Is the molester also the killer?

[DeeDee249]

The garland could definitely have come from the stairway. But the wineceller and other basement areas were also used for storage of Christmas decorations, like artificial trees, wreaths and garlands. As a matter of fact, among the crime scene photos, there is a photo of the area right outside the closed wineceller door. Hung on that wall is an artificial greenery "spray" (I wouldn't really call it a wreath) right next to the door. The caption on the photo that I saw said that JBR's yet-undiscovered body was actually right on the other side of that door at the time that photo was taken. I saw it on acandyrose, though it may have appeared on other sites as well.

 

[philamena]

it does;I've also wondered if she could have been dragged down the spiral staircase,since there was garland in her hair.

But if she was dragged, she would have most likely had bruises that pointed to that and she didn't.

 

[JMO8778]

But if she was dragged, she would have most likely had bruises that pointed to that and she didn't.

could some of the abrasions,or the scratch on her leg,have come from that?

 

[Solace]

it does;I've also wondered if she could have been dragged down the spiral staircase,since there was garland in her hair.

JMO, She was not dragged; she was carried and the garlands got in her hair. Picture it. She is being carried, she is at the person's waist in their arms, her hair falls against the banister and the garlands get on her. They would not drag her - this is an accident - They do not want Berke to hear what is going on.

Why would they drag her down the stairs.

 

[Solace]

But if she was dragged, she would have most likely had bruises that pointed to that and she didn't.

She was more than likely dragged when the killer twisted her shirt around her neck and left their thumb print - I think she was dragged off the bed and into the bathroom and SLAMMED up against the sink and then she is unconscious.

 

[UKGuy]

I'm confused then,b/c you believe the missing paintbrush part was left inside her,yet you think the sexual assault was hidden.it seems that's not really hiding it,if it was indeed left there.


UK,you do know that (per the FBI,I read this in Susan Smith's case)when a mother kills her child,it is usually has something to do with water,or the child is wrapped in plastic..a 'sending them back to the womb' of sorts,in an unconcious way,I suppose.That is not to say the mother didn't plan the murder..only the the way the child was killed and /or placed afterwards ususally has something to do with water or wrapping them up(like drowning or suffocation).SO,I'm not saying the murder itself was loving..it wasn't.Only the way the body was found indicates something only a parent would do.JB could have been found staged pretty shockingly,but she wasn't.(ie-posed,hung or lying naked on the bare floor,for example).she was found wrapped in a blanket.would an intruder do that?not likely.so why would a parent?bc they didn't want to leave her any other way.it seems to indicate some regret?
The way the perp(s) felt JB needed to be staged,for all intensive purposes,wasn't conducive to water or being wrapped in plastic..but,she was wrapped in a blanket.





quite possibly.

I'm saying the staged one wasn't concealed,since they knew that upon undressing and examining her,and the autopsy itself, would reveal a sexual assault.it wasn't concealed,*she was only covered up.it was still there.she didn't have to be uncovered for it to still be there.
and the underwear? JB either wasn't wearing any originally,and the big size was put on her,or the previous underwear she had on was hidden and disposed of after a real sexual assault, which proceeded the staged one of course.

JMO8778,

I'm confused then,b/c you believe the missing paintbrush part was left inside her,yet you think the sexual assault was hidden.it seems that's not really hiding it,if it was indeed left there.

Why should you be confused, what I believe and what the evidence states may be two different things, and when I answered regarding this, I referred to the forensic evidence.

I think you may be missing the point somewhat, regardless of whether she was sexually assaulted twice, or the missing piece of paintbrush handle was left inside her. JonBenet's sexual assault was hidden from public view, now how does this fit in with the wine-cellar staging, where I assume the garroting was applied, and the intention was to create the impression that a homicidal intruder had garroted and sexually assaulted JonBenet?

