Prior Vaginal Trauma

[Holdontoyourhat]

So, no, there is no evidence any stick was ever inserted in her vagina. Thought so.

How dare IDI postulate a foreign faction as was both stated and implied by someone in writing, who knows more about this subject than all of us combined.

Lets instead continue to imagine what happened.

 

[MurriFlower]

How dare IDI postulate a foreign faction as was both stated and implied by someone in writing, who knows more about this subject than all of us combined.

Lets instead continue to imagine what happened.

Ya know, just when I think all this is a waste of my time, a day like today happens!!

First, I find out that the 'she was killed in the hallway' isn't true.

Then I find out that the 'she was assaulted with a stick' isn't true either.

Now, back to the SFF!!

 

[DeeDee249]

Ya know, just when I think all this is a waste of my time, a day like today happens!!

First, I find out that the 'she was killed in the hallway' isn't true.

Then I find out that the 'she was assaulted with a stick' isn't true either.

Now, back to the SFF!!

How can you say they aren't true? The urine stains on the carpet can't be dated, but their location so close to both the WC and the paint tote, combined with the FACT that JB's clothing was stained on the front (indicating she was on her stomach when this happened) Puts her death in that area of the basement very likely.
As there are no eyewitnesses to this posting here (as far as we know), NO one knows for sure, including me and you.

 

[SunnieRN]

No, you're making the assertions, therfore you need to prove they are photos of JBR. Where did they come from, how do you know, and why did they have them? How did they arrive at them by legal means?

Who's word did you take? BPD?

I seem to remember you starting the acusations by saying that the pgotos were fake, the responsibility is yours to prove it. Put your money where your keyboard fingers are please!

 

[LinasK]

:hand:I think we have a few wannabe defense attorneys on this thread who really believe we're gullible enough to believe that JonBenet's vaginal injuries were due to bubble baths, bed-wetting accidents, horseback riding, or dancing/gymnastics. We also have many female posters here whom, (without describing their own anatomy) can personally tell you: the above activities absolutely are not enough to cause the type of injuries JonBenet suffered!!!:doh:

Not to put down UKGuy, but bike riding wouldn't do it either!:snooty:

 

[MurriFlower]

How can you say they aren't true? The urine stains on the carpet can't be dated, but their location so close to both the WC and the paint tote, combined with the FACT that JB's clothing was stained on the front (indicating she was on her stomach when this happened) Puts her death in that area of the basement very likely.
As there are no eyewitnesses to this posting here (as far as we know), NO one knows for sure, including me and you.

Yeah this is what I mean. Probably you are the one that convinced me about her being killed there but I now find out:

There is a stain on the carpet but it may or may not be urine, or if it is, it may or may not be JBR's urine and even if it is hers, it may or may not have been left when she 'voided' at death. I now see, this is the essence of how you come about your 'belief' for RDI. You take one thing and then pile all the others on top to make a 'body of evidence'. If you pull out the first thing, like the urine stain, the whole 'body of evidence' falls down like a pack of cards.

I could just as easily say she got a fright when the IDI grabbed her in her bed and she wet herself. He then removed her clothes in order to assault her and put them back on her before he left.

 

[DeeDee249]

Yeah this is what I mean. Probably you are the one that convinced me about her being killed there but I now find out:

There is a stain on the carpet but it may or may not be urine, or if it is, it may or may not be JBR's urine and even if it is hers, it may or may not have been left when she 'voided' at death. I now see, this is the essence of how you come about your 'belief' for RDI. You take one thing and then pile all the others on top to make a 'body of evidence'. If you pull out the first thing, like the urine stain, the whole 'body of evidence' falls down like a pack of cards.

I could just as easily say she got a fright when the IDI grabbed her in her bed and she wet herself. He then removed her clothes in order to assault her and put them back on her before he left.

