Three critical questions

[OpenMind4U]

OpenMind4U,
This is why BDI is the most consistent theory, since it offers the parents a reason to collude.

It could be PDI with PR engaging in molestation for any number of bizarre psychological reasons, say linked to historic familial abuse?

JR is possible as long as he can persuade Patsy to collude and according to the forensic evidence, actually asphyxiate JonBenet?

BDI is the theory with the least number of holes, but maybe puberty arrived early in the Ramsey household, with JonBenet falling victim to the elder brother syndrome?

Coroner Meyer said there was both digital penetration and sexual contact, later analysis revealed prior chronic molestation. A splinter of wood was found inside JonBenet at autopsy, described as birefringent material.

Was the insertion of say the paintbrush part of the sex play or was it an attempt at staging, thats another bit I'm not certain about?

If you put the whack on the head and the insertion of the paintbrush together, then these do not seem to be the behaviour of an adult, more that of an ignorant child?

.

Absolutely agree! I have no problem with SEX and RAGE-related facts in BDI. As I stated earlier, the only weackest link in BDI is the ROPE/MURDER. Was it done by BR and modified (added 'garrote') by PR/JR? Who was the last one to tide ROBE until BR expired? Without knowing at which EXTEND BR was capable of RAGE that evening - I cannot be 100% sure who did what in regards to ROPE/MURDER....Therefore, knowledge of BR medical history should provide these answers. Agree?

 

[UKGuy]

Absolutely agree! I have no problem with SEX and RAGE-related facts in BDI. As I stated earlier, the only weackest link in BDI is the ROPE/MURDER. Was it done by BR and modified (added 'garrote') by PR/JR? Who was the last one to tide ROBE until BR expired? Without knowing at which EXTEND BR was capable of RAGE that evening - I cannot be 100% sure who did what in regards to ROPE/MURDER....Therefore, knowledge of BR medical history should provide these answers. Agree?

OpenMind4U,
Well that would be shocker if was a BDI with Burke doing the initial asphyxiation. No reason why not, although thats a lot of questions, and if the medical history agrees, then many years of therapy for yours truly.



.

 

[midwest mama]

MM, but IF it's true then we must explain the following:
- Why wipe the blood out?!
- Why clean-up and redress JBR?!
- Where is JBR original panty?!
- Where is the brush or woodstick or any other 'tool' which made this acute injury?! Does missing end of 'garrotte' was part of acute injury?!

Like you said, the purpose of the 'staging' is to 'cover up the signs of previous abuse', right? And I would agree with you if above questions could be explained.

OpenMind - I believe JB was wiped, cleaned and redressed for one of two reasons:
1. The stager knew there was prior sexual abuse and thought that inflicting the vaginal trauma would disguise the prior abuse, and did not want JB to be 'found' displaying any signs of the wound in the hopes that the abuse would not be apparent. I doubt the stager considered if she were 'found' that an autopsy would have to reveal the sexual abuse. Also, if it was intended that JB be 'found' outside of the house, the stager may have assumed that decomposition of the body would have disguised the sexual abuse, as long as there was no obvious outward sign of it. The ligature would lead to strangulation as a cause of death, and they might have gotten away without having the sexual abuse discovered.
2. The stager just wanted to have JB look as lovely and angelic as possible, and that surely would not include the bloody vaginal mess that they cleaned up. The strangulation would have been necessary to oblige the "kidnapping", but a narcissistic personality (which I believe ran strong in the Paugh/Ramsey family dynamic, JMO) would have wanted JB to be found dead without the "messiness" associated with blood, etc. The little silver star shirt was one of JB's favorite shirts also, which might explain that the stager wanted her to be wearing it, wrapped up in her favorite blanket. God forbid there would be blood allowed on those things. :maddening:

If JB had on a size 6 pair of Bloomies before being re-dressed, they could have been disposed of in numerous ways. Wadded up they would have been about the size of a tennis ball at most. They also could have been hand washed and tossed in the dryer, then put back in her drawer, where several size 6's were taken into police evidence. They also could have been cut up into small pieces and flushed one at a time down a toilet. With many flushings, they would have made it into the Boulder sewer system and out of the property plumbing, which was searched. :moo:

