Size 12/14 Bloomies
- Thread starter Jayelles
- Start date
-
-
-
CA - Court upholds Menendez brothers' convictions- Latest: Smelly Squirrel
Britt
New Member
I agree in the sense that the punitive abuser lacked boundaries, sexual and otherwise, between herself and her child... but not in the sense of a pedophile, who sees his/her victim as a sexual object.UKGuy said:
That is Patsy may have had lesbian preferences that she indulged herself with via JonBenet!
As PR was active member of ECUSA and with Jerry Winterrowd as bishop this lesbian connection could be worth looking into. If PR had lesbian tendencies she would probably be quite confused about the subject, the good bishop was.
As PR was active member of ECUSA and with Jerry Winterrowd as bishop this lesbian connection could be worth looking into. If PR had lesbian tendencies she would probably be quite confused about the subject, the good bishop was.
UKGuy, in prior posts you said that JB's killing was a planned act and the reason you gave was that the perp wiped the flashlight beforehand.UKGuy said:
So you think that John or Patsy planned to kill JonBenet, and 'prepared' the flashlight by wiping it beforehand?
Maybe this expert (was this Dr. Krugman?) was referring to the paintbrush injury only?Britt said:
For Dr. McCann, a world-renowned pediatric expert, was of the opinion that JB's old injuries were from prior sexual abuse. According to Dr. McCann, the change in the hymeneal structure was due to healing from prior penetration: there existed three-dimensional thickening from the inside to outside of the inferior hymeneal rim and irregularity of the edge of the hymen.
Then there was the exposure of vaginal structures which are normally covered, the reddening of the vaginal walls, and the hymeneal orifice being too wide for a child of that age.
rashomon said:
rashomon,
I think you are jumping ahead of yourself.
I never said anyone
You are misinterpreting what I posted, your last post had a similar question.
Now its actually the other way round. The perp wiped the flashlight and batteries after JonBenet was killed.
The planned aspect comes into play if you can demonstrate that the batteries are new into the flashlight.
Wiping the flashlight indicates forensic awareness, like the size-12 underwear this has significance, whether you consider it to be intentional or a by-product of a cleaning up process is for you to decide.
Yes I think John or Patsy or both together killed JonBenet then staged her homicide in the wine-cellar.
.
"1. John had an incestuous relationship with JonBenet.
2. Patsy had an incestuous relationship with JonBenet.
3. Burke had an incestuous relationship with JonBenet.
4. Some combination of the above."
And you'll find plenty who subscribe to every one of them!
"I've always wondered if the prior sexual abuse wasn't incurred not out of sexual gratification but out of corporal punishment administered to JonBenet (imo, by Patsy for her incontinence.)"
That would be Richard Krugman. Rashomon got it right.
Patsy a lesbian abusing JB? What a horrid thought! But there was something along thos lines...
Jamie Turndorf, a psychotherapist, said that Patsy's need to dress JB up in the costumes like she wore were an attempt to relive her sexual fantasies of being a sex object. But when JB got too good, maybe it was like, "You little
! I see the way you make those men look at you!" And that brought on the sexual attacks. That, is of course, JSB, in the strongest sense!
2. Patsy had an incestuous relationship with JonBenet.
3. Burke had an incestuous relationship with JonBenet.
4. Some combination of the above."
And you'll find plenty who subscribe to every one of them!
"I've always wondered if the prior sexual abuse wasn't incurred not out of sexual gratification but out of corporal punishment administered to JonBenet (imo, by Patsy for her incontinence.)"
That would be Richard Krugman. Rashomon got it right.
Patsy a lesbian abusing JB? What a horrid thought! But there was something along thos lines...
Jamie Turndorf, a psychotherapist, said that Patsy's need to dress JB up in the costumes like she wore were an attempt to relive her sexual fantasies of being a sex object. But when JB got too good, maybe it was like, "You little
! I see the way you make those men look at you!" And that brought on the sexual attacks. That, is of course, JSB, in the strongest sense!sandraladeda
Inactive
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2004
- Messages
- 2,588
- Reaction score
- 10
Question about the too-big panties -SuperDave said:
Brand new panties are a bit stiff, almost starchy before they have been laundered.
