Jon Benet's vaginal injuries: the work of a crazed paedophile?

[southcitymom]

The garotte did not function like that. It was not a noose knot that slides, it was a fixed knot - one which stayed in place once it was tied in place. This knot, called a double knot by Meyer in the autopsy, would not have been able to function as a breath control device as you like suggest. The person who tied it on her tied it on her good and tight, and there is no evidence that JonBenet ever struggled against it.

Addressing the pediatrician Dr Beuf - he has been discussed quite a bit on this board in the past. He was a personal friend of the Ramseys - he was there at the Ramsey house on the 26th and gave Patsy tranquilizers. I don't believe he can been relied upon to be impartial. I have no idea what he's talking about when he says he never suspected that JonBeent had been sexually abused. Her history of vaginal ailments goes beyond that of average girls and bubble bath irritation is not an acceptable answer. Maybe once, but more than that?

Patsy was the one taking JonBenet to the doctor all those times, and I think she had to know that something was wrong - she was the one making all of the appointments! Very interesting to me is the fact they never had JonBenet to a urologist. They dismiss their frequent visits to Dr Beuf as the advantage of having excellent health insurance, but I can't understand why they never thought JonBenet's issues warranted the advice of a specialist if they were so well covered. The conclusion I've come to is that Patsy knew someone was abusing JonBenet (if she wasn't the one doing it), Beuf had to at least suspect but kept quiet, and Patsy didn't want anyone else checking it out. Why else would you not take your daughter to a specialist when she has such problems with incontinence, including fecal issues?

I would say that Dr. Beuf's failure to recognize these common symptoms associated with sexual abuse is malpractice, so of course he has to go public and say, "No I never saw any indication of sexual abuse." He's trying to save his own skin.

 

[Guy_in_Georgia]

UKGuy where did you get the info about the entrance to JBs vagina being enlarged. I havent heard that information before.....could you please link a source

As reported in Vanity Fair: Dr. Robert Kirschner of the University of Chicago's pathology department pointed out that JonBenet's vaginal opening was twice the normal size for the average six-year-olds. He stated, 'The genital injuries indicate penetration, but probably not by a penis, and are evidence of previous molestations, as well as the night of the murder.'

http://www.phrusa.org/research/forensics/history_kirschner.htm

http://denver.rockymountainnews.com/extra/ramsey/0716jon.htm

 

[Guy_in_Georgia]

I am enclosing a portion of the text from the Denver Rocky Mtn News link because I had forgotten some of it, particularly in regard to what the pathologists had to opine about the gloves, the wiping down and the empty bladder:

http://denver.rockymountainnews.com/extra/ramsey/0716jon.htm

Wright noted that the presence of "birefringent (shiny) foreign material'' in JonBenet's vaginal tract could be consistent with someone penetrating her while wearing rubber gloves. That, combined with prior disclosures that someone appeared to wipe down the body, is inconsistent with a typical child sex offender. "It's not the typical pattern of somebody who decides they like having sex with young girls,'' said Wright. "This looks like something different. If you're into having sex with kids, it's usually not so subtle.''
Wright was particularly intrigued by the girl's empty bladder. Evacuation of the bladder often occurs at the time of death, he said, but it's usually only partial. Complete emptying of the bladder, he said, would be consistent with her having done so intentionally while awake, near the time of the crime, or a bed-wetting.

 

[Guy_in_Georgia]

I am enclosing a portion of the text from the Denver Rocky Mtn News link because I had forgotten some of it, particularly in regard to what the pathologists had to opine about the gloves, the wiping down and the empty bladder:

http://denver.rockymountainnews.com/extra/ramsey/0716jon.htm

Wright noted that the presence of "birefringent (shiny) foreign material'' in JonBenet's vaginal tract could be consistent with someone penetrating her while wearing rubber gloves. That, combined with prior disclosures that someone appeared to wipe down the body, is inconsistent with a typical child sex offender. "It's not the typical pattern of somebody who decides they like having sex with young girls,'' said Wright. "This looks like something different. If you're into having sex with kids, it's usually not so subtle.''
Wright was particularly intrigued by the girl's empty bladder. Evacuation of the bladder often occurs at the time of death, he said, but it's usually only partial. Complete emptying of the bladder, he said, would be consistent with her having done so intentionally while awake, near the time of the crime, or a bed-wetting.