And, why couldn't the stick used as the ligature handle have been the cause of the injury? It could easily have been cleaned off before being wrapped into the cord. According to several opinions I've read, the handle in the ligature would not have had to have been used to achieve the strangulation, since the knot of the cord was a "slip knot" of sorts. So, the vaginal assault with the ligature handle (aka broken paintbrush handle) could have been done either prior to (causing JB to scream) or even while she was comatose from the head blow. And yes, even the missing piece of paintbrush (the upper tip) could have been the weapon used in the assault. :moo:

 

[txsvicki]

I don't think the wiping was just for jonbenet to be found without a mess because the saliva and mucus was not wiped from her face and the blanket and gown did have blood, unless those were old spots. Could she have been wiped because the stager wanted it to appear that she was dead when jabbed? Whoever did it didn't seem to have A problem with seeing her face up after the neck cord because she was found face up. It seems to me the person had all the stuff right and ready before the cord and jab then either someone else did some wiping or there was a change of mind in the staging. I keep thinking that the jabber thought jonbenet dead when jabbed and there was too much blood. That and thinking twice and making sure to wipe any evidence away. Whoever did this seems to be quite thinker and planner with a plan a, b, and c in place with both the note and the injuries while considering the longterm effect.

 

[txsvicki]

Another question has come to mind that i haven't seen discussed, at least in recent years. What happened to any saliva that jonbenet may not have been swallowing due to the head injury? I'm wondering if she was swallowing at all during that 90 minutes. If it was draining out then it should have been in her hair, on her shirt, the carpet in the basement, somewhere. I know some was on her cheek but it didn't seem like very much so maybe someone was suctioning, wiping, or really did change her shirt.

 

[OpenMind4U]

MM, Thank you for replay. You made some very good logical points....Would I agree with all of them? Not really....but that where the beauty of discussion is! It would be sooo boring if everyone would agree with each other all the time:woohoo:

1. The stager knew there was prior sexual abuse and thought that inflicting the vaginal trauma would disguise the prior abuse, and did not want JB to be 'found' displaying any signs of the wound in the hopes that the abuse would not be apparent. I doubt the stager considered if she were 'found' that an autopsy would have to reveal the sexual abuse

- If the acute sexual injury was performed by the 'stager' to conceal the chronical sexual injury then the above two sentences contradicts each other. Meanning, why disquise the prior abuse if the 'stager' has NO consideration of such a discoveries during the autopsy?;
- For the sake of the argument, is it possible that 'stager' had NO knowledge of the prior sexual abuse? What then? Would you agree that in this case, 'stager' has no need to perform any sexually-oriented acts?;

IMHO, regardless if 'stager' knew about prior sexual abuse or not, the act of the wiping, cleaning, destroying evidences related to acute sexual injury - logically points that acute sexual assult was NOT performed by the 'stager'.

 

[midwest mama]

Another question has come to mind that i haven't seen discussed, at least in recent years. What happened to any saliva that jonbenet may not have been swallowing due to the head injury? I'm wondering if she was swallowing at all during that 90 minutes. If it was draining out then it should have been in her hair, on her shirt, the carpet in the basement, somewhere. I know some was on her cheek but it didn't seem like very much so maybe someone was suctioning, wiping, or really did change her shirt.

I have always felt her white shirt was put on as part of the final redressing. Even if the wrist ligature was put on prior, it could have been untied, just as JR did when he 'found' her, then retied after changing her into the white shirt. I think JB might have been wearing the pink nightgown during the assaults against her. And, maybe the mouth area was cleaned up as well, but when the stager(s) saw there was still fluid out of her mouth, even though it had dried, they added the piece of duct tape to cover that area as well. Just another desire to minimize the ghastly appearance.