Were the panties tested to see if they had ever been worn and laundered before, or if they were fresh out of the package when worn by the dead JBR? Panties that had been previously laundered would have traces of laundry detergent, perhaps fabric softener. They certainly would not have any trace DNA evidence from the underwear factory worker in China.
This could help to decode Patsy's rambling inconsistencies in bold above regarding the Bloomies. They were in the package? They were in JBR's underwear drawer and had been amalgamated with the regular lineup of size 6 panties? I would assume that, if the package was still intact (which seems to be the case if the Ramsey's PIs took the pack of size 12s and kept custody of it) with all but the Wednesday pair, then it is silly to think the Wednesday pair had found its way into the underwear drawer.
sorry if I'm not making sense.
This is the best JBR thread I have read in awhile.
Britt
New Member
Krugman, yes. He made the distinction between "physical" abuse and "sexual" abuse and thought that JB was being physically abused for punishment. He agreed with the consensus of prior/chronic abuse, but disagreed that it was for sexual purposes.rashomon said:
sandraladeda said:
sandraladeda,
No you make perfect sense Patsy does not.
The size-12 underwear may be her Smoking-Gun since it can be shown she is lying her head off.
Once you link it to other aspects of JonBenet being redressed, and factor in whether to regard it as staging, then more questions will arise.
BPD found NO size-12 underwear in her panty drawer, none is listed on any search warrants itemizing underwear taken from the house.
That there was size-12 underwear handed into the BPD at a later date should raise a red flag for people.
This tells you how important the size-12 redressing was to the Ramseys, so vital they analyzed the situation and for consistencies sake, decided to hunt down some size-12 underwear, and hand it in.
But was the underwear handed in the original packet or another one purchased when it was decided it mattered?
Also why remove the remaining size-12's? This is another item to place on the removed list!
.
That the flashlight was wiped after the killing is my theory too.UKGuy said:
I can't retrieve the posts right now, but I'm fairly sure that you disputed that wiping the flashlight was an afterthought by the perp. I had the impression you thought an intruder who had wiped it beforehand had brought it into the home.
You also wrote why, in case they were the perps, would the Ramseys leave that flashlight on the kitchen table and not put it in the wine cellar for staging purposes.
Why do you think the Ramseys dressed JB in size 12 underwear?
rashomon said:
rashomon,
Yes I possibly did, but this is not the same as saying it was wiped prior to use.
What I was claiming is that wiping after the fact is intentional and indicates premeditation.
Also if the batteries are new in the flashlight then its almost conclusive.
Well whichever way round it is, what I was trying to highlight is the inconsistency of the flashlight being removed from the wine-cellar.
Currently I view the flashlight as part of the staging prior to the ransom note, I think JonBenet was whacked on the head to simulate a violent death, and the flashlight left behind.
Later on, with revision to the Kidnap/Ransom staging, someone decided the flashlight was out of place, so removed it to the kitchen where it was wiped clean, probably to break any forensic links with the wine-cellar.
In terms of a staged homicide I think most of the items in the wine-cellar now have a consistent interpretation.
.
sandraladeda
Inactive
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2004
- Messages
- 2,588
- Reaction score
- 10
UK Guy, I'm just wondering if you believe the flashlight was used as a light, or simply used as a weapon? I am just not sure what bearing new batteries would have on pre-meditation if, in fact, the flashlight was used as a weapon only. IOW, you don't need battery power to whack someone over the head with a flashlight....a dead flashlight works just as well....
Clearly the R's goes as far as the flashlight was not theirs, at least this seem to be the stagers initial agenda. So therefore their prints on the batteris would have to go.
They never acknowledged that the maglite was indeed theirs.
Why LE does not push them to show THEIR flashlight I don't understand.
