"personal hygeine" of JB

[Ames]

To be fair to the housekeeper, Linda Hoffman-Pugh may not have actually though JBR was being abused, but rather "punished". While there are many people who would never physically punish a child, there are many who do. The housekeeper may have just not wanted to interfere with her employer's method of disciplining their children. Also, some kids do overreract (I am not suggesting that this was the case here) and scream and carry on when it is not warrented. Now, if "corporal cleansing" (by douching) had resulted in obvious injury, such as bloodied underwear, I believe Linda Hoffman-Pugh would have said it, especially after she realized that PR was trying to implicate her and her husband as possible suspects. Linda never mentioned anything like this, and JBR's panties were taken into evidence (although as was the case with the silver serving spoon in the pineapple, I don't know for certain if the panties were ever tested for blood, semen, or DNA. )

I agree...she just didn't want to interfere....or risk losing her job. WOW..just imagine what Patsy would have done and said...if the housekeeper were to have tried to intervene. She would have been out of there so fast....

 

[DeeDee249]

Yes, and it seemed like Linda Hoffman-Pugh really needed that job. Not many housekeepers would likely question an employer's method of disciplining their kids, but I think anyone (Linda included) would report abuse if they saw it. When questioned in those early days, Linda defended PR, called her a wonderful person, said she was a devoted and involved mother. And it sounded like she really meant what she said. It was only after poor Linda realized that PR was trying to pin this horrible crime on her and her husband (among many others) that she testified against her, and I am sure if she suspected PR had abused JBR at that point she would have come forward with it.

 

[Ames]

Yes, and it seemed like Linda Hoffman-Pugh really needed that job. Not many housekeepers would likely question an employer's method of disciplining their kids, but I think anyone (Linda included) would report abuse if they saw it. When questioned in those early days, Linda defended PR, called her a wonderful person, said she was a devoted and involved mother. And it sounded like she really meant what she said. It was only after poor Linda realized that PR was trying to pin this horrible crime on her and her husband (among many others) that she testified against her, and I am sure if she suspected PR had abused JBR at that point she would have come forward with it.

She did come forward with the fact that she heard JB screaming...while in the bathroom with Patsy. But, since she wasn't in there....she couldn't say for sure what was happening in there.

 

[BBB167893]

I agree...she just didn't want to interfere....or risk losing her job. WOW..just imagine what Patsy would have done and said...if the housekeeper were to have tried to intervene. She would have been out of there so fast....

I have to agree. It's happened millions of times.

 

[armywife210]

Yep, I think it is, CK wouldn't lie about it.

It seems that she was douched as punishment for wetting and soiling herself. The housekeeper said that she used to hear JB screaming in the bathroom...(and Patsy would be in there with her).

If I heard a child screaming in a bathroom I would go to investigate, how can the housekeeper sit there and listen to a child scream and not do nothing about it? If JonBenet was being abused then Linda the housekeeper is just as guilty as Patsy because she heard what was going on in that house and didn't report it.

I agree completely, but this is a woman who had to borrow money from Patsy. She needed the job. To most of us, money is nothing compared to our integrity. But to some.... well things are a little bit more hazy.

 

[Ames]

Yep, I think it is, CK wouldn't lie about it.

It seems that she was douched as punishment for wetting and soiling herself. The housekeeper said that she used to hear JB screaming in the bathroom...(and Patsy would be in there with her).

I agree completely, but this is a woman who had to borrow money from Patsy. She needed the job. To most of us, money is nothing compared to our integrity. But to some.... well things are a little bit more hazy.

Yeah, THAT...and the fact that Patsy would have fired her on the spot, if she had of interfered. She didn't want to lose her job.

 

[UKGuy]

I don't know UK,Patsy may have been slack in her thinking about laundry,and just thought as long as they'd been washed,(and by LHP at that..I'm assuming she must have been a good maid),that she may have thought that as long as they'd been washed,they were clean,despite the stains.

JMO8778,

This is something we do not know a lot about, e.g. the frequency of purchases of new underwear for JonBenet?

