Did JonBenet Have A Nosebleed The Night She Died?

[DeeDee249]

You know, I've often thought the initial attack took place in or near her bedroom. Maybe I was right.

That's definitely a possibility. Actually, it could have happened anywhere, including the wineceller (though I think she was placed there after the murder). Since the crime scene was basically NEVER really secured and potential evidence lost forever, there was no chance to find out.
This is something I am just thinking about....The R's supposedly never went back into that house. Auntie P did, though, so there was a lot of evidence that she could have taken out. I know there were search warrents issued, and things were taken into evidence, but did anyone ever go into that home with a forensic investigation? Like looking for blood splatters, etc. I have read varying things about urine-stained carpet, bedding, etc. being taken. Unfortunately, things like that, and fingerprints, too, can't be dated. There is no way to prove when they were actually left, is there?
And that house was sold pretty quickly, to a group of R supporters, right? How does a search warrent work- would LE be allowed to search the home after it had changed ownership?
I know one of the subsequent owners walled up the wineceller. Be interesting to go back in with today's DNA advances and see it again. Or am I watching too many CSI shows?

 

[Ames]

You know, I've often thought the initial attack took place in or near her bedroom. Maybe I was right.

I believe it was too...and then she was moved, I believe...to keep Burke from seeing her.

 

[Ames]

That's definitely a possibility. Actually, it could have happened anywhere, including the wineceller (though I think she was placed there after the murder). Since the crime scene was basically NEVER really secured and potential evidence lost forever, there was no chance to find out.
This is something I am just thinking about....The R's supposedly never went back into that house. Auntie P did, though, so there was a lot of evidence that she could have taken out. I know there were search warrents issued, and things were taken into evidence, but did anyone ever go into that home with a forensic investigation? Like looking for blood splatters, etc. I have read varying things about urine-stained carpet, bedding, etc. being taken. Unfortunately, things like that, and fingerprints, too, can't be dated. There is no way to prove when they were actually left, is there?
And that house was sold pretty quickly, to a group of R supporters, right? How does a search warrent work- would LE be allowed to search the home after it had changed ownership?
I know one of the subsequent owners walled up the wineceller. Be interesting to go back in with today's DNA advances and see it again. Or am I watching too many CSI shows?

Sort of off subject....but, I read somewhere....and I do not know how true this is....that there had been a vomit stain on the carpet...possibly caused by JB the night of the murder, and that Patsy pretended to throw up in that exact spot, when all of her friends were over the next morning....to hide the fact that the vomit was already there.

 

[DeeDee249]

Now I can't stop thinking...where is the garotte today? Still in evidence? Isn't there a way today to take prints from small things, like the cord? Or the size-12 panties? I know there are more advanced methods today, but if that really WAS a thumbprint on the body and a print could have been lifted....
The parents' fingerprints on anything other than that mark on her neck, the garrotte, the panties could be explained away as well, they LIVE there, they touch things, including their daughter. But on THOSE items, which are specific to the murder, we'd have the crime solved. I can't believe they haven't been tested. PR's prints on the paintbrush, even the part used to make the garrotte, would be expected, but if there were NO prints-like the flashlight- I don't recall ever reading anything about prints on the paintbrush handle.
OK, I'll give the CSI shows a rest for a while.

 

[Ames]

Now I can't stop thinking...where is the garotte today? Still in evidence? Isn't there a way today to take prints from small things, like the cord? Or the size-12 panties? I know there are more advanced methods today, but if that really WAS a thumbprint on the body and a print could have been lifted....
The parents' fingerprints on anything other than that mark on her neck, the garrotte, the panties could be explained away as well, they LIVE there, they touch things, including their daughter. But on THOSE items, which are specific to the murder, we'd have the crime solved. I can't believe they haven't been tested. PR's prints on the paintbrush, even the part used to make the garrotte, would be expected, but if there were NO prints-like the flashlight- I don't recall ever reading anything about prints on the paintbrush handle.
OK, I'll give the CSI shows a rest for a while.

On the most recent "48 Hours" special on the 10th anniversary, of the case....it was stated on there, that there was a WAREHOUSE FULL of evidence, that STILL hasn't been gone through. Can you believe it???

 

[DeeDee249]

On the most recent "48 Hours" special on the 10th anniversary, of the case....it was stated on there, that there was a WAREHOUSE FULL of evidence, that STILL hasn't been gone through. Can you believe it???