I'm saying the staged one wasn't concealed,since they knew that upon undressing and examining her,and the autopsy itself, would reveal a sexual assault.it wasn't concealed,*she was only covered up.it was still there.she didn't have to be uncovered for it to still be there.
and the underwear? JB either wasn't wearing any originally,and the big size was put on her,or the previous underwear she had on was hidden and disposed of after a real sexual assault, which proceeded the staged one of course.

So once her sexual assault was discovered, you reckon whomever killed JonBenet never stopped to consider whether a bona-fide intruder would wipe JonBenet down, and redress her in clean size-12 underwear, or would this seem incredulous to the investigators with suspicion falling directly upon the residents?

So is not leaving her staged sexual assault open and on view, not only consistent with an intruder staging, but reduces the possibility of the stager being suspected, after all JonBenet can no longer point her finger at anyone?

Also why does JonBenet require a second staged sexual assault if her original one is still apparent, why not just leave the original assault as it is, and stage it as an intruder sexual assault, who can prove otherwise?

I'm not saying you are entirely wrong and that I am right etc, what I am wanting to flag up is that a decision to wipe down JonBenet and redress her in size-12 underwear was taken, this effectively conceals her sexual assault, even if it only discovered during the autopsy, guess who may have flown interstate by then?

Patently the issue was not hygiene or presentation since JonBenet was left wearing urine-soaked longjohns and her face was covered in mucous, again if she wet the bed, then dry longjohns should have been the order of the day, so I reckon she was wiped down to remove forensic evidence and hide the sexual assault?

So why hide the sexual assault if its express purpose was to be part of the staging?


.

 

[Camper]

I started writing a post here and when I began studying my words
I erased it all.

NOW then my thoughts wander to asking HOW many recently incarcerated
non family member murderers OR random killers, sitting on death row, for killing a child,
actually might have cleaned up their victims to remove their OWN
identifying personal forensic evidence?

I am thinking that DNA testing was available in 1996, help me out here.
Didn't DNA ability start in the 1970's?

WHY would a perp take the time to wipe the flashlight batteries clean IF IF
the flashlight was NOT his, and then then then leave the flashlight behind?

WHY didn't the slippery sneaky perp TAKE HIS flashlight with him?

Refresh my memory did R's ever find their OWN flashlight just like the one
on the kitchen counter?

You would have to be a nut case NOT to believe that when PR came down those
stairs at midnight for her regular trips to take JBR to the bathroom, that SHE took a
flashlight, rather than turn on lights to disturb everyone.

Where was 'that'flashlight, when the BPD was bagging up
evidence for days?

.

.

 

[Solace]

JMO8778,


Why should you be confused, what I believe and what the evidence states may be two different things, and when I answered regarding this, I referred to the forensic evidence.

I think you may be missing the point somewhat, regardless of whether she was sexually assaulted twice, or the missing piece of paintbrush handle was left inside her. JonBenet's sexual assault was hidden from public view, now how does this fit in with the wine-cellar staging, where I assume the garroting was applied, and the intention was to create the impression that a homicidal intruder had garroted and sexually assaulted JonBenet?


So once her sexual assault was discovered, you reckon whomever killed JonBenet never stopped to consider whether a bona-fide intruder would wipe JonBenet down, and redress her in clean size-12 underwear, or would this seem incredulous to the investigators with suspicion falling directly upon the residents?

So is not leaving her staged sexual assault open and on view, not only consistent with an intruder staging, but reduces the possibility of the stager being suspected, after all JonBenet can no longer point her finger at anyone?

Also why does JonBenet require a second staged sexual assault if her original one is still apparent, why not just leave the original assault as it is, and stage it as an intruder sexual assault, who can prove otherwise?

I'm not saying you are entirely wrong and that I am right etc, what I am wanting to flag up is that a decision to wipe down JonBenet and redress her in size-12 underwear was taken, this effectively conceals her sexual assault, even if it only discovered during the autopsy, guess who may have flown interstate by then?

