Skull fracture question

[Solace]

While there was evidence of sexual abuse, it was not not conclusive to the point of ruling out other explanations. That's the problem with this case.
SteveThomas (p. 228):

And believe me, they would have argued differently and imo the sexual abuse theory would NOT have held up in court. I don't want to play devil's advocate for Patsy Ramsey here, but as her defense lawyer, I would have brought the argument that if she had known JonBenet was being sexually abused (or even took active part in her abuse), then the LAST thing she would have done would be to take JonBenet to Dr. Beuf so often because of chronic vaginitis. Far too risky, for he might ask questions ...
If there was chronic abuse, I'm convinced that Patsy did not know about it.
No one will deny that JonBenet had genital irregularities. But the chronic vaginal inflammation could also be explained by her chronic bedwettig problem - you can bet that the defense would have used this argument.
Also, the fact that her hymen consisted only of a rim of mucosal tissue ranging from the 2 to 10 o'clock position is no abnormal finding. Hymens come in many sizes and forms - there are also girls who aren't born with a hymen at all.
Imo the prosecution at trial would neither have been able to conclusively argue a toilet rage scenario nor a sexual abuse scenario.

jmo

Great post Rash. I am inclined to agree. I just don't see sexual abuse here. Now if there were no problems with bedwetting and constant irritations from wet underwear, I would be so inclined. But (sorry to be graphic, but ST said she looked different from a normal six year old). I just think it was rashes, etc. She must have been a mess really.

 

[Solace]

Rash, in case I wasn't clear in my first answer, I am saying, in my view, it would have taken a combination of low velocity + high pressure to create the massive cranium damage with relatively little associated damage to the brain tissue as seen in JonBenet. High velocity likely would have created more underlying damage to the brain and not have created a fracture the length seen on JonBenet. I think a 300 pound man swinging, say, a golf club, would have left an deeply embedded wound underneath the cranium and not just a comminuted fracture to the skull with associated bleeding. Nothing is mentioned about the brain tissue being mutilated to any degree.

Slinging her around is still relatively slow compared to, say, a bullet or a swinging golf club, when you measure the force presented to the entire surface area. I'm not saying the skull won't be cracked at all, just that it won't likely create a crack that runs nearly half-way around the entire head. You need a lot of pressure to get that split to travel as wide and as far as JonBene'ts fracture shows, in my opinion. A high velocity would with high pressure would have probably pulverized that side of her head. A high pressure wound with low pressure would create damage similar to a bullet - the damage would be concentrated at the contact sight and there would lots of internal damage.

If you have the eggs to waste in an experiment, try hitting one with a "weapon" of proportional size, then try holding it and hitting against a countertop while also applying pressure.

So you think it was an object. Okay, I hate this case again. I really wish that ST had gone into more detail on why and who said it was a slam rather than blunt force trauma. Because it is the only thing that does not seem to fit. I think Rash posted an article the other day by a policeman who believed JB was slammed into a smooth surface like a sink or a bathtub due to the fact that there was no laceration - then, yes it is true, one of our posters countered that with her son (I think her son) fell and hit head or she hit her head (I am sorry, the memory you know) and there was a laceration) - so it is not always written in stone. Hey I like this. Maybe it is not always written in stone that the wound would be only this severe from blunt force trauma. I don't even know what I am talking about anymore, but ....

She is very very tiny - and if we look at her hands, they look like a toddler's. Soooooo, when she is being pulled so hard that the person leaves their print and they have to be in a white rage - I cannot see them stopping and then getting the flashlight to hit her over the head. I see this killing as one nonstop motion.

Patsy comes down to take her to the bathroom at midnight, sounds right, the time, and she sees that JB has wet the bed and the shirt is even wet and that is very very possible - and she is furious and grabs her by the turtleneck collar and twists it leaving her thumbprint on her neck (the nail side) - someone pulling someone like this is furious and they are going to keep going - they are fueled by rage - it just seems that she pulled her and as she is doing so, JB's face is facing Patsy and the back of her head is going into the bathrroom first and she is thrown. Why can't this be it? We have to figure this out because ahmm goin craza.