Sadly, yes I can.

 

[Ames]

Sadly, yes I can.

I would LOVE to know that is inside of that warehouse. And what the h*ll is taking them so long to go through it.

 

[icedtea4me]

Is it known that the blood on the pillowcase is actually JonBenet's? Is it possible that someone else could have injured their finger and transferred their blood when they moved the pillow to the foot of the bed?


-Tea

 

[Solace]

I cant remember if someone posted a photo of this thumb print or not, but solace is there one i can look at?

Hi Charlie. Do a search for JonBenet autopsy photos and you will get it right away and they are grim. I fyou can't find it, I will post it.

 

[Solace]

no doubt,that's prob. why it was said there was a surprising lack of blood.But I think she was out immediately after the head injury and her BP dropped,so any blood was wiped away easily.[/quote]

I totally agree with you!!

And also she is being strangled as she is dragged and that slows the blood, does it not? So when she is hit, there is less blood in her head. That is a very very deep impression of her thumb. My son who is 26 had a thumb impression on his neck from a sparring partner who was ten years older and it only left an outline. He said his Gi was twisted and a thumb print left. My point is that this is a man doing this to my son's neck and as hard as he can and he leaves only an outline. The thumb print is of the WHOLE THUMB on JB's neck. So someone is very very enraged and of course JB is a only 40 pounds - So someone is very angry and could easily kill her by throwing her and there would be less blood because of the prior strangling.

 

[Ames]

Is it known that the blood on the pillowcase is actually JonBenet's? Is it possible that someone else could have injured their finger and transferred their blood when they moved the pillow to the foot of the bed?


-Tea

Good question. And it would also depend on how old the blood stain was.

 

[Veronica10]

Hi Veronica,

This is what I think. She was angry at her for some reason - she was so angry that she twisted her shirt with her hand and left her thumbprint on the front of JonBenet's neck. That means she grabbed her by the collar and twisted and dragged her. I think she dragged her and threw her into the bathroom (NOW IF THIS IS TRUE AND SHE IS DRAGGING HER - WHEN SHE THROWS HER, she will land on the back of her head, which is exactly where the blow originated) because she is grabbing her from the front proven by the print, so her arm is basically over JB's face as she is basically strangling her with rage) and JonBenet fell back against the bathtub and she sustained the lethal blow there. She had to use considerable force to do this, but she is already using considerable force, because she has left her thumb print clearly defined on JB's neck) - So Patsy tries to wake her and becomes terrified and starts to shake her (Cyrill Wecht says someone shook JonBenet and left bruising on the sides of her brain). So she is shaking her very hard, hard enough to leave bruising and nothing - she has to feel her head to see if she is bleeding. She does not feel blood but she HAS TO FEEL THE SPLIT - HAS TO. She also has to HEAR IT AS IT HAPPENED. Cyrill Wecht says this was a very loud crack and when it happened, it was heard. Maybe JonBenet starts to convulse, but I would bet money that Patsy herself is convulsing with fear at this moment, because she knows she split JB's head in half - she can feel it. And she is not calling anyone.


And that is what I think happened.

HAVE A NICE WEEKEND VERONICA. NICE TO SEE YOU AGAIN.

Thanks Solace....you have given me much to think about. By the way, I am always here, just not always posting. I am a professional lurker.

 

[Solace]

Hi Veronica,

This is what I think. She was angry at her for some reason - she was so angry that she twisted her shirt with her hand and left her thumbprint on the front of JonBenet's neck. That means she grabbed her by the collar and twisted and dragged her. I think she dragged her and threw her into the bathroom (NOW IF THIS IS TRUE AND SHE IS DRAGGING HER - WHEN SHE THROWS HER, she will land on the back of her head, which is exactly where the blow originated) because she is grabbing her from the front proven by the print, so her arm is basically over JB's face as she is basically strangling her with rage) and JonBenet fell back against the bathtub and she sustained the lethal blow there. She had to use considerable force to do this, but she is already using considerable force, because she has left her thumb print clearly defined on JB's neck) - So Patsy tries to wake her and becomes terrified and starts to shake her (Cyrill Wecht says someone shook JonBenet and left bruising on the sides of her brain). So she is shaking her very hard, hard enough to leave bruising and nothing - she has to feel her head to see if she is bleeding. She does not feel blood but she HAS TO FEEL THE SPLIT - HAS TO. She also has to HEAR IT AS IT HAPPENED. Cyrill Wecht says this was a very loud crack and when it happened, it was heard. Maybe JonBenet starts to convulse, but I would bet money that Patsy herself is convulsing with fear at this moment, because she knows she split JB's head in half - she can feel it. And she is not calling anyone.


