Head blow vs strangulation

[rashomon]

rashomon,

Why not assume she had been sexually assaulted prior to death, which caused the bleeding, which caused the wipe down, which caused her to be redressed?

Is this not simpler than inventing other reasons as to why it occurred such as zombie or accident?

UkGuy,

if it was a real sexual assault (and not a staged one on an unconscious child): who do you think inflicted the acute injury? John Ramsey?
Who 'manually strangled' JB?
Who whacked JB on the head?
What is your time line of events re these injuries?

If the former assumption becomes inconsistent with the forensic evidence it can easily be dropped as was Lou Smit's Intruder Theory.

D. England pointed out that we may be attributing far too much 'logic' into the staging of the scene than there actually was.
He wrote he has no doubt that the Ramseys were in something like a zombie mental state when staging the scene, which is why the staging was chaos from start to finish.
I think this is a valid point. Who wouldn't be in a zombie mental state after realizing what they had done to their child?

 

[Solace]

SOURCES???

I think most children if not helped would have soiled underwear. We are talking about five and six year olds. Yes I believe they would. They are too inept at that age. So really the soiled underwear is a sign of nothing but "age" as far as that goes. Now, infections, that is another story.

 

[rashomon]

SOURCES???

Toltec, I'm not sure if I understand what you mean here (English is not my native language). I had asked you for a link to the source of your statement that no underwear was found in JB's turned inside-out pants which had been found on the floor.

But in case you were referring to be told the source for this:
(From my prior post)

And virtually every pair of (laundered) underwear which was found in JB's drawer showed signs of prior soiling.

Like I said before, I can't remember the name of the sexual abuse expert who was hired as a consultant on the case, but I'm sure others here will be able to dig up the source.
This expert stated she always starts with a visit to the child's bedroom. What struck her as odd in JB's room was that it did not look like a child's room at all. She also noted that virtually every pair of laundered underwear in JB's drawers showed signs of prior soiling.

 

[rashomon]

The reason I disagree with this is because I saw a video of John and Patsy after Jon Benet had died, several years later, and she was squirting him with one of those huge waterguns. They were truly having a great time. This would not be happening if she had caught him in the throes of fornication with her six year old daughter. Just would not be happening.

Thanks for the info, Solace. I have to agree with your opinion.
If it weren't for the evidence of prior sexual abuse on JB, this would be a fairly simple case: a parent snapped and lost it, killed the child in a rage, then tried to cover it up with the help of their spouse to avoid public exposure and prosecution.

But in case JB had been the victim of prior sexual abuse, this case becomes very complicated and intricate, for there are so many variables and unanswered questions that it can make one's head spin, for example:

- Who was JB's abuser?
- Was her abuser also her killer? (not necessarily!)
- if yes: was the killing of JB a rage attack or a planned murder?

- if JB's killer was not the person who had ben abusing her:
- did the killer know about the abuse or not?
- was the sexual abuse the reason for the attack or not?

Solace, what do you think happened and why?

 

[Tober]

Like I said before, I can't remember the name of the sexual abuse expert who was hired as a consultant on the case, but I'm sure others here will be able to dig up the source.
This expert stated she always starts with a visit to the child's bedroom. What struck her as odd in JB's room was that it did not look like a child's room at all. She also noted that virtually every pair of laundered underwear in JB's drawers showed signs of prior soiling.

That expert was Holly Smith of the Boulder County Sexual Abuse Team.

 

[rashomon]

Thanks Tober for providing the source. Nice to see you here on WS!

 

[UKGuy]

UkGuy,

if it was a real sexual assault (and not a staged one on an unconscious child): who do you think inflicted the acute injury? John Ramsey?
Who 'manually strangled' JB?
Who whacked JB on the head?
What is your time line of events re these injuries?
D. England pointed out that we may be attributing far too much 'logic' into the staging of the scene than there actually was.
He wrote he has no doubt that the Ramseys were in something like a zombie mental state when staging the scene, which is why the staging was chaos from start to finish.
I think this is a valid point. Who wouldn't be in a zombie mental state after realizing what they had done to their child?

rashomon,

D. England's opinion is not without some interest, but to elevate it above that of the pathologists opinion, and to replace the physical evidence with your own assertions based on nothing more than a distaste for logic, simply does does nothing to advance your case.