So why was the flashlight out of its drawer? Could be the JR used it at his plane visit on the 25th or it could be used in the house during Christmas night or evening or maybe someone were looking underneath some furniture for a dropped object(thats my own primary use of a flashlight nowadays...).
The flashlight or atleast some flashlight was probably used as lighting after the fact, using the normal lightening would draw attention from the neighbours.
Flickering lights in the kitchen was reported by a neighbour.
The only normal light reported is that one of the neighbours noticed the light in the butlers kitchen was lit at some point, that seem to indicate that the flashlight was not in use at that point.
I find this butlers kitchen light interesting. Why was this light lit? We know that the painting tote was stored there prior to it being moved to the basement. Maybe PR was looking for the painting tote and thought that maybe the cleaning lady had not moved it yet or she just forgot that and thought of the last location she had seen it. Could it be that PR at this point already has the garrote in her mind or is it the paintbrush she needs. If this is so it seem to indicate that the flashlight was used after the paint tote.
I may also be the case that turning the light on in the butlers kitchen brought the light issue to the perp attention and used a flashlight after that.
But it could also be the case that turning the light on in the butlers kitchen is done because the flashlight is already cleaned and placed in the kitchen at this point so she have to turn the light on for a quick peek for the paint tote.
In this case the flashlight could be the initial murder weapon. Maybe lying around in the kitchen after JR had used it on the 25th. As the pineapplebowl was found nearby could it be that the fatal incident happened in the kitchen connected to the pineapple bowl?
Would turnin the basment light on be noticed outside the house? If not the perp would probably feel safe not to use the flashlight in the basement.
Enought spitballing for the moment
They never acknowledged that the maglite was indeed theirs.
Why LE does not push them to show THEIR flashlight I don't understand.
So why was the flashlight out of its drawer? Could be the JR used it at his plane visit on the 25th or it could be used in the house during Christmas night or evening or maybe someone were looking underneath some furniture for a dropped object(thats my own primary use of a flashlight nowadays...).
The flashlight or atleast some flashlight was probably used as lighting after the fact, using the normal lightening would draw attention from the neighbours.
Flickering lights in the kitchen was reported by a neighbour.
The only normal light reported is that one of the neighbours noticed the light in the butlers kitchen was lit at some point, that seem to indicate that the flashlight was not in use at that point.
I find this butlers kitchen light interesting. Why was this light lit? We know that the painting tote was stored there prior to it being moved to the basement. Maybe PR was looking for the painting tote and thought that maybe the cleaning lady had not moved it yet or she just forgot that and thought of the last location she had seen it. Could it be that PR at this point already has the garrote in her mind or is it the paintbrush she needs. If this is so it seem to indicate that the flashlight was used after the paint tote.
I may also be the case that turning the light on in the butlers kitchen brought the light issue to the perp attention and used a flashlight after that.
But it could also be the case that turning the light on in the butlers kitchen is done because the flashlight is already cleaned and placed in the kitchen at this point so she have to turn the light on for a quick peek for the paint tote.
In this case the flashlight could be the initial murder weapon. Maybe lying around in the kitchen after JR had used it on the 25th. As the pineapplebowl was found nearby could it be that the fatal incident happened in the kitchen connected to the pineapple bowl?
Would turnin the basment light on be noticed outside the house? If not the perp would probably feel safe not to use the flashlight in the basement.
Enought spitballing for the moment
sandraladeda said:
sandraladeda,
It may have been used for both purposes.
Lets assume the flashlight would not normally be found in the basement, particularly the wine-cellar.
So it would probably have arrived there as part of the general crime-scene, that is it formed part of the crime.
The premeditation can come in at two levels, that is, possibly it was used in the commission of JonBenet's homicide, and afterwards to navigate the Ramsey house, if they decided not to switch on lights? So speculating, maybe the batteries ran out and needed replaced, or they were replaced with new ones prior to or just after she was killed?