 

[coloradokares]

Yes, I think Patsy is innocent of both vigorous corporal cleaning and sexual abuse. I believe her rage attack on Jonbenet on that fatal night had more to do with the child refusing to go to bed when it was already close to midnight. On top of that, maybe Jonbenet then also wet or soiled herself and this pushed Patsy over the edge.
The fibers in the garrote, the ransom note written on pen and paper from the Ramsey home with a body left behind in the house and the clumsily staged scene are such strong indicators of parental involvement that imo the prosecution could have disregarded speculations about possible sexual abuse altogether.

Then how do you explain the screaming in broaddaylight at the cleaning going on by Patsy behind closed doors that LHP testified to at the trials I am not sure of the sexual abuse however I am convinced there is something to the cleaning rituals I believe that on that night Jon Benet wet and or both soiled herself the cleaning got rough there was some fighting back on Jon Benets part she was learning to scream back and even kick as witnessed by LHP and at least upon one occasion witnessed by those at the pagent who saw her Kick Patsy. I also think that the sexual abuse officer Holly Smith was not to far off in her theories.

 

[BOESP]

So you think it was an object. Okay, I hate this case again. I really wish that ST had gone into more detail on why and who said it was a slam rather than blunt force trauma. Because it is the only thing that does not seem to fit. I think Rash posted an article the other day by a policeman who believed JB was slammed into a smooth surface like a sink or a bathtub due to the fact that there was no laceration - then, yes it is true, one of our posters countered that with her son (I think her son) fell and hit head or she hit her head (I am sorry, the memory you know) and there was a laceration) - so it is not always written in stone. Hey I like this. Maybe it is not always written in stone that the wound would be only this severe from blunt force trauma. I don't even know what I am talking about anymore, but ....

She is very very tiny - and if we look at her hands, they look like a toddler's. Soooooo, when she is being pulled so hard that the person leaves their print and they have to be in a white rage - I cannot see them stopping and then getting the flashlight to hit her over the head. I see this killing as one nonstop motion.

Patsy comes down to take her to the bathroom at midnight, sounds right, the time, and she sees that JB has wet the bed and the shirt is even wet and that is very very possible - and she is furious and grabs her by the turtleneck collar and twists it leaving her thumbprint on her neck (the nail side) - someone pulling someone like this is furious and they are going to keep going - they are fueled by rage - it just seems that she pulled her and as she is doing so, JB's face is facing Patsy and the back of her head is going into the bathrroom first and she is thrown. Why can't this be it? We have to figure this out because ahmm goin craza.

Hi Sol,

I think she was probably pushed, shoved, fell, or was (wo)man-handled and her head hit something blunt and solid rather than something hitting her. Blunt force trauma could be either way: head striking against something or something striking the head. I think the head struck something.

I would certainly agree that what you said in the last paragraph above sure makes sense to me and it fits what I know based on evidence available to the public, including Patsy and JonBenet's routine for making a midnight potty run on most nights.

 

[BOESP]

Then how do you explain the screaming in broaddaylight at the cleaning going on by Patsy behind closed doors that LHP testified to at the trials I am not sure of the sexual abuse however I am convinced there is something to the cleaning rituals I believe that on that night Jon Benet wet and or both soiled herself the cleaning got rough there was some fighting back on Jon Benets part she was learning to scream back and even kick as witnessed by LHP and at least upon one occasion witnessed by those at the pagent who saw her Kick Patsy. I also think that the sexual abuse officer Holly Smith was not to far off in her theories.

CK, there had to be a reason a sexual abuse officer was brought in unless Colorado has a law stating that all child deaths under a certain age must be investigated for sexual abuse. I can't imagine a state doing that but maybe in Colorado?????

 

[BOESP]

Great post Rash. I am inclined to agree. I just don't see sexual abuse here. Now if there were no problems with bedwetting and constant irritations from wet underwear, I would be so inclined. But (sorry to be graphic, but ST said she looked different from a normal six year old). I just think it was rashes, etc. She must have been a mess really.

Sol, how would you explain the internal vaginal congestion and acute and chronic damage described in the autopsy if not from sexual abuse and/or some type cleansing? I think investigators ruled out the likelihood of masturbation but something caused the damage. I'd agree with staging except there was evidence of a chronic problem.

 

[coloradokares]

CK, there had to be a reason a sexual abuse officer was brought in unless Colorado has a law stating that all child deaths under a certain age must be investigated for sexual abuse. I can't imagine a state doing that but maybe in Colorado?????