You might assume this was a regular purchase for Patsy since JonBenet was not so hygenic, particularly with her pageant appearances?

Yet we do know that JonBenet had a drawer full of stained underwear, on its own its not entirely unusual, but does it offer us a time frame back to the size-6's purchased at bloomingdales?

It's not meant to sound nasty, but what does it matter what underwear JonBenet is dressed in after she is dead, she was left in her urine-soaked longjohns, why were her underwear so imperative?

I do not think it was a cleanliness issue on Patsy's behalf otherwise those longjohns would also have been replaced?


.

 

[DeeDee249]

Cleanliness had nothing to do with it. JBR was wearing rosebud print panties with "Wednesday" on the waistband that day, size 6 (her usual size at that time). Those panties became stained with blood to the extent that anyone who saw the body would have known immediately there had been a sexual assault. Now keep in mind the long johns were likely removed for the sexual assault. There was no blood on the long johns. The original panties were either pulled down or removed as well. After they were pulled back up, enough bleeding occured to make it necessary to replace them, and they had to be replaced with an identical pair. This blood would have soaked through to the long johns as well, making it immediately apparent that something had penetrated the child's vagina with enough force to cause the bleeding.
See, I feel the sexual assault, both chronic (previous) and acute (at/near the time of death) were being HIDDEN by the changing of the panties, redressing in the long johns, wiping the pubic area and thighs, wrapping in the blanket. A sexual predator OTHER THAN A FAMILY MEMBER does not need to hide the assault. He has a dead victim who cannot identify him as well. So why redress, wipe down, etc. Those kind of killers either don't care if the sexual crime is apparent or WANT it to be apparent. Everything about the way the body was left screams abuse by a family member.
The body had to look as if the garrotte was all there was to the crime. The garrotte IMO was also meant to hide the fact that there had been a head bash and vaginal penetration. That's why it was a "gentle" strangulation. Just tight enough to make that groove in her skin, make it look as if it was the only cause of death. At this point, there was an unconscious, still alive but dying JBR (from the head bash which IMO came first), who was also bleeding from the vagina. To me, that was the only reason the garrotte was applied at all. And the tape. Just to make it seem like a kidnapping/strangulation and to divert the suspicion from the REAL cause of death (the head bash) which came as a sudden reaction to her scream (from the sexual assault).
Whoever redressed JBR never though the fact that the panties were not her usual size would ever be noticed by anyone, because they never figured that anyone would discover what size she really wore. I don't think they ever though JBR's OTHER panties would be taken into evidence. They though all LE would ever see were the clothes she had on when the body was found.

 

[JMO8778]

JMO8778,

This is something we do not know a lot about, e.g. the frequency of purchases of new underwear for JonBenet?

You might assume this was a regular purchase for Patsy since JonBenet was not so hygenic, particularly with her pageant appearances?

Yet we do know that JonBenet had a drawer full of stained underwear, on its own its not entirely unusual, but does it offer us a time frame back to the size-6's purchased at bloomingdales?

It's not meant to sound nasty, but what does it matter what underwear JonBenet is dressed in after she is dead, she was left in her urine-soaked longjohns, why were her underwear so imperative?

I do not think it was a cleanliness issue on Patsy's behalf otherwise those longjohns would also have been replaced?


.

exactly.they were NEW for one thing....no R's DNA on them !! and they said Wed. on them....as if she wore them only Wed.,and they took her straight to bed from the car,as they stated,and it was a bedside abduction...only they didn't,and it wasn't.
to me it looks more and more like *JR did it..and from a knee jerk reaction to JB's scream and possible injury (if it wasn't all just a staged injury).
to me that is the only thing that makes sense...esp. her scream,unless that was Patsy.

