There's always the possibility that she was the object in motion and hit something else.
Why was JB killed?
- Thread starter Anyhoo
- Start date
There's always the possibility that she was the object in motion and hit something else.
What if it WASN'T an outsider that she mentioned it to?
And the severity makes no difference to me. This was a small, fragile child's skull.
There's an "Ask Super" thread around for just such issues.
There's an old thread around devoted to that idea specifically.
Actually, there's no "contrasting" opinions as you suggest Mama, as I understand it. The only difference is between the ones who said flat-out that there was prior sexual abuse and the ones who couldn't say from physical findings alone that it was sexual in nature.
I know what you mean. When I first came onto the forums, it was like a new world.
That's my understanding, too.
otg
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2010
- Messages
- 2,410
- Reaction score
- 184
For anyone who ever wants to question whether or not JonBenet was sexually abused/molested/assaulted/raped (whatever term you choose to call it), PLEASE read the autopsy report. When it was first released publicly, much of it was redacted and speculation (even by "experts") went both ways. But once the full report was released (against the wishes of the coroner, Dr. Meyer), there should be no doubt in anyone's mind exactly how much "punishment" this little child's genitals had received. I'll post the pertinent portions here, and I encourage anyone who has any doubt about something to look up each and every word they are not sure of so there is no mistaking what happened to her. This is so important to understanding what happened regardless of what any so-called expert might say. I don't care about IDI, RDI, PR, JR, BR, JAR, JMK, or SFF... It doesn't matter. Whoever did this, was abusing her, and did so just before she died. That is not my opinion -- that is a fact.
This from the section of the AR called the "EXTERNAL EVIDENCE OF INJURY":
On the anterior aspect of the perineum, along the edges of closure of the labia majora, is a small amount of dried blood. A similar small amount of dried and semifluid blood is present on the skin of the fourchette and in the vestibule. Inside the vestibule of the vagina and along the distal vaginal wall is reddish hyperemia. This hyperemia is circumferential and perhaps more noticeable on the right side and posteriorly. The hyperemia also appears to extend just inside the vaginal orifice. A 1 cm red-purple area of abrasion is located on the right posterolateral area of the 1x1 cm hymenal orifice. The hymen itself is represented by a rim of mucosal tissue extending clockwise between the 2 and 10:00 positions. The area of abrasion is present at approximately the 7:00 position and appears to involve the hymen and distal right lateral vaginal wall and possibly the area anterior to the hymen. On the right labia majora is a very faint area of violet discoloration measuring approximately one inch by three-eighths of an inch. Incision into the underlying subcutaneous tissue discloses no hemorrhage. A minimal amount of semiliquid thin watery red fluid is present in the vaginal vault. No recent or remote anal or other perineal trauma is identified.
The following is from the section called the "MICROSCOPIC DESCRIPTION: (All sections Stained with H&E)":
(Note that the following results come from microscopic examination of the cellular structures of tissue. IOW, it's something that can be objectively seen by the doctor -- not simply his subjective opinion. The staining with H&E is explained here.)
Vaginal Mucosa: All of the sections contain vascular congestion and focal interstitial chronic inflammation. The smallest piece of tissue, from the 7:00 position of the vaginal wall/hymen, contains epithelial erosion with underlying capillary congestion. A small number of red blood cells is present on the eroded surface, as is birefringent foreign material. Acute inflammatory infiltrate is not seen.
The Ramseys have tried to play down the sexual aspects of this, and they've even tried to deny that JonBenet was sexually abused (sometimes through their lawyers). Ask yourself why they would do that. Unless they were trying to protect someone for whatever the reason, why on earth wouldn't they be just as enraged as any other parent of a child who was raped and murdered? Why wouldn't they be constantly screaming in the press about the monster who molested their daughter before he killed her? Instead, they go on any show that will have them whimpering and whining about how much they have had to endure, and denying that JonBenet was sexually abused.
I've said enough for now. Please excuse me while I go puke.
If livor was in the blanching phase (non-fixed) she could have been slid long the floor in exactly the same position (on her back, legs straight, head cocked to the right) without making a second livor pattern. For instance, if she was pulled along the floor on the white blanket.
After livor becomes fixed, there is no possibility of making a second pattern. So she could have been moved from deeper in the room to a place closer to the door.This is one reason to explain why FW did not see her when he looked in the room, and yet she was right there when he returned with JR later.