The above appears to point away from Patsy as sexually assaulting JonBenet (the evidence of the "birefringent (shiny) foreign material'' in JonBenet's vaginal tract could be consistent with someone penetrating her while wearing rubber gloves) as well as evidence that the blow to the head came well before strangulation:

The blow to her head -- which Wright is convinced was not from a golf club but more likely a blunt object such as a baseball bat or heavy flashlight -- came first, Wright said. "She was whopped on the head a long time before she was strangled,'' said Wright. "That might or might not have rendered her unconscious. But this is not anything that kills her right away.'' He said 20 to 60 minutes elapsed between the skull fracture and the strangulation. The reason he's so sure, said Wright, is that details revealed about the brain injury, "the swelling, the bleeding here and there, they take a while to happen.'' And that wouldn't have happened, he said, if she was already dead. "I think, probably, the head injury came first, because the strangulation resulted in petechial (pinpoint) hemorrhages'' in areas such as the eyelids, Kirschner said. "I think she died when she was strangled. The cerebral hemorrhaging and bruising of the brain did occur first. But she was still alive when strangled.''

http://denver.rockymountainnews.com/extra/ramsey/0716jon.htm

The preponderance of evidence points to the intruder theory, which appears to outweigh the "Patsy did it" theory (why would Patsy wear gloves, and why would she sexually assault her daughter while wearing gloves after striking her?). Thoughts anyone?

 

[UKGuy]

UKGuy where did you get the info about the entrance to JBs vagina being enlarged.
I havent heard that information before.....could you please link a source

dingo,

Here are a selection of sources and quotes.

Coroner Meyer's Opinion:

Detective Arndt told Your Affiant that she witnessed the autopsy of JonBenet Ramsey which was conducted by Dr. John Meyer on December 26, 1996. Detective Arndt told Your Affiant 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 is was his opinion that the victim had been subjected to sexual contact.
http://www.acandyrose.com/01301997warrant.htm

Dr. John McCann's Examination:

Dr. John McCann
Clincial Professor of Medicine
Dept of Pediatrics
Univeristy of California at Davis

In August, the Boulder police department contacted Dr. John McCann, one of the nation’s leading experts on child sexual abuse. McCann had agreed to assist the police department in determining if JonBenet had been a victim of sexual abuse during or before her murder. McCann was sent the autopsy report and photos. According to McCann, examination findings that indicate chronic sexual abuse include the thickness of the rim of the hymen, irregularity of the edge of the hymen, the width or narrowness of the wall of the hymen, and exposure of structures of the vagina normally covered by the hymen. His report stated that there was evidence of prior hymeneal trauma as all of these criteria were seen in the post mortem examination of JonBenet.

There was a three dimensional thickening from inside to outside on the inferior hymeneal rim with a bruise apparent on the external surface of the hymen and a narrowing of the hymeneal rim from the edge of the hymen to where it attaches to the muscular portion of the vaginal openings. At the narrowing area, there appeared to be very little if any hymen present. There was also exposure of the vaginal rugae, a structure of the vagina which is normally covered by an intact hymen. The hymeneal orifice measured one centimeter which is abnormal or unusual for this particular age group and is further evidence of prior sexual abuse with a more recent injury as shown by the bruised area on the inferior hymeneal rim.

Cyril Wecht's Analysis

Cyril Wecht entered the case via a phone call from a supermarket tabloid, the Globe. He did not know the case he was being asked to review, only told that it was on the "west coast." When he got the photos, he realized the case was that of JonBenet Ramsey. From what he could see, he thought she had been bound with the intent to restrain, not kill. It even hinted of a sex game gone wrong. The fact that the killer had written a ransom note as an afterthought, rather than bringing it along, also seemed strangely unprepared for a kidnapping, as did the note's complexity, content and length. Wecht decided that molestation was the primary motive and that the death itself was accidental.

As he paid attention to the case and read the portion of the autopsy report that was released, he noted items that supported the likelihood of chronic sexual abuse—that is, her vaginal injury had not occurred at the time of the crime. It may have been done by a finger or some object, not via outright rape, but he believed it was clear that before the murder someone had behaved inappropriately with the child.

People both inside and outside of the investigation reacted to that statement.

Yet as more of the autopsy report was released, he felt more certain of his analysis, and recent events appear to bear him out.