If there is no basement urine stain, it still doesn't mean she wasn't killed in the basement. She may have been killed in her room or bathroom, urine stains were definitely found on her sheets. But the possibility of all that activity, including a scream loud enough to be heard across the street, taking place just down the hall from her brother's room seems unlikely. Not to mention that the parents' room was just one floor up and sound would carry with an open staircase like the spiral stairs. The parents' room was just at the top of those stairs, JB's room right near the same stairs one floor down.
To be honest, where she was killed is not THE most important thing in this case. Indeed, LE made no attempt to determine this. Not that I think it is insignificant, but it really doesn't change much about the crime, except to move it a bit closer to RDI (for me, anyway) if she was killed in her bedroom.

 

[MurriFlower]

If there is no basement urine stain, it still doesn't mean she wasn't killed in the basement. She may have been killed in her room or bathroom, urine stains were definitely found on her sheets. But the possibility of all that activity, including a scream loud enough to be heard across the street, taking place just down the hall from her brother's room seems unlikely. Not to mention that the parents' room was just one floor up and sound would carry with an open staircase like the spiral stairs. The parents' room was just at the top of those stairs, JB's room right near the same stairs one floor down.
To be honest, where she was killed is not THE most important thing in this case. Indeed, LE made no attempt to determine this. Not that I think it is insignificant, but it really doesn't change much about the crime, except to move it a bit closer to RDI (for me, anyway) if she was killed in her bedroom.

Perhaps, but I think it's important not to get these things wrong, because this can lead to other wrong things.

If for instance, she was attacked in her bedroom by an IDI who came in through the balcony, this is an entirely different thing to being lured downstairs (assumably by someone she knew, who had a key), fed pineapple (again by someone she knew) and taken to the basement and killed. It eliminates the probability of someone she knew being involved, so it changes my take on suspects. See what I mean?

 

[joeskidbeck]

It doesn't change my take at all. I have always believed the head bash happened in her bed because that is where she was being molested that night. And please don't forget when Patsy looked at the picture of the bed and said "I don't see any blood, do you?" Why in the name of God did she say that and why would the detectives not jump all over that statement? She knew that's where JB's head was bashed and for one fleeting moment thought there may have been a spot of blood left behind.
The urine stain in the basement is probably because that is where they strangled her and finished the staging. It did not have to be an intruder if it happened in her room. I will go so far as to say especially if it happened in her room! Good grief, Burke was in his bedroom, where, next door? This would be a big problem for an intruder, not so much for a family member. And, I guess this intruder was sure that JAR wouldn't be coming home with the family as his room was right next door to hers. What would he have done then? Oh I'm sure the intruder knew absolutely everything there was to know about the Ramseys, including exactly where every member of the family was that night.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

I seem to remember you starting the acusations by saying that the pgotos were fake, the responsibility is yours to prove it. Put your money where your keyboard fingers are please!

Thats an odd statement.

The conclusions drawn from the photos are invalid because the photos cannot be sourced. Its impossible to know or validate they are even JBR because their source is not legitimate.

It is RDI drawing conclusions from the photos. I don't need to source them, I am simply rejecting them. RDI needs to effectively source them to maintain credibility in the argument. Where did they come from? How were they obtained? Was it legal? Who is in the photos? How do you know? Who said, BPD?

 

[joeskidbeck]

Thats an odd statement.

The conclusions drawn from the photos are invalid because the photos cannot be sourced. Its impossible to know or validate they are even JBR because their source is not legitimate.

It is RDI drawing conclusions from the photos. I don't need to source them, I am simply rejecting them. RDI needs to effectively source them to maintain credibility in the argument. Where did they come from? How were they obtained? Was it legal? Who is in the photos? How do you know? Who said, BPD?

Holdon, we are talking about the photos that were used by the panel of doctors to determine prior sexual abuse. They used post mortem photos of JB's vagina as well as post mortem photos of healthy six year old vaginas. These are not photos that any of us has seen, we have only read about them in the reports of the conclusions of the doctors.

 

[SunnieRN]

Thats an odd statement.

The conclusions drawn from the photos are invalid because the photos cannot be sourced. Its impossible to know or validate they are even JBR because their source is not legitimate.