I get torn right there, I ask myself over and over was it sexual abuse, rough cleaning abuse or both. There was more than enough reason to bring in the sexual abuse officer based on the autopsy alone. However all those soiled undies and hiding them soiled in her drawer is like a flag to a suxual abuse officer that something is terribly wrong.

 

[Solace]

Sol, how would you explain the internal vaginal congestion and acute and chronic damage described in the autopsy if not from sexual abuse and/or some type cleansing? I think investigators ruled out the likelihood of masturbation but something caused the damage. I'd agree with staging except there was evidence of a chronic problem.

Okay, here is what I think. Linda Hoffman said there was daily screaming and crying coming from the bathroom with Patsy and JB. Maybe she exaggerated, but I do not think she lied. And I believe her. Also, Patsy told her friend she was concerned about the constantly damp underwear. She applied desitin because of the rashes. She spoke to Dr. Boeuf about the bedwetting although she said she did not remember doing so, ST had the records (I do not for one minute believe that she did not remember doing that) First of all, it is not something that is pleasing. It is something that is not a good thing and you want to get her over that quickly, you will remember it.) So why does she lie about that - because she wants to play it down. She wants to play it down because I think ST is right on the money here and she knows what he thinks so she is going to play it down. I am sure her attorneys said, Patsy, they are trying to say you were angry about the bedwetting and killed her. I would bet money they told her that.

So anyway, Colorado said it was common knowledge among insiders (I know this sounds ridic, but I believe it) that it was known that Patsy resorted to douching - now if this is so, there could be internal damage from that, especially if she is being rough so that JonBenet will get the idea - no more bedwetting. Also, it shows that Patsy is getting real tired of this and she wants it stopped.

I think it was corporal punishment meant to humiliate to stop the bed wetting. The woman is nuts or was nuts.

 

[Solace]

CK, there had to be a reason a sexual abuse officer was brought in unless Colorado has a law stating that all child deaths under a certain age must be investigated for sexual abuse. I can't imagine a state doing that but maybe in Colorado?????

Well I think a sexual abuse officer would be brought in because there was evidence of an assault that evening - I mean they may later realize this is staging - but when a child is found strangled and some blood in her underwear, I would think this would be paramount. They took the computers and looked for - why not? A child is dead and appears to be sexually assaulted.

 

[BOESP]

I get torn right there, I ask myself over and over was it sexual abuse, rough cleaning abuse or both. There was more than enough reason to bring in the sexual abuse officer based on the autopsy alone. However all those soiled undies and hiding them soiled in her drawer is like a flag to a suxual abuse officer that something is terribly wrong.

CK, Holly Smith's report probably spells out the specifics and came to a conclusion. I doubt that report will ever be made public. I wonder if the Grand Jury got to see it. We'll probably never know. Regardless, someone in the investigation thought there was a need for a Child Protective Officer -- maybe they were just following up on the perverted Intruder angle but I doubt it.

 

[coloradokares]

Okay, here is what I think. Linda Hoffman said there was daily screaming and crying coming from the bathroom with Patsy and JB. Maybe she exaggerated, but I do not think she lied. And I believe her. Also, Patsy told her friend she was concerned about the constantly damp underwear. She applied desitin because of the rashes. She spoke to Dr. Boeuf about the bedwetting although she said she did not remember doing so, ST had the records (I do not for one minute believe that she did not remember doing that) First of all, it is not something that is pleasing. It is something that is not a good thing and you want to get her over that quickly, you will remember it.) So why does she lie about that - because she wants to play it down. She wants to play it down because I think ST is right on the money here and she knows what he thinks so she is going to play it down. I am sure her attorneys said, Patsy, they are trying to say you were angry about the bedwetting and killed her. I would bet money they told her that.

So anyway, Colorado said it was common knowledge among insiders (I know this sounds ridic, but I believe it) that it was known that Patsy resorted to douching - now if this is so, there could be internal damage from that, especially if she is being rough so that JonBenet will get the idea - no more bedwetting. Also, it shows that Patsy is getting real tired of this and she wants it stopped.

I think it was corporal punishment meant to humiliate to stop the bed wetting. The woman is nuts or was nuts.