"I have learned that the police called in three separate child sexual abuse experts," he reports. "They separately and independently came to the same conclusion that there was evidence of prior sexual abuse. Not that I needed anybody to hold my hand, but for saying that same thing I took abuse on national television from self-appointed Ramsey defenders and sycophants. But it's the most ridiculous thing in the world, a little girl with half of the hymen gone and she's dead, and you've got a tiny abrasion, a tiny contusion and a chronic inflammation of vaginal mucosa. That means it happened more than 72 hours earlier; we don't know how long, or how often it was repeated, but chronic means it wasn't from that night. This was a tragic, tragic accident. This was a game that had been played before."
http://www.crimelibrary.com/criminal_mind/forensics/cyril_wecht/6.html
also PMPT hb pg 437 "Injury to hymen "dated from an old injury"; Dr. Cyril Wecht

Three other medical doctors also believed that prior sexual abuse had occurred:

Dr. David Jones
Professor of Preventative Medicine and Biometrics
University of CO Health Sciences Center

Dr. James Monteleone
Professor of Pediatrics
St. Louis University School of Medicine
Director of Child Protection
Cardinal Glennon Children's Hospital

Dr. Ronald Wright
Former Medical Examiner
Cook County Illinois

.

 

[UKGuy]

The preponderance of evidence points to the intruder theory, which appears to outweigh the "Patsy did it" theory (why would Patsy wear gloves, and why would she sexually assault her daughter while wearing gloves after striking her?). Thoughts anyone?

Guy_in_Georgia,

the term birefringent is used to describe material that bends light differently depending upon the angle.

The glaze on the paintbrush handle also has this property and its refractive index can be identified as such.

Also its possible that John Karr has inferred that the missing piece of the paintbrush handle was left inside JonBenet, and that this is the undisclosed gruesome forensic evidence?

 

[MysteryAddict]

The garotte did not function like that. It was not a noose knot that slides, it was a fixed knot - one which stayed in place once it was tied in place. This knot, called a double knot by Meyer in the autopsy, would not have been able to function as a breath control device as you like suggest. The person who tied it on her tied it on her good and tight, and there is no evidence that JonBenet ever struggled against it.

Addressing the pediatrician Dr Beuf - he has been discussed quite a bit on this board in the past. He was a personal friend of the Ramseys - he was there at the Ramsey house on the 26th and gave Patsy tranquilizers. I don't believe he can been relied upon to be impartial. I have no idea what he's talking about when he says he never suspected that JonBeent had been sexually abused. Her history of vaginal ailments goes beyond that of average girls and bubble bath irritation is not an acceptable answer. Maybe once, but more than that?

Patsy was the one taking JonBenet to the doctor all those times, and I think she had to know that something was wrong - she was the one making all of the appointments! Very interesting to me is the fact they never had JonBenet to a urologist. They dismiss their frequent visits to Dr Beuf as the advantage of having excellent health insurance, but I can't understand why they never thought JonBenet's issues warranted the advice of a specialist if they were so well covered. The conclusion I've come to is that Patsy knew someone was abusing JonBenet (if she wasn't the one doing it), Beuf had to at least suspect but kept quiet, and Patsy didn't want anyone else checking it out. Why else would you not take your daughter to a specialist when she has such problems with incontinence, including fecal issues?

I agree that Patsy had to have suspected abuse, now the big question is WHY wasn't she frantic to rush her to a specialist to have this confirmed? This would send most Mothers on the Warpath against her child's abuser!

But not Patsy, so either she was the abuser or knew that John was and decided not to confront him.

If John was the abuser and she confronted him, it would
mean destroying what meant more to her than her little girl, the status and life style that marriage to John had provided.

 

[openminded1]

I agree that Patsy had to have suspected abuse, now the big question is WHY wasn't she frantic to rush her to a specialist to have this confirmed? This would send most Mothers on the Warpath against her child's abuser!

But not Patsy, so either she was the abuser or knew that John was and decided not to confront him.

If John was the abuser and she confronted him, it would
mean destroying what meant more to her than her little girl, the status and life style that marriage to John had provided.

In some cases, a parent might want to hide the abuse because they would think the fact the child was abused would cast them in a negative light to the outside world. If the abuser was a family member, that can bring up all kinds of mixed emotions. I have known someone who was sexually abused by a family member, and her mother's solution to the problem was to tell the abuser to stop. It was not until she started having problems outside the home that she was referred for therapy, told the right people about hte abuse, and got the proper care.

 

[BBB167893]

"So mom slammed her head against the bathtub a few times and then stuck a paintbrush up there as a cover up?"

Where do you get a few times?

"Did JBR ever have any injuries evident before? Show up to Pageants with black eyes?"

In one pageant, she had a HUGE bruise on one of her arms, so yes.

"Mom just woke up and became the worst child abuser possible in one day or did JR become a vicious sexual pedophilic sadistic child murderer overnite? Neither one seems likely IMHO."

No, just people in over their heads. Why does everyone assume premeditation?

"Is it at all possible that JonBenet's toileting issues could have made for a high number of genital infections which would have caused some of the vaginal symptoms observed? Have always wondered about that."

