare program

Inadequate front-to-back wiping

Smaller labia minora, which are less protective of the vestibule, with a short distance from the anus to vagina

Vulvovaginal epithelium that is not well estrogenized and thus thinner and more prone to irritation

Foreign body such as toilet paper, small toys, or pieces of cloth, which may be inadvertently inserted in the vagina by the child

Chemical irritants such as bubble baths, shampoos, or bath oils, and certain deodorant soaps

Dermatologic conditions such as eczema and seborrhea

Chronic disease and altered immune status

Sexual abuse



There are many reasons for chronic irritation, why choose the last.

[BlueCrab]

Probably more than you wanted to know, but necessary to clarify some misunderstandings in regard to Meyer's description of JonBenet's hymen.

http://www.coolnurse.com/hymen.htm

Rainsong

Hello Rainsong,

Welcome and thanks for the info re' hymens. It's something I've always wondered about but was afraid to ask. (Sort of like the King's physician who examined Snow White and wondered what caused those seven little dimples on her hymen.)

I agree with you that Meyer's description of JonBenet's hymen is debatable --
"The hymen itself is represented by a rim of mucosaL tissue extending clockwise between the 2 and 10:00 positions." By itself, that could mean almost anything. That's why other evidence has to also be considered to help reach a conclusion, such as:

o The hyperemia (excess blood in the tissue) is extensive and extends into the vaginal orifice.

0 The hymenal orifice measures 1x1 cm, about twice the size it should measure.

o There are abrasions (acute and chronic) at the 7 o'clock position in the vagina.

Therefore, although not conclusive, there is evidence the hymen was likely lost as a result of these intrusions into the vagina, and it was not a "natural" condition of the vagina.

BlueCrab

[JBRMod2]

Welcome Rainsong and any recent other new members.

Please be sure to check out the Ramsey Links and Resources (http://websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=20136) thread at the top and to be careful not to name private individuals as suspects in the Ramsey case.

[Rainsong]

"There are doctors (even pediatricians) who claim that any inflammation of a little girl's vulva is a manifestation of sex abuse. Most, however, claim that this is an extremely common finding and can result from sweat, tight pants, certain kinds of soap, and the occasional mild rubbing (and masturbatory) activity of the normal girl. There are significant differences of opinion regarding what is the normal size of the hymenal opening and this, of course, bears directly on the question of abuse. Most agree that there have not been large studies of many children at different ages with regard to what the normal hymen looks like, its size, and whether or not it is indeed circular."
http://www.ipt-forensics.com/journal/volume2/j2_4_2.htm

"Active hyperemia is the increase in organ blood flow that is associated with increased metabolic activity of an organ or tissue. With increased metabolic activity, vascular resistance decreases due to both vasodilation and vascular recruitment (particularly in skeletal muscle). Active hyperemia occurs during muscle contraction (also termed exercise or functional hyperemia), increased cardiac activity, increased mental activity, and increased gastrointestinal activity during food absorption."
http://www.oucom.ohiou.edu/CVPhysiology/BF005.htm

The last statement, "There are abrasions (acute and chronic) at the 7 o'clock position in the vagina" .is incorrect.

From the autopsy report:"The area of abrasion is present at approximately
the 7:00 position and appears to involve the hymen and distal right
lateral vaginal wall and possibly the area anterior to the hymen."

No mention is made of chronic abrasions. What is stated under MICROSCOPIC DESCRIPTION is, "Vaginal Mucosa: All of the sections contain vascular congestion and focal interstitial chronic inflammation.

This is at the cellular level.

The hymen was not 'lost' any more than was the pineapple. Compare the following, both from the autopsy report:

The yellow to light green-tan apparent vegetable or fruit material which may
represent fragments of pineapple.

The hymen itself is represented by a rim of mucosal tissue extending clockwise between the 2 and 10:00 positions.

One cannot conclude the hymen was 'lost' when Meyer clearly states it is present and in a crescent configuration as per previous citations regarding various hymenal configurations.