I dont think that anyone can say that douching was a definite, only that was suspected amongst other issues . What is said is never the same as eyewitness account... however it could be consistent with the erosion etc that found, I doubt that anyone can provide an eyewitness account. It comes down to believing or not believing. What was common knowldege was the belief that the cleaning was as Steve Thomas had layed out and suggested. I dont know that was ever totally spelled out. That the woman was nuts, yes I believe that . That is my opinion that somethings were not right in that household.

 

[UKGuy]

Yes, I think Patsy is innocent of both vigorous corporal cleaning and sexual abuse. I believe her rage attack on Jonbenet on that fatal night had more to do with the child refusing to go to bed when it was already close to midnight. On top of that, maybe Jonbenet then also wet or soiled herself and this pushed Patsy over the edge.
The fibers in the garrote, the ransom note written on pen and paper from the Ramsey home with a body left behind in the house and the clumsily staged scene are such strong indicators of parental involvement that imo the prosecution could have disregarded speculations about possible sexual abuse altogether.

rashomon,

If Patsy did the majority of the staging, why did she not remove evidence relating to toileting e.g. soiled pants in the bathroom, urine-soaked longjohns?

Why would JonBenet be sexually assaulted prior to her death, then have this cleaned up, and hidden from view?

How might that play into Patsy whacking JonBenet on the head?

If this was only a Toilet Rage case then JonBenet would not need those size-12's, they focus attention on that area.


.

 

[JMO8778]

Solace,
I'm having trouble finishing the book as well. I got it last summer at the flea market for $2 (hardcover).
It should be labeled "fiction".

science fiction ! that's what it would take in order for an intruder to have done it..a bit of something unreal.

 

[JMO8778]

Not agreeing may offer the possibility of a domestic homicide being accidental in nature, but that was not what I was debating, what I was outlining is that the vast majority of domestic accidents presented to AE do not display the range of serious injuries that JonBenet had, they may be concussed, suffer subscapular bleeding, exhibit hairline fractures etc etc, but certainly not linear and non-linear fractures, bleeding inside the skull.

The severity of JonBenet's skull injuries tell you they were not accidental, someone deliberately whacked JonBenet on the head with the intention of killing her.\
.

I think so,too,UK.I don't think you get an 8 1/2 inch skull fracture without intent.Do I think Patsy intentionally killed her? yes, I do.I keep coming back to Fuhrman's it was no accident comment.I think she snapped and said to herself,'you know what? I'm just sick and tired of this kid and I've had enough !' and that was that.

 

[JMO8778]

Unless Patsy or John was using a speculum and a light I doubt either one was examining JonBenet's internal genitalia. Even Dr. Beuf stated he'd never done an internal exam, so I'd say that also explains why he never noticed it either.

By the way, I didn't say Patsy WAS rough-cleaning. I was offering possibilities and not statements of fact.

Thomas said he thought the dark blue fibers on her could have come from rough wiping.I tend to think Patsy did wipe her too roughly,in anger,if not that night then some time prior to it.

 

[JMO8778]

Incredible. If I had not read it, I would not have believed it.

This is one of the reasons I have a hard time finishing it.

they do jump around a lot,(it reminds me of that song Jump Around) without staying on one subject for long,despite the fact it's divided into several chapters.

 

[JMO8778]

My guess would be there possibly could be separation of the cervical vertebrae but not compression, under the condition you mention above. Based on my personal theory about the scene, I can't see her cervical spine being damaged but I'm open to other ideas, especially if new evidence is ever released.

Ok,thx,I wonder if there is more in the autopsy report that's not been released.

The strangulation could have been staging or it could have been a mercy killing. Concerning the strangulation, proving intent in this case would be a problem in my opinion. I can't decide about that but something must have suggested this could be a Murder One charge since Fuhrman and Thomas talked about the "aha" moment they believed suggested Murder One. I'm not sure how you could prove Patsy (or anyone who did this) did it knowingly with malice aforethought. Maybe Colorado has some law that allows a Murder One charge because of the age of the child or other factor.

I'm guessing the severity of the head wound rules out accident.I did find more info,I'll brb with that.
I don't know if it would be enough to convince a jury that it was deliberate either,I guess it would depend on the arguments proposed,but when it comes down to the liguature strangulation,I believe it would have been argued she was already thought to be dead,and so there was no intent to intentionally kill at that point.

