Simple question...

[Holdontoyourhat]

The key to understanding the timing of the damages done to JonBenet's vaginal region is the use of the word chronic in the autopsy report. That means there was damage inflicted before the night she died, as well as the acute damage done the night she died. The inference is she experienced trauma on more than one occasion.

Chronic inflammation or infiltrate doesn't mean prior abuse. Don't take my word for it, ask your doctor.

 

[BBB167893]

The key to understanding the timing of the damages done to JonBenet's vaginal region is the use of the word chronic in the autopsy report. That means there was damage inflicted before the night she died, as well as the acute damage done the night she died. The inference is she experienced trauma on more than one occasion.

Exactly! Wendy Murphy, who specializes in sex crimes, said it flat out: "old and new injuries."

 

[BOESP]

"The FBI believed that JonBenet's vaginal trauma was not consistent with a history of sexual abuse, and they had turned up no evidence of any other type of abuse." PMPT 306

There we go with the "no evidence" problem again. It would've been a LOT better for RDI if this instead read that the FBI believed there was a history of abuse. Any abuse.

It would be a lot better if EVERYBODY read the FBI report and not what was published in PMPT. Thomas's book is as close as we can get to first-hand testimony about what he saw and how he evaluated what he saw. He was there. Schiller wasn't.

 

[BOESP]

Chronic inflammation or infiltrate doesn't mean prior abuse. Don't take my word for it, ask your doctor.

The interpretation of the autopsy is that there was something causing the inflammation. Now just what do you suppose caused this chronic and acute inflammation?

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

It would be a lot better if EVERYBODY read the FBI report and not what was published in PMPT. Thomas's book is as close as we can get to first-hand testimony about what he saw and how he evaluated what he saw. He was there. Schiller wasn't.

Isn't he the guy who gave up his position and responsibility of finding the actual killer, especially if it was PR or JR, and instead wrote a book that was ineffective?

 

[BOESP]

Isn't he the guy who gave up his position and responsibility of finding the actual killer, especially if it was PR or JR, and instead wrote a book that was ineffective?

Not that I know of.

 

[BBB167893]

The interpretation of the autopsy is that there was something causing the inflammation. Now just what do you suppose caused this chronic and acute inflammation?

I'd like to add to that: it's not just the physical aspects, not by a damn sight. It's the behavioral aspect that goes with it. This little kid had MAJOR boundary issues, among other problems.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

I'd like to add to that: it's not just the physical aspects, not by a damn sight. It's the behavioral aspect that goes with it. This little kid had MAJOR boundary issues, among other problems.

This little kid's biggest problem was in her audience. That person doesn't like capitalists, according to JR.

 

[Ravyn]

Excellently put!

HOTYH did not provide the entire quote.

But this is what I keep finding....
In addition, police adopted a suggestion by the FBI "to publicly name [the Ramseys'] as suspects and apply intense media pressure to them so that they would confess to the crime." The police department's attempt to "smoke out" the Ramseys as their daughter's killers utilized the media as a tool, according to Carnes' order. "In addition to this intentional use of the press, a number of leaks of confidential information, at various stages of the murder investigation, served to hamper the ability of the Boulder Police Department to conduct an effective investigation into the crime



So how strong in the FBI's belief in the parents done this...This is strong in my eyes....

 

[BBB167893]

This little kid's biggest problem was in her audience. That person doesn't like capitalists, according to JR.

Don't avoid the issue. I answered your question.

"According to JR." Well, he ought to know! (HINT, HINT!)

 

[BBB167893]

So how strong in the FBI's belief in the parents done this...This is strong in my eyes....

Mine as well. HOTYH wants a source? I'll give him one!

Here's the entire quote:

It reads: The FBI believed that JonBenet's vaginal trauma was not consistent with a history of sexual abuse, and they had turned up no evidence of any other type of abuse. The sexual violation of JonBenet, whether pre- or postmortem, did not appear to have been committed for the perpetrator's gratification. The penetration, which caused minor genital trauma, was more likely part of a staged crime scene, intended to mislead the police.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

But this is what I keep finding....
In addition, police adopted a suggestion by the FBI "to publicly name [the Ramseys'] as suspects and apply intense media pressure to them so that they would confess to the crime." The police department's attempt to "smoke out" the Ramseys as their daughter's killers utilized the media as a tool, according to Carnes' order. "In addition to this intentional use of the press, a number of leaks of confidential information, at various stages of the murder investigation, served to hamper the ability of the Boulder Police Department to conduct an effective investigation into the crime



So how strong in the FBI's belief in the parents done this...This is strong in my eyes....

You're reading news from 1996 or something and interpreting it to mean that here in 2010 the FBI believes the R's did it and staged a sex crime coverup.

Sorry, but I'm reading the news from 2008-2010 that has the latest information.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Mine as well. HOTYH wants a source? I'll give him one!

Here's the entire quote:

It reads: The FBI believed that JonBenet's vaginal trauma was not consistent with a history of sexual abuse, and they had turned up no evidence of any other type of abuse. The sexual violation of JonBenet, whether pre- or postmortem, did not appear to have been committed for the perpetrator's gratification. The penetration, which caused minor genital trauma, was more likely part of a staged crime scene, intended to mislead the police.

It would've been better for RDI if the FBI stated the R's staged the crime scene. They didn't. Better read the Quantico analysis, its empty and returned no arrest.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Don't avoid the issue. I answered your question.

"According to JR." Well, he ought to know! (HINT, HINT!)

He does, because he's thought about it a helluva lot more than you. He is the ranking expert on this case.

What are you hint-hinting anyway?

 

[BOESP]

It would've been better for RDI if the FBI stated the R's staged the crime scene. They didn't. Better read the Quantico analysis, its empty and returned no arrest.

It would have been better for IDI if the FBI stated an Intruder staged the crime scene.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

It would have been better for IDI if the FBI stated an Intruder staged the crime scene.

The FBI stated that there was no evidence of abuse, and the US Secret Service stated that there was no indication that PR executed the material in the ransom note. What more could PR and JR ask for? Thats as good a result as they could possibly get.

Quantico did not help RDI.

 

[BOESP]

Who had more to gain:

an Intruder staging the crime scene to look like an Intruder did it?

or

someone known to be in the house at the time of the crime who thought they were staging the crime scene to look like an Intruder did it?

 

[BBB167893]

It would've been better for RDI if the FBI stated the R's staged the crime scene.

The implication is quite clear.

Better read the Quantico analysis, its empty and returned no arrest.

Because of the DA, for the 100th time.

He does, because he's thought about it a helluva lot more than you.

That's kind of my point: he didn't have much choice.

He is the ranking expert on this case.

He ought to be! Most of it was probably his idea to start with!

What are you hint-hinting anyway?

Let me spell it out for you: he most likely thought up that angle in the first place!

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Who had more to gain:

an Intruder staging the crime scene to look like an Intruder did it?

or

someone known to be in the house at the time of the crime who staged the crime scene to like an Intruder did it?

You're asking me to accept the premise that there was staging. I have not accepted that, its not a case fact.

 

[BBB167893]

Who had more to gain:

an Intruder staging the crime scene to look like an Intruder did it?

or

someone known to be in the house at the time of the crime who staged the crime scene to like an Intruder did it?

Could not have said it better myself!