He wrote he has no doubt that the Ramseys were in something like a zombie mental state when staging the scene, which is why the staging was chaos from start to finish.
I think this is a valid point. Who wouldn't be in a zombie mental state after realizing what they had done to their child?

This is speculation pure and simple, it has no basis in fact or forensic evidence. I might as well claim that the Ramsey's were the recipients of a religious visitation, which counseled them to kill JonBenet, so the world may be saved, this left them in a confused mental state, hence the disorganized staging.

I note you are doing the same thing with JonBenet's soiled pants left on the bathroom floor, this topic was covered exhaustively, with a discussion regarding pants as in trousers or pants as in underwear.


.

 

[Dru]

This discussion is so interesting!

I tend to think that the staging was not disorganized, that it was actually a little 'overplanned.' The reason it seems disorganized to us is that IMO the crime scene was staged three different times, and each time the scene was 'restaged' some elements of the earlier staging remained. The end result seems as chaotic as a painting cut into three pieces and then stapled back together completely out of order, one piece on top of another.

In my theory, the first staging took place because JR had to a) remove evidence linking him to the crime and b) stage the scene to look like BR had done it, but only for PR to see. I think he did at least these things: removed the size six underwear, which was bloodstained; wiped down JBR; replaced the size six with the size 12 underwear, unwrapping several packages to find it; replaced the long johns, placed a piece of rope over the marks of strangulation; placed BR's pocket knife on the floor near the cut ends of the rope; placed a golf club beside the body (to suggest the 'golf club incident' with BR from years earlier). He may also have removed the red turtleneck and replaced it with the white top, but I'm not convinced that JBR wasn't wearing the white top all along anyway. Besides, I think the whole reason he went looking for the size 12 'gift' underwear was so he wouldn't disturb anyone upstairs before he'd brought PR down to see what had 'happened.'

The second staging followed the first, but here's where I think things got complicated. If things happened at all like I envision them, PR and JR spent some time in the basement, PR just cradling JBR as they discussed what to do. Finally, she goes upstairs to write the RN. She's not happy about it, and she definitely doesn't want to abandon JBR's body, something I think comes out in the RN. Meanwhile JR starts to rearrange the scene. First he removes the "BR elements" but since he knows BR isn't involved, he's not too careful; the pocket knife ends up on a countertop not too far from the crime scene, and I think the golf club just went back in the bag, prompting JR's anxious question later to Pam Paugh about the golf clubs. He intends to discard the rope, too, and re-dress JBR in the nightgown before wrapping her in the blanket, but he runs into several problems. One, the size 12 underpants. I doubt he realized before he put them on in the first place how big they were going to be, but he put them on anyway since the long johns would keep them in place; but if he removes the long johns they're going to be obviously too big. He could remove them, but what if PR notices? Worse, what if there's still blood in the area of the wound, and that blood gets on the nightgown? But there's a bigger problem. I think JBR was killed around midnight, give or take. By the time PR has seen the body and gone to write the ransom note, it's probably between 2:30 and 3, since JR's first staging would have taken some time, too. I'm still trying to find out how temperature affects rigor mortis, but if it had been nearly three hours since death occurred in a freezing cold basement in Colorado in winter, I think it's possible that rigor had set in enough to make it nearly impossible to re-dress JBR in the nightgown. That, combined with JR's reflections about the danger of carrying through the plan to dump JBR's body, put an end to the second staging.

PR is still working on the note, but JR begins the third staging of the crime scene. He knows something PR doesn't know--that JBR's body will show signs of sexual assault, since in his first panic after the blow to the head he tried to confuse the evidence he'd left on occasions which occurred before that night. He goes to her, tells her he's reconsidered dumping the body, and that he's going to stage the crime scene to look like the work of a pedophile. PR shows him the note, and asks what to do. He tells her to finish it anyway, but quickly, and then come help him, which to me accounts for the abrupt change from the more formal 'Mr. Ramsey' tone of the note to the personal insults aimed at 'John.' PR returns to the basement and finds JR fashioning the wrist ligature. He has replaced the rope around JBR's neck, and has thought of the garrote idea. He explains it to PR and asks for a stick of some kind; she gets the paintbrush and helps him fashion it, leaving lots of sweater fibers in the process. The useless duct tape is placed on JBR's mouth during this time as well, after which PR insists that they wrap her up in the blanket anyway, despite the fact that this was supposed to be a "second staging" element, and leaves a jarring note in the "third staging," as does the RN. The discarded nightgown also remains near JBR's body, as the R's return upstairs.