 

[midwest mama]

MM, Thank you for replay. You made some very good logical points....Would I agree with all of them? Not really....but that where the beauty of discussion is! It would be sooo boring if everyone would agree with each other all the time:woohoo:



- If the acute sexual injury was performed by the 'stager' to conceal the chronical sexual injury then the above two sentences contradicts each other. Meanning, why disquise the prior abuse if the 'stager' has NO consideration of such a discoveries during the autopsy?;
- For the sake of the argument, is it possible that 'stager' had NO knowledge of the prior sexual abuse? What then? Would you agree that in this case, 'stager' has no need to perform any sexually-oriented acts?;

IMHO, regardless if 'stager' knew about prior sexual abuse or not, the act of the wiping, cleaning, destroying evidences related to acute sexual injury - logically points that acute sexual assult was NOT performed by the 'stager'.

1. The stager knew there was prior sexual abuse and thought that inflicting the vaginal trauma would disguise the prior abuse, and did not want JB to be 'found' displaying any signs of the wound in the hopes that the abuse would not be apparent. I doubt the stager considered if she were 'found' that an autopsy would have to reveal the sexual abuse

Sorry I made such a fuzzy comment here. Here's my rewrite: If Patsy was involved in the staging and knew there was prior sexual abuse (since she took JB to the Doc so many times - maybe already aware of what JB and Burke might have been up to) she thought causing some sort of fresh, noticeable vaginal injury might camouflage the pre-existing injury. (Either she or JR could have done the ensuing jabbing.) Or, the stager(s) might have seen indications of fresh penetration in some way, either with a different instrument or digitally. There would have been telltale signs of it - fluids, exterior redness, etc. The assault by a stager would have been an attempt to disguise either the previous abuse or the fresh attack to make the fresh attack look bad enough so no one could ever consider that a child had done it. Only evil kidnappers would attack JB that viciously. During this extremely heinous time of trying to cover up as much of the damages to JB and have her 'found' without displaying the ugliness of the sexual aspect of the crime so obviously, I do not think the stager was considering that previous abuse would have been detectable 'separately' from from the immediate molestation during an autopsy.

Hope this helps you to understand my thinking. Love your challenging thought on this case. I can tell you're as anxious as anyone to try to clearly establish the killer of JB withing the R's! :seeya:

 

[txsvicki]

I'd sure like to see more from the experts about the acute injury and the lab results about the blood found. Some thought her just about expired when the jab was done but it would help to have it explained by some of them. Imo, there was no way she was jabbed and left there for over an hour. There's 25 million rbc's in a teaspoon of blood and there were few of them found at her injury . The body's first defense mechanism is to constrict vessels and capillaries fill, which she had. There seems to have not been time for the wound to form a fibrin mesh to catch lots of rbc's to begin forming a plug and white blood cellls. If an expert could explain it all in layman terms and give a timeline it would help. I think it was a matter of seconds or a minute or two at the most.

 

[DeeDee249]

Another question has come to mind that i haven't seen discussed, at least in recent years. What happened to any saliva that jonbenet may not have been swallowing due to the head injury? I'm wondering if she was swallowing at all during that 90 minutes. If it was draining out then it should have been in her hair, on her shirt, the carpet in the basement, somewhere. I know some was on her cheek but it didn't seem like very much so maybe someone was suctioning, wiping, or really did change her shirt.

In addition to the streak of saliva, and mucus on her cheek, there was fluid on her sleeve as well. Saliva can go down the throat, too. While a dead person can't "swallow", saliva from the mouth doesn't always drain out in copious amounts.

 

[UKGuy]

I'd sure like to see more from the experts about the acute injury and the lab results about the blood found. Some thought her just about expired when the jab was done but it would help to have it explained by some of them. Imo, there was no way she was jabbed and left there for over an hour. There's 25 million rbc's in a teaspoon of blood and there were few of them found at her injury . The body's first defense mechanism is to constrict vessels and capillaries fill, which she had. There seems to have not been time for the wound to form a fibrin mesh to catch lots of rbc's to begin forming a plug and white blood cellls. If an expert could explain it all in layman terms and give a timeline it would help. I think it was a matter of seconds or a minute or two at the most.

txsvicki,
I think the use of the paintbrush handle to assault JonBenet is generally assumed.