Patently the issue was not hygiene or presentation since JonBenet was left wearing urine-soaked longjohns and her face was covered in mucous, again if she wet the bed, then dry longjohns should have been the order of the day, so I reckon she was wiped down to remove forensic evidence and hide the sexual assault?

So why hide the sexual assault if its express purpose was to be part of the staging?


.

UK, if part of the paintbrush were left inside (and it was a splinter by the way, maybe too tiny for the naked eye, for all we know). You have it in your head that because John wiped her down, he is playing some sort of a game. Think about this in the framework that it could be an accident, just for a second. She is killed, Patsy is hysterical, she tells John, he sees that it is a mortal wound when feeling her head and she probably convulsed. He tells Patsy write the note and he does the staging. (And this is not immediately, They are both insane here and the plan is going to take a while) He stages a sexual assault in the basement - we know he called Patsy from the basement - she SAYS so in answering Haney (by mistake of course, she meant to say John screamed for me from the bedroom after I called his name, BUT, she makes an error and says "John screams for me from the basement". So he is staging downstairs and Patsy is writing upstairs. Imagine the insanity of just bringing her to the basement and staging - don't you think it possible that sorrow would overtake and he might wipe her off in a loving way after just defiling her with a paintbrush to throw the police off. He is definitely showing love by wrapping her in a a blanket and her favorite nightgown is beside her - that could be an accident and it was just stuck to the blanket, but he is lovingly wrapping her and the tying of the hands is ridiculous - he CANNOT bring himself to tie her up. So if he is as intent as you say, HE WOULD HAVE TIED HER HANDS MORE. The garrote is horrific enough. He tied her hands after the garrote and could not bear to do it.

You act like we are dealing with a serial killer here. It is with two parents who in a matter of a few hours will have to call the police and tell them their daughter has been kidnapped. They are so out to lunch that night that they leave a three page ransom note. No, it is not illogical that they wiped her down. It goes right along with everything they are doing.

 

[Camper]

Let us not forget that small cut fibres from the garrote rope
were found on JBR's bed.

.

 

[Solace]

Let us not forget that small cut fibres from the garrote rope
were found on JBR's bed.

.

Yes, I read that. Maybe it was done in the bedroom and she was transferred after the garroting. And in the basement she was wiped down and lovingly covered up and laid out as a final goodbye.

 

[UKGuy]

Yes, I read that. Maybe it was done in the bedroom and she was transferred after the garroting. And in the basement she was wiped down and lovingly covered up and laid out as a final goodbye.

Solace,

Please pay attention to the forensic evidence, the garrote was applied down in the basement, but she may have been wiped down upstairs.

lovingly covered up and laid out as a final goodbye.

Suerly you mean indifferently wrapped in blankets and deposited in the windowless wine-cellar, since this a homicide we are discussing not a kindergarten snooze.


.

 

[Camper]

Solace,

Please pay attention to the forensic evidence, the garrote was applied down in the basement, but she may have been wiped down upstairs.


Suerly you mean indifferently wrapped in blankets and deposited in the windowless wine-cellar, since this a homicide we are discussing not a kindergarten snooze.


.

Solace,

Please pay attention to the forensic evidence, the garrote was applied down in the basement, but she may have been wiped down upstairs.


Suerly you mean indifferently wrapped in blankets and deposited in the windowless wine-cellar, since this a homicide we are discussing not a kindergarten snooze.


.

--->>>It has happened this case has finally made me nuts!!

WHY would the garrote be made in JonBenets bedroom leaving some rope fibres on her bed, then using it in the basement?
The unknown factor here is WHAT time of day was the garrote made? IF that was the case the perp was nuts too! OR JonBenet 'may'
have watched the person 'make' the garrote.

So a tiny review here, perp comes to R house, finds rope 'where??' takes it upstairs and makes the contraption on JonBenets bed,
then takes it down to the basement later to use it??

OR OR did the perp 'bring' his own rope, yet use the R's pens, paper, blankets, unworn new panty size 12, and uses PR's old paint brush.