Though the RN no longer matches the scene, it's still necessary. They have to have a good reason to cancel the Charlevoix trip. They can't just call up and cancel their flight. I think it's after 5am before the third staging is finished, and there's just enough time for the two of them to prepare for the 911 call (PR has to put on her makeup to hide the evidence that she's been crying most of the night, and JR quite possibly takes his shower at this time, instead of the night before.)

When JR finally 'finds' the body of JBR the next day, the scene that he disturbs has been staged three separate times, with three different scenarios in mind. And taken together, they make as much sense as the cut-up, layered picture I describe above.

 

[rashomon]

I note you are doing the same thing with JonBenet's soiled pants left on the bathroom floor, this topic was covered exhaustively, with a discussion regarding pants as in trousers or pants as in underwear.

UkGuy,

and what was the result of this discussion? If memory serves, it could not definitely be concluded from the interview if there was underwear inside the pair of trousers on the floor or not.

rashomon,

D. England's opinion is not without some interest, but to elevate it above that of the pathologists opinion, and to replace the physical evidence with your own assertions based on nothing more than a distaste for logic, simply does does nothing to advance your case.

The pathologist gave no opinion as to to whether JB was alive or not when the acute vaginal injury was inflicted - he merely described what he noted. She probably was alive when wounded, since the wound bled.
I don't elevate D. England's opinion over any one else's, but he has put a lot of thought and reasoning into this case. For example, if it weren't for his input, people would probably still believe that the garrote was a 'real' garrote and not constructed for mere staging purposes.
I don't have a distaste for logic, UkGuy - quite the contrary. Which is why I have asked you for your time line of events a couple of times, to see if it fits logic, but got no reply from you. But I'll try once more:

If it (per your theory) it was a real sexual assault (and not a staged one on an unconscious child): who do you think inflicted the acute vaginal injury on JB? John Ramsey?
Who 'manually strangled' JB?
Who whacked JB on the head?
What is your time line of events re these injuries?

This is speculation pure and simple, it has no basis in fact or forensic evidence. I might as well claim that the Ramsey's were the recipients of a religious visitation, which counseled them to kill JonBenet, so the world may be saved, this left them in a confused mental state, hence the disorganized staging.

UkGuy, remember that all our theories as to why JB was killed are speculation, yours and everybody else's.
Your theory that JB was murdered (first-degree murder) is of as much or little value as other people's theories that she tragically died as a result of a rage attack by a parent who had had no intention to kill her.

Do we know what exactly went on in the Ramseys' heads as they staged the scene? We don't. The Ramseys were no hired killers doing their job, but frantic parents faced with the choice of either turning themselves in or trying to escape justice. How much logic and reasoning is to be expected from people in such a situation?

 

[Solace]

UkGuy,

and what was the result of this discussion? If memory serves, it could not definitely be concluded from the interview if there was underwear inside the pair of trousers on the floor or not. Exactly Rashomon, it was never made clear. I would love to have seen a picture. The dialogue is in the interviews with Patsy and I believe Detective Haney, and I could look it up again, but I do not believe they make that clear.

The pathologist gave no opinion as to to whether JB was alive or not when the acute vaginal injury was inflicted - he merely described what he noted. She probably was alive when wounded, since the wound bled.
I don't elevate D. England's opinion over any one else's, but he has put a lot of thought and reasoning into this case. For example, if it weren't for his input, people would probably still believe that the garrote was a 'real' garrote and not constructed for mere staging purposes.

I don't have a distaste for logic, UkGuy - quite the contrary. Which is why I have asked you for your time line of events a couple of times, to see if it fits logic, but got no reply from you. But I'll try once more: I have to say, I notice that also, when UK seems to dislike the post, she just ignores it. You are a she aren't you UK.

If it (per your theory) it was a real sexual assault (and not a staged one on an unconscious child): who do you think inflicted the acute vaginal injury on JB? John Ramsey?
Who 'manually strangled' JB?
Who whacked JB on the head?
What is your time line of events re these injuries?

