Prior Vaginal Trauma

[UKGuy]

First stage of grief is DENIAL.

The fibers I think are the most related to who killed her are the ones on her thighs and vaginal area. Where is THAT cloth? Who ever wiped her down is in a direct involvement of fiber transfer and finding that piece of evidence is probably the MOST important fiber evidence.

CathyR,

BPD claim those fibers uniquely matched John's Israeli manufactured shirt!

.

 

[BBB167893]

My understanding of that point is there was no evidence of a gradual accumulation of infiltrate, as would be expected with recurrent invasive or irritant abuse.

Look again, Chuck. It says "ACUTE inflammatory infiltrate." It was referring to the injury from that night. There are plenty of other signs of recurrent invasive abuse.

As long as there is an alternate, logical possibility that could explain JBR's recurrent medical issues I do not believe one could conclude on-going sexual abuse as a given.

Agreed. Problem is, there doesn't seem to be one. At least not one that the experts didn't already think of.

 

[BBB167893]

The ~ 8-inch-long skull fracture.

The injury was not visually apparent. This suggests a direct with minimal to no lateral shift impact by a solid, possibly stationary object.

Interesting.

Why were JBR's hands tied 'above' her head, arms straightened?

Probably because that was the easiest way.

What held them in that position?

Nothing would have needed to.

Simply tying her wrists together above her head would not prevent her from moving her arms down unless they were tied to something heavy or stationary behind her head.

I've been saying that for years!

Was JR able to pick up JBR without detaching her from anything?

If memory serves, FW said that JB was simply picked up off the floor.

Also, during the sexual abuse phase of the crime were JBR's pelvis and legs positioned flat on the ground or was she placed or propped in place that raised her vulva to a 'comfortably accessible' position?

Flat on the ground would be my guess.

 

[BBB167893]

This is an invalid argument even if true because fibers on a surface aren't DNA or fingerprints. They can only be 'consistent with' fibers from an item of clothing.

I'm afraid it's quite valid, as is JR's "hit-dog" reaction!

I rather doubt its true anyway because interrogators can and frequently do lie in order to elicit testimony.

Not THESE guys. One, they were not interrogators. This was a meeting on equal terms. Two, and more importantly, these guys were prosecutors who could lose their licenses if they lied about evidence.

It doesn't wash, HOTYH.

 

[BBB167893]

Of course, we have the following ...

• Metal baseball bat with unidentified DNA, found on the R property.
• Unidentified DNA found under JBR's fingernails. Police claim this evidence is contaminated but might be usable.
• Unidentified DNA found on JBR's undergarment. Tests performed on unopened packages of the same undergarment from the same manufacturer revealed DNA. Unusable.
• Unidentified public hair found on the white blanket in the WC.
• Many hairs and fibers found do not belong to the Rs or extended family members.
• Unidentified shoe print(s) found in the WC floor.
• Unidentified palm print found on the WC door.
• "No footprints found in the snow surrounding basement windows" according to police but in fact there was no snow around most of the windows.
• The house had been remodeled .. multiple contractors.
• Source of cord and duct tape not found in the house.
• At least 15 of R's friends were given a key to the R house by JR.

Just a few things. It's been public knowledge since 2002 that the pubic hair, shoeprint and palm print were matched to Patsy, Burke and Melinda respectively.

What do we have pointing to either / both Rs?

How much TIME have you got, Chuck?

 

[BBB167893]

There is no reason fibers from either parents clothing should not be on JBR.

That's exactly my point!

PR knelt down and leaned against JBR's body.

When it was already covered. And even then, it wouldn't account for the basement fibers. PR tried that explanation herself. It didn't work. Wendy Murphy said it best: "flat-out magic."

 

[BBB167893]

No, I said that any parent would want to think she was still alive. I didn't say that any parent would continue to deny reality in the face of obvious corpse rot. (Denying reality only goes so far, whether it is from John or from you, HOTYH.)
.

