madeleine
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2008
- Messages
- 4,972
- Reaction score
- 90
A bowl she didn't recognize.
IMO it's the same like with the 911 call&"Burke was asleep".It kinda ruined their timeline.
Are the Ramseys involved or not?
- Thread starter Britt
- Start date
- Status
A bowl she didn't recognize.
IMO it's the same like with the 911 call&"Burke was asleep".It kinda ruined their timeline.
Right here, in the autopsy report:
"A 1 cm red-purple area of abrasion is located on the right posterolateral area of the 1x1 cm hymeneal orifice. The hymen itself is represented by a rim of tissue extending clockwise from between the 2:00 and 10:00 positions.
"Vaginal Mucosa: All of the sections contain vascular congestion and focal interstitial chronic inflammation. The smallest piece of tissue, from the 7:00 position of the wall/hymen, contains epithelial erosion with underlying capillary congestion.
And here:
"According to McCann, examination findings that indicate chronic sexual abuse include the thickness of the rim of the hymen, irregularity of the edge of the hymen, the width or narrowness of the wall of the hymen, and exposure of structures of the vagina normally covered by the hymen. His report stated that there was evidence of prior hymeneal trauma as all of these criteria were seen in the post mortem examination of JonBenet.
"There was a three dimensional thickening from inside to outside on the inferior hymeneal rim with a bruise apparent on the external surface of the hymen and a narrowing of the hymeneal rim from the edge of the hymen to where it attaches to the muscular portion of the vaginal openings. At the narrowing area, there appeared to be very little if any hymen present. There was also exposure of the vaginal rugae, a structure of the vagina which is normally covered by an intact hymen. The hymeneal orifice measured one centimeter which is abnormal or unusual for this particular age group and is further evidence of prior sexual abuse with a more recent injury as shown by the bruised area on the inferior hymeneal rim.
"The examination results were evidence that there was at least one prior penetration of the vagina through the hymeneal membrane. The change in the hymeneal structure is due to healing from a prior penetration. However, it was not possible to determine the number of incidents nor over what period of time. Because the prior injury had healed, any other incidents of abuse probably were more than 10 days prior."
And here:
"The vagina l opening, according to Dr. Robert Kirschner of the University of Chicago's pathology department, was twice the normal size for six-year-olds. "There were new vaginal injuries over old ones. The tissue was stretched and eroded, not just torn. This happens over time. JonBenet's hymenal opening was roughly twice that of an unmolested child."
And here:
in June 1998, Det. Jane Harmer gave the gathered group an anatomy lesson. She showed side-by-side photographs of JonBenet's vagina and that of a normal six-year-old girl. "Even to the uninitiated, the visual difference was apparent."
And here:
In 2006, FOX News did an interview with Holly Smith. At the time of JonBenet's murder, she was the head of the Boulder County Sex Abuse team. In the interview, she talked about what she found. "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. Hoping to zero in on a possibility, Smith said that by the third day of the investigation, she'd found fecal staining on every pair of JonBenet's panties. I'm not talking simple "skid marks." These clothing items had been laundered beforehand.
Any questions?
Oh, yeah? Then why did Lin Wood go out of his way to threaten her over the phone? He was quite brusquely rebuffed for his trouble!
Because that's what people usually do with nuisance lawsuits.
Yeah, and if an article I recently came across has any truth to it, I may know why. According to the article, Wood was going to call the grand jurors as witnesses. You can imagine where that would lead. Heck, I'd take one for the team to make sure they didn't get their little paws on that information.
Well, I wouldn't assume that. RiverRat is quite correct, I'll have you know. You asked:
It might interest you to know that I did a little checking on Mr Wood's record, and apparently, his M.O. is to find out how much a company's insurance guards against lawsuits and files for just that amount, so they pay and he goes away. Maybe that's not conclusive proof, but it's a good place to start.