Rainsong

[Rainsong]

Welcome Rainsong and any recent other new members.

Please be sure to check out the Ramsey Links and Resources (http://websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=20136) thread at the top and to be careful not to name private individuals as suspects in the Ramsey case.

Thank you and BlueCrab both for the welcome.

Rainsong

[BlueCrab]

The last statement, "There are abrasions (acute and chronic) at the 7 o'clock position in the vagina" .is incorrect.



Rainsong,

From the autopsy report:

"Vaginal Mucosa: All of the sections contain vascular congestion and focal interstitial chronic inflamation. The smallest piece of tissue, from the 7:00 position of the vaginal wall/hymen, contains epithelial erosion with underlying capillary congestion."

Epithelial erosion is an abrasion created over time that, due to repetition, gradually removes the top layer of skin (called mucosa when referring to the vagina's interior), thus revealing the chronic injury (inflicted 1 to 3 days prior to the murder) at the same 7:00 position as is the acute injury (inflicted the same day as the murder).

BlueCrab

[Rainsong]

I will repeat: "There are doctors (even pediatricians) who claim that any inflammation of a little girl's vulva is a manifestation of sex abuse. Most, however, claim that this is an extremely common finding and can result from sweat, tight pants, certain kinds of soap, and the occasional mild rubbing (and masturbatory) activity of the normal girl."
http://www.ipt-forensics.com/journal/volume2/j2_4_2.htm

And :
"Causes, incidence, and risk factors

Cervical erosion may be caused by trauma (through intercourse, tampon insertion, foreign objects in the vagina, or speculum insertion), or infection (herpes, early syphilis, tampons that were not removed, severe vaginal infections), and sometimes chemicals (spermaticidal contraceptive creams or foams, douches).

There is an increased risk associated with vaginal use of chemical agents or multiple sexual partners; however, the condition is seen in women without these risk factors."
http://health.yahoo.com/ency/adam/001492

As stated in the excerpt from the IPT, this condition is also seen in young children.

Given no history of prior abuse on the part of either parent, nor any indication per JonBenet's pediatrician and the history of previous vaginal inflammations/infections, there is no valid reason to suspect sex abuse.

From the autopsy report: No recent or remote anal or other perineal trauma is identified.

The inflammation was chronic. The abrasion was not. Abrasions and erosions are not the same thing. They may appear to be the same, superficially, but there are not since their causes are not the same.

Edited to add:
Nonspecific Vulvovaginitis

Vulvovaginal inflammation is the most common gynecological disorder of prepubertal girls and accounts for over 50% of visits to pediatric gynecological clinics.[15] Inflammation may involve the vulva or vagina or both and can result from a variety of stimuli. Several instigating factors that can contribute to nonspecific vulvovaginitis include:

1.Poor hygiene practices at home or daycare program
2. Inadequate front-to-back wiping
3.Smaller labia minora, which are less protective of the vestibule, with a short distance from the anus to vagina
4.Vulvovaginal epithelium that is not well estrogenized and thus thinner and more prone to irritation
5.Foreign body such as toilet paper, small toys, or pieces of cloth, which may be inadvertently inserted in the vagina by the child
6.Chemical irritants such as bubble baths, shampoos, or bath oils, and certain deodorant soaps
7.Dermatologic conditions such as eczema and seborrhea
8.Chronic disease and altered immune status
9.Sexual abuse

Rainsong

[Toltec]

WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT????

When the hymen is torn...you "lose" your virginity. I do not recall losing my virginity at such a young age.

When the hymen is torn...you bleed...you know...bleed like as in your monthly period!

The hymen is inside the female orifice...not outside.

You've heard the term "deflowered"...well that comes from tearing your hymen....as in losing your virginity...as in having sex.

[Rainsong]

JonBenet's hymen was not torn.

Rainsong

[BlueCrab]

JonBenet's hymen was not torn.