That's hitting below the belt, otg. And I LOVED it!

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Remember that you and I and other average humans think in terms of a broad scope of publicity being in the context of a huge world that collectively surrounds us.

Some perps simply live within their own protective, comfortable and / or tortured life-bubble and every so often they float that bubble in to the "real world" where innocents are converted in to victims and logic falls floppy dead.

1. Mr. Ramsey:
2. Listen carefully!
3. We are a group of individuals that represent a small foreign faction.
4. We respect your business but not the country that it serves.
5. At this time we have your daughter in our possession.
6. She is safe and unharmed and if you want her to see 1997, you must follow our instructions to the letter.
7. You will withdraw $118,000 from your account.
8. $100,000 will be in $100 bills and the remaining $18,000 in $20 bills.
9. Make sure that you bring (an) adequate size attache to the bank.
10. When you get home you will put the money in a brown paper bag.
11. I will call you between 8 and 10 a.m. tomorrow to instruct you on delivery.
12. The delivery will be exhausting so I advise you to be rested.
13. If we monitor you getting the money early, we might call you early to arrange an earlier delivery of the money and hence a earlier pickup of your daughter.
14. Any deviation of my instructions will result in the immediate execution of your daughter.
15. You will also be denied her remains for proper burial.
16. The two gentlemen watching over your daughter do not particularly like you so I advise you not to provoke them.
17. Speaking to anyone about your situation such as police or F.B.I. will result in your daughter being beheaded.
18. If we catch you talking to a stray dog, she dies.
19. If you alert bank authorities, she dies.
20. If the money is in any way marked or tampered with, she dies.
21. You will be scanned for electronic devices and if any are found, she dies.
22. You can try to deceive us, but be warned we are familiar with law enforcement countermeasures and tactics.
23. You stand a 99% chance of killing your daughter if you try to outsmart us.
24. Follow our instructions and you stand a 100% chance of getting her back.
25. You and your family are under constant scrutiny as well as the authorities.
26. Don't try to grow a brain, John.
27. You are not the only fat cat around so don't think that killing will be difficult.
28. Don't underestimate us, John.
29. Use that good, southern common sense of yours.
30. It is up to you now, John!
31. Victory!
32. S.B.T.C.

Cryptic in bold

IOW someone would tend to have follow-on questions, like 'what foreign faction?' why do you respect JR's business? why do you disrespect the US? What does SBTC stand for? Lots of material to fuel a mystery. Designed to be notorious.

I think because of the reference to FBI, beheading a child, and all the cryptic stuff, its possible that this ransom note author was going for notariety. They knew because of JBR's status and the long puzzling, almost challenging ransom note that it would be propelled to a high profile.

 

[ChuckMaureen]

Hi, otg,

Thank you for the clarification.

Just a correction on that, CM:
I think it is accepted that John didn't "hold JonBenet's body close to his chest as he transported it up the stairs" (which doesn't negate any of your other points). Of course "close" is a relative term, but I still think we should maintain that image of just exactly how he carried her.

From IRMI:
"John Ramsey emerged from the basement carrying the body of JonBenet, not cradled close but held away from him, his hands gripping her waist. The child's head was above his, facing him, her arms were raised high, stiffened by rigor mortis, and her lips were blue. The child was obviously dead."
LINK


The only reason for pointing that out (and I know this has nothing to do with the topic of fiber evidence) is to show that he obviously already knew she was dead, but the first thing he asked Arndt was if she was dead.
.

Arndt's observation of this scene began when JR stepped into view from the basement door. That did not include for when JR first discovered JBR's body, knelt down and unwrapped the blanket folds from the body and picked it up from the floor.

A question then is how did JR first make contact with the body and did he initially hold her body close to his then moved it away due to the corpse condition (aroma)?

