Size 12 Panties

[LovelyPigeon]

Britt, I am without my old PMPT hardback index, and alas, cannot quickly put my finger on Dr. Meyer's conclusion.

I can provide this, however:

PMPT hardback p 437:
Dr Richard Krugman...injury to the hymen...took place after her death.

Dr Werner Spitz said that JonBenét's vaginal injury dated to the time of her death.

p513:
Detective Harmer...reviewed the medical findings about JonBenét's vaginal injuries. Several well-known experts had concluded that the child's hymen was torn weeks or even months before her murder, Harmer said, but other experts had said the tear was recent. Broken blood vessels inside the child's vagina clearly indicated that she was penetrated that night, but there was no conclusive evidence of a sexual assault before that time.

 

[Britt]

PMPT hardback p 437:
Dr Richard Krugman...injury to the hymen...took place after her death.

Dr. Krugman said a whole lot more than that:

From Spade's notes at FFJ, on the "Sexual Abuse" thread:

Dr. Richard Krugman, Dean of the University of Colorado Medical School, an expert first contacted for assistance in the Ramsey case by the D.A.’s office, was the most adamant supporter of the finding of chronic sexual abuse. He felt that in considering the past and present injuries to the hymen that the bedwetting/soiling took on enormous significance. He believed that this homicide was an indecent [incident ?] of “toilet rage” and subsequent cover up. He told the group of experts and detectives about another Colorado case where both parents had been at home and both were charged. “The JonBenet case is a text book example of toileting abuse rage," Krugman stated.

http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/showthread.php?threadid=3783

And from PMPT:

[Dr. Krugman] told the media that on the basis of what he’d read in the report, JonBenet was not a sexually abused child. Then he added, "I don't believe it's possible to tell whether any child is sexually abused based on physical findings alone." The presence of semen, evidence of a sexually transmitted disease, or the child's medical history combined with the child's own testimony were the only sure ways to be confident about a finding of sexual abuse, Krugman told reporters.

Physical abuse was another matter. Krugman had occasionally seen injuries to little girls' genitals that were related to toilet training and had nothing to do with sexual abuse. In children, one had to separate sexual from physical abuse. By now the detectives had learned that at age six, JonBenet was still wetting the bed, and was asking adults to wipe her after she was done on the toilet. It was possible that the injury to her vagina was a result of punishment. p. 467 paperback

And from Burden of Proof, Krugman suggested the 'sexual' abuse could have been a cover-up for prior physical abuse in the vaginal area:

COSSACK: Doctor you made a statement which almost made it sound though that you believe that the sexual abuse was a coverup to perhaps hide the amount of physical abuse. Do you have a feel on that area?

KRUGMAN: In my view that's certainly a possibility.

Burden of Proof - Monday, December 29, 1997

 

[Shylock]

Excellent post Britt. Good job of digging out related information!

 

[LovelyPigeon]

As PMPT summarizes neatly, Dr Krugman was of the opinion that the sexual injuries were made after JonBenét's death.

I'm not sure how Dr Krugman thinks the wounds bled if JonBenét was already dead, but there you have his expert opinion.

And those are just the range of opinions sought by the BPD. You can well imagine there are varying conclusions by other experts, including those who might be consulted by a defense.

 

[BlueCrab]

As PMPT summarizes neatly, Dr Krugman was of the opinion that the sexual injuries were made after JonBenét's death.

I'm not sure how Dr Krugman thinks the wounds bled if JonBenét was already dead, but there you have his expert opinion.

And those are just the range of opinions sought by the BPD. You can well imagine there are varying conclusions by other experts, including those who might be consulted by a defense.

LovelyPigeon,

Dr. Krugman's remarks about possible postmortem injuries concerned the ACUTE injuries to JonBenet's vagina. Krugman did not deny there were also CHRONIC injuries to the vagina.

JMO

 

[Britt]

Dr. Krugman's remarks about possible postmortem injuries concerned the ACUTE injuries to JonBenet's vagina. Krugman did not deny there were also CHRONIC injuries to the vagina.

Exactly, BlueCrab.

Dr. Krugman's comments make it clear that he believes JB was being physically abused in the vaginal area and the perp staged an acute injury in order to stage a "sexual attack," to divert from the truth.

Krugman makes a distinction between "physical" abuse and "sexual" abuse - which goes to the motive behind the abuse - but whichever label one uses, the abuse was chronic and was inflicted in the vaginal area.

(Thanks, Shylock )

 

[why_nutt]

I'm not sure how Dr Krugman thinks the wounds bled if JonBenét was already dead, but there you have his expert opinion.