 

[JMO8778]

Cleanliness had nothing to do with it. JBR was wearing rosebud print panties with "Wednesday" on the waistband that day, size 6 (her usual size at that time). Those panties became stained with blood to the extent that anyone who saw the body would have known immediately there had been a sexual assault. Now keep in mind the long johns were likely removed for the sexual assault. There was no blood on the long johns. The original panties were either pulled down or removed as well. After they were pulled back up, enough bleeding occured to make it necessary to replace them, and they had to be replaced with an identical pair. This blood would have soaked through to the long johns as well, making it immediately apparent that something had penetrated the child's vagina with enough force to cause the bleeding.
See, I feel the sexual assault, both chronic (previous) and acute (at/near the time of death) were being HIDDEN by the changing of the panties, redressing in the long johns, wiping the pubic area and thighs, wrapping in the blanket. A sexual predator OTHER THAN A FAMILY MEMBER does not need to hide the assault. He has a dead victim who cannot identify him as well. So why redress, wipe down, etc. Those kind of killers either don't care if the sexual crime is apparent or WANT it to be apparent. Everything about the way the body was left screams abuse by a family member.
The body had to look as if the garrotte was all there was to the crime. The garrotte IMO was also meant to hide the fact that there had been a head bash and vaginal penetration. That's why it was a "gentle" strangulation. Just tight enough to make that groove in her skin, make it look as if it was the only cause of death. At this point, there was an unconscious, still alive but dying JBR (from the head bash which IMO came first), who was also bleeding from the vagina. To me, that was the only reason the garrotte was applied at all. And the tape. Just to make it seem like a kidnapping/strangulation and to divert the suspicion from the REAL cause of death (the head bash) which came as a sudden reaction to her scream (from the sexual assault).
Whoever redressed JBR never though the fact that the panties were not her usual size would ever be noticed by anyone, because they never figured that anyone would discover what size she really wore. I don't think they ever though JBR's OTHER panties would be taken into evidence. They though all LE would ever see were the clothes she had on when the body was found.

:clap:
well said !! do you think she as killed in the basement? b/c along w the scream heard,and the sexual attack (family member hiding her from others for it),that appears likely to me.but then what about the ligatures...why not tie them tightly as if it were a KN,(why leave 15 inches in between the wrists?) and why did JR later lie and say they were tied tightly,when they weren't..any ideas?
I also have to wonder about the 'secret santa' visit...to me it seems it was a lure by a family member to get her into the basement...esp. since it was supposed to be *secret.I don't think the R's knew it was something innocent,like santa coming to the MI house..that wouldn't have been a secret.(wasn't JR q'd about a santa suit?)
And I suspect the 'cutesy' pics taken in the basement were done by JR,even if they weren't considered pornographic in nature.

 

[UKGuy]

exactly.they were NEW for one thing....no R's DNA on them !! and they said Wed. on them....as if she wore them only Wed.,and they took her straight to bed from the car,as they stated,and it was a bedside abduction...only they didn't,and it wasn't.
to me it looks more and more like *JR did it..and from a knee jerk reaction to JB's scream and possible injury (if it wasn't all just a staged injury).
to me that is the only thing that makes sense...esp. her scream,unless that was Patsy.

JMO8778,

Yes, unless new evidence appears, it looks like someone was molesting JonBenet , then whacked her over the head, strangled her, cleaned her up and staged a crime-scene?

Without knowing some of the evidence that Steve Thomas had access to, its difficult to expand any particular theory.

.

 

[phenolred]

Im usually just a lurker on the Jonbent board BUT I just had to jump in on this one. When I read the original thread I was like YEAH I bet that was it DOUCHING.

It just seems to make alot of sense, because of the errosion of the hymen.. And with all the screaming in the bathroom and with all of her soiling issues and I rememberred reading about corporal cleaing in the book and could never figure out what that was supposed to be but now I think it was douching. HOWEVER, the one point I wanted to make is this. Alot of people seem to think it was a punishment this is where I disagree I think it was just Patsy's warped way of cleaning her Patsy was from the south and maybe was a little Old School I seem to remember enemas or castor oil being givin to children as a routine in the old days. Maybe Pasty just thought she was cleansing Jonbenet not punishing her maybe when she soiled she thought she needed to clean out that area so Jonbenet wouldnt get another infection. Maybe this was an alternative to bathing her in the bath tub, maybe that is why she thought she didnt need a bath because she cleaned her with the douche???? I dont know Im just throwing my thoughts out there and hopefully I dont get attacked....
LOL

 

[Albert18]

Didn't the experts think the sexual attack that night was a part of the staging?