Rainsong,

True. At autopsy JonBenet's hymen was not torn. That's because the hymen didn't even exist except for a rim of mucosal tissue that "represented" the hymen, so it's unclear whether it had been torn away at an earlier date or had never existed. But the peripheral evidence (abrasions, size of the hymenal orifice, etc.) suggests the hymen had likely been physically eliminated.

[Seeker]

1.Poor hygiene practices at home or daycare program
2. Inadequate front-to-back wiping

JB would call for anyone within earshot to come and wipe her. Someone who was leary of being called a baby raper may have been afraid to wipe her and left her wet instead even when he gave her a clean pair of his own daughter's panties to change into.

5.Foreign body such as toilet paper, small toys, or pieces of cloth, which may be inadvertently inserted in the vagina by the child

Or a paitbrush handle....

6.Chemical irritants such as bubble baths, shampoos, or bath oils, and certain deodorant soaps

Didn't JB's (allegedly seen by the BPD as well before they vanished into the ether) medical records indicate that she had vaginal problems due to the irritation of bubble baths?

[Rainsong]

Rainsong,

True. At autopsy JonBenet's hymen was not torn. That's because the hymen didn't even exist except for a rim of mucosal tissue that "represented" the hymen, so it's unclear whether it had been torn away at an earlier date or had never existed. But the peripheral evidence (abrasions, size of the hymenal orifice, etc.) suggests the hymen had likely been physically eliminated.

One more time: The hymen may be annular, crescent-shaped, redundant, and irregular or teardrop-shaped[1] (Fig. 5).

JonBenet's hymen was present: The hymen itself is represented
by a rim of mucosal tissue extending clockwise between the 2 and
10:00 positions. The area of abrasion is present at approximately
the 7:00 position and appears to involve the hymen and distal right
lateral vaginal wall and possibly the area anterior to the hymen.

Now, if JonBenet's hymen was not present, just how was it abraded as per the autopsy report?

Rainsong

[BlueCrab]

Rainsong,

Don't mean to badger you, but almost all of the medical experts who studied the autopsy report and the associated microscopic slides concluded that JonBenet had suffered prior sexual abuse. These included Dr. David Jones; Dr. James Monteleone; Dr. John McCann; Dr. Cyril Wecht; Dr. Ronald Wright; and many others.

Dr. Wecht, who is a medical doctor, a lawyer, and a coroner, told the Daily Camera in 1997, "Chronic inflammation and epithelial erosion of the vagina indicates sexual abuse more than two days old."

[Rainsong]

Rainsong,

Don't mean to badger you, but almost all of the medical experts who studied the autopsy report and the associated microscopic slides concluded that JonBenet had suffered prior sexual abuse. These included Dr. David Jones; Dr. James Monteleone; Dr. John McCann; Dr. Cyril Wecht; Dr. Ronald Wright; and many others.

Dr. Wecht, who is a medical doctor, a lawyer, and a coroner, told the Daily Camera in 1997, "Chronic inflammation and epithelial erosion of the vagina indicates sexual abuse more than two days old."

Wecht is entitled to his opinion and like the other experts,he did not examine JonBenet's body. All he--and they--had were photos and the autopsy report.

Again: "There are doctors (even pediatricians) who claim that any inflammation of a little girl's vulva is a manifestation of sex abuse. Most, however, claim that this is an extremely common finding and can result from sweat, tight pants, certain kinds of soap, and the occasional mild rubbing (and masturbatory) activity of the normal girl."

Per Schiller: Without semen or some other hard evidence, the incest theory went nowhere. A careful review of Dr. Beuf''s medical record gave no indication of prior abuse. Nor could the police find any indication of suspicious behavior on the part of JonBenet's parents.

The only reason to conclude--in the face of the LACK of corroborating evidence--that JonBenet was a victim of sexual abuse is to claim one of the parents perpetrated the murder.

Rainsong

[BlueCrab]

.

