JBR, PR and UMI

[MurriFlower]

No drugs of any kind were found in JB. Not to mention how the intruder would get her to eat it.
Responding to the rest is pointless.

Oh DD, I wish I had your confidence in this investigation. Apparently, the Medical Examiner spent 10 minutes in the house when JBR was examined initially. The Autopsy was not performed until the following morning (holidays, you know). Did they check for GHB and if they did would they have detected it? Got to wonder.....

No one's suggesting that the IDI was unknown to JBR. Remember the 'Secret Santa'? Likely she was 'set up' to expect someone to come to her on Christmas night. Pretty easy to fool a 6 yo at Christmas I expect.

 

[DeeDee249]

Oh DD, I wish I had your confidence in this investigation. Apparently, the Medical Examiner spent 10 minutes in the house when JBR was examined initially. The Autopsy was not performed until the following morning (holidays, you know). Did they check for GHB and if they did would they have detected it? Got to wonder.....

No one's suggesting that the IDI was unknown to JBR. Remember the 'Secret Santa'? Likely she was 'set up' to expect someone to come to her on Christmas night. Pretty easy to fool a 6 yo at Christmas I expect.

I agree that the "drive-by" nature of the coroner's first examination of JB is a disgrace, and he neglected to perform to standard procedures that would have determined the TOD with accuracy- a liver stab and a vitreous eye fluid sample. That being said, toxicology tests would not have been done on the body in situ in general but done at the autopsy. The next-day scheduling was pretty standard- not because of any holiday but because autopsies are usually not done on an "emergency" basis, but usually can wait till the next day (of course, removal of the body to a refrigerated morgue storage is necessary as soon as the coroner signs off on his first examination). Blood would have been drawn before the autopsy began, and performing it any sooner would not have affected whether drugs could be detected. While the full profile of drug tests ran would HOPEFULLY be listed somewhere, not that I have seen.

 

[WHITEFANG]

I agree that the "drive-by" nature of the coroner's first examination of JB is a disgrace, and he neglected to perform to standard procedures that would have determined the TOD with accuracy- a liver stab and a vitreous eye fluid sample.

Odd. Why haven't the Rs been blamed for this? There must be a witness somewhere willing to say (for a few hundred bucks or season tickets to the Broncos) they observed a mysterious looking Jaguar with license plate ....... who jumped out of the car and robbed the good doctor just before he arrived at their home. Thus, the reason for his missing thermometer.

 

[madeleine]

So okay maybe Barnhill didn't see JAR but someone else.Who was that person?Wasn't it important to find out?

 

[DeeDee249]

Odd. Why haven't the Rs been blamed for this? There must be a witness somewhere willing to say (for a few hundred bucks or season tickets to the Broncos) they observed a mysterious looking Jaguar with license plate ....... who jumped out of the car and robbed the good doctor just before he arrived at their home. Thus, the reason for his missing thermometer.

I'll assume you are joking here. No one would blame the coroner's improper examination on the Rs, guilty or not of her murder. We don't know whether he had the proper equipment with him or not, but he should have. We don't know what background info he may have been given by the DA or BPD before he got to the house, and we don't know his reasons for not following proper procedure. I don't think I have ever seen where he was even asked why he didn't do these two important steps, and I don't think I have ever seen where he was asked about why he didn't follow proper procedures with the nail clippers either. Technically, the nail clippers alone, and the accusation (which was not denied) that similar unsterile procedures had been done with other autopsies, would be cause to have any findings dismissed and any impact they had on trials overturned.
All I know is Mayer had never made a public statement on his procedures and why he made the decision to not follow proper procedures. Like so much in this case, it seems there was no accountability.

