The bubble bath excuse

[Toltec]

Why would Patsy even make a comment like that? Apparently she really liking waving flags that were red whenever she opened her mouth. Nedra was just as excellent as Patsy at saying things that were just bizarre and raised red flags...like how JB was only a little bit molested. The Paugh women are very strange indeed. I'd love to know what Patsy's homelife was really like...I can't imagine an adult neglecting to teach a child how to wipe properly. What else was neglected in JonBenet's life with those freaky Paugh women at the helm?

IMO, the Paugh girls were themselves victims of child sexual abuse. That is why Patsy had that thought of John possibly molesting JonBenet. The reasoning she gave for dismissing that thought is because Nedra was physically present in JB's room to prevent it from happening...

Hmmmm

 

[rashomon]

She had just been attacked close to death. The vaginal area is elastic and the size at death means nothing if what was normal was not determined prior to that night.

The vaginal area is elastic but the hymen of a six-year-old child is not. This is info from a poster with medical knowledge on another forum.
JBs hymenal opening measured 1x1 cm (far too much for a child of her age), and while vaginitis may be caused by bubble bath, bubble bath can't enlarge the hymenal opening in any way.

 

[UKGuy]

IMO, the Paugh girls were themselves victims of child sexual abuse. That is why Patsy had that thought of John possibly molesting JonBenet. The reasoning she gave for dismissing that thought is because Nedra was physically present in JB's room to prevent it from happening...

Hmmmm

Toltec,

Sanity check:

If the Paugh girls had been sexually abused, why should Patsy think Nedra would protect JonBenet if the Paugh girls had not been?


.

 

[Ames]

IMO, the Paugh girls were themselves victims of child sexual abuse. That is why Patsy had that thought of John possibly molesting JonBenet. The reasoning she gave for dismissing that thought is because Nedra was physically present in JB's room to prevent it from happening...

Hmmmm

I have wondered about that myself. I think that there is a possiblity that the Paugh girls were victims of child sexual abuse, by their dad. And its also possible that grandpa Paugh could have also been abusing JB. IMO

 

[Ames]

Toltec,

Sanity check:

If the Paugh girls had been sexually abused, why should Patsy think Nedra would protect JonBenet if the Paugh girls had not been?


.

Patsy said that Nedra would PREVENT it from happening. John isn't going to just barge into JB's bedroom with Nedra in there, and precede to molest JB.

 

[UKGuy]

Patsy said that Nedra would PREVENT it from happening. John isn't going to just barge into JB's bedroom with Nedra in there, and precede to molest JB.

Ames,

Of course not, he will just wait until he and JonBenet are alone outside of the bedroom, imo that statement by Patsy is an indirect reference to the then public suspicion that some family member had been sexually abusing JonBenet, the investigators confronted her with this information, looks like she was defending John?

In other words Patsy was offering a partial truth as the whole truth, she wanted to create the public impression that in her absence JonBenet could never have been abused.

So why would Patsy do that?


.

 

[icedtea4me]

Patsy said that Nedra would PREVENT it from happening. John isn't going to just barge into JB's bedroom with Nedra in there, and precede to molest JB.

Yet, Nedra wasn't there the night of 12/25/96, therefore....


-Tea

 

[icedtea4me]

UK, you can look at it this way, true. BUT, what about the fact that I saw the video of Patsy running after John with a huge watergun and spraying him, they were both loving each other at that moment. I sensed only fun between the two of them. Do you really think that would be going on if Patsy had caught John molesting JonBenet? I just don't think so.

Could be some sort of passive-aggressive thing going on.


-Tea

 

[Ames]

Ames,

Of course not, he will just wait until he and JonBenet are alone outside of the bedroom, imo that statement by Patsy is an indirect reference to the then public suspicion that some family member had been sexually abusing JonBenet, the investigators confronted her with this information, looks like she was defending John?

In other words Patsy was offering a partial truth as the whole truth, she wanted to create the public impression that in her absence JonBenet could never have been abused.

So why would Patsy do that?



.

IMO...because I believe that IF JB was being molested by John, that Patsy knew it. JB probably even told her, or she figured it out on her own. I believe that Patsy herself had been molested, as a child...by HER dad. IMO

 

[JMO8778]

Yet, Nedra wasn't there the night of 12/25/96, therefore....


-Tea

yes,and I do think JR was trying to account for his fiber evidence being in her room,near her bed,if there was any found.
not to mention his shirt fiber evidence!!!

 

[Toltec]

Toltec,

Sanity check:

If the Paugh girls had been sexually abused, why should Patsy think Nedra would protect JonBenet if the Paugh girls had not been?


.

Me thinks Patsy was an enabler.

 

[Toltec]

Let's see...Patsy becomes a dysfunctional frigid person. She has to ask her housekeeper for sexual advise...she dare not ask her friends.

Pam Paugh never marries..becomes severely obese...

