- Joined
- Feb 27, 2005
- Messages
- 3,862
- Reaction score
- 13,250
What I'm sure of is that most "adult women" are not aware of the condition of their hymen when they were 6 years old. UNLESS they were molested, bet they'd know for sure. As a woman and one that raised 2 daughters, I can tell you that my daughters rarely had UTI's and NEVER had yeast and other infections of their internal sexual organs. The first time I took my oldest to the doctor with a UTI his advice was "absolutely no bubble baths" and guess what, no more UTI's. What I don't and have never understood is all of the dr. visits that JB made. Patsy Ramsey was looking for an answer and she either never got the one she wanted or she failed miserably to follow the dr's advice. She was not a stupid woman and I want to know why LE didn't question her extensively about those doctor visits. Also, if Dr. Beuf was not called to testify to the Grand Jury, then I can't see the reason to even covene it. Normal six year old girls don't have to go to the doctor umpteen times a year with UTI's and yeast infections and they don't soil their underpants or have to have help wiping, even from non-family members. I know some of the posters who believe these things are not indicative of molestation are men and I guess I can almost understand that, but I cannot understand a woman who would not recognize these signs for what they were: she was being abused! I don't proclaim to know who did it, but someone did it. Look at autopsy reports all you like, but the autopsy report you should be concerned with was probably never done. Was there a psychological autopsy done on JonBenet? I bet not. The family would never have allowed it. If you are not familiar with what that term means, please go here: http://www.deathreference.com/A-Bi/Autopsy-Psychological.html
RANT OVER
Hi, joeskidbeck,
You seem quite intent, without prevarication, in categorizing the condition of JBR's genital region as being the result of molestation.
I do understand your position. It's difficult to ignore an "alarm bell" after previous experience has honed and polished the bellform and clapper.
But surely you understand that such a conclusion can not be definitive without supportive medical and other history beyond the information offered in the autopsy report that describes a condition that is more common to pathology and / or physical causes other than molestation. Include bed wetting and doctor visits. Collectively, are they "indicators" of molestation? Not always and that is just as valid an observation as is yours.
Your hard conclusion would have to implicate Dr. Beuf, since certainly he would have to be in on the cover-up. Why would he risk his practice? Why would he not question the frequency of necessary visits unless he had concluded to other cause? There is no evidence of conspiracy nor of cover up.
"Doctor B, my little JonBenet has this vaginal infection, can you fix? hush hush". It's possible it was a result of molestation but moreso as unlikely.
There are other possible causes for what was described in the autopsy and for her behaviors. Molestation isn't and shouldn't be an automatic diagnosis, although it definitely should be investigated and ruled out or addressed immediately and appropriately.
JBR might have suffered from an immunity disturbance or perpetual bacterial infections caused by poor hygiene or even overzealous hygiene.
Given how JBR was pampered to the nth degree, all that pampering was teaching JBR to be reliant upon whomever was her caretaker of the moment.
Once JBR had someone unquestioningly wipe for her, I suspect that royal treatment went a long way in instilling such dependent behavior. I'm wet, dry me. I've messed, wipe me. To a 6 year old, wouldn't that seem as "normal", given that might have been all she'd experienced during her life? Queens are as Queens do.
I've read comments attributed to BR (during interviews) that indicated he was at times jealous of the heightened attention JBR received. I suspect his personal experience was often a stark contrast.
I also suspect if JBR had learned to properly wipe herself, she would have suffered less often from infection since she would have learned to be careful on the upstroke (if she could not perform a downstroke) whereas, someone wiping for her might not be as careful nor observant as to what ended up where, with JBR oblivious as to consequence.
If there was abuse, I expect Dr. Beuf would have been aware, at least inwardly and when JBR was murdered why would he not come forward? Why would he remain friends with the abuser(s) and risk being "found out" during an investigation of the murder of a 6 year old?
Fear? Perhaps, but we'd be making assumptions beyond realities that are more common.