 

[WHITEFANG]

I'll assume you are joking here. No one would blame the coroner's improper examination on the Rs, guilty or not of her murder. We don't know whether he had the proper equipment with him or not, but he should have. We don't know what background info he may have been given by the DA or BPD before he got to the house, and we don't know his reasons for not following proper procedure. I don't think I have ever seen where he was even asked why he didn't do these two important steps, and I don't think I have ever seen where he was asked about why he didn't follow proper procedures with the nail clippers either. Technically, the nail clippers alone, and the accusation (which was not denied) that similar unsterile procedures had been done with other autopsies, would be cause to have any findings dismissed and any impact they had on trials overturned.
All I know is Mayer had never made a public statement on his procedures and why he made the decision to not follow proper procedures. Like so much in this case, it seems there was no accountability.

Her temperature when he got there was important in determining time of death. Basic stuff, real basic. Yes, I was being sarcastic because it seems like this was one of the few areas where they weren't blamed or associated with his performance debacle.

 

[UKGuy]

some people exhibit what they think is "normal" behaviour but is really some form of cognitive disorder resulting from childhood abuse which neither they, since their behaviour is normal, or their relatives wish to acknowledge, since to do so is to open a can of worms.

.

 

[BBB167893]

Before I get started, I have something to say. I realize this may seem a bit petty, but I am VERY disappointed in some of the things said on this thread, specifically with the general narrow-mindedness shown, both toward the subject and those who legitimately do grapple with mental illness every day.

Asking if someone suffers from undiagnosed mental illness is not an accusation. Not by any means. If anything, it's a plea for understanding and hope that maybe, just maybe, if more people became more aware of the warning signs, these unfortunate people can get HELP before anything terrible happens. In other words, it's a plea for sympathy, not condemnation.

Bottom line.

 

[BBB167893]

Right. Now, on to business.

some people exhibit what they think is "normal" behaviour but is really some form of cognitive disorder resulting from childhood abuse which neither they, since their behaviour is normal, or their relatives wish to acknowledge, since to do so is to open a can of worms.

Indeed, UKGuy. HOTYH actually said something very astute a little while back:

What you seem to be not really considering--EVEN SLIGHTLY--is that there are people who are REALLY NOT NORMAL. Usually, it is the result of childhood traumas that has left them emotionally or morally vacant and capable of conscience-free acts.

Leaving aside the obvious irony in that accusation, perhaps our friend is on to something. Again, speaking totally hypothetically, let's examine these two statements, along with this one:

You are not alone a lot of people share your intuition. An accident simply required 911. But Prior Vaginal Trauma required a lot of explaning away and that this was even attempted suugests prior knowledge on either or both parents behalf. Patsy never batted an eyelid when confronted with it during an interview.My money is on both parents and the extended family knowing hence the ongoing silence.

UMI or not, I have often wondered if PR was herself a victim of childhood abuse, sexual abuse specifically. Now, BEFORE anyone says anything, I should point out that this viewpoint is not unique to RDI believers. IDI supporters have expressed the same idea without any prompting from me.

Now, my brother and I spoke about this a few years ago. It went something like this:

"Guv," he said, "have you ever wondered if Patsy was molested?"

I said, "what do you mean, Mate?"

"Well, Guv," he said, "it would explain a few things: why Patsy married a guy so much older than she was; why her sister Pam never got married, never had kids and put on so much weight; why she had such a dead reaction to being told that JB had been a victim and why she seemed to shrink away when asked if she was abused."

This floored me. Not just that my brother, who has no interest in this case at all, would speak so plainly, but the idea itself. So I started thinking (admittedly, a dangerous thing). I decided to express my thoughts in writing. A sample is as follows:

If she was abused in her past, she would definitely have a pronounced reaction to JonBenet telling her. That's the kind of thing you try to forget and pretend never happened. JonBenet's off-the-cuff remark, while perhaps meaning little to a child, would mean a great deal to Patsy, a virtual hammer crushing her to powder inside. Her first instinct would be to deny it. The idea that it could happen to JonBenet would be shattering. In the scenario I outlined, Patsy reacted with extreme rage. She thought JonBenet was lying. Maybe she had picked up something from one of her friends or an older kid, like one of Burke's friends. Anything to keep from facing the awful truth: that as a victim of abuse who was suppressing the memory, she was more likely to marry someone who was also an abuser and she subconsciously blamed herself for not protecting her daughter.

