Solace said:
UK, Do you think JR was molesting her?
Solace,
If you accept Coroner Meyer's reported autopsy remarks regarding the enlargement of JonBenet's hymen, her staged sexual assault, and pageant sexualisation, then its difficult to avoid the distinct probability that someone was actively molesting JonBenet. That could be one of John, Patsy, or Burke Ramsey either individually or collectively?
An accident does not require all the complex staging involved, on a previous occassion when Burke whacked JonBenet with a golf-club she was rushed straight to hospital, no cover up, no staging!
Currently there is no theory that explains the forensic evidence satisfactorly. The Ramsey's had the best part of six-hours to stage a crime-scene yet what they eventually fabricated is full of self evident contradictions, and personal forensic evidence that links both parents to the
staged crime-scene!
Why should this be, particularly if her death was accidental, they always knew her corpse would be discovered on the premises, so why mess up the very thing that is meant to hide an accident?
We also know the sequence that the staging took e.g. the wine-cellar staging preceded the writing of the ransom-note, else the ransom-note is redundant if JonBenet is discovered dead on her bedroom floor.
So there may have been a prior staging elsewhere in the house, which minimally involved the removal of incriminating forensic evidence, and possibly included JonBenet being wiped down, and redressed in her size-12 underwear?
Otherwise we have John and Patsy at the wine-cellar separately staging elements of her crime-scene. There is the possibility that John and Patsy were both involved at the wine-cellar with Patsy breaking the paintbrush and John applying it, along with a digital sexual assault, else it appears the work of Patsy?
So why would JonBenet need wiped down, why is this important, is this a fetish intruders exhibit during sex crimes? It cannot be because she wet the bed since there was subsequent post-mortem urine release onto her longjohns that was simply ignored, and soiled clothing was left on the bathroom floor. If it was to remove any resulting blood, how then would investigators distinguish between a domestic sexual assault and an intruder led one? Was Patsy fitting John up, did John suspect this so engage separate legal representation for them each?
Although John's shirt may have been used to wipe JonBenet down, this does not mean it was him that did it. If his shirt was in his bedroom or a laundry basket then his shirt can be used on JonBenet without him doing it. But if JonBenet was in John's bedroom, why should she be wiped down ahead of being sexually assaulted in the wine-cellar, since I assume the blood would follow from the sexual assault?
Can you imagine John rising at say 5AM to be told by Patsy
"Hey I just killed JonBenet, but I have it all worked out, here is the plan, last time we saw her was when we put her to bed, then we went to bed, then we wake up, and discover a ransom-note ..." yada yada. Why should he go along with all this, possibly incriminating himself in a homicide?
But he did, so did Patsy and to a lesser extent Burke, since he knows what happened the previous night. So they are all colluding to hide something, and it cannot simply be JonBenet's death since that was always going to be self evident.
So her pageant sexualisation may simply be a reflection of her domestic abuse, where her role models are those of her abusers and form part of a pedophile pathology harkening back to a previous generation, e.g. no Spice-Girls or Britney Spears style here?
.