The phenomenon is called "artifactual hemorrhages" or "post-mortem bleeding." It is addressed in MEDICOLEGAL INVESTIGATION OF DEATH as a potentially misleading indicator of assault since, as the picture link shows below, it is possible for small blood vessels to break and leak after death, giving the impression the damage was done while the victim was still alive.

http://s92053900.onlinehome.us/postmortem.gif

Artifactual hemorrhages on the inner aspect of the arm produced by seepage of blood from small veins torn when the body was lifted for the purpose of removal.

http://www.phrusa.org/research/forensics/israel/Israel_accident_3.html

It is possible that death was a few hours before. Movement of the body may cause post-mortem bleeding to start.

 

[Shylock]

I'm not sure how Dr Krugman thinks the wounds bled if JonBenét was already dead, but there you have his expert opinion.

Gravity, LP. Just like when they butcher an animal and hang it upside down for the blood to drain out. Not that she was hanging or being held in any perticular position, but blood will always travel to the lowest position in a dead body, seeping from any open wounds along the way.

 

[LovelyPigeon]

But we aren't talking about seepage..these were drops of blood on the crotch of the panties.

There were also smears of blood on JonBenét's thighs that had been partially wiped away to the point that it didn't appear to be blood to the naked eye. Remember the detectives at the autopsy thinking that the material on her thighs was semen because it lit up under the black light?

Wasn't there some trace blood on the blanket also, and on the Barbie gown?

 

[Shylock]

But we aren't talking about seepage..these were drops of blood on the crotch of the panties.

There were also smears of blood on JonBenét's thighs that had been partially wiped away to the point that it didn't appear to be blood to the naked eye. Remember the detectives at the autopsy thinking that the material on her thighs was semen because it lit up under the black light?

Wasn't there some trace blood on the blanket also, and on the Barbie gown?

I couldn't begin to assume how blood seeping from a wound would "drip" or "stream" from a dead person. I would think everyone would be different, based on their size and the size/location of the wound, so no real conclusion could be drawn. Could the blood have dripped when her body was moved into the wine cellar and held upright?--Who knows.

Yes, the body was cleaned up and blood wiped off her, leaving smeared blood on her leg. That fact has always pointed away from an intruder who wouldn't have been cleaning up his victim for presentation purposes.

And I've never heard about blood on the blanket or nightgown that I can remember.

 

[WolfmarsGirl]

...Patsy in my opinion would be correct in stating JBR to wear around a size 8. In my experience with my kids and my niece whom I just took on a weeks vacation, they tend to wear underwear a size larger than their clothing size. My niece was wearing size 8 clothing but her panties were a 10...

Exactly what I have been saying Eliza!

I still contend that a size 12 would not be unheard of for a little girl to accidentally put on by herself.

My little girl insisted on wearing a size 10 leotard last year to gymnastics...we got it in a bunch of clothes from her now teen-aged cousin.

Because the material was stretchy, it didn't look TOO bad...But, we changed it nonetheless.

I think JBR put them on by herself, OR, as you mention, they were over pull-ups.

 

[LovelyPigeon]

Cleaning up is usually done in effort to remove evidence, not for appearance sake. The cleaning up by the intruder/killer failed to remove his DNA deposited with or on or over the blood spots on JonBenét's panties. I think he thought his own blood or saliva might have been left behind on her body, so he wiped it off, however clumsily.

I hope we have at least established that little girls are fond of appearing like older girls and are as likely as not to choose a larger size for just that reason if left to their own choice.

And that size 12 panties on a 6 year old girl would be big, but would not be falling-off-big---and especially not under pants as opposed to a dress.

 

[WolfmarsGirl]

I don't think she was "tiny." She was tall for her age and she certainly doesn't look thin. My kids never matched the age/size number.

JBR was rather short for a six-and-a-half-year-old girl, imo. My daughter is not yet six and she is 49+ inches tall...Plus, JBR did appear to have a bit of a toddler-tummy left on her and chubby thighs...My kid is lanky and lean and she wears 8 undies...A 6 gets "stuck in the butt..." (Sorry for the graphics...my kid's words, lol)

I think a 12, if it was a 'bikini,' just might be ok for a girl this size to put on by herself and wear all day. Sure, they wouldn't fit quite right, but it would not be impossible to believe.

 

[WolfmarsGirl]

The phenomenon is called "artifactual hemorrhages" or "post-mortem bleeding." It is addressed in MEDICOLEGAL INVESTIGATION OF DEATH as a potentially misleading indicator of assault since, as the picture link shows below, it is possible for small blood vessels to break and leak after death, giving the impression the damage was done while the victim was still alive.

http://s92053900.onlinehome.us/postmortem.gif

Artifactual hemorrhages on the inner aspect of the arm produced by seepage of blood from small veins torn when the body was lifted for the purpose of removal....

Not to change the subject, but I will... Just for a minute, I promise...

So, Why_Nutt, could this phenomenon account for why the strange abrasions on JBR's body look very dark?

I mean - related to Patsy's rings - could pressure marks, made by squeezing the skin after death result in artifactual hemorrhages?