Now, if JonBenet's hymen was not present, just how was it abraded as per the autopsy report?



Rainsong,

IMO the RIM of mucosal tissue, which "represents" what at one time was the hymen, was abraded (rough and irritated), obviously from friction. The hymen itself was gone due to either past sexual abuse or it was never there to begin with. Take your pick.

[BlueCrab]

Wecht is entitled to his opinion and like the other experts,he did not examine JonBenet's body. All he--and they--had were photos and the autopsy report.




Rainsong,

The medical experts had more than the autopsy report and photos to make a professional determination as to whether sexual abuse had occurred or not. They had the microscopic specimen slides made in the lab from the swabs that John Meyer had taken from JonBenet. These people have spent their lives studying microscopic specimens and know what they are looking at and talking about. Their scientific findings, I assure you, are more than just "opinions".

[Rainsong]

Rainsong,

IMO the RIM of mucosal tissue, which "represents" what at one time was the hymen, was abraded (rough and irritated), obviously from friction. The hymen itself was gone due to either past sexual abuse or it was never there to begin with. Take your pick.

You have not answered the question. If JonBenet's hymen was "lost" (your word), how could it be abraded?

Considering the numerous configurations for hymens and Meyer's description, it was certainly there and was crescent shaped.

Rainsong

[Rainsong]

Rainsong,

The medical experts had more than the autopsy report and photos to make a professional determination as to whether sexual abuse had occurred or not. They had the microscopic specimen slides made in the lab from the swabs that John Meyer had taken from JonBenet. These people have spent their lives studying microscopic specimens and know what they are looking at and talking about. Their scientific findings, I assure you, are more than just "opinions".

Studying a microscope slide will not show you whether or not a hymen is present in the body of a six-year-old murder victim. Now will it show you concrete evidence of prior sexual abuse unless it is a slide of STD cells.

"The anterior hymenal rim may be very slim or absent as a normal variant; this was the case with JonBenet Ramsey and the pathologist recognized it as normal. http://www.pathguy.com/abuse.htm"

Wecht also said Steve Thomas 'knows so much about the JonBenet Ramsey murder he doesn't mince words.' Those words are from Steve Thomas' deposition--the same depositon that shows how little Steve Thomas actually knew about the case. Wecht also said, "There's absolutely no question she was abused," Wecht said. "There's blood, and contusions (in the vagina,) and the hymen has been torn." Yet the autopsy report does not say the hymen was torn--and Wecht goes on to say he viewed JonBenet's murder as an accident, but follows that with, "If you inflict a blow like that on someone whose heart is beating," he asserts, "the heart doesn't stop, because the cardiac and respiratory centers are at the base of the brain.� You're not damaging that with a blow to the top of the head.� It'll become compromised as the brain swells, but initially there's no compromise.� They control your heart and lungs.� The heart continues to beat. The blood continues to flow.� But in the Ramsey case, they got less than a teaspoon and a half of blood.� If you have a beating heart and the carotid arteries are carrying blood, this person doesn't die right away.� That means that blow was inflicted when she was already dead or dying."

So the question is, how do you accidently strangle someone? His summation is not logical, therefore no credence should be given to his opinion of prior sex abuse.

And from Dr. Thomas Henry: {Denver Medical Examiner} From what is noted in the autopsy report, there is no injury to the anus, there is no injury to the skin around the vagina and the labia. There is no indication of healed scars in any of those areas. There is no other indication from the autopsy report at all that there is any other previous injuries that have healed in that area.

Rainsong

[BlueCrab]

So the question is, how do you accidently strangle someone?



Rainsong,

Good question. Since a very young child was the victim, you have to read between the lines in regard to what Wecht is telling the reader about an accidental strangulation. My BDI theories are similar to Wecht's theory, so here it is in a nutshell.