Of course, this poses some interesting questions, many of them involving PR's relationship with her own parents. Did her mother know? And if so, did she wave it off? Nedra didn't strike me as very warm or understanding.

That's what I wanted to bring up, awful as it is.

 

[UKGuy]

"Well, Guv," he said, "it would explain a few things: why Patsy married a guy so much older than she was; why her sister Pam never got married, never had kids and put on so much weight; why she had such a dead reaction to being told that JB had been a victim and why she seemed to shrink away when asked if she was abused."

SuperDave,
Nicely put. There are always alternative explanations for Pam not marrying, for Patsy marrying the older man e.g. trading youth for security via money, the response to the suggestion of abuse may simply be moral outrage etc.

But when an autopsy reveals prior sexual abuse e.g. JonBenet was internally enlarged, Dr Meyer alluded to this via his descriptive phrase digital penetration, and by that he meant an adult digit, not that of Burke or one of his friends as some RDI theories promote. Then the above explanations fail as such and become convenient forms of denial.

There is a rage or anger that surfaces when a person is confronted with something that conflicts with the enacted standard family role, e.g. their normal identity . So I reckon its entirely possible for Patsy to have either whacked or throttled JonBenet as response to either JonBenet saying he did this to me momma, or Patsy discovering someone actually molesting JonBenet

There is another possibility that Patsy was the abuser and that JonBenet refused to take part, eliciting an enraged response? In this context if you consider Steve Thomas' suggestion that corporal punishment may have been the cause of JonBenet's Prior Vaginal Trauma, then Dr Meyer's reference to sexual activity might dispel this and make you wonder was Steve Thomas keeping his powder dry, remember he saw the autopsy pictures, he was left in no doubt by the use of comparitive images of normal healthy girls, that 6-year old JonBenet had a history of prior molestation.

Although we were told that JonBenet shared a bedroom and at times a bed with Burke, did she ever sleep in her parents bedroom?

Summarising: The autopsy demonstrates that JonBenet had been molested more than once prior to her death. So this is the central issue in this case. IMO its why staging took place. Patsy could have simply phoned 911 and said Jonbenet fell off the window sill whilst playing some game, there would still be a dead body. Instead the staging masks the initial cause of death, and the prior molestation with a sexual assault inflicted via a broken paintbrush handle.

So when Patsy was confronted with JonBenet's molestation, her upper middle class veneer may have been stripped away, her identity shattered via very painful memories resulting in rage and anger.

For me its a no brainer, the big unknown is whose was the adult digit referred to by Dr Meyer or may there have been more that one e.g. was this a case of extended familial abuse?


.

 

[MurriFlower]

Right. Now, on to business.
Indeed, UKGuy. HOTYH actually said something very astute a little while back:
Leaving aside the obvious irony in that accusation, perhaps our friend is on to something. Again, speaking totally hypothetically, let's examine these two statements, along with this one:
UMI or not, I have often wondered if PR was herself a victim of childhood abuse, sexual abuse specifically. Now, BEFORE anyone says anything, I should point out that this viewpoint is not unique to RDI believers. IDI supporters have expressed the same idea without any prompting from me.
Now, my brother and I spoke about this a few years ago. It went something like this:
"Guv," he said, "have you ever wondered if Patsy was molested?"
I said, "what do you mean, Mate?"
"Well, Guv," he said, "it would explain a few things: why Patsy married a guy so much older than she was; why her sister Pam never got married, never had kids and put on so much weight; why she had such a dead reaction to being told that JB had been a victim and why she seemed to shrink away when asked if she was abused."
This floored me. Not just that my brother, who has no interest in this case at all, would speak so plainly, but the idea itself. So I started thinking (admittedly, a dangerous thing). I decided to express my thoughts in writing. A sample is as follows:
If she was abused in her past, she would definitely have a pronounced reaction to JonBenet telling her. That's the kind of thing you try to forget and pretend never happened. JonBenet's off-the-cuff remark, while perhaps meaning little to a child, would mean a great deal to Patsy, a virtual hammer crushing her to powder inside. Her first instinct would be to deny it. The idea that it could happen to JonBenet would be shattering. In the scenario I outlined, Patsy reacted with extreme rage. She thought JonBenet was lying. Maybe she had picked up something from one of her friends or an older kid, like one of Burke's friends. Anything to keep from facing the awful truth: that as a victim of abuse who was suppressing the memory, she was more likely to marry someone who was also an abuser and she subconsciously blamed herself for not protecting her daughter.
Of course, this poses some interesting questions, many of them involving PR's relationship with her own parents. Did her mother know? And if so, did she wave it off? Nedra didn't strike me as very warm or understanding.
That's what I wanted to bring up, awful as it is.

