Forensic evidence inconsistencies or puzzles -
I dont have an intent to challenge the forensic evidence, since what we possess wasnt ever challenged in court; nor do I have intent to question anyones theory. This is just some items Ive gathered which have enabled me to review some actions in the context of the crime. Maybe it will be useful to someone else. Maybe not.
Puzzle #1 A question has always been whether a paintbrush assault was coupled with a digital assault, unless those two assaults occurred at different times. The digital assault may have left circumferential hyperemia in the vaginal vault. The paintbrush could be responsible for the abrasion in the vaginal vault. A difference in timing between two such assaults is left open to possibility, based on the vague and or inconsistent statements about JonBenéts activities on Christmas day following breakfast. Thered be no need for a staging of a pedophile, if shed had a digital assault that night. Staging is what Beckner called the paintbrush assault. But see Puzzle #4 for an alternate possibility.
Puzzle #2 According to two doctors (iirc, Dr. Wright and Dr Judith Densen-Gerber), JonBenét should have released more urine at death; her bladder was empty indicating she had released urine prior to her death. This could have resulted from 1-going to the bathroom before bed (Contradicted by the parents account of her being zonked and redressing her for bed), or 2-a bedwetting accident, or 3-in great fear of harm at the time of a rage assault. If one of the latter two of those events had occurred, it would give an additional reason to explain why her panties were changed to the Size 12. The other panties were urine soaked. This would support Beckners theory of a staging of a sexual assault with a paintbrush.
Puzzle #3 Its been speculated that the size 12 panties were placed on her after someone wiped her genital area and thigh. But there was a drop of blood in her panty. My understanding is that even after death, if someone is moved, some oozing of blood may occur.
Puzzle #4 Heres a big puzzle. Spitz claimed that a paintbrush injury (which caused some bleeding) occurred shortly before or after death. But all we have for corroboration of the timing between injuries is the report from Dr. Lucy Rorke-Adams. Both Kolar and Beckner have accepted that timing. Making an assumption via Kolar that BR was responsible for the head blow, that timing creates an issue for BR to have perpetrated the paintbrush injury which caused the bleeding. Unless Spitz is wrong or Rorke-Adams is wrong? Or the following scenario occurs . . . A different scenario might include that BR does not face an angry parent rushing in after a scream, and he goes off to play a bit. He might then return and in addition to jabbing JB on the back to rouse her, he also jabs her with the paintbrush - maybe some psychopathy here. If she moves or is showing any sign of life, he responds by placing a ligature around her neck, pulling her up by this ligature to try to get her to sit up or stand. An action which strangles her. Or he intentionally strangles her. Kolar leads one to believe intentionally. No way to know. This ligature was thought to have been placed on her after unconsciousness because of her hairs caught in the ligature knot as well as in the garrote apparatus, and no defensive signs on her neck.
Puzzle #5 Brown fibers on the ligature indicating someone wore gardening or work gloves, plus there was foreign tdna on the garrote. For BDI association with the ligature, one would have to believe the parents lied about having such gloves, and BDI had his own set of garden/work gloves.
Puzzle #6 Fibers, baby, fibers. Patsys fibers are all over the paint tote, and some on the duct tape. JRs fibers are in the crotch of the new size 12 Bloomies. (Again, Im not listing this stuff to create argument, just listing it as it is information given us. Folks know already that IDI claim attorneys lie to entrap suspects and that I have pointed out that the rules regulating attorney conduct (COBAR) do not allow for deceit from attorneys; and lest one forget, pitbull attorney LW was right there during these interviews.)
The year 2000 interviews-
Since Ive mentioned the fibers which first were revealed in the year 2000 interviews, there is a sequence of actions in the case which are thought-provoking (as if we dont already have enough to figure out).
If one doesnt think that fiber evidence is anything of significance, look at the manner in which LW reacted to this information. He swung into action with the speed of the proverbial striped
* ape. Consider also that AH backed ML to become his successor, as, imo, she would carry on the ruse of no true bills. Next connect LWs subsequent action. When LW was not able to crack ST in his 2001 depo as to whether the fiber evidence was real or not, a concerted effort was launched to move the investigation from the BPD to the BDA office, via threat of lawsuits. Its merely my speculation about the transition from the Rs total confidence** after the GJ ended to the next stage which was threat of lawsuits. My impression is that its the shocking info pertaining to the fibers in the panties and at the crime scene. Someone got a little nervous.
**One other piece to mention in regard to these interviews. LW, I believe, had recommended that they refuse these interviews, that they had little to gain. They went ahead with the interviews anyway. One interesting comment was from a law professor of Notre Dame and former federal prosecutor. He made the statement,
''For them to agree to this is either the peak of arrogance or it's just absolute ignorance.'' I vote the former. Whether they knew the GJ had voted True Bills or not, AH had come through for them. Their confidence would have morphed into a self-satisfied arrogance about it by then.