I like to use a "jello" comparison when explaining livor mortis. Picture a bowl of freshly made jello. It is liquid at first, but thick, and if you pick up the bowl within the first 10 minutes or so while it is setting it will make a new "ring" each time you move it. But as it begins to set or gel, it will no longer move around in the bowl as a liquid. When it is completely set, it will not make a new ring or pattern in the bowl no matter how much you move it around. BUT the rings or patterns previously made will STILL REMAIN. Blood behaves the same way in a newly dead person. Gravity causes the no-longer-circulating blood to sink to the lowest part of the body touching the floor or ground. If lying on the floor on your back (supine) it will form on the back, buttocks, posterior surface of arms and legs. If sitting, (or suspended) it will form in the lower legs and feet (sometimes the hands). If lying prone, it will form on the face, stomach and and anterior surface of arms and legs. This is how I know she was never hung, suspended, stuffed in a suitcase, hidden in a freezer (all have been suggested). She was placed on her back, head cocked to the right, legs straight- and that is it.
Meara
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2013
- Messages
- 512
- Reaction score
- 335
The devil is in the details. Suffocation would have been more emotionally traumatic for both of them. To do it, Patsy would have had to be extremely close to JBR, nearly on top of her, and to hear and feel her struggling for however many minutes the murder took. Though hidden by the pillow, JBR's face would have been in front of Patsy's, and JBR would have known it was her mother killing her. A head blow from behind with a weapon long enough to put a little distance between her and JBR - emotionally as well as physically - and accomplish the deed in one stroke was less ghastly.
The garrotte could have been necessary if the blow didn't kill JBR outright. Or, together with the rest of the scene, its purpose could have been to point suspicion toward John, or at least away from herself. Many PDIs still falter a bit at the thought of PR assaulting JBR in those ways.
DeDee
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 21, 2013
- Messages
- 7,344
- Reaction score
- 42,070
The severity of the head blow is important because the amount of force used to create the head wound clearly shows intent to kill.
The amount of force required to knock a hole and run a wide crack through JonBenet's skull first rendered her unconscious. Yet she was slowly breathing and her heart continued to slowly pump, too, because the location in the brain that controls those functions were not yet totally adversely affected by the blunt force trauma. But she could no longer speak or walk. Thus, she collapsed. Clearly, to all who were present, she was dying. So why was there a need to strangle her in such a horrific manner? Maybe it was always planned to be like that.
Without a doubt, imo, JonBenet was killed in a sex-related crime.
Mama2JML
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 28, 2012
- Messages
- 1,233
- Reaction score
- 7
otg, I appreciate your response and respect your opinion. Thank you for taking the time/energy to share a detailed and educated analysis.
Now, it seems I need to clarify my stance as I do not dispute Dr. Meyer's findings.
Now, it seems I need to clarify my stance as I do not dispute Dr. Meyer's findings.
The autopsy report clearly indicates JonBenet suffered genital trauma near the time of death. I do not argue against a sexual assault having occurred subsequent to the murder. However, a pattern of previous & ongoing sexual abuse is not definitive. I believe this is a possibility. BUT, to build a theory on the presumption that JonBenet was subjected to prior, perhaps repeated, abuse would elicit too many assumptions & increase the probability of arriving at false conclusions. ...in my opinion.
otg
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2010
- Messages
- 2,410
- Reaction score
- 184
And I agree with you on all that, Mama. Forgive me if I misunderstood the point you questioned. If it is the prior abuse only, that is not as well defined in the AR, but it is there -- albeit, not quite as “glaringly obvious” as UKGuy noted.
I am not a medical type person, so a lot of this was all new to me when I started looking into it. But use of the word chronic versus acute in medical terms is not as you and I understand it (I’m assuming you’re not in the medical field either). Understanding this first helps to understand exactly what was being addressed in the AR. Rather than repeat it all, I’ll refer to posts where I tried to explain what I had come to understand about it [ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=9746303&postcount=1654"]here[/ame] and [ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=9750506&postcount=1657"]here[/ame]. The bottom line is that the terms refer to the stage of healing that an injury is at. Chronic does not necessarily mean that something has to be repeated multiple times, but rather that an injury is at a certain stage in healing and therefore it is distinguishable from a recent injury. The length of time in that healing process is dependent on several factors, but mostly the severity of the injury and where it occurs. The changes that happen during the healing process are not as grossly obvious (macroscopically) as they are under microscopic examination, which is why the coroner did this type of examination with the cells stained.