It's a valid point.

I honestly wonder how many girls haven't experienced 'sexual abuse' of some kind - from simply having a stranger expose themselves right through to actual penetration. I'd expect that many (most?) females (and quite a few males), have been a childhood victim of something between these two extremes.

Pretty children of both genders are probably more at risk than plain children.

The inference that JBR was abused previously is therefore not surprising. It doesn't automatically mean though, that it was her father, because there were plenty of other males who had access to the child. As we've previously discussed, this may not have been confined to males either.

Was her mother also abused? Possibly. Would this have led to the child being 'blamed' and then punished? I wouldn't have thought so. PR (if she was a victim also) would have been more likely IMO to have sought to achieve the 'justice' for JBR that she may have been denied (or was too scared/embarrassed to tell). This is why I doubt that PR was herself a victim, because she seemed totally 'clueless' about security/safety and supervision of the children. For example, when "Mr Mom" was taking care of the children for the weekend while she and PW went shopping. If abused, PR would have found any excuse NOT to leave the kids alone with a man. Ditto for her father babysitting them. McSanta would have rung alarm bells - his obsession with JBR was like a flashing warning sign. I think also if PR was abused, she would not have allowed (let alone encouraged) JBR to compete in the pageants. So, I therefore believe that PR was probably NOT abused herself as a child, otherwise she would have been more in tune with the dangers to her own daughter.

As far as the sexual abuse that occurred at the time that JBR was killed, it appears that there was 'digital' penetration and perhaps an 'object' (broken stick). There was enough violence to have caused bleeding, so it was not insignificant (as NP described), however, given the extreme violence of her death (bash and strangle) the sexual assault seems comparitively minor. This is why I believe that sexual assault was not the original intention and it was this unplanned assault that then led to the killing of JBR (to prevent her telling).

I therefore still feel that there was originally another motive, as I've suggested previously, to 'pretend' to kidnap her, and make a quick $$ without exposing the person(s) responsible to the 'risk' of taking her from the home. The mistake was in the person left to watch over her taking liberties and this was ultimately the reason she died.

 

[claudicici]

...I have often wondered if JB's grandpa could have been the abuser of both JB and Patsy...maybe Patsy found out during the Christmas party when the 911 call was made but then did not report it instead had some sort of psychological break and blamed herself and was raging against JB because her own childhood memories flashed back,she basicially did what he did to her to her own daughter...it would somehow make sense that the grandma would say "she was only molested a little bit" because she was sticking up for her husband,John Ramsey's reaction would make sense in that case as well,didn't he owe it to his father in law and to his wife to keep quiet?

 

[MurriFlower]

...I have often wondered if JB's grandpa could have been the abuser of both JB and Patsy...maybe Patsy found out during the Christmas party when the 911 call was made but then did not report it instead had some sort of psychological break and blamed herself and was raging against JB because her own childhood memories flashed back,she basicially did what he did to her to her own daughter...it would somehow make sense that the grandma would say "she was only molested a little bit" because she was sticking up for her husband,John Ramsey's reaction would make sense in that case as well,didn't he owe it to his father in law and to his wife to keep quiet?

Well, as I said, I doubt that PR was too clued up about sexual abuse, as she surely would have been if she herself had been a victim.

The suggestion that her own father abused both daughter and granddaughter is possible, but if so, this would have had nothing to do with the murder.