Wants money for kidnapping, but spoils his chance of ever getting any by leaving the body in the basement. Wipes fingerprints OFF the R's
flashlight and the batteries.

Yep the perp is nuts, wherever he/she is today.

How much did JonBenet weigh I have forgotten? If a mom carried her to the basement a mom would have the childs arms around moms neck, it is
easier for a woman to carry a large child this way.

IF a man carried her I suspect he would have cradled her in his arms so that her hair could have colided with the garland.

Further would a right handed man have her head on his left arm thereby missing the garland on the stair hand rail, or would a right handed man have her head on his right arm?

IF the person picked up JonBenet, while she was lying in her bed, and he ? was standing at the head of her bed on the side the ribbon bed tie was loose, he would have scooped her up with her head on his right arm, and would then have most likely have snagged garland from the stair rail on the right as he went down the stairs.

Another thing that has always bothered me was WHY the burglar alarm was NOT set that night. IF IF the R's had it installed during the remodeling, and IF IF they in t had a VHS tape on stun guns as was reported,
then they surely must have been interested in security for their family.

Did one of the children turn the alarm off to let one of their friends come in LATER AFTER 'all' were in bed, OR?

Help me clean up this thought parade.

.

 

[UKGuy]

--->>>It has happened this case has finally made me nuts!!

WHY would the garrote be made in JonBenets bedroom leaving some rope fibres on her bed, then using it in the basement?
The unknown factor here is WHAT time of day was the garrote made? IF that was the case the perp was nuts too! OR JonBenet 'may'
have watched the person 'make' the garrote.

So a tiny review here, perp comes to R house, finds rope 'where??' takes it upstairs and makes the contraption on JonBenets bed,
then takes it down to the basement later to use it??

OR OR did the perp 'bring' his own rope, yet use the R's pens, paper, blankets, unworn new panty size 12, and uses PR's old paint brush.

Wants money for kidnapping, but spoils his chance of ever getting any by leaving the body in the basement. Wipes fingerprints OFF the R's
flashlight and the batteries.

Yep the perp is nuts, wherever he/she is today.

How much did JonBenet weigh I have forgotten? If a mom carried her to the basement a mom would have the childs arms around moms neck, it is
easier for a woman to carry a large child this way.

IF a man carried her I suspect he would have cradled her in his arms so that her hair could have colided with the garland.

Further would a right handed man have her head on his left arm thereby missing the garland on the stair hand rail, or would a right handed man have her head on his right arm?

IF the person picked up JonBenet, while she was lying in her bed, and he ? was standing at the head of her bed on the side the ribbon bed tie was loose, he would have scooped her up with her head on his right arm, and would then have most likely have snagged garland from the stair rail on the right as he went down the stairs.

Another thing that has always bothered me was WHY the burglar alarm was NOT set that night. IF IF the R's had it installed during the remodeling, and IF IF they in t had a VHS tape on stun guns as was reported,
then they surely must have been interested in security for their family.

Did one of the children turn the alarm off to let one of their friends come in LATER AFTER 'all' were in bed, OR?

Help me clean up this thought parade.

.

Camper,

WHY would the garrote be made in JonBenets bedroom leaving some rope fibres on her bed, then using it in the basement?

My understanding is that the garrote was constructed down in the basement, just outside the wine-cellar , where shards from the paintbrush handle were found, and that the cord tied to the paintbrush handle is nylon, so there should be no rope fibers associated with the wine-cellar staging.

This does not discount the possibility that the rope was used in a prior staging?



.

 

[DeeDee249]

There were rope fibers found in her bed, but I remember reading those as coming from the rope that was found in a paper bag, I think in the bedroom. There are photos of that rope around, and it is a thick hemp-like rope. It is very much like the rope shown in a photo of JBR dressed in "country" clothes and braids, a thick hemp rope curled up by her legs. If those were the rope fibers, they didn't come from the garrotte. The garrotte was made of flat, white narrow nylon. There is a pretty school photo of JBR wearing a navy sailor shirt that is trimmed with white flat cord that looks just like the garrotte. Much has been made about not finding the rest of the garrotte cord. I wonder- did PR have a sewing kit? I don't ever remember seeing anything about that.