Meaning it wasn't real.

Meaning, JonBenet wasn't really sexually assaulted that night. This was a staged sexual assault.

Meaning, sexual assault shouldn't be the basis for a theory because it wasn't real. The sexual assault was like planted evidence.

The sexual assault should be ignored, it is a diversion.

 

[coloradokares]

Didn't the experts think the sexual attack that night was a part of the staging?

Meaning it wasn't real.

Meaning, JonBenet wasn't really sexually assaulted that night. This was a staged sexual assault.

Meaning, sexual assault shouldn't be the basis for a theory because it wasn't real. The sexual assault was like planted evidence.

The sexual assault should be ignored, it is a diversion.

Except this was not the first time that Jon Benet had some sort of violation, there was evidence suggesting hymen erosion. So that part of the staging was an attempt to hide the fact there was some crazy corporal cleaning or something was going on that was violating Jon Benet

 

[Albert18]

Except this was not the first time that Jon Benet had some sort of violation, there was evidence suggesting hymen erosion. So that part of the staging was an attempt to hide the fact there was some crazy corporal cleaning or something was going on that was violating Jon Benet

But I don't think any of the staging was done because of previous events. I think all the staging was directed at the fact JonBenet was dead.

Let's say JonBenet was previously sexually abused. Let's say douches were used on her. Let's say inappropriate things were done to her because she was wetting and soiling her underwear. None of that matters. JonBenet is dead. That matters.

The staging was to create an intruder. Physical evidence of an intruder couldn't be created. Physical acts of an intruder could be created. That is what the staging did.

 

[JMO8778]

JMO8778,

Yes, unless new evidence appears, it looks like someone was molesting JonBenet , then whacked her over the head, strangled her, cleaned her up and staged a crime-scene?

unless there was a staged assault,I agree,even so,she could have been molested b/f anything was staged.
but according to the scream heard...and it sounds like there was one....JB was in the basement,and something happened there.she screamed,and was struck upon the head,thus the scream ending suddenly,as reported.

Without knowing some of the evidence that Steve Thomas had access to, its difficult to expand any particular theory.

.

that it is,there must be more reasons he believes Patsy did it.If she did do it then I suspect it was over more than just soiling/bedwetting issues.I know it can happen, but there is more to this case,esp. signs of incest,that I think shouldn't be discounted.
I suspect there is more evidence on JR being involved,at least in the coverup.I just don't see how JR could have kept pointing out JM and friends,ST questioning him about that,(and not just once but many times),and then ST looking at the RN and seeing the connection there..JR's input in trying to frame them,along with his comment 'this had to be an inside job'.
Also the way too big underwear is not mentioned in his book at all.
If JB wasn't killed in connection with Patsy losing it and doing more harm than she meant to in her room/bathroom....then she sure was deliberately killed when someone took her to the basement..at that point,they'd decided not to turn back and not to get her any help..and not to try to make it appear to be an accident,and not to call 911 or seek medical attention...thus it was deliberate.In that case,IMO she was taken to the basement with the sole intention of killing her,and then staging the crime.
If Patsy accidently hit her too hard,then why not put her at the end of the stairs and say she fell? And why kill her to hide nothing more than douching? She could have told them she was doing it to insure cleanliness.I think any parent would have still held out hope...if they didn't want her dead.
And wouldn't an accident be staged as an accident? why would someone make things appear worse by staging an accident as a murder? ..b/c it was a murder that needed to be covered for.JMO.

 

[JMO8778]

Im usually just a lurker on the Jonbent board BUT I just had to jump in on this one. When I read the original thread I was like YEAH I bet that was it DOUCHING.