His findings were that the entire inside surface of JonBenet’s vagina (all sections of the vaginal mucosa) had vascular congestion (engorgement of blood at that level) and the type of inflammation which indicated prior injury/injuries that had begun to heal (focal interstitial chronic inflammation).
There was an area of hymenal tissue that had a “1 cm red-purple area of abrasion” (the abrasion would be acute) from which he removed a sample for microscopic examination. His finding from it was that it contained “epithelial erosion with underlying capillary congestion.” IOW, it had an eroded surface (resulting from repeated exposure) with increased capillary activity (the body’s response indicating a healing injury).
[As an aside from the point of chronic injury, I should point out here that in that part of the AR addressing the section of hymen examined under a microscope, Meyer says, "A small number of red blood cells is present on the eroded surface," and, "Acute inflammatory infiltrate is not seen." He is pointing out here that the abraided surface has some red blood cells present indicating a recent injury (acute). But since there is no inflammatory infiltrate present, the body hasn't had a chance to respond to the injury -- meaning it was very close in time to her death.]
These are the things specifically stated that speak to the prior abuse. But beyond that, there are also implied things that require interpretation based on what the coroner states and what we are supposed to know. Remember though that the coroner states what he sees assuming anyone who reads the AR will know what it means -- he doesn’t write it for the layperson. So when he tells us that her “uterus measures 3 x 1 x 0.8cm,” and that the hymenal orifice is “1x1 cm,” and that the “hymen itself is represented by a rim of mucosal tissue extending clockwise between the 2 and 10:00 positions,” we are supposed to understand that she has very little left of a hymen (which is something Nancy Grace doesn’t seem to understand). In fact, it is completely missing in the upper one-third of its circumference (clockwise from 10 to 2). What is there in the lower two-thirds (clockwise from 2 to 10) is an eroded and retracted “rim” of tissue, meaning that it has been exposed repeatedly enough to cause this reaction. A single forceful entry will usually cause tears (none of which were noted in the AR) and bleeding in the membrane. (This is despite the misconceptions of pubescent boys about a mysterious organ called a “cherry” that gets “popped” during first intercourse.) After repeated exposure, the hymen erodes and retracts until it is no longer present.
This is all stuff that shouldn’t matter whether you or I are IDI or RDI. This is all information found in the AR. We can disagree politely with one another on who we think is responsible, but there really shouldn’t be any disagreement on the injuries and what they mean. Again, Medicalese is not my native language (I'm still learning it), so if I wasn’t clear in explaining what I was trying to say, or if you (or anyone) has any questions about what I meant, just let me know and I’ll be glad to discuss it more with you.
Mountain_Kat
Heca Firimar !
- Joined
- Oct 28, 2010
- Messages
- 13,966
- Reaction score
- 45,142
OTG, that's one intelligent, well thought out post! Thanks for that.
txsvicki
Active Member
If I understand all reports correctly, the eroded part was actually the acute scratch? The actual hymen was not eroded but shriveled enough so that the paintbrush entered and didn't even tear a hymen? One centimeter was the size of the opening. About the size of a fingernail or a half a penny. About the size of the paintbrush handle, too. That seems pretty big for a 6 year old girl even to me, who has no idea of how big the opening should be.
thepinkdragon
Verified US Army Veteran/Certified Veteran's Menta
- Joined
- Oct 8, 2011
- Messages
- 850
- Reaction score
- 844
IMO that size opening and retracted hymen could be consistent with repetitive sexual abuse/rape by a prepubescent male penis. From all that I've read I would not be shocked if BR is responsible for JonBenet's vaginal infections and her death. MOO
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD
Sadly, I agree. I feel that had it been an adult male's digits or genitals, it would have been gone completely, I think.
Meara
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 10, 2013
- Messages
- 512
- Reaction score
- 335
Originally Posted by Meara
I have often wondered whether Patsy suspected that John had begun molesting JBR, or was grooming her for that, and killed her to protect her. If Patsy's cancer returned and she died, she wouldn't be there to intervene. In the interview where Patsy says JBR would never have to suffer from cancer or know the death of a child, I wonder whether this other possibility of 'would never have to live through the nightmare of being sexually abused for years by her father' was lurking behind her words. Maybe JBR was killed not so much to protect a secret but to prevent her from living out that particular secret.
All that said, Patsy strikes me as a person with complex motives. She set great store by her Miss West Virginia title and would not have liked being replaced by this new little pageant winner daughter. Behind her words might also have been the thought, 'She'll never have to know what it's like to lose her looks and sexual vitality and her husband's interest to cancer like I did."
Meara, do you believe that Patsy or one of her sisters experienced abuse by their father?
Good question, Dave. I've had to ponder it. Don Paugh is one of the subjects in this case I know the least about. Over the years, I've read rumors that he sexually abused his daughters, and possibly JBR, but have not come across any factual basis for them.
It's evident that these three women were seriously wounded by something in their formative years. But the parent who first comes to mind is Nedra, who, in my opinion - and I want to state this conservatively, since we don't have a formal diagnosis - was a flaming 5-star narcissist. All three daughters were inevitably harmed . If any of them were also experiencing abuse from their father, I don't think it was Patsy. Her core issues and symptoms weren't about sexual abuse but about identity disturbance, a classic result of her mother's disorder.
So, do I think Patsy may have wanted to protect JBR from sexual abuse because she herself had been abused? It's possible, but I don't get the Aha. I'd bet a sister was the target, and Patsy suppressed what she knew or suspected. In one of the interviews, Patsy is asked whether she herself was sexually abused. Understandably, many interpret her childlike "No" as evidence that she was. It could just as well mean, though, that her distress over JBR was compounded by memories of what happened to her sister.
It's nice to meet you, by the way.
I have often wondered whether Patsy suspected that John had begun molesting JBR, or was grooming her for that, and killed her to protect her. If Patsy's cancer returned and she died, she wouldn't be there to intervene. In the interview where Patsy says JBR would never have to suffer from cancer or know the death of a child, I wonder whether this other possibility of 'would never have to live through the nightmare of being sexually abused for years by her father' was lurking behind her words. Maybe JBR was killed not so much to protect a secret but to prevent her from living out that particular secret.
All that said, Patsy strikes me as a person with complex motives. She set great store by her Miss West Virginia title and would not have liked being replaced by this new little pageant winner daughter. Behind her words might also have been the thought, 'She'll never have to know what it's like to lose her looks and sexual vitality and her husband's interest to cancer like I did."
Meara, do you believe that Patsy or one of her sisters experienced abuse by their father?
Good question, Dave. I've had to ponder it. Don Paugh is one of the subjects in this case I know the least about. Over the years, I've read rumors that he sexually abused his daughters, and possibly JBR, but have not come across any factual basis for them.
It's evident that these three women were seriously wounded by something in their formative years. But the parent who first comes to mind is Nedra, who, in my opinion - and I want to state this conservatively, since we don't have a formal diagnosis - was a flaming 5-star narcissist. All three daughters were inevitably harmed . If any of them were also experiencing abuse from their father, I don't think it was Patsy. Her core issues and symptoms weren't about sexual abuse but about identity disturbance, a classic result of her mother's disorder.
So, do I think Patsy may have wanted to protect JBR from sexual abuse because she herself had been abused? It's possible, but I don't get the Aha. I'd bet a sister was the target, and Patsy suppressed what she knew or suspected. In one of the interviews, Patsy is asked whether she herself was sexually abused. Understandably, many interpret her childlike "No" as evidence that she was. It could just as well mean, though, that her distress over JBR was compounded by memories of what happened to her sister.
It's nice to meet you, by the way.
Sadly, I agree. I feel that had it been an adult male's digits or genitals, it would have been gone completely, I think.
Not necessarily, Tawny. An adult male penis, yes. There's no question in my mind about that. As for digits, if the penetrations are gradual enough and over a long enough period of time, it could cause light damage. That's the idea behind grooming.
There are other possibilities, too.
Likewise, Meara. I'm an old vet of this case. I wish I could say I was not.
I have no solid basis to believe that Patsy or her sisters were abused, either by their father of someone else in the family. BUT, there are some things that seem to yell out to me. Here's an example. One night, my brother and I were drinking a bit, and he said, "Ya know, Guv, I think there was abuse in PR's family."
"What do you mean, Mate?"
"Think about it: the two oldest sisters were known for their looks, right? Doesn't it strike you a bit odd that the sister (meaning Pamela) never got married, never had kids and let her looks and weight go so badly?"
I have to admit, I've looked at things differently since then.
I also agree with the assessment about Nedra. God only knows what she was like toward her daughters. I don't think she had a very healthy relationship with her daughters. Call that a hunch, if you will.