Did anything ever become of the Ramsey's phone records the night/morning after the murder? I seem to remember reading that there was a reason they weren't looked at??? Were they ever? It should show the calls to the pastor, the White's, and 911. Anyone else?
DA Hunter refused to issue a warrant for the phone records, telling police he felt they should just ASK the Rs for them. It was about a year later when they finally did get them, but by that time they probably had been "altered". For example, cell phone records show NO calls made for the month of December. And even when police did get them, they were only allowed to get the December records, and as I said, the cellphone records were blank for that month.
As for the landline house phone, I have not seen the results of that search, but if there were NO calls to the "breakfast club" that showed up that morning, that would be really suspicious. Like, I'd be thinking either they were already there, or they had been called much earlier- before the note was "found"- possibly right after her death. Then told to leave and come back later. Calls to them that morning would be expected- but maybe the records would have shown another set of calls placed between midnight and 5am. I'd bet anything the cellphone records would show calls placed at that very ominous and suspicious time of night.
well, the descriptions within the autopsy are identical to the medical standard for evidence of sexual assault and chronic inflamation does suggest a history of sexual abuse.
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1479790
Childhood sexual abuse and family physicians
re hymenal injuries, accidental injuries to the hymen do occur:
EXPERIENCE AND REASON:
Accidental Hymenal Injury Mimicking Sexual Trauma
http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/cgi/content/extract/103/6/1287
One of the noteworthy findings was a “fragmented hymenal rim.” This terminology illustrates a recurring problem in past literature relating to medical evaluation of childhood sexual abuse. Until recently, terminology was not standardized, and the importance of certain findings was difficult to determine.
I'm limited to what I can read, by lack of subscription, little blips of medical terminologies .....
http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/criminal_mind/forensics/cyril_wecht/6.html
"But it's the most ridiculous thing in the world, a little girl with half of the hymen gone and she's dead, and you've got a tiny abrasion, a tiny contusion and a chronic inflammation of vaginal mucosa. That means it happened more than 72 hours earlier; we don't know how long, or how often it was repeated, but chronic means it wasn't from that night. This was a tragic, tragic accident. This was a game that had been played before." -CW
http://www.wpxi.com/news/16838417/detail.html
July 9, 2008, Dr. Cyril Wecht Responds To New Evidence in JonBenet Ramsey Murder
Dr. Wecht said it's difficult for him to believe an outsider would have known about the hidden room in the basement, would have left no other evidence, that he would write a ransom note then leave the body behind. Wecht says none of this explains evidence of previous sexual abuse on JonBenet's body.
JonBenets father, Jon Ramsey, told police he carried her body upstairs after finding her so Wecht wondered where is his DNA? "How is it possible that some DNA of his did not get on her body and her clothing in that kind of transfer. Think about that," said Wecht
July 9, 2008, Dr. Cyril Wecht Responds To New Evidence in JonBenet Ramsey Murder
Dr. Wecht said it's difficult for him to believe an outsider would have known about the hidden room in the basement, would have left no other evidence, that he would write a ransom note then leave the body behind. Wecht says none of this explains evidence of previous sexual abuse on JonBenet's body.
JonBenets father, Jon Ramsey, told police he carried her body upstairs after finding her so Wecht wondered where is his DNA? "How is it possible that some DNA of his did not get on her body and her clothing in that kind of transfer. Think about that," said Wecht
I think I was more so..... kinda asking .... why does the sexual abuse evidence have to be related to the Ramsey's, with the touch dna evidence 'confirming' a person other than the Ramseys, why can't the sexual abuse exist independent of the Ramseys.
For sure, that the forensic medical evidence mimics sexual abuse could be a consideration, but how can the present investigation dismiss what it previously recognized as sexual abuse.
You're GOOD, Tadpole! Very good. (Incidentally, did you catch the name "J. McCann" in that second one near the bottom? I'm not a betting man either, but if I were, I'd say it's the very same John McCann.)