Whether its staging or part of the acute assault is a moot point. It will only matter if the use of the paintbrush is part of the acute assault period.

So if its BDI, did BR flip out and jab JonBenet with the paintbrush, causing her to scream out aloud, after inserting his finger?

Or after whomever had acutely assaulted JonBenet along comes Patsy and John.

John wipes down JonBenet with his shirt, one of the two insert the paintprush, to act as a proxy for her prior acute injuries, Patsy then asphyxiates JonBenet, wraps her up in the blanket then places her into the wine-cellar?

The 64K Q here is why would John take his shirt off and directly inplicate himself?



.

 

[rashomon]

txsvicki,
I think the use of the paintbrush handle to assault JonBenet is generally assumed.

Also, the piece of 'birefringent material' (= cellulose) originating from the paintbrush was found in exactly the same location where the acute genital wound had been inflicted.

So if its BDI, did BR flip out and jab JonBenet with the paintbrush, causing her to scream out aloud, after inserting his finger?

A fiber from the jacket Patsy had been wearing to the Whites' was found in the paint tray; another fiber was found the nylong wrappings around the broken paintbrush handle.
Imo this links her to the staging of both the sexual assault and asphyxiation scene.

Or after whomever had acutely assaulted JonBenet along comes Patsy and John.

Far more likely scenario imo.
I can see Burke delivering the head blow, but not as the stager of the scene.

The 64K Q here is why would John take his shirt off and directly inplicate himself?

I can't see John doing that to implicate himself. Can anyone?
I can't even see these fibers having gotten there accidentally as he was trying to help Patsy stage the scene.
Now we don't know how many of those fibers were found. If it was just one or two, they might somehow have ended up in the size 12s as he put them on JonBenet.
But maybe the fibers had been on JB's genitals before, were not wiped off completely, and some were then found in the size 12s.
But in that case, the only explanation I have is that they got there via sexual contact.

Question to those who have already read Kolar's book: does he address the fiber evidence from John's shirt?

 

[OpenMind4U]

Also, the piece of 'birefringent material' (= cellulose) originating from the paintbrush was found in exactly the same location where the acute genital wound had been inflicted.


A fiber from the jacket Patsy had been wearing to the Whites' was found in the paint tray; another fiber was found the nylong wrappings around the broken paintbrush handle.
Imo this links her to the staging of both the sexual assault and asphyxiation scene.


Far more likely scenario imo.
I can see Burke delivering the head blow, but not as the stager of the scene.

I can't see John doing that to implicate himself. Can anyone?
I can't even see these fibers having gotten there accidentally as he was trying to help Patsy stage the scene.
Now we don't know how many of those fibers were found. If it was just one or two, they might somehow have ended up in the size 12s as he put them on JonBenet.
But maybe the fibers had been on JB's genitals before, were not wiped off completely, and some were then found in the size 12s.
But in that case, the only explanation I have is that they got there via sexual contact.

Question to those who have already read Kolar's book: does he address the fiber evidence from John's shirt?[/QUOTE]

Yes, he does.

 

[Detective Pinkie]

txsvicki,
I think the use of the paintbrush handle to assault JonBenet is generally assumed.

Whether its staging or part of the acute assault is a moot point. It will only matter if the use of the paintbrush is part of the acute assault period.

So if its BDI, did BR flip out and jab JonBenet with the paintbrush, causing her to scream out aloud, after inserting his finger?

Or after whomever had acutely assaulted JonBenet along comes Patsy and John.

John wipes down JonBenet with his shirt, one of the two insert the paintprush, to act as a proxy for her prior acute injuries, Patsy then asphyxiates JonBenet, wraps her up in the blanket then places her into the wine-cellar?

The 64K Q here is why would John take his shirt off and directly inplicate himself?



.