Given that JBR weighed ~45 lbs, JR could have been holding her close and repositioned his carry grip to hands-on-waist by the time he emerged from the basement stairwell, or just as possible he initially grasped JBR's body by the waste and maintained that carry-hold throughout.

Another question is how did JR position himself in relation to JBR's body after he placed it on the floor and released her waiste?

 

[BBB167893]

I think because of the reference to FBI, beheading a child, and all the cryptic stuff, its possible that this ransom note author was going for notariety. They knew because of JBR's status and the long puzzling, almost challenging ransom note that it would be propelled to a position of high publicity.

Careful, HOTYH! Talking like that might get your IDI Gold Card revoked!

 

[otg]

That's hitting below the belt, otg. And I LOVED it!

I really didn't intend it to be below the belt. Just simple reality. And if it was taken that way, I apologize. I do respect their opinion, but not the purpose that it serves.
.

 

[ChuckMaureen]

Hi, ukguy,

bubm

ChuckMaureen,
Just because the touch-dna does not match any resident Ramsey, it does not follow that one or more of them were not involved in JonBenet's death.
.

Yes, it does not explicitly exclude them from participation .. and there is no evidence that indicates participation.

As I mentioned before your selective reasoning portrays you as a Ramsey apologist.

The motivation for the crime has been established. JonBenet was sexually molested prior to her death. The coroner cited digital penetration and sexual contact that in anyones language IDI or RDI, reference Lou Smit, means JonBenet's death is a sexually motivated homicide.

That you wish to demote or ignore forensic evidence simply weakens your rhetoric amongst the more knowledgable members here.


.

Motivation has not yet been established, but sexual motivation remains a likely possibility .. but not the only possibility since the content of the RN negates SM as a definitive conclusion.

 

[otg]

Hi, otg,

Thank you for the clarification.

Arndt's observation of this scene began when JR stepped into view from the basement door. That did not include for when JR first discovered JBR's body, knelt down and unwrapped the blanket folds from the body and picked it up from the floor.

A question then is how did JR first make contact with the body and did he initially hold her body close to his then moved it away due to the corpse condition (aroma)?

Given that JBR weighed ~45 lbs, JR could have been holding her close and repositioned his carry grip to hands-on-waist by the time he emerged from the basement stairwell, or just as possible he initially grasped JBR's body by the waste and maintained that carry-hold throughout.

Another question is how did JR position himself in relation to JBR's body after he placed it on the floor and released her waiste?

All true, CM, the things we don't know. And as I said, that one image does not negate any of your points about possible fiber transfer previously. We don't know if John juggled her body as he was coming up the stairs. I just feel it's important to remember how he carried her when he was seen because it speaks to whether or not he knew she was alive. If he felt she was alive at that time, would a father carry his daughter holding her out like the stinking carcass of a dead animal, or would he have been holding her close to his chest like the precious child she was?
.

 

[BBB167893]

Yes, it does not explicitly exclude them from participation .. and there is no evidence that indicates participation.

My bold.

EXCUSE me?

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

ChuckMaureen,
Just because the touch-dna does not match any resident Ramsey, it does not follow that one or more of them were not involved in JonBenet's death.

Signal.

The DNA is fragile and was found in three places on two separate articles of clothing. The DNA is matched in CODIS and doesn't match tested family members, friends, neighbors, or relatives. If the DNA is accepted on its prima facie basis as having been deposited that night (two items of clothing), then the answer is IDI. Therefore it does follow that the R's were not involved.

As I mentioned before your selective reasoning portrays you as a Ramsey apologist.

Noise.

The motivation for the crime has been established. JonBenet was sexually molested prior to her death. The coroner cited digital penetration and sexual contact that in anyones language IDI or RDI, reference Lou Smit, means JonBenet's death is a sexually motivated homicide.
.

Signal.

Not by a long shot. There is too much unknown information, too many unanswered questions to have 'established a motive'. Since the sexual assault was atypical and less than some would've expected. Sorry to quote the FBI on you, but the sexual assault may not have been for the gratification of the perpetrator.