But a few things to keep in mind:
1) Yes, it is possible for accidental hymenal injuries to occur. But how many of those have spots where the vaginal walls were worn down to go with them? (That's the layman's version of "focal interstitial inflammation and epithelial erosion, BTW!)
2) Much more importantly, some estimates I've read say that 90% of all child abuse goes undetected. That is staggering.
Think about it this way: do you know how many rape victims don't report it? Some estimates say as many as 60%. So if it's that difficult for ADULT women to report it, think how hard it must be for a little child.)
DA Hunter refused to issue a warrant for the phone records, telling police he felt they should just ASK the Rs for them.
Why?
Because he didn't want to upset them!
Think about it this way: do you know how many rape victims don't report it? Some estimates say as many as 60%. So if it's that difficult for ADULT women to report it, think how hard it must be for a little child.)
Hi SD. Of course I know ... I am woman of 'substantial'? age, so you don't have to tell me, that children never tell ..... and that most women never report.
Those same abused children as adults, often do tell/share their 'secrets' of childhood sexual abuse,
so in my experience ... not reporting sexual abuse is the norm.
Hi SD. Of course I know ... I am woman of 'substantial'? age, so you don't have to tell me, that children never tell ..... and that most women never report.
Those same abused children as adults, often do tell/share their 'secrets' of childhood sexual abuse,
so in my experience ... not reporting sexual abuse is the norm.
Tadpole, it's not ME you have to tell that to!
If Linda Hoffman-Pugh is a credible witness, then I believe the Ramsey's are involved. Here is what she had to say about the white blanket that JonBenet was wrapped in when she was found:
http://www.rense.com/general11/benet.htm
"The blanket wrapped around JonBenet's body had been left in the dryer. There was still a Barbie Doll nightgown clinging to the blanket, so it had to have come out of the dryer recently, she said. Only Patsy would have known it was in the dryer," she said.
http://www.rense.com/general11/benet.htm
"The blanket wrapped around JonBenet's body had been left in the dryer. There was still a Barbie Doll nightgown clinging to the blanket, so it had to have come out of the dryer recently, she said. Only Patsy would have known it was in the dryer," she said.
There's more. LHP said that JBR had been wetting/soiling the bed EVERY night at that point, and her bedding was washed every day. LHP also said that the white blanket was always washed in the basement washer/dryer because it was a full-size washer dryer. The smaller washer/dryer right outside JBR's bedroom was an apartment-sized set and the blanket didn't fit well. No intruder, even one who may have known the family, would know that.
LHP also said that she last changed JBR's bedding on Dec. 23rd, the day of the Ramsey Christmas party, which she attended with her daughter. When she was shown the crime scene photos of JBR's bed, she stated that the sheets on the bed were not the ones she remembered putting on the bed when she was last there. She was not scheduled to come till Dec. 26th (after the Rs had left for their trip) and so it was apparent that PR must have changed the sheets herself, as JBR must have wet/soiled the sheets again Dec. 24th (and Dec. 25th IF she went to bed that night after the White's). Usually when a child wets the bed, their nightclothes get wet also, so that explains why the pink nightie was in the dryer with the blanket.
I believe JBR wet the bed again on Dec. 24th, and when PR changed the sheets, she put the blanket in the basement washer/dryer, as usual, put clean sheets on the bed. JBR had more than one set of sheets for her bed, but only ONE "special blanket". So PR had extra sheets for the bed, but had to wait for the blanket to be dry, which takes longer. And with all there was to do to get ready for Christmas, and the trip, PR simply did not have a chance to get the blanket back on the bed so she made the bed up with just the sheets and bedspread. This is clearly seen in the photo- there is NO blanket on the bed. When questioned about this by LE, PR does admit that the bed does look undisturbed at the bottom, so it was not possible anyone pulled off the blanket from the bed.