Is it definitely known that John was wearing the shirt that day? I had imagined that it was something lying around, close at hand that was grabbed, like dirty washing or clean washing to be put away. I had assumed that whoever wiped her down hadn't realised what they were using.

Are we assuming John was wearing that shirt at the time or is there some evidence to suggest he was?

 

[cynic]

Also, the piece of 'birefringent material' (= cellulose) originating from the paintbrush was found in exactly the same location where the acute genital wound had been inflicted.

Dr. Spitz was joined (in Boulder for an investigation) by Tom Faure, the coroner's chief investigator, and Weinheimer (Dr. Carey Weinheimer). The group studied the cellulose substance that was found in victim's vagina and determined that it was consistent with the wood from the broken shard of the paintbrush handle used in the garroting. They also found that JonBenet had sustained a very powerful blow to the head, which, though it did not cause external bleeding, caused intracerebral bleeding that would quickly prove fatal. They could not determine if the head blow preceded that garroting with scientifc certainty, though the head blow, in all probability, had come first. Since the head wound was fully developed, this meant that the victim had survived for a period of time.
Cracking more cases: the forensic science of solving crimes, Henry Lee, page 222

Also...

On November 5, Detective Weinheimer arrived in St. Clair Shores, Michigan, to meet Dr. Werner Spitz, one of the world’s foremost forensic pathologists. Weinheimer took with him a stack of black-and-white photographs of the cellulose that coroner John Meyer had found in JonBenét’s vagina.
[SNIP]
Finally, the detectives turned to the microscopic splinter of cellulose found in JonBenet’s vagina, which looked like wood. The broken paintbrush that had been tied to the stick was splintered into shards. Logic suggested that a splinter of wood might have stuck to the perpetrator’s finger before he or she penetrated JonBenét vaginally. It could also have broken off the end of the paintbrush if the stick, rather than a finger, was used to penetrate her.
Perfect Murder, Perfect Town, Lawrence Schiller, pages 557, 559

Question to those who have already read Kolar's book: does he address the fiber evidence from John's shirt?

No he doesn't.

 

[Whaleshark]

"Question to those who have already read Kolar's book: does he address the fiber evidence from John's shirt?"

OpenMind4U - Yes, he does.

Cynic - No, he doesn't.


I have the book -- haven't read it yet. So, ???

 

[UKGuy]

Is it definitely known that John was wearing the shirt that day? I had imagined that it was something lying around, close at hand that was grabbed, like dirty washing or clean washing to be put away. I had assumed that whoever wiped her down hadn't realised what they were using.

Are we assuming John was wearing that shirt at the time or is there some evidence to suggest he was?

Detective Pinkie,
Yes, from memory he was photographed at the White's party wearing it, plus he never denied wearing it.

John stated he undressed in his bedroom and left the clothes worn to Whites in his bedroom?

I had assumed that whoever wiped her down hadn't realised what they were using.

Thats why its a 64K Q. Another interpretation is that the shirt was in the laundry basket in the basement and Patsy just used it as is?

My point in raising the question is if John was really wearing it, why would he willingly implicate himself, and why was he not wearing his shirt?

Was he in his bedroom with JonBenet, or did he just run to the basement when he heard Patsy scream or shout. And when it was evident that JonBenet needed to be wiped down, John simply takes off his shirt and wipes the blood from JonBenet, very strange?


.

 

[UKGuy]

Dr. Spitz was joined (in Boulder for an investigation) by Tom Faure, the coroner's chief investigator, and Weinheimer (Dr. Carey Weinheimer). The group studied the cellulose substance that was found in victim's vagina and determined that it was consistent with the wood from the broken shard of the paintbrush handle used in the garroting. They also found that JonBenet had sustained a very powerful blow to the head, which, though it did not cause external bleeding, caused intracerebral bleeding that would quickly prove fatal. They could not determine if the head blow preceded that garroting with scientifc certainty, though the head blow, in all probability, had come first. Since the head wound was fully developed, this meant that the victim had survived for a period of time.
Cracking more cases: the forensic science of solving crimes, Henry Lee, page 222

Also...