Unlikely that even RDI would suggest PR would have had a 'rage attack' two days after! Granddad was in Atlanta according to his alibi. Very unlikely that JBR's mother, father and grandmother would cover for him if he was the killer!

 

[claudicici]

...in that theory he would not be the killer but it would have to do with the murder two days later...I find PR "premonitions" about JB's death very odd....introducing death to christmas by using purple and seeing JB in a coffin as the doll in the box....I feel she may have felt all along that JB was in the same boat she was in and started fantasizing about a "grandiose" death,especially because I think she thought her death was imminent...I think something "snapped"....a lot of the anger displayed in the RN ,as mentioned somewhere before,may have been directed towards DP instead of JR ,since JR was not even from the south....I also think PR always lived through JB and did not view her as an individual but as an extension of herself and she saw herself as the pageant queen....JB was clearly trying to break away from that already (wanting to wear a different outfit than PR,not identifying with the pageant doll,etc...)

 

[Ames]

...I have often wondered if JB's grandpa could have been the abuser of both JB and Patsy...maybe Patsy found out during the Christmas party when the 911 call was made but then did not report it instead had some sort of psychological break and blamed herself and was raging against JB because her own childhood memories flashed back,she basicially did what he did to her to her own daughter...it would somehow make sense that the grandma would say "she was only molested a little bit" because she was sticking up for her husband,John Ramsey's reaction would make sense in that case as well,didn't he owe it to his father in law and to his wife to keep quiet?

I have wondered about that too. That would explain alot...like why the Paugh's (Patsy's parents) didn't step forward...not even "a little bit"...and demand justice for their granddaugher's death. Not once...did they go on tv, radio....or in any magazine article...and ask for anyone that may know something about JB's death, to please come forward. Not one single tv interview!!! Makes me sick to think about it. Makes me think that they really didn't care about her afterall. Also makes me realize that they most likely KNOW that some unknown intruder did not murder their grand-daughter. Why else would they have stayed so silent about her death??

 

[MurriFlower]

I have wondered about that too. That would explain alot...like why the Paugh's (Patsy's parents) didn't step forward...not even "a little bit"...and demand justice for their granddaugher's death. Not once...did they go on tv, radio....or in any magazine article...and ask for anyone that may know something about JB's death, to please come forward. Not one single tv interview!!! Makes me sick to think about it. Makes me think that they really didn't care about her afterall. Also makes me realize that they most likely KNOW that some unknown intruder did not murder their grand-daughter. Why else would they have stayed so silent about her death??

The grandparents were now supposed to go on TV radio or a magazine article and ask for justice?? Why would they, when the parents were criticised by RDI for EXACTLY doing this? They did it too soon, not soon enough, too much, too little, not for long enough, answered wrong, were coached!!

What makes me sick is people who blame the Rs, their parents, their other children, -- and choose to look no further. Then they use their own assumptions to back up their own suspicions and ask themselves retorical questions about why no one else has come forward to confess to this murder!!. Well, the answer is clear - it was one of THEM!! Plllleeasssee!!!

 

[claudicici]

I'm not RDI or IDI and I havn't thought about the case in awhile but something keeps drawing me back from time to time.
I've explored IDI in my mind 1000 of times,I don't think it's entirely impossible that an IDI but it seems very unlikely and just doesn't make sense.
I'm looking for answers that make sense to me.
The bed wetting theory and staging afterwards again I've considered it 1000 times.Again I don't think it's entirely impossible but I don't think it makes a lot of sense either.
Noone is "blaming" anyone I think,we're just trying to come up with a scenario that makes sense.....and that can be entirely different depending on who you are,what you're past experiences are,etc,etc....

 

[Ames]

The grandparents were now supposed to go on TV radio or a magazine article and ask for justice?? Why would they, when the parents were criticised by RDI for EXACTLY doing this? They did it too soon, not soon enough, too much, too little, not for long enough, answered wrong, were coached!!

What makes me sick is people who blame the Rs, their parents, their other children, -- and choose to look no further. Then they use their own assumptions to back up their own suspicions and ask themselves retorical questions about why no one else has come forward to confess to this murder!!. Well, the answer is clear - it was one of THEM!! Plllleeasssee!!!