It is RDI drawing conclusions from the photos. I don't need to source them, I am simply rejecting them. RDI needs to effectively source them to maintain credibility in the argument. Where did they come from? How were they obtained? Was it legal? Who is in the photos? How do you know? Who said, BPD?

There are multiple experts that saw the photos and declared them to show that Jon Benet had been sexually abused. The photos exist and will not be proven to exist to you, as this is still an open murder investigation, and no offense, but you're a nobody. Not an expert on anatomy or sexual abuse of 6 year old females. If you say that the source is not legitimate, prove it. Prove your accusations. It is he way reasonable, intelligent people can better present arguments. Share your reputable sources that prove the pictures are not of Jon Benet.



And yes HOTYH, you don't have to prove they are not real, but if you want anyone to believe you it is the rational thing to do.

 

[MurriFlower]

There are multiple experts that saw the photos and declared them to show that Jon Benet had been sexually abused. The photos exist and will not be proven to exist to you, as this is still an open murder investigation, and no offense, but you're a nobody. Not an expert on anatomy or sexual abuse of 6 year old females. If you say that the source is not legitimate, prove it. Prove your accusations. It is he way reasonable, intelligent people can better present arguments. Share your reputable sources that prove the pictures are not of Jon Benet.



And yes HOTYH, you don't have to prove they are not real, but if you want anyone to believe you it is the rational thing to do.

Um, they don't usually have your name tattooed on, so I can't see how you would know whose they were.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Holdon, we are talking about the photos that were used by the panel of doctors to determine prior sexual abuse. They used post mortem photos of JB's vagina as well as post mortem photos of healthy six year old vaginas. These are not photos that any of us has seen, we have only read about them in the reports of the conclusions of the doctors.

There are multiple experts that saw the photos and declared them to show that Jon Benet had been sexually abused. The photos exist and will not be proven to exist to you, as this is still an open murder investigation, and no offense, but you're a nobody. Not an expert on anatomy or sexual abuse of 6 year old females. If you say that the source is not legitimate, prove it. Prove your accusations. It is he way reasonable, intelligent people can better present arguments. Share your reputable sources that prove the pictures are not of Jon Benet.

Oh I'm sorry, there not just any photos they are THE photos. These wouldn't be the same photos acquired by the tabloids? The Globe maybe?

Because BPD has no 'panel of doctors that determined prior abuse'. And if they don't, nobody does.

Thats pure fiction hogwash.

 

[SunnieRN]

Um, they don't usually have your name tattooed on, so I can't see how you would know whose they were.

No one is going to lose their career by stating that the pictures were of JB if they were not. Of course maybe you are not in the medical field and are not aware of the importance of your licensure and reputation.

Oh I'm sorry, there not just any photos they are THE photos. These wouldn't be the same photos acquired by the tabloids? The Globe maybe?

Because BPD has no 'panel of doctors that determined prior abuse'. And if they don't, nobody does.

Thats pure fiction hogwash.

I will say yet again, Prove it! And when you bold MY post, say that you did it!

 

[ChuckMaureen]

Consider yourself backed up! JB did not masturbate to the point of BLEEDING. No one would. To suggest that this murdered, sexually assaulted little girl masturbated herself as she was being killed is one of the most vile "opinions" I have ever read on this forum.

Hi, DeeDee249,

Please show me the phrase in my post that you claim offers my opinion that JBR "masturbated herself as she was being killed"?

... this is the 2nd time in which you inferred and announced an intent to one of my posts that does not accurately reflect actual content.

I cordially accept that members of these forums hold varying beliefs and opinions, that we opine and debate sensitive subject matter but I do not appreciate my commentary being negatively adorned with phrases or inferred intent which I never included, and then to be categorized as "vile opinion" after the adornment.

Apologies to all if this post is a TOS issue, but I will not let stand another poster morphing my commentary into something other than what is included and intended in my writings.

No hard feelings, as I understand the anger and pain that accompanies some of our experiences and now and again we slip and let that anger and pain spill over towards those with whom we might disagree.