Maybe some, not all!

"The issue of the paintbrush and shards in the vagina could simply have been part of the staging and an attempt to feign a sexual assault."

AH! Allow me to quote CASKU:

"The FBI believed that JonBenet's vaginal trauma was not consistent with a history of sexual abuse, and they had turned up no evidence of any other type of abuse. The sexual violation of JonBenet, whether pre or postmortem did not appear to have been committed for the perpetrators gratification. The penetration, which caused minor genital trauma, was more likely part of a staged crime scene intended to mislead the police." (PMPT pg 306; quote and source provided by Internet poster The Punisher)

I'd say that's a yes!

"By the way, one noted Forensic Pathologist has stated publicly that if he was an emergency room physician, and was aware of the chronic inflammation within the childs' vagina (chronic meaning of long duration or frequent recurrence, over a long period of time), he would have definitely called the police to report sexual abuse of the child. If the physician who had been examining JonBenet before her death was aware of the repeated uncontrolled urination and bowel movements that were known to have been occurring (which often can be a result of sexual abuse), then the question is why is that physician not a common subject of this forum?"

It's hard to remember that far back! I remember it!

"If JBR had not come from a well do do family would he have just let all of these abuse indicators go?"

He was John's pal, after all.

"UKGuy where did you get the info about the entrance to JBs vagina being enlarged."

Autopsy report, Kirschner, McCann, etc.

"The preponderance of evidence points to the intruder theory, which appears to outweigh the "Patsy did it" theory"

I don't see that at all! And intruder who abused her day after day?

"I agree that Patsy had to have suspected abuse, now the big question is WHY wasn't she frantic to rush her to a specialist to have this confirmed? This would send most Mothers on the Warpath against her child's abuser!"

You'd like to think so, wouldn't you? But the horrible truth is, a LOT of mothers look the other way! Ever heard of Marilyn Van Derbur? That happened to her.

 

[lily]

Hmmm, i guess the question I have is why does the guy who did the autopsy not think there was prior sexual abuse? and then three people later say there was? Bit like the handwriting experts who say the note is way more of a match to JMK when it wasnt him. These experts just seem to say what they think - not what is.

BTW lots of kids wet their pants at school in the first grade. Most school offices have spare clothes because of this. I think the thing that stands out with jonbenet is the infections. My son wet and yes some-times (hard to remember) but i think he may have dirtiest his pants - (not very often on that one tho) He never had any infections, he did things like got too busy and forgot to go to the toilet. he grew out of this at about 7 y.o. It was frustrating times.

My guess on all this is that Christmas Day was busy and stressful, Jonbenet wasn't feeling well so therefore grumpy and disagreeable, she may have acted like a bit of a brat (who knows - kids can do this). So when she wet her bed and soiled her pants earlier (was that reported?) Pasty just cracked and flew into a rage. Bedwetting and clothes soiling just before a 6 am flight is really annoying cause thats a lot of washing to wash and dry. She may have lashed out and really hit her on the head with the torch. She may not have meant to kill her at all, and when faced with how to cover this all up her husband would have had to admit the molesting and so staged it that way to cover it all up.

 

[Hyatt]

Whoa! Where did you read where JonBenet was taken to a GYN!! My daughter is 16 and still seeing a Pediatrician. Girls don't start seeing a GYN until they are 18 or thereabouts. The question should be why was the child taken to a GYN in the first place?

By the way, during visits to the Pediatrician, there is NO invasive examination. Quick visual, question and answer with the child/parent, end of story.

Yes, I have often wondered how JonBenet's doctor could testify to never having seen sigs of prior sexual abuse since children don't usually get internal examinations, do they?

JMO

 

[LinasK]

So one theory to explain all this might be, her death was originally an accident, but it was realized the prior sexual abuse would become known, so it was masked by a staged sexual assault?

U.K. Guy, this is my theory. I think John was the one sexually abusing J.B. JMK even stated in his e-mails that JR was "affectionate and loving" with JB.

 

[UKGuy]

U.K. Guy, this is my theory. I think John was the one sexually abusing J.B. JMK even stated in his e-mails that JR was "affectionate and loving" with JB.

LinasK,

Yes this could be the case, it would explain a lot of the evidence, do you think Patsy knew and willingly entered into a cover up along with John?


.

 

[BBB167893]

Lily:"Hmmm, i guess the question I have is why does the guy who did the autopsy not think there was prior sexual abuse? and then three people later say there was? Bit like the handwriting experts who say the note is way more of a match to JMK when it wasnt him. These experts just seem to say what they think - not what is."