There is absolutely NO evidence of an intruder....what did he do, come in wearing a bee-keeper's suit?? An intruder is not going to come into a home, and stay for hours...writing ransom notes...taking a child from her bed, taking her down the stairs to the basement/wine cellar....strangle the child, hit her over the head with something, take the time to re-dress her, wrap her in a blanket, ETC...without leaving some sort of evidence behind. Oh but yet...the only fibers found at the crime scene....are matched to the very same sweater jacket that Patsy wore that very same night. Go figure..... Also, the parents were not IMMEDIATELY criticised...that came later...because of their actions. The grandparents...should have....and would have...if they had of thought that there had REALLY been an intruder...come out publicly and asked the public for any and all information that they may have regarding the death of their grand daughter. Just like Caylee Anthony's grandparents did when she went missing. Any grandparent that truly loves their grandchild is going to do this. They just sat back and did nothing....

 

[MurriFlower]

There is absolutely NO evidence of an intruder....what did he do, come in wearing a bee-keeper's suit?? An intruder is not going to come into a home, and stay for hours...writing ransom notes...taking a child from her bed, taking her down the stairs to the basement/wine cellar....strangle the child, hit her over the head with something, take the time to re-dress her, wrap her in a blanket, ETC...without leaving some sort of evidence behind. Oh but yet...the only fibers found at the crime scene....are matched to the very same sweater jacket that Patsy wore that very same night. Go figure..... Also, the parents were not IMMEDIATELY criticised...that came later...because of their actions. The grandparents...should have....and would have...if they had of thought that there had REALLY been an intruder...come out publicly and asked the public for any and all information that they may have regarding the death of their grand daughter. Just like Caylee Anthony's grandparents did when she went missing. Any grandparent that truly loves their grandchild is going to do this. They just sat back and did nothing....

IMO there are four red fibers that may or may not have come from the clothes PR wore. These could have been deposited innocently by JR or FW who had presumably comforted her that morning - remember she was distraught. There are numerouse other fibers and fur on the tape and body not sourced to the house.

The tape was not sourced to the house.

The cord was not sourced to the house.

The DNA was not sourced to the Rs or anyone else tested.

Deny all you like, but regardless of how bizzare this crime was, there is evidence of an intruder.

 

[UKGuy]

IMO there are four red fibers that may or may not have come from the clothes PR wore. These could have been deposited innocently by JR or FW who had presumably comforted her that morning - remember she was distraught. There are numerouse other fibers and fur on the tape and body not sourced to the house.

The tape was not sourced to the house.

The cord was not sourced to the house.

The DNA was not sourced to the Rs or anyone else tested.

Deny all you like, but regardless of how bizzare this crime was, there is evidence of an intruder.

MurriFlower,

The cord was not sourced to the house.

Who says so, state a source and a 2nd party that confirms it independently.

The tape was not sourced to the house.

Who says so, state a source and a 2nd party that confirms it independently.

The DNA was not sourced to the Rs or anyone else tested.

The dna may be touch dna from Patsy's hands she picked up anywhere inside or outside the Ramsey household. There is nothing to demonstrate that the dna discovered has anything to do with JonBenet's death. Intellectually it is a fraud, a red-herring, and until they find a human person with that dna who can then be eliminated or factored into the homicide, to talk about or cite is misleading.

Much better to cite the pineapple that was in JonBenet's stomach despite the parents stating she went straight to bed.

There are numerouse other fibers and fur on the tape and body not sourced to the house.

Of course not, that is because they blow in through the window, or arrived via the clothing of other people visiting the Ramsey house.

If I look around my room and state that object is not mine then it becomes not sourced to my house, but this does not demonstrate that it is foreign to the house, likewise with your selected items that are described as not sourced.

So as usual with the IDI theory semantics plays a part, but then it has to, since there is zero forensic evidence that an intruder was in the Ramsey household. As a theory it only has credibility with the Ramsey's and their paid clients.


.