Question: If JonBenet went to her regular doctor, WHY would he be examining a 6 year old's vaginal area?? That in and of itself is very strange indeed. The only reason I can think of is Was there a concern from someone that JB had possibly been molested? Did JB herself say something to that effect? It doesn't seem likely that either of these scenarios took place. So why was the GP looking down there?
Hmmm...could any vaginal examinations that Dr. might have been doing been in any way a result of the incontinence JonBenet had to contend with, or the results of that incontinence?
Just how in-depth were these vaginal exams? A quick visual peek of the outside area, enough to see the next infection on JB's skin in what Patsy said was a frequent occurrence? Probably. I seriously doubt it went so far as involve implements used on adult women.
This is what infuriates me the most about the Ramsey case - the
needless suffering JonBenet had to endure.
If JonBenet had so many infections and Patsy knew it, even said they were hard to clear up because she always wet, WHY didn't Patsy take her to a specialist? Patsy brags about how incredible the health insurance the Rs have is in DOI - why wasn't that totally awesome amount of insurance going towards helping JonBenet stay infection-free?
Why haven't Dr. Beuf's notes ever been released?
Why did Patsy call Beuf's office three times in one hour, only to later conveniently forget why?
Why did JonBenet visit the school nurse on three consecutive Mondays in December, in the weeks just before she was murdered?
What are they HIDING? WHY???
I have to agree that either Burke or Patsy would have been the most likely culprits, but it just makes me nauseous. Did Burke have some sort of explosive disorder? And is the bedwetting that big of a deal? My daughter had some bedwetting problems even into her teens and I can tell you she was never molested. She just slept really hard. Sorry for all the amateur questions, I just want to understand.
Patsy often downplayed JB's incontinence as bed-wetting, but in JB's situation, it had gone far beyond mere bed-wetting.
While Patsy did say that if she didn't wake JonBenet up around midnight to use the bathroom, she may end up wet by morning, but she also told a friend of hers named Pam Griffin that (from PMPT, hb, page 94) "JonBenet often waited until an emergency was imminent and as a result, was still having accidents."
Bed-wetting is one thing; wetting one's self at age 6 while wide awake was another. Accident? Every now and then, sure. But...later on that same page we learn:
"Patsy complained that JonBenet had frequent infections that were hard to clear up because her underpants were always wet."
Accidents are one thing, but how many accidents does one little girl have to have before it turns not only into an infection, but an infection that is hard to clear up - because the child being treated is still sitting in wet underwear...? What mother just ignores her 6 yr old daughter having to endure that as normal, everyday, average, nothing to really be concerned about (which is how Patsy downplays it post-murder)?
The skin on that area of the body is so sensitive, especially on a child. It must have been so uncomfortable for JonBenet, and then remember she's only 6. She needed an adult to help her with it, because that is just beyond the scope of what a 6 yr old can do for herself. Having to drop her clothes and sit exposed just to let anyone look at it to help her with it, much less have to treat it, must have been at the very least uncomfortable in embarrassment alone for JB...not to mention how sore it would have been.
And then figure in how BPD said the underwear they found searching JonBenet's drawers showed that almost every pair had stains of soiling. If I may quote and link:
Holly Smith, head of Boulder County Sexual Abuse team,
stated had found fecal staining in all of JBR's panties on the 3rd day of the investigation; in 2006 she stated: "There is this dynamic of children that have been sexually abused sometimes soiling themselves or urinating in their beds to keep someone who is hurting them at bay," explains Smith....While Smith points out there could be innocent explanations, this was the kind of information that raised questions."
http://jonbenetramsey.pbworks.com/w/page/11682469/Evidence%20of%20Prior%20Sexual%20Abuse
So Jonbenet wasn't just wetting the bed every now and then at night...she was wetting herself during the day as well, and sat around in soaking wet underwear so often that it created what her mother referred to as "frequent infections that were hard to clear up from always being in wet underpants".
And then we also know that the sex abuse expert from BPD discovered Jonbenet's underwear were stained with fecal soiling.
So she's got frequent infections from being wet and/or soiled either during the day or night or both, and it's just some bed-wetting?
No. IMO, something in JonBenet's life was extremely wrong, and the toileting issues were her best way to try to communicate how badly she was being abused. Nothing about the entire situation with the soiling or toileting issues is any way normal or average, when you compare the life JonBenet lived to the lives other children live. In any other child, no one would argue such issues denote abuse - but for some reason, the Rs are exempt, no matter how obvious it is to everyone, including the Rs.
IMO, Patsy knew JonBenet's toileting issues were the manifestation of the abuse JonBenet went through on a regular basis, and that's why she ignored them and tried to deny any of it ever existed to the full scope that it did. Sexual and physical abuse. And both JR and PR knew, cause they were each part of it. They covered up for each other, because both were equally as guilty in one way or another. IMO.