UkGuy, remember that all our theories as to why JB was killed are speculation, yours and everybody else's. I concur; otherwise the New York Times would be knocking down UK's door, right UK?

Your theory that JB was murdered (first-degree murder) is of as much or little value as other people's theories that she tragically died as a result of a rage attack by a parent who had had no intention to kill her. I would like to add that it was UK's theory that John had hoped the body would not have been discovered at first and they (Patsy and John and Burke) could get out of Dodge. I had more than a little skeptism for that theory. I don't think John is that stupid to believe that once the FBI comes on the scene, that they would not have checked every crevice of that house. He was after all reading John Douglas' book and even if he had not been, he would have known the FBI to be thorough when looking for a kidnapping victim and the house would have been thoroughly checked.

Do we know what exactly went on in the Ramseys' heads as they staged the scene? We don't. The Ramseys were no hired killers doing their job, but frantic parents faced with the choice of either turning themselves in or trying to escape justice. How much logic and reasoning is to be expected from people in such a situation?

Not very much, especially when you can see that the handwriting is shaking and I believe Patsy wrote that note. Hell was in session.

99% of the time, crimes are what they seem, so maybe John was molesting JonBenet. There is that 1% that maybe he was not. But the fact remains that no evidence of an intruder exists. The parents are involved.

 

[UKGuy]

UkGuy,

and what was the result of this discussion? If memory serves, it could not definitely be concluded from the interview if there was underwear inside the pair of trousers on the floor or not.

The pathologist gave no opinion as to to whether JB was alive or not when the acute vaginal injury was inflicted - he merely described what he noted. She probably was alive when wounded, since the wound bled.


I don't elevate D. England's opinion over any one else's, but he has put a lot of thought and reasoning into this case. For example, if it weren't for his input, people would probably still believe that the garrote was a 'real' garrote and not constructed for mere staging purposes.
I don't have a distaste for logic, UkGuy - quite the contrary. Which is why I have asked you for your time line of events a couple of times, to see if it fits logic, but got no reply from you. But I'll try once more:

If it (per your theory) it was a real sexual assault (and not a staged one on an unconscious child): who do you think inflicted the acute vaginal injury on JB? John Ramsey?
Who 'manually strangled' JB?
Who whacked JB on the head?
What is your time line of events re these injuries?

UkGuy, remember that all our theories as to why JB was killed are speculation, yours and everybody else's.
Your theory that JB was murdered (first-degree murder) is of as much or little value as other people's theories that she tragically died as a result of a rage attack by a parent who had had no intention to kill her.

Do we know what exactly went on in the Ramseys' heads as they staged the scene? We don't. The Ramseys were no hired killers doing their job, but frantic parents faced with the choice of either turning themselves in or trying to escape justice. How much logic and reasoning is to be expected from people in such a situation?

UkGuy,
and what was the result of this discussion? If memory serves, it could not definitely be concluded from the interview if there was underwear inside the pair of trousers on the floor or not.

No that was not a conclusion that was possible since there was no reference to plural objects in the photograph. What you could infer was that the object in the photo was either underwear or trousers, the latter was what I assumed e.g.

My current understanding is that the subject of the photograph was a soiled pair of pants, probably her play jeans, worn earlier xmas-day, in the absence of any further forensic evidence, it would appear we have two options: ...

If there had been a soiled pair of underwear on the bathroom floor, we would have heard about from Steve Thomas, imo soiled anything on bathroom floor is inconsistent with a Toilet Rage theory, also the underwear would have been itemized as soiled in the search warrant list.

The pathologist gave no opinion as to to whether JB was alive or not when the acute vaginal injury was inflicted - he merely described what he noted. She probably was alive when wounded, since the wound bled.

I agree, when alive JonBenet was sexually assaulted, it was also Coroner Meyer's opinion that she had been digitally penetrated. That is hard physical forensic evidence then expanded upon by a pathologist.


Any one of the residents may have sexually assaulted JonBenet then strangled her, then whacked her on the head, either to make sure she was dead, or as part of a postmortem assault, which may be intended as staging? The garrote is staging to mask the manual asphyxiation as is her wipe-down and redressing in size-12 underwear e.g. this masks any sexual assault, the longjohns are probably also staging.