On November 5, Detective Weinheimer arrived in St. Clair Shores, Michigan, to meet Dr. Werner Spitz, one of the world’s foremost forensic pathologists. Weinheimer took with him a stack of black-and-white photographs of the cellulose that coroner John Meyer had found in JonBenét’s vagina.
[SNIP]
Finally, the detectives turned to the microscopic splinter of cellulose found in JonBenet’s vagina, which looked like wood. The broken paintbrush that had been tied to the stick was splintered into shards. Logic suggested that a splinter of wood might have stuck to the perpetrator’s finger before he or she penetrated JonBenét vaginally. It could also have broken off the end of the paintbrush if the stick, rather than a finger, was used to penetrate her.
Perfect Murder, Perfect Town, Lawrence Schiller, pages 557, 559

No he doesn't.

cynic,
He does address the fiber evidence from John's shirt, but not in detail. He confirms that the fibers were comingled with blood on JonBenet's genitals.

Which is an advance on simply being on the body, groin, genitals etc.


.

.

 

[cynic]

Kolar definitely doesn’t mention any fiber evidence relating to JR’s shirt.
Here are quotes from all the sections of the book relating to fibers:

JonBenét’s clothing was removed and bagged for the collection of other trace fibers and evidence that might be present. Obvious items of trace evidence, fibers, hair, were collected from the clothing before they were removed from her body and bagged.
Foreign Faction, Who Really Kidnapped JonBenet, James Kolar, page 56

The long-delayed examination of fibers found on the sticky side of the duct tape used to silence JonBenét had finally returned from the lab. Only days before the presentation, BPD investigators had learned that fibers from Patsy Ramsey’s black and red Essentials jacket were consistent with those found on the duct tape. This suggested to some investigators that Patsy had been in direct personal contact with the duct tape used to cover her daughter’s mouth, an element believed to have been used in the staging of the crime. She purportedly had never been to the basement on the morning of the kidnapping when the tape had been recovered. How could the transfer of this fiber evidence take place if it was the intruder who had brought the tape to the home during the kidnapping?
Foreign Faction, Who Really Kidnapped JonBenet, James Kolar, page 151

In additional “news,” the Denver Post reported that the newly impaneled grand jury was expected to review “fiber evidence” that linked clothing of Patsy Ramsey to the duct tape found on her daughter’s body. “The fiber was discovered in recent months, long after the killing, sources said. The article proceeded to cover the legal complications involved in the late discovery of the evidence, and chastised the police for their inability to have uncovered the fiber earlier in the investigation.
Foreign Faction, Who Really Kidnapped JonBenet, James Kolar, page 173

The most extensive look at the fiber evidence in Kolar’s book is the following and contains no mention of any fiber evidence from John’s shirt:
Trujillo advised me that lab technicians had identified eight different types of fibers on the sticky side of the duct tape used to cover JonBenét’s mouth. They included red acrylic, gray acrylic, and red polyester fibers that were subsequently determined by laboratory examination to be microscopically and chemically consistent to each other, as well as to fibers taken from Patsy Ramsey’s Essentials jacket.
[SNIPPED for brevity]
Brown cotton fibers had been found on four items closely associated with the body of JonBenét and implements used in her murder. Lab technicians thought the fibers similar to a pair of cotton work gloves.
Foreign Faction, Who Really Kidnapped JonBenet, James Kolar, pages 228 – 229

An alternate light source (ALS) was used to scan JonBenét’s body in search of other trace evidence and fluids. The area around her upper thighs illuminated traces of fluid and indications that she may have been wiped clean with some type of cloth. Investigators thought perhaps that the fluid source reacting to the ALS was semen, but swabbing’s of the area would later be determined to be a smear of blood.
Foreign Faction, Who Really Kidnapped JonBenet, James Kolar, page 58

 

[Whaleshark]

Ok then, guess we're just going to have to read the book ourselves, to know for sure...