Would the item causing the pressure leave a dark impression, like the ones we see on JBR due to this type of hemorrhaging after death?

 

[BlueCrab]

JBR was rather short for a six-and-a-half-year-old girl, imo. My daughter is not yet six and she is 49+ inches tall...Plus, JBR did appear to have a bit of a toddler-tummy left on her and chubby thighs...My kid is lanky and lean and she wears 8 undies...A 6 gets "stuck in the butt..." (Sorry for the graphics...my kid's words, lol)

I think a 12, if it was a 'bikini,' just might be ok for a girl this size to put on by herself and wear all day. Sure, they wouldn't fit quite right, but it would not be impossible to believe.

It's impossible for me to believe. The only sizes of underwear in JonBenet's underwear drawer were 4's and 6's. There were no other sizes. The size 12's were in unopened packages except for the pair found on JonBenet's dead body. Her size 6 panties she had to have been wearing are missing from the crime scene.

Common sense tells me the killer wiped down JonBenet with a dark blue cloth and re-dressed her in size 12 underwear because he couldn't find her underwear drawer in the bathroom. The motive was to try to hide the sexual aspects of the crime and make it look like a kidnapping, fake ransom note and all.

An intruder would have no reason to try to hide the sexual assault -- only a family member would do that. Since John and Patsy would have known better than to put size 12 underwear on JonBenet, it appears the killer was Burke A/O a friend he had in the house that night as a guest.

JMO

 

[LovelyPigeon]

Her size 6 panties she had to have been wearing are missing from the crime scene.

I don't think there is ANY evidence that ANY panties are "missing". Many pairs of girl panties were collected by several different crime techs on different dates.

It is logical that panties collected for forensic examination would either be "dirty" and found on the floor or laundry, or clean from the laundry or drawer but with old "stains".

JonBenét's bathroom had only one sink set in a cabinet with drawers. It would be impossible not to be able to find the drawer with panties.

 

[BlueCrab]

I don't think there is ANY evidence that ANY panties are "missing". Many pairs of girl panties were collected by several different crime techs on different dates.

It is logical that panties collected for forensic examination would either be "dirty" and found on the floor or laundry, or clean from the laundry or drawer but with old "stains".

JonBenét's bathroom had only one sink set in a cabinet with drawers. It would be impossible not to be able to find the drawer with panties.

Of course there's no evidence of the size 6 panties missing. THEY ARE MISSING!

Since the panties were obviously changed by the perp, who put ridiculous size 12 panties on JonBenet, then it means there were stains on the size 6 panties he took off JonBenet. It was evidence against him. The size 6 panties she was wearing are missing -- and probably went out the door with the other missing items of crime scene evidence in the pockets of the fifth person in the house that night.

How many homes have underwear drawers in the bathroom? Not very many. Clothing items are usually kept in the bedroom. IMO the perp looked only in the bedroom for clean underwear, and could find only the packages of size 12's. So he used them.

The reason for changing the underwear was to disguise the sexual assault. Only a family member would have a motive to change the crime scene from a sexual assault to a kidnapping, thus pointing away from family members.

But John and Patsy would have known better than to put size 12's on little JonBenet. Therefore, the evidence points to Burke and an accomplice -- the fifth person in the house that night who was likely older than Burke.

JMO

 

[why_nutt]

So, Why_Nutt, could this phenomenon account for why the strange abrasions on JBR's body look very dark?

I mean - related to Patsy's rings - could pressure marks, made by squeezing the skin after death result in artifactual hemorrhages?

Would the item causing the pressure leave a dark impression, like the ones we see on JBR due to this type of hemorrhaging after death?

It would appear to be possible. MEDICOLEGAL INVESTIGATION has this to say:

Depending on the mechanism of abrasion, it may be called a graze, such as when a bullet sideswipes the body, a scratch when caused by a sharp edge or fingernails, or a brush burn if caused by the frictional force of rubbing against a rouch surface, as in dragging on the ground.

A scratch, especially when dry and dark brown, may resemble a burn.

 

[LovelyPigeon]

There's not even any evidence that the package of size 12 panties was in the bedroom rather than in the bathroom drawer with all the other panties.

There's no evidence of missing size 6 panties!

The most logical and likely happening is that JonBenét herself put on herself a pair of brand new, day-of-the-week bigger-girl panties to wear to the Christmas dinner/party at the Whites' house that night.

Whatever panties she took off in order to put the size 12s on she probably left on the floor of her bedroom or bathroom.

 

[LovelyPigeon]

Depending on the mechanism of abrasion, it may be called a graze, such as when a bullet sideswipes the body, a scratch when caused by a sharp edge or fingernails, or a brush burn if caused by the frictional force of rubbing against a rouch surface, as in dragging on the ground.

Sounds like a close description of a stun gun "burn".