And that is what I think happened.

HAVE A NICE WEEKEND VERONICA. NICE TO SEE YOU AGAIN.

Thanks Solace....you have given me much to think about. By the way, I am always here, just not always posting. I am a professional lurker.

Nice to see you again.

 

[tml]

Very interesting observations. I never thought about it in that way...

"Burke and prior sexual abuse need to be put in a box and put away in storage, they only clutter up what may have happened that night. If the decision makers there that night were involved in prior sexual abuse to JonBenet, why on earth would they do anything to cause greater scrutiny in that area.
It seems to me, if the head wound hadn't happened, JonBenet would still be alive today, prior sexual abuse or not." 4

You are correct, IF the R's were involved in sexually abusing JBR (either both or just one), WHY would they point that out even further with the elaborate and brutal staged assault? If they were NOT involved in abusing her, and the head injury was an accident that led to her death, why and HOW (mentally) could you do that to your dead six-year old? If the abuse just started - which there are a few indicators of, including JBR's bedwetting, reports of depression symptoms in JBR around that time, an interesting section I just read in Cyril Wecht's book stating that the typical age of first incident of incest is SIX YEARS OLD - it should NOT have caused the erosion of the hymen and enlargement of the vaginal opening as evidenced in the autopsy report. If the abuse was chronic, which is supported by said autopsy findings, then there is no way the R's would shine a flashlight on that by so viciously "sexually manipulating" their daughter. So what the hell are we left with? All final conclusions seem to contradict each other.

 

[DeeDee249]

Very interesting observations. I never thought about it in that way...

"Burke and prior sexual abuse need to be put in a box and put away in storage, they only clutter up what may have happened that night. If the decision makers there that night were involved in prior sexual abuse to JonBenet, why on earth would they do anything to cause greater scrutiny in that area.
It seems to me, if the head wound hadn't happened, JonBenet would still be alive today, prior sexual abuse or not." 4

You are correct, IF the R's were involved in sexually abusing JBR (either both or just one), WHY would they point that out even further with the elaborate and brutal staged assault? If they were NOT involved in abusing her, and the head injury was an accident that led to her death, why and HOW (mentally) could you do that to your dead six-year old? If the abuse just started - which there are a few indicators of, including JBR's bedwetting, reports of depression symptoms in JBR around that time, an interesting section I just read in Cyril Wecht's book stating that the typical age of first incident of incest is SIX YEARS OLD - it should NOT have caused the erosion of the hymen and enlargement of the vaginal opening as evidenced in the autopsy report. If the abuse was chronic, which is supported by said autopsy findings, then there is no way the R's would shine a flashlight on that by so viciously "sexually manipulating" their daughter. So what the hell are we left with? All final conclusions seem to contradict each other.

I disagree that the erosion would not have happened with repeated sexual abuse consisting of digital penetration. It would. Most of the experts who studied the autopsy (including the one who performed it) agree that the hymenal erosion was caused by digital penetration. Coroner Mayer told those police preset at the autopsy (Detectives Linda Arndt and Trujillo) that his findings were consistent with digital penetration. He was referring to the erosion, more than the small amount of blood and bruising.

 

[KoldKase]

The insertion of the paintbrush into the vagina was to cover up previous molestation which would surely be found at autopsy.

IMO, that's the only reason the paintbrush was used. If the child was unconscious from the head blow, which I think happened somewhere other than in the basement (the blood on the pillowcase may indicate that it was near or on her bed), the only reason to take her to the basement cellar room, laying her first beside the paint tray, was to finish with the strangulation and staging.

I believe the strangulation may have been part of the staging, but with the intention of also finishing her life, if the killer knew she wasn't yet dead. Perhaps she wasn't dying fast enough: the clock was ticking, after all, and phone calls we'll never know about could have been made for guidance in medical and/or legal matters.

The paintbrush was inserted before she was strangled, before it was broken and tied onto the ligature, it seems logical to me; but she never fought--no defensive wounds on her body. That indicates the head blow had already rendered her unconscious.