IMO JonBenet Ramsey was accidentally strangled while erotic asphyxiation was being performed on her. The device wrapped around her throat was not a garrote. It was a device designed and built to be used for erotic asphyxiation (EA) and autoerotic asphyxiation (AEA), both of them dangerous masturbation techniques. The goal of the devices is to enhance orgasms by temporarily restricting air to the lungs and hence oxygen to the brain. Due to evidence of a stun gun having been used on JonBenet, her participation in the EA game was likely involuntary.

The FBI estimates that EA (with a partner) and AEA (solo) accidentally asphyxiates about 500 Americans every year, almost all of them young people. Most of the families of the victims, due to the embarrassment, try to change the scenes of the deaths and invent stories about suicide, accidents, murder, etc.

Breath control devices such as that found on JonBenet usually have safety mechanisms built into the design, such as a cord that can be let go of that will immediately loosen the ligature around the neck, so the subjects don't accidentally strangle themselves. When these safety mechanisms fail, it can result in death.

My theory on why the safety mechanism on the EA device wrapped around JonBenet's neck failed is that her hair got entangled in the slip knot that should have easily released the tension on the ligature when let go, but it didn't release. I theorize that, fighting to breathe, JonBenet, or her partner, in a panic pulled on the cord and made the knot with the hair tangled in it even tighter -- asphyxiating her.

The final extreme tightening of the ligature and the bash in the head, IMO, were both part of the staging to go along with the fake ransom note from a bunch of bad asses from a "small foreign faction".

IMO the perpetrators were children experimenting with something they knew little about, although some of my BDI theories include an older accomplice. The parents, of course, helped cover up the crime and continue to coverup to this day.

Anyhow Rainsong, that is how you accidentally strangle someone.

BlueCrab

[Rainsong]

Rainsong,

Good question. Since a very young child was the victim, you have to read between the lines in regard to what Wecht is telling the reader about an accidental strangulation. My BDI theories are similar to Wecht's theory, so here it is in a nutshell.

IMO JonBenet Ramsey was accidentally strangled while erotic asphyxiation was being performed on her. The device wrapped around her throat was not a garrote. It was a device designed and built to be used for erotic asphyxiation (EA) and autoerotic asphyxiation (AEA), both of them dangerous masturbation techniques. The goal of the devices is to enhance orgasms by temporarily restricting air to the lungs and hence oxygen to the brain. Due to evidence of a stun gun having been used on JonBenet, her participation in the EA game was likely involuntary. (snip)

My theory on why the safety mechanism on the EA device wrapped around JonBenet's neck failed is that her hair got entangled in the slip knot that should have easily released the tension on the ligature when let go, but it didn't release. I theorize that, fighting to breathe, JonBenet, or her partner, in a panic pulled on the cord and made the knot with the hair tangled in it even tighter -- asphyxiating her.

The final extreme tightening of the ligature and the bash in the head, IMO, were both part of the staging to go along with the fake ransom note from a bunch of bad asses from a "small foreign faction".

IMO the perpetrators were children experimenting with something they knew little about, although some of my BDI theories include an older accomplice. The parents, of course, helped cover up the crime and continue to coverup to this day.

BlueCrab

Accidental strangulation, no matter what the reason, cannot be an option since the knot used on the garrote/noose/leash ligature is a knot specifically used to lessen the chance of slipping.

Also consider this, if what you say actually occurred, JonBenet would still have been alive as witnessed by the small accumulation of blood within her skull and slight narrowing of the sulci and flattening of the gyri.

Burke was not a large child and I doubt he would have had the strength to inflict the blow that shattered her skull. If his friend, whom you believe was an accessory to the murder, inflicted the blow, why was he satisfied with one crack? Would a child of his age have so much confidence in his strength that he wouldn't feel the need to inflict two or more blows to insure her death? This leaves the blow to the head to one of the parents. Why would either Patsy or John bludgeon their child when all they had to do was rush her to the hospital?