The coroner did not say there was not prior sexual abuse. He simply denotes what he finds. The rest is the job of the sex abuse experts. Dr. Sirotnak, who said he couldn't be sure, later apparently WAS sure, because he and Dr. Krugman co-authored an essay on child abuse where they agreed that JB had been abused.

"HYATT:Yes, I have often wondered how JonBenet's doctor could testify to never having seen sigs of prior sexual abuse since children don't usually get internal examinations, do they?"

And he admitted that he never performed one, Hyatt.

 

[Nedthan Johns]

actually it was said her vaginal opening was 6 times that of a child her age.

There was only 1 splinter found from the paintbrush lodged in her vaginal wall and her hymen was slightly torn.

Thomas wrote in his book he felt this correlated with a mother that may have forcibly wiped her child which would account for the enlarged opening. It was written that JonBenet would have others wipe for her down there. She had an on going bed wetting problem. The abuse to JonBenet is consistent with a child that was abused over a period of time. It’s not normal for a child to have an opening as large as JB’s was. It clearly points to a family member.

 

[BBB167893]

Det. Jane Harmer put up a side-by-side comparison of a normal 6-year-old's vagina and that of JonBenet's. The difference was said to be staggering.

 

[UKGuy]

actually it was said her vaginal opening was 6 times that of a child her age.

There was only 1 splinter found from the paintbrush lodged in her vaginal wall and her hymen was slightly torn.

Thomas wrote in his book he felt this correlated with a mother that may have forcibly wiped her child which would account for the enlarged opening. It was written that JonBenet would have others wipe for her down there. She had an on going bed wetting problem. The abuse to JonBenet is consistent with a child that was abused over a period of time. It’s not normal for a child to have an opening as large as JB’s was. It clearly points to a family member.

Nedthan Johns,

Coroner Meyer's opinion is that JonBenet's vaginal injuries were consistent with digital penetration.

A 6-year old girls vagina imo would not become enlarged due to being forcibly wiped down, this may distend the entrance to her vagina or damage her hymen, but I seriously doubt it could account for the increase in size.

In this instance the only viable explanation is that JonBenet was the victim of sexual abuse.

It is the sexual abuse that is being masked, not her death, and is likely the reason why she was killed.


.

 

[Nedthan Johns]

I go with that. I was just saying that was one thing Thomas speculated.

Although I think her vaginal opening could have resulted in rough wiping.

Depends on who is doing the wiping.

 

[s_finch]

In reading stories on Crime Library, many about sexual deviants, it becomes clear that many of them are impotent, so let's suppose that the offender, intending to go all the way with intercourse, couldn't get an erection and in anger (because most of them blame the victim for their body's lack of response) bashed her in the head.

Far fetched, but not totally impossible.

Actually, from what I've read concerning sexual deviants, that is very possible---very possible indeed that in his anger he would bash her skull. Or perhaps he realized she wasn't interested and her fighting back made him mad so he bashed her. And if he wasn't able to penetrate (for whatever reason), he still might have been able to ejaculate to some degree and therefore would explain the results of the blacklight test. I know the blacklight test shows positive for blood and semen, but do both show up the same under the light or do they glow differently??

 

[s_finch]

The pediatrician has been discussed on this forum, but it was a while back and now many, many pages downstream. I have always been very suspicious of him, he was always reassuring Patsy it was perfectly normal for a child of six to be wetting the bed and she would grow out of it, that urinary tract infections were due to bubblebath and vaginal infections due to not 'wiping' properly. IMO the guy was a pedophile and was in league with the other pedophiles who IMO had been abusing JonBenet for 3 years. He appeared on a couple of television shows and was adamant that he never saw any sign whatsoever of sexual abuse with JonBenet. It was absolutely pitiful IMO and the guy should have been investigated for incompetence at the very least.

I would very much like to know how Patsy came to choose him as JonBenet's pediatrician. I wouldn't be surprised to find that she was directed to him by someone who had a vested interest in JonBenet being cared for by somone who was prepared to turn a blind eye to signs of sexual abuse.

While everything the Dr. said in this case can be true, with reference to the bubblebath, and wiping properly, etc... it does seem that with that many visits in a short time span the Dr. was overlooking other possibilities. Of course, I've seen some very incompetent Drs. with regards to one of my children's health (she has a genetic disorder) so it doesn't surprise me that the Dr. did shoddy work. In addition, I have wondered about Mumchausen by Proxy http://www.kidshealth.org/parent/system/ill/munchausen.html with regard to Patsy and her taking JBR to the Dr. so many times.