Now if you are going to leave her lying wrapped in blankets on the wine-cellar floor wearing urine-soaked longjohns, then if her original size-6 underwear was also urine-soaked, then there is NO reason or purpose in removing them, but since they were removed and there is evidence of internal bleeding which was partially cleaned, then its possible that either blood or semen or both was present on her missing size-6 underwear?

Thats if it they are missing, since she may have been naked from the waist down, whilst being sexually assaulted, and this assault may have occurred in a bedroom other than her own, in this event, she would still have been cleaned up.

The death of JonBenet was not an unintended accident, nor did it result from the lustful intentions of a sociopathic intruder, it was the culmination of long term sexual abuse.

This is what was covered up, now why would two parents and a son collude in a conspiracy of silence?

Who had the motive, who colluded in the planning and implementation of JonBenet's abuse, who had the opportunity, did JonBenet sleep in another residents bed that night, was this preplanned, bear in mind she was not discovered dead in her own bed?

Did JonBenet run to Patsy and tell her that she had just been sexually assaulted, did Patsy place her hands around her throat to silence her, and tell her not to speak of this again, or did a male person simply strangle JonBenet after sexually assaulting her, because he knew she was going talk?

The forensic evidence tells you that this is a sexual abuse case, that it is a domestic homicide, and that her final resting place the wine-cellar is a staged crime scene.



.

 

[Solace]

Thanks for the info, Solace. I have to agree with your opinion.
If it weren't for the evidence of prior sexual abuse on JB, this would be a fairly simple case: a parent snapped and lost it, killed the child in a rage, then tried to cover it up with the help of their spouse to avoid public exposure and prosecution.

But in case JB had been the victim of prior sexual abuse, this case becomes very complicated and intricate, for there are so many variables and unanswered questions that it can make one's head spin, for example:

- Who was JB's abuser?
- Was her abuser also her killer? (not necessarily!)
- if yes: was the killing of JB a rage attack or a planned murder?

- if JB's killer was not the person who had ben abusing her:
- did the killer know about the abuse or not?
- was the sexual abuse the reason for the attack or not?

Solace, what do you think happened and why?

Hi Rash,

I use to think she was thrown full force against the bathtub, but upon looking at the photos of her skull, it is so bad, that it almost looks as if she were shot. I truly believe Patsy did this thing, but I do not know if she threw her or just in a blind rage hit her with the flashlight. I think it is very possible that she could get that angry after being up for 15 hours and still going. You have to be absolutely exhausted after a day like that and remember she had been mortally sick for some time with cancer.

I think John is covering for her. I think he helped her that night and did not find the body in the morning as Steve Thomas says, I think he helped her.

Rash, as far as sexual abuse goes, it is more llikely than not that she is a victim of this. I just cannot see a sex game that night as Cyril Wecht says. I do not believe John would take that chance. I am not even sure it was sexual abuse. I really am not. Thomas believes it was some sort of corporal punishment, and it could have been in the form of severe douching. Colorado says that she knows people who say that was a big thing that was talked about - that there was daily douching. With that kind of thing going on, JonBenet had to be incredibly dry and incredibly sensitive to bleeding after a while.

I don't know. What do you think happened? I don't know how. I just believe that Patsy lost it and killed her. And the only way she could live with it was by saying "I did not do it". Just as the man I saw on TV last week said after he finally admitted killing his son's teacher. When asked why he said he was innocent for so long, he said and I am paraphrasing - because it is too awful and you almost believe it after a while - it is basically the only way to get through - you live in denial and get to believe it.

 

[Solace]

No that was not a conclusion that was possible since there was no reference to plural objects in the photograph. What you could infer was that the object in the photo was either underwear or trousers, the latter was what I assumed e.g.



If there had been a soiled pair of underwear on the bathroom floor, we would have heard about from Steve Thomas, imo soiled anything on bathroom floor is inconsistent with a Toilet Rage theory, also the underwear would have been itemized as soiled in the search warrant list.


I agree, when alive JonBenet was sexually assaulted, it was also Coroner Meyer's opinion that she had been digitally penetrated. That is hard physical forensic evidence then expanded upon by a pathologist.


Any one of the residents may have sexually assaulted JonBenet then strangled her, then whacked her on the head, either to make sure she was dead, or as part of a postmortem assault, which may be intended as staging? The garrote is staging to mask the manual asphyxiation as is her wipe-down and redressing in size-12 underwear e.g. this masks any sexual assault, the longjohns are probably also staging.