As far as the pink nightie, I have never thought it was placed there deliberately to "send her off" with her favorite nightie. I think it was either pulled out of the dryer with the blanket and not noticed, or the plan was to redress her in the nightie, and rigor mortis made that impossible. Livor mortis proves that the body was not moved after death (at least not after 15-20 minutes had passed). So if they decided to redress her after that- her arms were fixed up in that "boxer's stance", bent at the elbow up in front of her face. Her legs, though in rigor, were out straight- making it easy to pull off the long johns and change the panties. But the shirt would have been very difficult to remove at that point, and manipulating the body that much would have been pretty gruesome.
Annie Maude
New Member
- Joined
- Jan 28, 2009
- Messages
- 81
- Reaction score
- 1
I can't believe I never heard about that autopsy report.
Don't beat yourself up. A lot of people haven't heard of it.
Holdontoyourhat
Former Member
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2005
- Messages
- 5,299
- Reaction score
- 12
The current media reports suggests an intruder killed JBR.
The idea that JBR was abused prior to the night she was murdered is just that, an idea. Not really considered a case fact, but treated here as if it were. For the sake of conversation, I suppose.
Familial sexual abuse isn't really relevant to JBR. Don't take my word for it, LE is persuing DNA leads, not familial abuse testimonies.
There has never been any action/charge against any R for anything, while LE searches for a DNA match. See what I mean?
Well, since you're so big on media reports, here's to you:
http://www.independent.ie/world-news/americas/jonbenet-in-search-of-a-killer-1640647.html?r=RSS
This piece comes to us from Ireland's Kildare Nationalist, and includes such gems as:
"there were signs that she had been sexually abused over a period."
That's just one of several things I'm sure will cause you to rethink your "media reports" stance. Leave it to the Irish to get to the heart of it. ERIN GO BRAGH!
I take exception to that characterization. To me, it's not a question of it being an established fact, it's more an instance of something that has more than a fair amount of support, yet many people, for whatever reasons (not casting any aspersions), refuse to even consider. You, Holdon, for example, have asked several times in the past "wouldn't someone have noticed if she was being abused?" That was the point I was trying to convey to Tadpole: that 9 times out of 10, it goes completely undetected. And I was attempting to explain why that might be. Just an idea.
IOWs, if someone has a principled reason to believe or not believe something, I say let it be known. To me, there's too much "there" to just dismiss it out of hand. If you have any actual reasons for not believing it, go ahead and tell us. Heck, I even took time to find someone on this forum who knows about the subject first-hand, specifically because you asked. All for nothing, and that makes me very upset.
That's exactly what it is. We're all just talking here, right?
In your opinion. I happen to think it's the key to the whole thing.
I think you had better change that to "Was." (And I've got plenty of material on THAT, as well.)
For the record, the police, "Dream Team," and FBI TOLD the DA to arrest and charge them, but the DA wouldn't go for it. You talk about the DA's office as if it were the end-all, be-all, but there's PLENTY of evidence out there that they have consistently acted inappropriately in this case. Don't take MY word for it, either. Ask Tricia. She knows more about it than me.
How can you say familial sexual abuse doesn't enter into the case? ANY sexual abuse of a child is a crime, in and of itself, of course. But in this case it may have a direct bearing of why she was killed and/or why the crime was covered up.
Holdontoyourhat
Former Member
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2005
- Messages
- 5,299
- Reaction score
- 12
Familial abuse never has entered into the case.
Don't take my word for it. There was NEVER any progress in the official investigation as far as familial abuse is concerned. It was an investigative dead end. Nothing ever happened or was uncovered that would corroborate the third party armchair expert testimony.
Now, because of the DNA, the impetus has moved away from the family. While there hasn't been any progress on the familial abuse, there has been progress on the unknown DNA.
JBR's murder is a crime looking for a motive, thats for sure. It is now less likely that the motive is coverup of familial abuse.
BTW, what do you believe was 'covered up' anyway?
- Status