 

[JMO8778]

rashomon,

If Patsy did the majority of the staging, why did she not remove evidence relating to toileting e.g. soiled pants in the bathroom, urine-soaked longjohns?

Why would JonBenet be sexually assaulted prior to her death, then have this cleaned up, and hidden from view?

How might that play into Patsy whacking JonBenet on the head?

If this was only a Toilet Rage case then JonBenet would not need those size-12's, they focus attention on that area.


.

..but the intent was the opposite,it was to downplay that area,ie-clean underwear=no R DNA.I'm really suspect of new underwear being placed on her...to me it spells out that the perp must make sure no R dna was on her there,and why worry about that if in fact none had been there??? that leads me to think it was placed on her to circumvent any sexual abuse evidence that might have been there.

 

[JMO8778]

So you think it was an object. Okay, I hate this case again. I really wish that ST had gone into more detail on why and who said it was a slam rather than blunt force trauma. Because it is the only thing that does not seem to fit. I think Rash posted an article the other day by a policeman who believed JB was slammed into a smooth surface like a sink or a bathtub due to the fact that there was no laceration - then, yes it is true, one of our posters countered that with her son (I think her son) fell and hit head or she hit her head (I am sorry, the memory you know) and there was a laceration) - so it is not always written in stone. Hey I like this. Maybe it is not always written in stone that the wound would be only this severe from blunt force trauma. I don't even know what I am talking about anymore, but ....

She is very very tiny - and if we look at her hands, they look like a toddler's. Soooooo, when she is being pulled so hard that the person leaves their print and they have to be in a white rage - I cannot see them stopping and then getting the flashlight to hit her over the head. I see this killing as one nonstop motion.

Patsy comes down to take her to the bathroom at midnight, sounds right, the time, and she sees that JB has wet the bed and the shirt is even wet and that is very very possible - and she is furious and grabs her by the turtleneck collar and twists it leaving her thumbprint on her neck (the nail side) - someone pulling someone like this is furious and they are going to keep going - they are fueled by rage - it just seems that she pulled her and as she is doing so, JB's face is facing Patsy and the back of her head is going into the bathrroom first and she is thrown. Why can't this be it? We have to figure this out because ahmm goin craza.

I tend to think so,too,although it's possible she had the FL in the other hand,and it was convenient in her frustration.
the only other thing I would add is that it appears JB was grabbed around the collar more than once,correct me if I'm wrong,but aren't the abrasions on the other side of her neck,opposite the thumb print? so she would have had to let go at least once and regrab her.perhaps JB was trying to get away,screaming,trying to run,and she was grabbed again,and thrown,slammed or hit upon the head.

 

[JMO8778]

Rash, in case I wasn't clear in my first answer, I am saying, in my view, it would have taken a combination of low velocity + high pressure to create the massive cranium damage with relatively little associated damage to the brain tissue as seen in JonBenet. High velocity likely would have created more underlying damage to the brain and not have created a fracture the length seen on JonBenet. I think a 300 pound man swinging, say, a golf club, would have left an deeply embedded wound underneath the cranium and not just a comminuted fracture to the skull with associated bleeding. Nothing is mentioned about the brain tissue being mutilated to any degree.

Slinging her around is still relatively slow compared to, say, a bullet or a swinging golf club, when you measure the force presented to the entire surface area. I'm not saying the skull won't be cracked at all, just that it won't likely create a crack that runs nearly half-way around the entire head. You need a lot of pressure to get that split to travel as wide and as far as JonBene'ts fracture shows, in my opinion. A high velocity would with high pressure would have probably pulverized that side of her head. A high pressure wound with low pressure would create damage similar to a bullet - the damage would be concentrated at the contact sight and there would lots of internal damage.

If you have the eggs to waste in an experiment, try hitting one with a "weapon" of proportional size, then try holding it and hitting against a countertop while also applying pressure.

that's what I was thinking...maybe an egg would be a good example.
you think JB was thrown,pushed or shoved into something,and then Patsy held her there,applying pressure to her head? and then her skull split from the pressure? I recall reading that her skull cracking would have made a tremendous noise..would pressure vs being hit w. an object be more likely to make that noise,or would it not matter,either way?