Polly Paugh...I think she had the brains to stay away from the whole pageant thing. Perhaps Patsy and Pam were protecting her.

 

[JMO8778]

Let's see...Patsy becomes a dysfunctional frigid person. She has to ask her housekeeper for sexual advise...she dare not ask her friends.

Pam Paugh never marries..becomes severely obese...

Polly Paugh...I think she had the brains to stay away from the whole pageant thing. Perhaps Patsy and Pam were protecting her.

I agree but,she'd also had a hyst and so therefore,lacked hormones(and thue most likely desire as well),as I don't recall reading she ever had hrt replacement.and at a fairly young age as well.

 

[rashomon]

But I find it very hard to imagine Patsy would have covered up for John if he had both molested and killed her daughter.

 

[JMO8778]

True,but her remark 'WE didn't mean for this to happen' fits that scenerio better.If PR did it, then perhaps it was for a reason other than toileting problems?

 

[UKGuy]

But I find it very hard to imagine Patsy would have covered up for John if he had both molested and killed her daughter.

rashomon,

Have a go, imagine a scenario in which Patsy colludes in the abuse and death of her own daughter, imagine her subjecting her daughter to pageant discipline, so to conform with a dysfunctional view of what is feminine, imagine her neglecting JonBenet, while she deals with her cancer, imagine Patsy's sex life coming to a halt, imagine Patsy flinging herself into her socialite role, imagine JonBenet learning her adult dance routines, and from whom? Imagine who might fulfill Patsy's role in John's sex life now, imagine that this arrangement had Patsy's approval simply because she never disapproved, it was convenient since it offered leverage over pageant trips and expenses etc.

If you can imagine that Patsy had as much to gain from JonBenet's silence as John, since JonBenet talking , complaining, would bring an unwelcome searchlight upon this glittering boulder socialite e.g. if she turns John in then he can turn her in. They were both implicated in the death of JonBenet, both assisted in the staging, the forensic evidence demonstrates this, so they both colluded to defend each other, Patsy's remarks about Nedra protecting JonBenet is an example of Patsy defending John from allegations of prior abuse!

For all we know, rather than being a passive partner, Patsy may have actively colluded in the sexual abuse of JonBenet?

But I find it very hard to imagine Patsy would have covered up for John if he had both molested and killed her daughter.

But this indeed may be the case, an unpalatable truth, since it contravenes the notion of a maternal instinct, but the evidence is in front of your eyes, Patsy was told JonBenet had been chronically sexually abused, her genitals were abnormally enlarged, yet she never reconsidered her position, she defended John, why would she do this?

So although you may find it a very hard scenario to imagine, the forensic evidence, and the post-mortem behaviour of both Ramsey parents, do not contradict this speculation.

JonBenet's death removes her as a witness to her own sexual abuse, this is why there was a staged crime-scene, it was to mask the real motive lying behind her death!


.

 

[rashomon]

rashomon,

Have a go, imagine a scenario in which Patsy colludes in the abuse and death of her own daughter, imagine her subjecting her daughter to pageant discipline, so to conform with a dysfunctional view of what is feminine, imagine her neglecting JonBenet, while she deals with her cancer, imagine Patsy's sex life coming to a halt, imagine Patsy flinging herself into her socialite role, imagine JonBenet learning her adult dance routines, and from whom? Imagine who might fulfill Patsy's role in John's sex life now, imagine that this arrangement had Patsy's approval simply because she never disapproved, it was convenient since it offered leverage over pageant trips and expenses etc.

If you can imagine that Patsy had as much to gain from JonBenet's silence as John, since JonBenet talking , complaining, would bring an unwelcome searchlight upon this glittering boulder socialite e.g. if she turns John in then he can turn her in. They were both implicated in the death of JonBenet, both assisted in the staging, the forensic evidence demonstrates this, so they both colluded to defend each other, Patsy's remarks about Nedra protecting JonBenet is an example of Patsy defending John from allegations of prior abuse!

For all we know, rather than being a passive partner, Patsy may have actively colluded in the sexual abuse of JonBenet?



But this indeed may be the case, an unpalatable truth, since it contravenes the notion of a maternal instinct, but the evidence is in front of your eyes, Patsy was told JonBenet had been chronically sexually abused, her genitals were abnormally enlarged, yet she never reconsidered her position, she defended John, why would she do this?

So although you may find it a very hard scenario to imagine, the forensic evidence, and the post-mortem behaviour of both Ramsey parents, do not contradict this speculation.

JonBenet's death removes her as a witness to her own sexual abuse, this is why there was a staged crime-scene, it was to mask the real motive lying behind her death!

I do agree that the scene was staged to mask the real motive lying behind her death, but am not at all sure as to what that real motive was.
What I'm having difficulty with (suppose it was sexual abuse by the parents) is the acute vaginal injury. According to Dr. McCann, it was a very painful injury done with an object much harder than a finger, which was not just shoved in, but jabbed in. A cellulose splinter was found in JB's vagina, so it seems the paintbrush had been used for that.
If her abuser actually did that, it was downright sadistic, but I don't think the Ramseys were sexual sadists.
The injury also does not seem to have been inflicted in a rage, for the labia had to be manually separated first (see Dr. McCann's report). All this points to a calculated act.