Now if you are going to leave her lying wrapped in blankets on the wine-cellar floor wearing urine-soaked longjohns, then if her original size-6 underwear was also urine-soaked, then there is NO reason or purpose in removing them, but since they were removed and there is evidence of internal bleeding which was partially cleaned, then its possible that either blood or semen or both was present on her missing size-6 underwear?
Thats if it they are missing, since she may have been naked from the waist down, whilst being sexually assaulted, and this assault may have occurred in a bedroom other than her own, in this event, she would still have been cleaned up.

The death of JonBenet was not an unintended accident, nor did it result from the lustful intentions of a sociopathic intruder, it was the culmination of long term sexual abuse.

This is what was covered up, now why would two parents and a son collude in a conspiracy of silence?

Who had the motive, who colluded in the planning and implementation of JonBenet's abuse, who had the opportunity, did JonBenet sleep in another residents bed that night, was this preplanned, bear in mind she was not discovered dead in her own bed?

Did JonBenet run to Patsy and tell her that she had just been sexually assaulted, did Patsy place her hands around her throat to silence her, and tell her not to speak of this again, or did a male person simply strangle JonBenet after sexually assaulting her, because he knew she was going talk? No.

The forensic evidence tells you that this is a sexual abuse case, that it is a domestic homicide, and that her final resting place the wine-cellar is a staged crime scene.



.

UK, if there were semen in the size 6 underwear, then there would have been some evidence of it on JonBenet or inside her. I do not care how much they wiped her down. There was no semen.

 

[Albert18]

But how do you get from sexual abuse to murder?

Unfortunately children are sexually abused all the time and it doesn't escalate into murder. Sexual abuse combined with physical abuse might, but not sexual abuse alone. There is no evidence JonBenet was being physically abused. JonBenet was not beaten to death.

If you include John in the early stages of the crime you have to include him in the ransom note. The ransom note does not read like John was involved. The best I can pin John's involvement down is to some time after the ransom note to before the 911 call.

I believe it was on the Larry King show where Steve Thomas lays the blame on Patsy and tries to exonerate John. He basically talked around Patsy to John while Patsy sat right there, I believe she was sitting between Steve and John.

People keep asking, why would John cover for Patsy? The answer is, why wouldn't he. John was NEVER pinned to the wall and forced to do otherwise. They never even came close to him so why wouldn't he play along. Turning Patsy in wouldn't bring JonBenet back to life and it would put Burke's mother in prison.

 

[UKGuy]

UK, if there were semen in the size 6 underwear, then there would have been some evidence of it on JonBenet or inside her. I do not care how much they wiped her down. There was no semen.

Solace,

Sure no semen then that leaves blood, there is also the distinct possibility that she was wearing no underwear e.g. she was naked?


.

 

[UKGuy]

But how do you get from sexual abuse to murder?

Unfortunately children are sexually abused all the time and it doesn't escalate into murder. Sexual abuse combined with physical abuse might, but not sexual abuse alone. There is no evidence JonBenet was being physically abused. JonBenet was not beaten to death.

If you include John in the early stages of the crime you have to include him in the ransom note. The ransom note does not read like John was involved. The best I can pin John's involvement down is to some time after the ransom note to before the 911 call.

I believe it was on the Larry King show where Steve Thomas lays the blame on Patsy and tries to exonerate John. He basically talked around Patsy to John while Patsy sat right there, I believe she was sitting between Steve and John.

People keep asking, why would John cover for Patsy? The answer is, why wouldn't he. John was NEVER pinned to the wall and forced to do otherwise. They never even came close to him so why wouldn't he play along. Turning Patsy in wouldn't bring JonBenet back to life and it would put Burke's mother in prison.

Albert18,

Unfortunately children are sexually abused all the time and it doesn't escalate into murder.

oh yes it does, there was case recently in the USofA where a very young girl was domestically sexually abused, then murdered and dumped outdoors by a relative, he dialled 911 and reported her missing!

There is no evidence JonBenet was being physically abused. JonBenet was not beaten to death.

Have you read the autopsy, you realize she was whacked about the head, and has numerous contusions on her body, someone manually strangled JonBenet then whacked her on the head, either of which may have killed her?