It just seems to make alot of sense, because of the errosion of the hymen.. And with all the screaming in the bathroom and with all of her soiling issues and I rememberred reading about corporal cleaing in the book and could never figure out what that was supposed to be but now I think it was douching. HOWEVER, the one point I wanted to make is this. Alot of people seem to think it was a punishment this is where I disagree I think it was just Patsy's warped way of cleaning her Patsy was from the south and maybe was a little Old School I seem to remember enemas or castor oil being givin to children as a routine in the old days. Maybe Pasty just thought she was cleansing Jonbenet not punishing her maybe when she soiled she thought she needed to clean out that area so Jonbenet wouldnt get another infection. Maybe this was an alternative to bathing her in the bath tub, maybe that is why she thought she didnt need a bath because she cleaned her with the douche???? I dont know Im just throwing my thoughts out there and hopefully I dont get attacked....
LOL

could be,good thoughts,I just want to say that if that was the case,it was b/c of Patsy herself,I've never heard of anyone from the south using douching to clean a child for soiling issues.

 

[JMO8778]

Whoever redressed JBR never though the fact that the panties were not her usual size would ever be noticed by anyone, because they never figured that anyone would discover what size she really wore. I don't think they ever though JBR's OTHER panties would be taken into evidence. They though all LE would ever see were the clothes she had on when the body was found.

that's why I think they were in the golf bag that JR asked for...he felt comfortable leaving them there,at least for a bit,since JB had the other pair on and he thought they wouldn't be searched for..not so if they'd been left off of her.

 

[JMO8778]

As far as the whole crime itself..douching,incest,and the details ..such as the perp's movements and evidence,where was she killed,WHO did it and WHY...I would really like for Mark Fuhrman to speak up...but darn it...he won't talk !! The only 2 things he will say is that 1-it was an inside job (and I don't think he means BR) and 2-it was not an accident.To quote him '..and it was not an accident.In fact,it was quite deliberate'.
So he is obviously not keeping quiet b/c he thinks the R's are innocent.In fact,is he not talking b/c he thinks JR did it,and JR is still alive,and so this is still a prosecutable case?
But I don't know if he means totally not an accident or what...meaning,she wasn't deliberately injured with intent to kill until she was taken to the basement,if it happened elsewhere.The way I see it is he means it was not an accident at all.I don't see how that severe head wound just happened to happen without intent behind it.
Anyway,if Mark would talk,for me,that would do it,if he would give his opinion on who did it and why,although I don't know if he knows more than we know here.I don't think that's going to happen though.He seems to be staying silent on the rest for now,for good reason.

 

[phenolred]

ok I just did a little research on douching.... Here is some of the things I found that caught my interest. First of all this is one that I found directly on the Summers Eve website on their FAQ regarding their wash/bath doesnt indicate douche but I would assume their answer would be the same
Can these products be used on children?
A: Summer's Eve Feminine Wash and Bath have only been clinically tested on women over the age of 18. Therefore, we cannot recommend them for children.


Then I found this.....from a medical journal I'm going to keep looking for some more along these lines here is a link to the original story
http://www.pec-online.com/pt/re/pec...TsXXp84Z6LMdlL7!-1740698184!181195629!8091!-1

Vaginal Laceration From a High-Pressure Water Jet in a Prepubescent Girl.
Illustrative Case
Pediatric Emergency Care. 23(2):112-114, February 2007.
Lacy, Judith MD; Brennand, Erin MD; Ornstein, Melanie MD; Allen, Lisa MD
Abstract:
Objective: To document an unusual case of water douche injury in a prepubescent girl.
Design: Case report.
Results: After sitting atop a high-pressure water jet in a public fountain, a 9-year-old girl experienced pain and vaginal bleeding. She sustained a laceration high in her vaginal vault with an estimated total blood loss of 750 mL. Examination and vaginal packing were done under general anesthesia resulting in cessation of bleeding.
Conclusions: High-pressure water doucheis recognized as producing serious vaginal injury in adult women but is not well reported as a cause of genital trauma in the pediatric population. Although not well documented, the prepubescent vagina is capable of receiving significant trauma due to highly pressurized water. Initial trauma management should be implemented with subsequent repair of the laceration, if possible. The prepubescent genital anatomy must be taken into account during examination and postoperative care.