That you wish to demote or ignore forensic evidence simply weakens your rhetoric amongst the more knowledgable members here.

Noise.

 

[MurriFlower]

CathyR,

BPD claim those fibers uniquely matched John's Israeli manufactured shirt!

.

my bold "CLAIM" isn't the same as "HAS PRODUCED EVIDENCE OF". We all know and accept that the Cops can claim to have evidence that they do not possess in order to elicit a response from their suspect. It's been discussed over and over. Nothing was every produced to back this up or in fact the supposed fibers of PR's found. The only 'evidence' we have is in the court records from a civil case where the judge noted four red fibers consistent with the jacket worn by PR on the tape, along with a large number of fibers unable to be sourced. Many people believe, and repeat constantly, that PR's jacket fibers were entwined in the ligature, but this is pure fiction.

 

[ChuckMaureen]

Hi, superdave,

Originally Posted by ChuckMaureen
My understanding of that point is there was no evidence of a gradual accumulation of infiltrate, as would be expected with recurrent invasive or irritant abuse.

Look again, Chuck. It says "ACUTE inflammatory infiltrate." It was referring to the injury from that night. There are plenty of other signs of recurrent invasive abuse.



Agreed. Problem is, there doesn't seem to be one. At least not one that the experts didn't already think of.

I stand corrected.

But I do maintain the history of vaginitus most likely explains the chronic inflammation given there is no evidence of "[chronic] sexual abuse", as it has never been reported by family or friends or LE that sexual abuse occurred or was witnessed during that and previous years.

The history of vaginitus might be viewed as the prevailing cause .. it does not exclude the possibility of sexual abuse .. but the vaginitus is documented over time while no such information exists regarding abuse.

 

[ChuckMaureen]

Interesting.

Nothing would have needed to.

JBR, if alive and conscious could have re-positioned her (tied-at-the-wrists) arms assuming they were not bound to a stationary or heavy object .. attempting to hit the perp or push him away.

 

[ChuckMaureen]

Hi, hotyh,

bbm

/// snippage ///

IOW someone would tend to have follow-on questions, like 'what foreign faction?' why do you respect JR's business? why do you disrespect the US? What does SBTC stand for? Lots of material to fuel a mystery. Designed to be notorious.

I think because of the reference to FBI, beheading a child, and all the cryptic stuff, its possible that this ransom note author was going for notariety. They knew because of JBR's status and the long puzzling, almost challenging ransom note that it would be propelled to a high profile.

I do not believe we can definitively conclude the composer(s) meant "US". Access Graphics / Lockheed Martin "served" many countries at that time.

I agree the "notariety" angle is possible, but I as of yet would not conclude that as primary motivation. I also do not believe primary motive was to "get rich quick".

Could "S.B.T.C." refer to a classified Access Graphics project or LM client?

Did the investigative team review Access Graphics employees (including classified employees and projects) and clients?

Of course, given the state and recovery location of JBR's body much of the RN is moot but not insignificant.

In fact, the 'auroa' of the RN suggests a fantastical mentality, someone who envisions himself as being more important or interesting than in reality. A self-loathing, pedophilic animal that comfort(s)ed himself by the virtual, clandestine world he created in the RN. A secret agent, to which even child murder is acceptable and perhaps necessary given his virtual "line of work".

 

[DeeDee249]

Chuck- just so I don't misunderstand you again- regarding your comment on the garrote being designed for SELF-use, you are not suggesting that JB made the garrote herself and strangled her self, are you? I don't THINK that is what you meant, but rather someone familiar with this activity may have made the garrote on JB.

I am aware of the appeal of auto-erotic asphyxiation for some men (and boys) and certainly would put it within the scope of JAR's knowledge, but I have to take issue with any suggestion that JB made this garrote to strangle herself for sexual pleasure.