It appears a classic sexual abuse case in that by strangling JonBenet her killer wanted her silenced, to make certain it looks as if post-mortem injuries were applied e.g. her severe depressed skull fracture, and the various contusions on her legs, back and face.

There was no intruder, there was no accident, you dont get a severe depressed head fracture by accident, or become asphyxiated by accident, nobody else on the planet has a motive for killing JonBenet, a depraved sociopathic pedophile would want to carry JonBenet off, alive, so why was she killed, patently so she could not talk of her prior abuse!


.

 

[Solace]

Albert18,


oh yes it does, there was case recently in the USofA where a very young girl was domestically sexually abused, then murdered and dumped outdoors by a relative, he dialled 911 and reported her missing! I believe Albert means most of the time, there is sexual abuse and it does not necessarily turn into murder. Come on.


Have you read the autopsy, you realize she was whacked about the head, and has numerous contusions on her body, someone manually strangled JonBenet then whacked her on the head, either of which may have killed her? Or she was shaken very hard to revive her. Cyrill Wecht believes someone hit her accidently and then violently shook her to wake her up.


It appears a classic sexual abuse case in that by strangling JonBenet her killer wanted her silenced, to make certain it looks as if post-mortem injuries were applied e.g. her severe depressed skull fracture, and the various contusions on her legs, back and face.

There was no intruder, there was no accident, you dont get a severe depressed head fracture by accident, You could if someone lashed out in rage. or become asphyxiated by accident, nobody else on the planet has a motive for killing JonBenet, a depraved sociopathic pedophile would want to carry JonBenet off, alive, so why was she killed, patently so she could not talk of her prior abuse! Or someone thought she was dead and then went on to staging but actually was killing her thinking she was nearly dead anyway and this was staging.


.

Possibly, or it was an accident of incredible rage. UK, people do kill out of rage. In fact most killings of family members are of rage. It could be what Steve Thomas says. He had been doing this type of crime for some ten years. This was not his first time at it. He had just found a toddler who was kidnapped and being sexually abused for two days. So he had been around. He believes it was a rage killing and Patsy did it. He does not believe that it was a sexual crime. Albert could be right.

 

[UKGuy]

Possibly, or it was an accident of incredible rage. UK, people do kill out of rage. In fact most killings of family members are of rage. It could be what Steve Thomas says. He had been doing this type of crime for some ten years. This was not his first time at it. He had just found a toddler who was kidnapped and being sexually abused for two days. So he had been around. He believes it was a rage killing and Patsy did it. He does not believe that it was a sexual crime. Albert could be right.

Solace,

Why do you want an accident to explain away the violence inflicted upon JonBenet, if she had been found dumped outdoors, do you reckon you would have thought oh just an accident she fell over?

To be asphyxiated, to incur a severe depressed head fracture, along with all the accompanying contusions etc cannot be accidental, there was two deliberate attempts to kill her, one by asphyxiation and the second by a head blow, then there is her sexual assault perpretated prior to her death, all this does not add up to an accident, its 1st Degree Murder!


.

 

[Solace]

Solace,

Why do you want an accident to explain away the violence inflicted upon JonBenet, if she had been found dumped outdoors, do you reckon you would have thought oh just an accident she fell over?

To be asphyxiated, to incur a severe depressed head fracture, along with all the accompanying contusions etc cannot be accidental, there was two deliberate attempts to kill her, one by asphyxiation and the second by a head blow, then there is her sexual assault perpretated prior to her death, all this does not add up to an accident, its 1st Degree Murder!


.

Finally, a reaction of sorts from UKGuy. Well congratulations. I am right proud of you!!

Tell me what reason Patsy has to kill her?

 

[Toltec]

I think most children if not helped would have soiled underwear. We are talking about five and six year olds. Yes I believe they would. They are too inept at that age. So really the soiled underwear is a sign of nothing but "age" as far as that goes. Now, infections, that is another story.

The point I want to make is the "wiping down" of JonBenet Ramsey. Let's presume she had not wiped properly Christmas day. Most children do have a bowel movement once a day. Having said that, JonBenet was found wiped down...even the labia....meaning one thing: a woman wiped her down.

Patsy wiped JonBenet down. Whether it was before the scuffle or after death...