Patsy Ramsey spoke with JonBenet about her private body areas. Given JonBenet's personality, I found it difficult to accept that she would meekly comply to any sexual demands by her brother or his friend.

The note itself does not exhibit any of the traits of a childhood hand. Most children, and for that matter, many adults are not apt to write such a long tome in block letters. The sooner they can get the job done, the better.

Had children been responsible for writing the note, one should see much poorer grammar, serious misspellings and less organized thought patterns within the wording itself. Since we know John Ramsey was eliminated as the author, that leaves Patsy and her handwriting barely raised a spike on the seismograph of handwriting experts.

One other item...why would a young boy even give a thought to giving a young girl an increased orgasm? Most children at this age are quite self-centered and their thoughts are focused on giving themselves pleasure rather than other people.

Your theory(ies) makes no sense from so many angles and ignores too much of the evidence.

Sorry, one more item...one should never read between the lines. Oftentimes one reads what isn't there.

Rainsong

[aussiesheila]

Rainsong,


IMO JonBenet Ramsey was accidentally strangled while erotic asphyxiation was being performed on her. The device wrapped around her throat was not a garrote. It was a device designed and built to be used for erotic asphyxiation (EA) and autoerotic asphyxiation (AEA), both of them dangerous masturbation techniques. The goal of the devices is to enhance orgasms by temporarily restricting air to the lungs and hence oxygen to the brain. Due to evidence of a stun gun having been used on JonBenet, her participation in the EA game was likely involuntary.

My theory on why the safety mechanism on the EA device wrapped around JonBenet's neck failed is that her hair got entangled in the slip knot that should have easily released the tension on the ligature when let go, but it didn't release. I theorize that, fighting to breathe, JonBenet, or her partner, in a panic pulled on the cord and made the knot with the hair tangled in it even tighter -- asphyxiating her.

The final extreme tightening of the ligature and the bash in the head, IMO, were both part of the staging to go along with the fake ransom note from a bunch of bad asses from a "small foreign faction".

IMO the perpetrators were children experimenting with something they knew little about, although some of my BDI theories include an older accomplice. The parents, of course, helped cover up the crime and continue to coverup to this day.


BlueCrab

BlueCrab
I think you have definitely got the method of death correct as well as its link to sexual abuse.
But I don't agree with you as to the perpetrators. I think it is more likely to have been a group of pedophiles some of whom were friends/neighbours of the family and who might have been abusing Burke as well.
I havent read all the threads on this site yet and you may already have given your reasons for thinking Burke and friends. I will keep reading and maybe I will find them. If you feel like replying I would be very grateful. From reading your posts I would say that you have done a lot of research into the topic especially into primary sources - very valuable. What is there about Burke that makes you suspicious?

[BlueCrab]

What is there about Burke that makes you suspicious?



aussiesheila,

A Ramsey living in the house that night is involved in this crime or the Ramsey "I don't remember" coverup taking place wouldn't be necessary. To be more specific re' which Ramsey, here's a few items to consider:

1. All three Ramseys lied about BR being in bed during the 911 call, obviously trying to distance BR from the crime scene.

2. The DNA evidence, the handwriting evidence, and the polygraph evidence, tends to clear the parents. The DNA evidence is reportedly in BR's favor too, but I am skeptical of it. Colorado authorities are lawfully able to lie and mislead to protect the identity of a juvenile involved in a crime. For instance, if the mitochondrial method of DNA extraction was used then technically BR was "male Paugh", not a male Ramsey, and this could lead to tricky wording making it appear the DNA cleared all male Ramseys, but which, of course, would not technically include BR. The authorities established a history of trickery as evidenced by the fraudulent October 12, 2000 affidavit drafted by Lin Wood but signed by Alex Hunter that falsely makes it appear BR has been cleared. BR has not been cleared.