So inserting the paintbrush would not have served any sexual purpose to a child molester, other than torture, because it would have been very painful. But she was already unconscious, so it would not fulfill any sadistic agenda, either.

Which brings me to these conclusions: Either the person who was already molesting the victim before that night inserted it around the time of death to confuse the medical examiner and hide the chronic, prior abuse, which to me would indicate an adult, as a child wouldn't really know about autopsies or female vaginal exams which would uncover that and lead to someone close to the child; or the adult already knew about the chronic sexual assaults and wanted to cover up for whomever was the abuser.

While I understand that Burke may have played a part in some of the abuse acted upon JonBenet, I am not convinced he had the sophistication to carry out all of it alone.

JMO, but once the head blow was struck, nobody was going to take the child to the ER because they knew what would be found beyond the "accident." That would have resulted in LE all up in the Ramsey's personal business, including deep investigation into who was molesting the child. Burke could have been taken out of his parents' custody, possibly. That is why they submitted to having him questioned by a child psychologist, I believe: it was going to happen one way or another.

As for the bruise on the child's neck, the large one on her left, it was caused by cord compression over the skin and muscle as it rolled and dragged up her neck, ever tightening. At FFJ there are photos from other strangulation victims who have similar bruising in that location.

The blood on JB's pillowcase was implied by Det. Haney to have come from JB, when he questioned Patsy about it in 1998. He asked Patsy if JB had nose bleeds and they went into great detail to pin down when her bedsheets had last been changed. You can find this in the transcript of that interview, at FFJ or other online sites.

Well, that's what I think I know about this murder, at any rate. I may be wrong, of course.

 

[andreww]

KK, very sound and logical thinking. It would be interesting to know exactly how much blood was on that pillowcase? I have the feeling it was a very small amount. I'm not 100% convinced where the head wound occurred as I don't really believe the Rs story of the previous night and believe that JBR was awake when they returned home. That head wound could have happened anywhere in that house. And has there been any conclusive evidence of prior sexual abuse?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[KoldKase]

Of course we don't know where the head blow occurred and probably never will, but if the blood on the pillowcase was from that blow, it would be reasonable to theorize it happened somewhere near that room. Otherwise, why not lay her on a couch, or another nearby bed, of that's what was done once she collapsed?

On the other hand, it could have occurred on the bed, if there was a fight there or something like that. Remember the curtain sash was out of place on the headboard.

I would imagine the blood was only drops, as well, probably unnoticed by the stager(s). Haney asked about a nosebleed, however, so we may infer the blood was thought to be from her nose, logically.

The conclusive (to me and all the experts who are on the record or whose determination has been documented by reliable sources) evidence of prior molestation is in the autopsy. The medical examiner uses medical and forensic language, but through the years we've had many forensic medical experts interpret the autopsy for us. You can find detailed, phrase by phrase breakdowns here on this forum and at FFJ. DeeDee is an excellent source on this topic, as well as many others who have those descriptions and links at the ready. I have to make an appt. so don't have time right now to look it up.

[Oops, sorry, hit wrong reply button. Here's the quote:]

andreww andreww is offline
Registered User
Join Date
May 2013
Posts
766
KK, very sound and logical thinking. It would be interesting to know exactly how much blood was on that pillowcase? I have the feeling it was a very small amount. I'm not 100% convinced where the head wound occurred as I don't really believe the Rs story of the previous night and believe that JBR was awake when they returned home. That head wound could have happened anywhere in that house. And has there been any conclusive evidence of prior sexual abuse?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[KoldKase]

Okay, back from getting my flu shot, so let me say...CYNIC is also someone who can direct you to the information about the chronic injuries found at autopsy.

Hello, cynic!:blowkiss:

 

[cynic]

Okay, back from getting my flu shot, so let me say...CYNIC is also someone who can direct you to the information about the chronic injuries found at autopsy.

Hey KK,

A few threads in general, and some posts specifically come to mind - including one of yours.

http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/showthread.php?10255-Autopsy-evidence-of-ONGOING-SEXUAL-ABUSE

http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/showthread.php?9030-Autopsy-questions&p=169548#post169548

Posts 2 – 5 @
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...y-Project-Rebuttal-(Non-Intruder-Posters-Only)

Hello, cynic!:blowkiss:

:blushing: :seeya: Good to see you around the forum again! :stay: