accident?

[rashomon]

rashomon,
The real reason JonBenet's genital area was wiped, was to effect a change of plan, the revised staging was that she was to be abducted sleeping from bed.

But what suggests to you that JB's genital area was wiped at all? The fibers from John Ramsey's shirt in the crotch area of her panties?
And how do we 'know' that it was in fact blood which was wiped off her body? Couldn't it have been urine or feces too?

 

[UKGuy]

But what suggests to you that JB's genital area was wiped at all? The fibers from John Ramsey's shirt in the crotch area of her panties?
And how do we 'know' that it was in fact blood which was wiped off her body? Couldn't it have been urine or feces too?

rashomon,

Coroner Meyer's remarks regarding blood staining on her underwear and genitals, or lack thereof?

JR's fibers dont suggest anything other than linking him to the crime-scene.

Yes urine and feces may have been wiped too, but I doubt it, why wipe urine, she was soaked through? Depending on your favorite theory the timeline constrains particular events.

That is certain events cannot occur in different theories e.g. no wipe down, implies the ransom note may have been written first.

There are other events, which although we were not there, we can assert happened otherwise JonBenet would not have been discovered as she was.

For example you can sequence an accidental head bash, followed with a mercy strangulation?

You can invert this sequence and it becomes murder.

A third option is concurrent injuries resulting in death, which may or may not have been intentional?

I'll assume each of these options will generate different types of forensic evidence, some of which are exclusive to a particular option.

Exploring this suggests there is evidence missing, and can offer an alternate reason for her being wiped down, as I mentioned I'll post on this once I get the timelines sorted out.



.

 

[JMO8778]

JMO8778,

Its likely that the police are holding something back, they nearly always do. Sometimes its something recovered from the crime-scene that becomes significant afterwards.

Re:Rooms; John does seem to suggest things in this manner, his vegas remarks were in a similar vien. Its possible he was suggesting a reason for any apparent use of the rooms, since if they were empty why all this stuff lying around? e.g. Patsy may have been sleeping in one of these rooms. From memory the closet was used as an overflow for JonBenet's costumes and clothes?

imo JonBenet was moved down to the basement to remove her from the true crime-scene, somewhere upstairs, depending on your favorite theory this can be her toilet, her bedroom, JR's bedroom etc.



.

Thanks,yes that makes sense.I hadn't thought about that one...I bet maybe PR didn't sleep with JR,and they had to pretend she did in order to say they knew each other was in bed by (whatever time they said).

 

[UKGuy]

Thanks,yes that makes sense.I hadn't thought about that one...I bet maybe PR didn't sleep with JR,and they had to pretend she did in order to say they knew each other was in bed by (whatever time they said).

JMO8778,

Sure, and although I believe this sleeping arrangement had something to do with Patsy being closer to the toilet. It may have set a private train of events into motion?


.

 

[rashomon]

rashomon,

Coroner Meyer's remarks regarding blood staining on her underwear and genitals, or lack thereof?

JR's fibers dont suggest anything other than linking him to the crime-scene.

Yes urine and feces may have been wiped too, but I doubt it, why wipe urine, she was soaked through? Depending on your favorite theory the timeline constrains particular events.

That is certain events cannot occur in different theories e.g. no wipe down, implies the ransom note may have been written first.

There are other events, which although we were not there, we can assert happened otherwise JonBenet would not have been discovered as she was.

For example you can sequence an accidental head bash, followed with a mercy strangulation?

You can invert this sequence and it becomes murder.

A third option is concurrent injuries resulting in death, which may or may not have been intentional?

I'll assume each of these options will generate different types of forensic evidence, some of which are exclusive to a particular option.

Exploring this suggests there is evidence missing, and can offer an alternate reason for her being wiped down, as I mentioned I'll post on this once I get the timelines sorted out.

UK Guy,

We were discussing if there was urine on the wine cellar floor too. Obviously yes. A poster on Forums for Justice wrote:

JonBenet also had urine on her clothes from when her bladder released at death onto the front of her bottoms and undies. Her urine was found on the carpet in that area, as well, released at TOD. She would have been lying on her stomach, then, when she expired.

So the urine in all probability was released post-mortem when JB was already lying in the wine cellar. And I think it is possible that the Ramseys did not notice this post-mortem release anymore. Suppose JB was face-down when the ligature was tightened around her neck, and this was the last thing the Ramseys did before throwing the blanket over her. Thus the following post-mortem shedding might have gone unnoticed.

I'm still looking for an official source where it says JB was wiped. Did Coroner Meyer state this?

 

[UKGuy]

UK Guy,

We were discussing if there was urine on the wine cellar floor too. Obviously yes. A poster on Forums for Justice wrote:

So the urine in all probability was released post-mortem when JB was already lying in the wine cellar. And I think it is possible that the Ramseys did not notice this post-mortem release anymore. Suppose JB was face-down when the ligature was tightened around her neck, and this was the last thing the Ramseys did before throwing the blanket over her. Thus the following post-mortem shedding might have gone unnoticed.

I'm still looking for an official source where it says JB was wiped. Did Coroner Meyer state this?

rashomon,
I am not a member of the forum which you quote and not party to their discussions or liable for any omissions.

Published photos of the Ramsey home show that the entire basement is carpeted with the exception of the wine-cellar Photos show that the carpet stops at the wine-cellar door. Wooden shards were found on the carpet just outside the wine-cellar door. So I assume this is where one or both ends of the paint brush handle were broken?

So if it can be demonstrated that there is urine-staining on the carpet in the basement originating from JonBenet, then I assert given the number of movements required to stage the crime-scene, at some point it would have been evident that there had been a post-mortem urine-release?

I'm still looking for an official source where it says JB was wiped. Did Coroner Meyer state this?

Affidavit of Jan. 30, 1997
http://www.acandyrose.com/01301997warrant.htm

Your Affiant is Jim Byfield, currently assigned to the Detective Division with the Boulder Police Department. Your Affiant has been assigned to the Detective Division for two years and served as a Patrol Officer with the Boulder Police Deparunent since January 5, 1981. After being duly sworn, Your Affiant states the following:

...

Det. Arndt tcld Your Affiant that she personally observed Dr. John Meyer examine the vaginal and pubic areas of the deceased, Dr. Meyer stated that he observed numerous traces of a dark fiber.

Detective Arndt told Your Affiant that she witnessed the autopsy of JonBenet Ramsey which was conducted by Dr. John Meyer on December 27, 1996. Detective Arndt told Your Afflant that she observed Dr. Meyer examine the vaginal area of the victim and heard him state that the victim had received an injury consistent with digital penetration of her vagina. Detective Arndt told Your Affiant that Dr. Meyer told her that it was his opinion that the victim had been subjected to sexual contact.

...

Det. Arndt informed Your Affiant that she observed Dr. Meyer swab these florescent areas. Dr. Meyer was also observed by Det. Arndt to obtain vaginal, oral and anal swabs from the child's body. (According to examinations conducted at the Colorado Bureau of Investigations, no semen was located on the body, panties, or clothing of Jonl3enet Ramsey).

Det. Arndt informed Your Affiant that Dr. Meyer stated to her that he observed red stains in the crotch area of the panties that the child was wearing at the time that the child's body was subjected to the external visual examination. Dr. Meyer stated to Det. Arndt that the red stain appeared to be consistent with blood. Det. Arndt further informed Your Affiant that Dr. Meyer stated to her that after examining the panties (as descnbed above), he observed the exterior pubic area ofthe child's body located next to the areas of the panties containing the red stains and found no visible reddish stains in that area. Dr. Meyer stated to Det. Arndt that his opinion is that the evidence observed is consistent with the child's pubic area having been wiped by a cloth.

...

(James Byfield's signature)
Sworn to and subscribed in my presence this 30th day of December 1997, in Boulder, Colorado.
(Judge Diane R. MacDonald's signature)

I hope this is official enough?

.

 

[rashomon]

rashomon,
I am not a member of the forum which you quote and not party to their discussions or liable for any omissions.

Published photos of the Ramsey home show that the entire basement is carpeted with the exception of the wine-cellar Photos show that the carpet stops at the wine-cellar door. Wooden shards were found on the carpet just outside the wine-cellar door. So I assume this is where one or both ends of the paint brush handle were broken?

So if it can be demonstrated that there is urine-staining on the carpet in the basement originating from JonBenet, then I assert given the number of movements required to stage the crime-scene, at some point it would have been evident that there had been a post-mortem urine-release?



Affidavit of Jan. 30, 1997
http://www.acandyrose.com/01301997warrant.htm


I hope this is official enough?

Thanks UKGuy.
The source is official enough, but still it raises questions imo, for the injury inflicted to JB's genital area could have been done at a time when she was nearing death, and maybe hardly bled anymore. So perhaps it wasn't even necessary to wipe her pubic area since there was no blood flow at all? Maybe those small spots found on her panties was the whole amount of blood shed?
Dr. Meyer examined the exterior pubic area of JB's body, found no reddish stains in that area and concluded that the child's pubic area must have been wiped because it did not match the location of the stains in the panties.
But did the 'exterior' pubic area of JB's body contain any fresh injuries at all?
Wasn't the injury inflicted to the lower rim of JB's hymen (see Dr. McCann's report)?
So couldn't a little blood from that wound just have seeped into the crotch area of the panties, the way menstrual blood would do?

Re the urine stains on the carpet in the basement: I'll ask the poster on FFJ to clarify which carpet exactly she is referring to.

 

[UKGuy]

Thanks UKGuy.
The source is official enough, but still it raises questions imo, for the injury inflicted to JB's genital area could have been done at a time when she was nearing death, and maybe hardly bled anymore. So perhaps it wasn't even necessary to wipe her pubic area since there was no blood flow at all? Maybe those small spots found on her panties was the whole amount of blood shed?
Dr. Meyer examined the exterior pubic area of JB's body, found no reddish stains in that area and concluded that the child's pubic area must have been wiped because it did not match the location of the stains in the panties.
But did the 'exterior' pubic area of JB's body contain any fresh injuries at all?
Wasn't the injury inflicted to the lower rim of JB's hymen (see Dr. McCann's report)?
So couldn't a little blood from that wound just have seeped into the crotch area of the panties, the way menstrual blood would do?

Re the urine stains on the carpet in the basement: I'll ask the poster on FFJ to clarify which carpet exactly she is referring to.

rashomon,

I guess anything may have happened regarding the flow of blood, forwards, backwards, or sideways. In Coroner's Meyer's opinion, JonBenet appeared to have been wiped down, and in the absence of the photographs, and there will be autopsy photographs reflecting his opinion, I simply accept it until I am offered alternative evidence.

Assuming I am interpreting Coroner Meyer correctly, some blood stains on her underwear had no corresponding blood on her genitals.

This I read as meaning those had been wiped away?

It does not say anything about other blood stains or their origin.


Coroner Meyer offers some interesting opinions, he has no axe to grind, John Ramsey was not paying him for his report.

So when he opines JonBenet's vagina was digitally penetrated, that she appeared to have been wiped down, and that dark fibers were recovered from JonBenet's pubic and vaginal area, I give more weight to this than speculation by non-professionals. Additionally if you consider that JonBenet was redressed in the size-12 underwear after being killed, then it would appear a lot of attention was given to JonBenet's genital area post-mortem!

Naturally this is in direct conflict with the assumption that a murder was staged to hide an accidental death which was the result of Toilet Rage.

Since she was left wearing urine-soaked underwear and longjohns!





.

 

[rashomon]

rashomon,

I guess anything may have happened regarding the flow of blood, forwards, backwards, or sideways. In Coroner's Meyer's opinion, JonBenet appeared to have been wiped down, and in the absence of the photographs, and there will be autopsy photographs reflecting his opinion, I simply accept it until I am offered alternative evidence.

Assuming I am interpreting Coroner Meyer correctly, some blood stains on her underwear had no corresponding blood on her genitals.

This I read as meaning those had been wiped away?

It does not say anything about other blood stains or their origin.


Coroner Meyer offers some interesting opinions, he has no axe to grind, John Ramsey was not paying him for his report.

So when he opines JonBenet's vagina was digitally penetrated, that she appeared to have been wiped down, and that dark fibers were recovered from JonBenet's pubic and vaginal area, I give more weight to this than speculation by non-professionals. Additionally if you consider that JonBenet was redressed in the size-12 underwear after being killed, then it would appear a lot of attention was given to JonBenet's genital area post-mortem!

Naturally this is in direct conflict with the assumption that a murder was staged to hide an accidental death which was the result of Toilet Rage.

Since she was left wearing urine-soaked underwear and longjohns!

But does the digital penetration Dr. Meyer mentions refer to the acute inury inflicted on JB? Or to the chronic signs of abuse in JB (the vaginal orifice measuring one cm for example - too large for a child of JB's age)?

 

[UKGuy]

But does the digital penetration Dr. Meyer mentions refer to the acute inury inflicted on JB? Or to the chronic signs of abuse in JB (the vaginal orifice measuring one cm for example - too large for a child of JB's age)?

rashomon,

No I do not think it does, since that injury is acute, Coroner Meyer is explicitly stating, and here I paraphrase: it looks as if someone has inserted their finger into JonBenet's vagina?

Although there may have been chronic abuse that does not preclude JonBenet from being sexually abused concurrently with her death?

Whoever staged JonBenet's murder did not seem to concerned that she was wearing urine soaked clothing, imo this is in direct conflict with the toilet rage theory as a cause?



.

 

[BBB167893]

But does the digital penetration Dr. Meyer mentions refer to the acute inury inflicted on JB? Or to the chronic signs of abuse in JB (the vaginal orifice measuring one cm for example - too large for a child of JB's age)?

Perhaps both.

Wendy Murphy: the child had old and new vaginal injuries. That's not nothing.

 

[rashomon]

rashomon,
I am not a member of the forum which you quote and not party to their discussions or liable for any omissions.

Published photos of the Ramsey home show that the entire basement is carpeted with the exception of the wine-cellar Photos show that the carpet stops at the wine-cellar door. Wooden shards were found on the carpet just outside the wine-cellar door. So I assume this is where one or both ends of the paint brush handle were broken?

So if it can be demonstrated that there is urine-staining on the carpet in the basement originating from JonBenet, then I assert given the number of movements required to stage the crime-scene, at some point it would have been evident that there had been a post-mortem urine-release?

UKGuy,

This is from Koldkase's post on FFJ. KK is an extremely well informed poster who has been researching this case for many years.

The green paint particle AND carpet fiber were on her chin. The garrote was tied in the back of the neck, and pulled from the back. Urine released from her relaxed muscles when she died was on the carpet outside the cellar room. She had urine on the FRONT of her clothes, proving she was ON HER STOMACH when that happened. Ocam's Razor.

So you were right UKGuy, there was no carpet in the wine cellar. But the presence of urine on the carpet in another part of the basement and other forensic evidence (the front of the long underwear was stained with urine too) suggests a scenario where the garrote was tied around JB's neck as she was lying face-down on this carpet. So this part of the staging was done in the basement (although not in the wine cellar).
KK also wrote:

See, one thing I have thought is that the killer did not go to the paint tray and get the paintbrush, run back upstairs and tie it onto the garrote, then bring her back down, etc. The evidence of the paint strip, carpet fibers, urine on the carpet, all indicate the body was there on the floor at some point, so it's more logical to me that JonBenet was brought to the basement, not that the things there were brought upstairs to JonBenet.

Very convincing arguments too imo. For there has been some discussion as to whether part of the ligature/garrote staging was done upstairs in JB's room.
I don't think it was, for it would have been far too risky (Burke might have come into the room for example), and the forensic evidence doesn't suport such a theory either.

KK's info re the urine stain has now convinced me that toilet rage was NOT at the origin of Patsy's rage.
I originally thought maybe when the Ramseys put JB's dead body in the wine cellar, and then placed a blanket over her, the post-mortem release might have gone unnoticed by them.
But as the post-mortem release obviously did not occur in the dark wine cellar (where JB's body was finally put), but outside it, I believe the Ramseys must have noticed the post-mortem urine release.
And indeed, leaving their daughter in urine-soaked clothing would make no sense at all if the purpose ws to hide toileting issues as the reason for JB's death.
Btw, the toilet rage is not my favorite theory as you said, I only didn't rule it out completely before reading KK's post.
My favorite theory is that Patsy delivered the head blow in a rage, but I am not at all sure what it was that caused her rage.

Why do you think JB's size six panties were removed and replaced with the size 12s?

 

[UKGuy]

UKGuy,

This is from Koldkase's post on FFJ. KK is an extremely well informed poster who has been researching this case for many years.


So you were right UKGuy, there was no carpet in the wine cellar. But the presence of urine on the carpet in another part of the basement and other forensic evidence (the front of the long underwear was stained with urine too) suggests a scenario where the garrote was tied around JB's neck as she was lying face-down on this carpet. So this part of the staging was done in the basement (although not in the wine cellar).
KK also wrote:

Very convincing arguments too imo. For there has been some discussion as to whether part of the ligature/garrote staging was done upstairs in JB's room.
I don't think it was, for it would have been far too risky (Burke might have come into the room for example), and the forensic evidence doesn't suport such a theory either.

KK's info re the urine stain has now convinced me that toilet rage was NOT at the origin of Patsy's rage.
I originally thought maybe when the Ramseys put JB's dead body in the wine cellar, and then placed a blanket over her, the post-mortem release might have gone unnoticed by them.
But as the post-mortem release obviously did not occur in the dark wine cellar (where JB's body was finally put), but outside it, I believe the Ramseys must have noticed the post-mortem urine release.
And indeed, leaving their daughter in urine-soaked clothing would make no sense at all if the purpose ws to hide toileting issues as the reason for JB's death.
Btw, the toilet rage is not my favorite theory as you said, I only didn't rule it out completely before reading KK's post.
My favorite theory is that Patsy delivered the head blow in a rage, but I am not at all sure what it was that caused her rage.

Why do you think JB's size six panties were removed and replaced with the size 12s?

rashomon,

KK's info re the urine stain has now convinced me that toilet rage was NOT at the origin of Patsy's rage.

I agree with you.

Why do you think JB's size six panties were removed and replaced with the size 12s?

This will depend on your favorite theory, but it may be as simple as the removal of forensic evidence. I have a theory that factors in an alternate reason for their removal, but its not ready for posting yet. I am not convinced 100% that the Wednesday feature was a deciding aspect in selecting them for redressing JonBenet, that reason alike the Toilet Rage theory and urine-soaked underwear, is also inconsistent in the size-12 area.

Very convincing arguments too imo. For there has been some discussion as to whether part of the ligature/garrote staging was done upstairs in JB's room.
I don't think it was, for it would have been far too risky (Burke might have come into the room for example), and the forensic evidence doesn't suport such a theory either.

mmm well you must ask your well informed posters if they accept that there was a post-mortem urine-release prior to JonBenet being placed into the wine-cellar, does this mean someone ran upstairs for the size-12's, or did she arrive in basement wearing them?

I would suggest that the ligature was applied to JonBenet upstairs. JonBenet may have been urine-soaked prior to being brought down to the basement?

What is important about the urine-soaked underwear is not the timeline but that the stager must have known that JonBenet was wet through.





.

 

[rashomon]

rashomon,
I would suggest that the ligature was applied to JonBenet upstairs. JonBenet may have been urine-soaked prior to being brought down to the basement?

But fibers from Patsy's jacket were found in the tray where the paintbrushes were kept, JB shed urine via post-mortem release on the carpet in the basement near the paint tray - all the forensic evidence suggests that the garrote staging was done in the basement.
Why should Patsy get the paintbrush from the basement and run upstairs with it to do the staging, and then bring her back down?

mmm well you must ask your well informed posters if they accept that there was a post-mortem urine-release prior to JonBenet being placed into the wine-cellar, does this mean someone ran upstairs for the size-12's, or did she arrive in basement wearing them?

I haven't asked the poster yet, but my guess would be that the size 12 panties and long underwear were put on JB upstairs, and that she was then taken down to the basement because the Ramseys wanted to avoid Burke coming into JB's room and seeing what had happened.
At that time the underwear was still dry, for JB, in a coma from the head bash but still alive, hadn't yet shed urine via post-mortem release.

 

[UKGuy]

But fibers from Patsy's jacket were found in the tray where the paintbrushes were kept, JB shed urine via post-mortem release on the carpet in the basement near the paint tray - all the forensic evidence suggests that the garrote staging was done in the basement.
Why should Patsy get the paintbrush from the basement and run upstairs with it to do the staging, and then bring her back down?



I haven't asked the poster yet, but my guess would be that the size 12 panties and long underwear were put on JB upstairs, and that she was then taken down to the basement because the Ramseys wanted to avoid Burke coming into JB's room and seeing what had happened.
At that time the underwear was still dry, for JB, in a coma from the head bash but still alive, hadn't yet shed urine via post-mortem release.

rashomon,

1. But fibers from Patsy's jacket were found in the tray where the paintbrushes were kept

Yes I agree.

2. JB shed urine via post-mortem release on the carpet in the basement near the paint tray

You cannot know this with any degree of certainty, she may have been wet prior to being brought downstairs?

3. all the forensic evidence suggests that the garrote staging was done in the basement.

Garrote staging possibly, but not the ligature!

4. Why should Patsy get the paintbrush from the basement and run upstairs with it to do the staging, and then bring her back down?

Obviously she didn't.



...

I haven't asked the poster yet, but my guess would be that the size 12 panties and long underwear were put on JB upstairs

So some staging may have taken place upstairs?

and that she was then taken down to the basement because the Ramseys wanted to avoid Burke coming into JB's room and seeing what had happened.
At that time the underwear was still dry, for JB, in a coma from the head bash but still alive, hadn't yet shed urine via post-mortem release.

Everything in this quote is speculative e.g. JonBenet may have been killed in the kitchen or any room in the house other than her bedroom?

Also you must ask your well informed posters where they think the acute injury to JonBenet's genitals was done? The why may be ambiguous.



.

 

[rashomon]

rashomon,
Garrote staging possibly, but not the ligature!

UKGuy,
why should the ligature around JBs hands have been put on upstairs if the garroting with the same cord obviously took place down in the basement? Forensic evidence supports this. Urine on the front part of JB's long underwear and a stain on the carpet point to post-mortem release while the child was lying face-down.
I believe that the wrist ligatures and duct tape were the last pieces of staging done on JB's body in the basement.

So some staging may have taken place upstairs?

Maybe the redressing of JB in the size 12 underwear and longjohns, and tying her hair in ponytails were done upstairs.

Also you must ask your well informed posters where they think the acute injury to JonBenet's genitals was done? The why may be ambiguous.

One of those well-informed posters at FFJ gave me the link to the layout of the basement, and you can see that the paintbrush shards, Patsy's paint tray and the urine stain were found directly in front of the wine cellar door, in the boiler room. Scroll to the # 3 post:

http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/showthread.php?p=126779#post126779

So the acute paintbrush injury obviously was done in that location, as well as the subsequent 'garroting'.

 

[Solace]

Solace,
The ransom note is just what it says e.g. JonBenet has been abducted from her bed. No mention of sexual assault or garroting.

We assume JonBenet had her size-6 pants replaced with size-12 underwear, and that she was wiped down?

So why does JonBenet's killer need to do all this, whats the purpose, JonBenet is dead?

imo the reason is to effect a change of plan, where the staging has to mirror the ramsom note, so JonBenet is redressed and wiped down, voila no apparent sexual assault. So if the ransom note was the first idea, there would be no need to sexually assault JonBenet, hence no need to wipe her down, most likely no need for a garrote either.

All this assumes there was a prior staging which was constructed along the lines of a predatory sexual assault?



.

UK Guy,

With all due respect, please speak plainly. Do you feel that Patsy was trying to cover up a sexual assault?

Why could it not be that Patsy was using corporal punishment on JB and the douching was part of it and that is where the prior injuries come from. But lets get back to your theory, because you have lost me and I would really like to understand it. From what I am reading, you are saying that there was a second thought because they forgot to hide the sexual abuse. And then they realized it and wiped her down, etc., etc.

So you think Patsy and John were sexually abusing her. Frankly, I am not following. So help me to understand what you are saying, please.

Thanks.

UK, I just reread your post and I understand it, but do you actually think that Patsy or John wrote that note and then realized that "wait a minute, we forgot to cover up the sexual abuse, let's do that now" kind of thing.

I mean I have read your others posts and while you don't really come out and say who you think did it and what happened, you do believe that this was more than a bedwetting rage. So what does that leave? I cannot see them writing the note and then saying what I think you are saying. Why would you expect that two people killing their daughter would do anything logical.

But I have to tell you, you lose me with the following:

"So if the ransom note was the first idea, there would be no need to sexually assault JonBenet, hence no need to wipe her down, most likely no need for a garrote either."

Why Not? You are assuming that the people who did this are thinking logically. They could have written the note first, but I don't see it that way. Not for the reason you say, but because I believe the person who did this is pretty much insane and has to get rid of her. Then she will write the note. It has nothing to do with logical thinking. It is a matter of priorities. That is what I think.

BUT, man, I am open to your convincing me. Maybe I am reading what you are saying wrong. HELPPPPPPPPP!

UK, I am going on vacation for a week, but I am truly interested in your reply. I find your posts very interesting. So I will look forward to it. Thanks, Solace

 

[UKGuy]

UKGuy,
why should the ligature around JBs hands have been put on upstairs if the garroting with the same cord obviously took place down in the basement? Forensic evidence supports this. Urine on the front part of JB's long underwear and a stain on the carpet point to post-mortem release while the child was lying face-down.
I believe that the wrist ligatures and duct tape were the last pieces of staging done on JB's body in the basement.


Maybe the redressing of JB in the size 12 underwear and longjohns, and tying her hair in ponytails were done upstairs.


One of those well-informed posters at FFJ gave me the link to the layout of the basement, and you can see that the paintbrush shards, Patsy's paint tray and the urine stain were found directly in front of the wine cellar door, in the boiler room. Scroll to the # 3 post:

http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/showthread.php?p=126779#post126779

So the acute paintbrush injury obviously was done in that location, as well as the subsequent 'garroting'.

rashomon,

why should the ligature around JBs hands have been put on upstairs if the garroting with the same cord obviously took place down in the basement?

Because it need not have been looped onto her hands upstairs, only looped around her neck to asphyxiate her?

Forensic evidence supports this. Urine on the front part of JB's long underwear and a stain on the carpet point to post-mortem release while the child was lying face-down.

The forensic evidence only supports the stain not where the post-mortem release first took place.

I believe that the wrist ligatures and duct tape were the last pieces of staging done on JB's body in the basement.

Blankets?

So the acute paintbrush injury obviously was done in that location, as well as the subsequent 'garroting'.

Possibly?


.

 

[UKGuy]

UK Guy,

With all due respect, please speak plainly. Do you feel that Patsy was trying to cover up a sexual assault?

Why could it not be that Patsy was using corporal punishment on JB and the douching was part of it and that is where the prior injuries come from. But lets get back to your theory, because you have lost me and I would really like to understand it. From what I am reading, you are saying that there was a second thought because they forgot to hide the sexual abuse. And then they realized it and wiped her down, etc., etc.

So you think Patsy and John were sexually abusing her. Frankly, I am not following. So help me to understand what you are saying, please.

Thanks.

UK, I just reread your post and I understand it, but do you actually think that Patsy or John wrote that note and then realized that "wait a minute, we forgot to cover up the sexual abuse, let's do that now" kind of thing.

I mean I have read your others posts and while you don't really come out and say who you think did it and what happened, you do believe that this was more than a bedwetting rage. So what does that leave? I cannot see them writing the note and then saying what I think you are saying. Why would you expect that two people killing their daughter would do anything logical.

BUT, man, I am open to your convincing me. Maybe I am reading what you are saying wrong. HELPPPPPPPPP!

UK, I am going on vacation for a week, but I am truly interested in your reply. I find your posts very interesting. So I will look forward to it. Thanks, Solace

Solace,

Why could it not be that Patsy was using corporal punishment on JB and the douching was part of it and that is where the prior injuries come from.

Because there is no forensic evidence to support this.

UK, I just reread your post and I understand it, but do you actually think that Patsy or John wrote that note and then realized that "wait a minute, we forgot to cover up the sexual abuse, let's do that now" kind of thing.

No from the likely sequence of events the ransom note came last, there may have been a prior staging that took the form of an intruder sexual assault, say in her bedroom? This was then revised to become an abduction so the ransom note was authored. But they expected JonBenet's body to be discovered so masked her sexual assault by wiping her down and changing her underwear, then wrapping her in blankets, all different layers of masking!

That is her acute injury may have been inflicted upstairs, but I'm not hung up on this.

Why would you expect that two people killing their daughter would do anything logical.

Because their attempt at staging a murder follows a logic particular to what they think a homicide should look like.

One of the problems in this case is using the staged evidence to promote your particular theory.

e.g. Toilet Rage is a favorite theory with the staged evidence used to back it up, e.g. redressed in clean underwear, and wiped down. So its more than a bedwetting rage because that theory is inconsistent with the forensic evidence.

The Intruder Theory is another classic interpretation which employs nearly all the staged evidence from the wine-cellar plus the ransom note.

So when the Ramsey's staged a murder, this suggests they are not only hiding the true cause of death, but also its location, and any relevant forensic evidence.

Both the autopsy and subsequent analysis by other medical professionals suggest JonBenet had been sexually assaulted not only on the occassion of her death but many times prior to it.

You have a good vacation.



.

 

[Solace]

Solace,


Because there is no forensic evidence to support this.



No from the likely sequence of events the ransom note came last, there may have been a prior staging that took the form of an intruder sexual assault, say in her bedroom? This was then revised to become an abduction so the ransom note was authored. But they expected JonBenet's body to be discovered so masked her sexual assault by wiping her down and changing her underwear, then wrapping her in blankets, all different layers of masking!

That is her acute injury may have been inflicted upstairs, but I'm not hung up on this.


Because their attempt at staging a murder follows a logic particular to what they think a homicide should look like.

One of the problems in this case is using the staged evidence to promote your particular theory.

e.g. Toilet Rage is a favorite theory with the staged evidence used to back it up, e.g. redressed in clean underwear, and wiped down. So its more than a bedwetting rage because that theory is inconsistent with the forensic evidence.

The Intruder Theory is another classic interpretation which employs nearly all the staged evidence from the wine-cellar plus the ransom note.

So when the Ramsey's staged a murder, this suggests they are not only hiding the true cause of death, but also its location, and any relevant forensic evidence.

Both the autopsy and subsequent analysis by other medical professionals suggest JonBenet had been sexually assaulted not only on the occassion of her death but many times prior to it.

You have a good vacation.



.

Thank you UK Guy. I love your posts and you were going to start another thread I read here on another theory. I will look forward to it. THanks again.