I agree you do not need battery power to whack someone over the head, but we do know the batteries were wiped clean, and its difficult to explain this other than the flashlight was used at the crime-scene so was cleaned, erasing the user's fingerprints and there may have been more than one set?
The more interesting aspect is why the flashlight was placed in the kitchen, think over all the forensic evidence, and other than possibly the barbie gown and size-12 underwear, yet found at the crime-scene, no other piece of evidence appears out of place?
As I suggested this is possibly because the flashlight was used as part of the staging, to whack JonBenet giving the appearance of a violent homicide, and attempting to mask any prior assault, the flashlight was left in the wine-cellar, but later when the staged was revised, someone removed it, and cleaned it up.
If you decide to use a tool and before you use it you make sure its in working order, including any change of batteries, then later you wipe it clean of fingerprints including the batteries. This has all the hallmarks of premeditation and planning.
It appears that JonBenet was strangled then her death was staged down in the wine-cellar, where she was redressed and her head was whacked with the flashlight. The sexual assault may have been prior to or after her death and forms part of the staging.
And its not to difficult to see the hands of Patsy then John involved in this staging?
The wine-cellar is a staged crime-scene. Nearly all the items can be satisfactorly explained within this context.
.
"Were the panties tested to see if they had ever been worn and laundered before, or if they were fresh out of the package when worn by the dead JBR? Panties that had been previously laundered would have traces of laundry detergent, perhaps fabric softener. They certainly would not have any trace DNA evidence from the underwear factory worker in China."
I'm pretty sure they were RIGHT out of the pack.
I'm pretty sure they were RIGHT out of the pack.
There was swelling of the brain, which would indicate that the head bash came first, as it takes some time for the brain to swell.
UkGuy:UKGuy said:
What do you think was the Ramseys' motive in redressing JonBenet in size 12 underwear?
rashomon said:
rashomon,
The head bash may have come first, but interpreting it as staging is my best interpretation of the evidence, to date. Possibly I'm missing something due to the staging?
The motive was staging, they were for effect.
Once you view the wine-cellar as a staged homicide then nearly everything contained therein has this as its purpose, its part of the design, its what lends to JonBenet's death a sense of wilful planning.
There is the outside possibilty, one I favor, that the redresser was in a hurry, and any pair of Wednesday underwear would do, the redresser would let others worry about the rationale.
But I'll mention it again, did JonBenet normally wear underwear to bed?
I should think not if she was prone to bedwetting?
So the redresser was not dressing JonBenet as for bed so to speak, but possibly more to replace the pair just removed?
So the motive is surely staging an attempt to hide the removal of her size-6 underwear which may have been contaminated with semen, she was wiped down, so possibly any other traces were removed?
The same reasoning can be applied to the Toilet Rage theory.
.
The basic question is: why didn't the redresser take one of JB's many size 6 underpants to replace the other pair? The only reasons I can think of:UKGuy said:
-either it was important to for the stager to have 'Wednesday' printed or them.
or
- the stager chose the far too big panties on purpose to lead investigators think that "no parent would dress her child in those big panties", i. e. the attention should be directed to an intruder.
UkGuy, can you think of another reason?
You mean the stager of the scene wanted to make it appear as a wilfully planned death?
Like SD mentioned in one of his posts, while the cord around her neck looks brutal at first glance, the larnyx, tongue and hyoid bone were undamaged.
In addition, the cord wrapped around the stick was obviously a contraption which did not function as a garrote at all.
Therefore to me, it seems that (aside from the vaginal injury and the ligatures around JB's wrists), the cord around the neck was the staging element. Although this may finally have cut JB's respiration of too, it obviously was placed on an unresistent (already unconscious) body.
JonBenet would not have died from the injury inflicted to her vagina either.
UkGuy, you said that one of the Ramseys killed JB. Why do you think was she killed?
And do you have a time line as to the sequence of events on that night?
Similar threads
Online statistics
- Members online
- 172
- Guests online
- 650
- Total visitors
- 822