3. IMO BR penned the naive and childish-sounding ransom note, but with the help of an older accomplice. The CBI's handwriting experts could not eliminate BR as the writer. Darnay Hoffman's handwriting experts concluded that whoever wrote the captions in BR's photo album also wrote the ransom note. It's clear BR likely wrote the captions in his own photo album. When Patsy was asked who wrote the captions, she couldn't remember.

4. BR's fingerprints were on the bowl of pineapple from which JonBenet snacked from about one hour before she died, putting BR secretly downstairs with JonBenet in the middle of the night after the parents had gone to bed.

There are many additional items I could list here, but this is likely enough for you to understand where I'm coming from.

BlueCrab

[Voice of Reason]

Here's a thought I had on the caption of that photo. If you were looking at a family photo album and a particular picture had a caption under it and you were asked if you wrote it, how would you respond? You would look at the handwriting, and say whether you wrote it or not. If it's not your handwriting, you would easily be able to say you didn't write it, whether you remember or not. However, if it sort of looks like your handwriting but maybe someone else's in the family, and you can't say for sure if you wrote it or not, you would answer as Patsy did...I don't know. Therefore, Patsy's answer suggests that either she wrote it or someone in the house has similar handwriting, ie, Burke?

[Rainsong]

Here's a thought I had on the caption of that photo. If you were looking at a family photo album and a particular picture had a caption under it and you were asked if you wrote it, how would you respond? You would look at the handwriting, and say whether you wrote it or not. If it's not your handwriting, you would easily be able to say you didn't write it, whether you remember or not. However, if it sort of looks like your handwriting but maybe someone else's in the family, and you can't say for sure if you wrote it or not, you would answer as Patsy did...I don't know. Therefore, Patsy's answer suggests that either she wrote it or someone in the house has similar handwriting, ie, Burke?

Not necessarily. Try this experiment. Go find something you 'know' you wrote five, seven years ago. Do you actually recognize your handwriting?

I've found items I wrote years ago and the handwriting from then is not the same as today's handwriting.

Rainsong

[Jayelles]

Here's a thought I had on the caption of that photo. If you were looking at a family photo album and a particular picture had a caption under it and you were asked if you wrote it, how would you respond? You would look at the handwriting, and say whether you wrote it or not. If it's not your handwriting, you would easily be able to say you didn't write it, whether you remember or not. However, if it sort of looks like your handwriting but maybe someone else's in the family, and you can't say for sure if you wrote it or not, you would answer as Patsy did...I don't know. Therefore, Patsy's answer suggests that either she wrote it or someone in the house has similar handwriting, ie, Burke?
As a teacher, I see a lot of handwriting and I can identify certain people's handwriting easily - even from old samples. However, I can only do this if the handwriting has some unique feature - something which makes it stand out.

My own handwriting is easily identifiable - it hasn't changed much from school days except to get smaller perhaps. I think if Burke had written the captions, we would have to consider that they had been written by a child who was aged 9 or less in which case, it should be apparent whether they were written by a young child or an adult.

[BlueCrab]

As a teacher, I see a lot of handwriting and I can identify certain people's handwriting easily - even from old samples. However, I can only do this if the handwriting has some unique feature - something which makes it stand out.

My own handwriting is easily identifiable - it hasn't changed much from school days except to get smaller perhaps. I think if Burke had written the captions, we would have to consider that they had been written by a child who was aged 9 or less in which case, it should be apparent whether they were written by a young child or an adult.


Jayelles,

As you know, the samples are on the internet, including ACR's site. These are the captions Darnay Hoffman's handwriting experts used as Patsy's exemplars, but which I believe are really Burke's exemplars:

"This me when I was first born. That's my Mom and the doctor."

"I was 2. I was going bike riding with my Mom and my Dad."

"I was i. I'm having a picture taken."


I don't think Patsy would have left the word "is" out of a sentence; the word spacing was wide apart, similar to the RN; the captions are written in the first person; the words "Mom" and "Dad" are unnecessarily capitalized, just as the words "Police" and "Law enforcement" are unnecessarily capitalized in the RN.

BlueCrab