 

[JMO8778]

WHY would the garrote be made in JonBenets bedroom leaving some rope fibres on her bed, then using it in the basement?
The unknown factor here is WHAT time of day was the garrote made?

So a tiny review here, perp comes to R house, finds rope 'where??' takes it upstairs and makes the contraption on JonBenets bed,
then takes it down to the basement later to use it??

I think the housekeeper hid BR's knife on a shelf outside JB's room.I've always thought the rope was cut on her bed,and then taken to the basement.I think JR told PR to go find rope and tape,which she may have gotten from an AG doll,which might have been in JB's room.


I don't think JB was concious when she was taken to the basement.

Another thing that has always bothered me was WHY the burglar alarm was NOT set that night. IF IF the R's had it installed during the remodeling, and IF IF they in t had a VHS tape on stun guns as was reported,
then they surely must have been interested in security for their family.

In DOI,JR says they didn't use the alarm,I think he said it went off accidently and they couldnt figure out how to turn it off.But,it's not like they couldn't have learned how to later,so I dont know if that's the real reason it was off or not.

 

[Ames]

JMO, She was not dragged; she was carried and the garlands got in her hair. Picture it. She is being carried, she is at the person's waist in their arms, her hair falls against the banister and the garlands get on her. They would not drag her - this is an accident - They do not want Berke to hear what is going on.

Why would they drag her down the stairs.

I don't believe that she was dragged either. Dragging someone down the stairs, would make a loud, thump, thump, thump, thump....over and over again.....and that would have woke Burke up.

 

[Ames]

She was more than likely dragged when the killer twisted her shirt around her neck and left their thumb print - I think she was dragged off the bed and into the bathroom and SLAMMED up against the sink and then she is unconscious.

Yep, I agree.

 

[Dru]

...I've asked this before, but I think I need to ask it again:

How do you explain the fact that the sexual wound inflicted on JBR was, by the evidence that it bled, inflicted before she died?

If you really believe that one or both parents inflicted this wound to make the crime look like a sex crime committed by a pervert intruder, then how do you account for the fact that they inflicted the wound while JBR's heart was still beating?

 

[Ames]

...I've asked this before, but I think I need to ask it again:

How do you explain the fact that the sexual wound inflicted on JBR was, by the evidence that it bled, inflicted before she died?

If you really believe that one or both parents inflicted this wound to make the crime look like a sex crime committed by a pervert intruder, then how do you account for the fact that they inflicted the wound while JBR's heart was still beating?

I am sure that her heartbeat was faint. Before my mom died, she had heart problems, and a hospice nurse would come to see her at home. Days before she died, they had trouble finding her pulse...even with a stethoscope, it was really hard to hear her heartbeat. Well, John and Patsy, I am quite sure...did not have a medical license. They would have THOUGHT that JB was already dead. I do not believe that they would have inserted the paintbrush, had they have known that she was still alive. IMO

 

[UKGuy]

...I've asked this before, but I think I need to ask it again:

How do you explain the fact that the sexual wound inflicted on JBR was, by the evidence that it bled, inflicted before she died?

If you really believe that one or both parents inflicted this wound to make the crime look like a sex crime committed by a pervert intruder, then how do you account for the fact that they inflicted the wound while JBR's heart was still beating?

Dru,

For those that promote the accident theory in all its guises that is an inconvenient question, one that really receives little attention.

As does the common explanation it was just staging well if thats the case why hide it by wiping her down, and redressing her in size-12's and the longjohns, why not leave the sexual assault as it is, so everyone can be in no doubt that this was a lust murder perpetrated by some deranged intruder?



.