I'm posting this simply as a reminder to us all, to please read carefully any post to which you desire to reply and be cognizant and thoughful of the content.

 

[UKGuy]

Not to put down UKGuy, but bike riding wouldn't do it either!:snooty:

LinasK,

No problem at all. I was trying to change the focus from all the things that could have injured JonBenet, to the actual forensic evidence. Since there is none to support other theories that tout the internal injuries arising from a non-abusive source.



.

 

[ChuckMaureen]

How can you say they aren't true? The urine stains on the carpet can't be dated, but their location so close to both the WC and the paint tote, combined with the FACT that JB's clothing was stained on the front (indicating she was on her stomach when this happened) Puts her death in that area of the basement very likely.
As there are no eyewitnesses to this posting here (as far as we know), NO one knows for sure, including me and you.

Hi, DeeDee,

If JBR's "clothing was stained on the front", as in stain appearing toward her stomach / chest, then I agree she might have been lying prone.

I do not agree that it suggests as "very likely" she was murdered in that position / location.

Assuming it was her urine, it suggests JBR:

• was alive, lying prone on the carpet and urinated.
• urinated in stance then lied down on the wet carpet afterward.
• was murdered by a blow to the head, her body dropped forward from impact, landed prone then her bladder relieved.

Another position that would cause urine stain toward her stomach / chest is if she were positioned with her head low or on the carpet and lower pelvis tilted anteriorly upward, above her head to a degree where urine would flow toward her stomach and perhaps spill to the carpet.

We might expect one of these possible causes for JBR to urinate:

• Fatigue.
• Satisfaction relief in-place.
• Medical condition.
• Fear.
• Loss of life w/bladder sphincter relaxation.

 

[ChuckMaureen]

:hand:I think we have a few wannabe defense attorneys on this thread who really believe we're gullible enough to believe that JonBenet's vaginal injuries were due to bubble baths, bed-wetting accidents, horseback riding, or dancing/gymnastics. We also have many female posters here whom, (without describing their own anatomy) can personally tell you: the above activities absolutely are not enough to cause the type of injuries JonBenet suffered!!!:doh:

Hi, LinasK,

Since in some of my posts I reference horseback riding, dancing and gymnastics I'm led to believe you include me as one of a "few wannabe defense attorneys" and also as one who holds the opinion that you and others are "gullible enough".

I am defending no one in this case. I also do not and never will hold the opinion that any member of these forums is "gullible enough".

I hope you do not believe that others doubt your gullibility factor simply because they offer opinions or conclusions different as to your own.

I respect that your opinions and conclusions are as valid as are mine and others within the contexts in which they are presented.

 

[ChuckMaureen]

In general six-year-olds do not masturbate themselves with their fingers inserted. In fact, this activity is considered abnormal sexual behavior for this age and would indicate a level of sexual understanding garnered through unhealthy means such as sexual abuse.

Hi, MTM,

bbm

You offer a definitive statement (bolded in your quoted comment).

That statement might be accurate in the context of masturbation, but might not be accurate in the context of insertion.

http://www.med.umich.edu/yourchild/topics/masturb.htm

Girls often don’t discover their vulva (female external genitalia) until about ten to eleven months of age. They may even insert objects into their vaginas as a matter of curiosity—much like the beans and small toys children of this age like to put into their noses and ears.

Genital play in both sexes can also take the form of rubbing with hands or rubbing against other objects such as a pillow, stuffed animal or the bed. Often the child will be found staring, flushed, with an absent look on their faces, breathing fast or irregularly while masturbating. The behavior generally increases with boredom, sleepiness or stress in the child’s life. It is important to remember that children do not generally associate this activity with sexuality or adult relationships until much later in childhood, more toward puberty. This is reassuring to some parents who are alarmed by their child’s behavior. Genital play is often used simply as a form of self-comfort.

Since it is noted that JBR presented with nocturnal enuresis it certainly is a possibility that natural curiosity led her to wonder why / how she urinates and "what's down / in there?" .. and perhaps would be so regardless of the effects of nocturnal enuresis.