 

[JMO8778]

I do agree that the scene was staged to mask the real motive lying behind her death, but am not at all sure as to what that real motive was.
What I'm having difficulty with (suppose it was sexual abuse by the parents) is the acute vaginal injury. According to Dr. McCann, it was a very painful injury done with an object much harder than a finger, which was not just shoved in, but jabbed in. A cellulose splinter was found in JB's vagina, so it seems the paintbrush had been used for that.
If her abuser actually did that, it was downright sadistic, but I don't think the Ramseys were sexual sadists.
The injury also does not seem to have been inflicted in a rage, for the labia had to be manually separated first (see Dr. McCann's report). All this points to a calculated act.

that's just it I think..it wasn't a done for a sadistic purpose,but as a calculated act to stage the crime,and cover up past abuse,IMO.

 

[UKGuy]

I do agree that the scene was staged to mask the real motive lying behind her death, but am not at all sure as to what that real motive was.
What I'm having difficulty with (suppose it was sexual abuse by the parents) is the acute vaginal injury. According to Dr. McCann, it was a very painful injury done with an object much harder than a finger, which was not just shoved in, but jabbed in. A cellulose splinter was found in JB's vagina, so it seems the paintbrush had been used for that.
If her abuser actually did that, it was downright sadistic, but I don't think the Ramseys were sexual sadists.
The injury also does not seem to have been inflicted in a rage, for the labia had to be manually separated first (see Dr. McCann's report). All this points to a calculated act.

rashomon,

Why should the acute vaginal injury be difficult? Firstly you do not know when it occurred, secondly the bleeding may result from an ante-mortem sexual assault, with the paintbrush being inserted and the leaving it there intended to cover for this?

Alternatively the paintbrush caused the bleeding, and its purpose is to expressly mask any prior sexual abuse?

So parents who may have regularly abused their six-year old daughter decided to assault her with a paintbrush, that sounds in character to me, particularly if the intention is to avoid arrest and discovery, never mind whacking her across the head and asphyxiating her, the people who killed JonBenet were not model citizens, after inflicting all her other injuries jabbing her with a paintbrush, would probably be of no concern to them?

Also have you considered when the paintbrush was inserted? Was this after it was split into three parts or before, your decision on this may influence how cold and calculating her killer(s) were, e.g. was it done prior to being wiped down and redressed in size-12 underwear?

If her abuser actually did that, it was downright sadistic, but I don't think the Ramseys were sexual sadists.

How about considering that they may have been, taking pleasure in sexually assaulting a six-year old girl, forcing a pageant discipline upon her, which all probably resulted in her underwear soiling episodes, those alleged stun-gun marks may be the result of sadistic injuries, applied to deliberately cause pain.

Even if they cannot be accused of being sadistic, then the intent behind inserting the paintbrush handle was to mask some other crime, which is patently sexual, and with her abnormally enlarged hymen, and references to chronic sexual abuse by other experts, not discounting Coroner Meyer, who imo authored a deliberately opaque autopsy report, then this other crime is sexual in nature?

Your only question now is who do you regard as the main suspect?


.

 

[rashomon]

rashomon,

Why should the acute vaginal injury be difficult? Firstly you do not know when it occurred, secondly the bleeding may result from an ante-mortem sexual assault, with the paintbrush being inserted and the leaving it there intended to cover for this?

The paintbrush was not left there - only a tiny splinter was found in the vagina.

Alternatively the paintbrush caused the bleeding, and its purpose is to expressly mask any prior sexual abuse?

This theory has often been discussed. I think it is possible.

So parents who may have regularly abused their six-year old daughter decided to assault her with a paintbrush, that sounds in character to me, particularly if the intention is to avoid arrest and discovery, never mind whacking her across the head and asphyxiating her, the people who killed JonBenet were not model citizens, after inflicting all her other injuries jabbing her with a paintbrush, would probably be of no concern to them?

Are you referring here to the vaginal injury being inflicted on an unconscious JB to stage a scene?

How about considering that they may have been, taking pleasure in sexually assaulting a six-year old girl, forcing a pageant discipline upon her, which all probably resulted in her underwear soiling episodes, those alleged stun-gun marks may be the result of sadistic injuries, applied to deliberately cause pain.

If the Ramseys had been in the habit of sadistically abusing JB sexually, I think JB would have had far more old genital injuries.

Also have you considered when the paintbrush was inserted? Was this after it was split into three parts or before, your decision on this may influence how cold and calculating her killer(s) were, e.g. was it done prior to being wiped down and redressed in size-12 underwear?

I'm alway confused as to which part of the paintbrush was missing:
What was found in the paint tote? The part with the bristles?