What I think about regarding the paintbrush/staged molestation is that something caused her to bleed that night. Dead people don't bleed. They can leak blood, though. A sample of the blood can tell whether it came from a living or dead person, but that was not possible in this case.
If the bleeding happened when she was alive- it was molestation. If it happened after she was dead it was staging.
DeeDee249,
It may not be an either/or option. Both events may have occurred e.g. staged sexual assault, internal bleeding.
Consider the evidence: Coroner Meyer in his public remarks at the autopsy stated that JonBenet had undergone sexual contact and digital penetration.
So as far as Coroner Meyer is concerned, JonBenet was both sexually assaulted and had a finger inserted internally.
Patently the sexual assault is prior to the staging. The latter which may take the form of digital penetration, but if I assume this same person fashioned the ligature then possibly the finger had traces of wood splinters from the painbrush handle, which was then deposited inside JonBenet?
The other possibility is that sexual contact and digital penetration occur in the same prior time frame and that the missing piece of the paintbrush handle was employed to stage a grotesque sexual assault.
This latter assumption is in keeping with the victim profile as projected by the stager. IMO aspects of JonBenet's internal injuries and whether the missing piece of paintbrush was found inside her have been redacted from the Autopsy Report. To corroborate this view consider how Steve Thomas in his book does not tell us the status of the missing piece of the paintbrush nor has anyone present at the autopsy stated no object was found inside JonBenet. Evidence that would not detract from any prosecution.
Given that the blood on the size-12 underwear arrived on JonBenet after the staging was undertaken, else there would be more forensic evidence, then its likely that the blood deposited has arrived after death as the result of gravity?
A further consideration is that the blood deposit is the result of the missing piece of the paintbrush being used to stage a sexual assault, and that the touch-dna included in the blood sample originated from the paintbrush handle?
If there has indeed been an autopsy redaction then the latter scenario seems plausible, and should go some way to explaining the Intruder DNA!
Remember John and Lou Smit praying together? Well I reckon the relationship between John and Lou Smit deliberately fostered the idea of a sexually deviant intruder. This matches JonBenet's victim profile, and Smit's subsequent spin to the media. With the passage of time it all looks suspiciously convenient.