The bubble bath excuse

[UKGuy]

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

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

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

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

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?

rashomon,

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

Sure thats if nothing has been redacted from the autopsy report.

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

Actually no!

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

JonBenet did exhibit chronic internal scarring indicitive of sexual abuse.

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?

The end without bristles attached is missing. So why remove this and leave the other two pieces, e.g. one as part of the garrote , and one in the paint tote?

Consider if you use the paintbrush to assault JonBenet , and you hold it by the end closest to the bristles, then there should be forensic evidence at that end, so placing this back into the paint-tote defeats any evidence removal purpose.

Could there be blood on the missing piece, possibly, so what, as long as its only JonBenet's, and we know she was assaulted, not much is advanced, so unless you remove JonBenet, then removing the missing piece seems redundant.

So from the above speculation do you think JonBenet was assaulted with the whole paintbrush e.g. unbroken, or was she assaulted with only the missing piece? Your answer may determine the staging sequence.

So the question remains why remove the missing piece of paintbrush handle, why does JonBenet's killer/stager consider this so important to remove, or was it left inside her?

Another question for those that do not consider JonBenet was manually strangled:

Why was she ligature strangled twice, once below the current circumferential furrow, and then again complete with garrote?

Why not simply apply the garrote to the lower ligature and pull tight, then leave for dead, or staging , whichever was intended?


.

 

[Nuisanceposter]

Someone once suggested perhaps there are two ligature marks due to hesitation - the person tying the cord started out tightening it, slacked off in hesitation, then summoned the courage to continue and got it right the second time. But I also think it's possible that someone was choking JonBenet before and/or at the time the head wound was inflicted. That huge bruise on her neck has me puzzled as to source, but it looks like she was being roughed up around the head and neck area, and it looks like she had been crying.

 

[JMO8778]

rashomon,

Sure thats if nothing has been redacted from the autopsy report.


Actually no!


JonBenet did exhibit chronic internal scarring indicitive of sexual abuse.


The end without bristles attached is missing. So why remove this and leave the other two pieces, e.g. one as part of the garrote , and one in the paint tote?

Consider if you use the paintbrush to assault JonBenet , and you hold it by the end closest to the bristles, then there should be forensic evidence at that end, so placing this back into the paint-tote defeats any evidence removal purpose.

Could there be blood on the missing piece, possibly, so what, as long as its only JonBenet's, and we know she was assaulted, not much is advanced, so unless you remove JonBenet, then removing the missing piece seems redundant.




.

I've always thought the ligature strangling to end her life came first..to make sure she was dead.and then the handle was broken off to similate a sexual assault shortly afterward.
as far as placing it back into the tote,I suspect someone just wasn't thinking very well under pressure,either way.

 

[JMO8778]

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.




.

is it possible she was pinched,and that caused the marks?JAT that comes to mind...the spaces bet. all of them might be just the right size for that.PR seemed so bizarre that I don't discount that she could have pinched JB if she didn't listen and do what she wanted her to do.

 

[Ames]

Someone once suggested perhaps there are two ligature marks due to hesitation - the person tying the cord started out tightening it, slacked off in hesitation, then summoned the courage to continue and got it right the second time. But I also think it's possible that someone was choking JonBenet before and/or at the time the head wound was inflicted. That huge bruise on her neck has me puzzled as to source, but it looks like she was being roughed up around the head and neck area, and it looks like she had been crying.

It looks that way to me, too. When do you think that the crying occurred, though?? As she was being screamed at by Patsy for soiling her bed and clothes? As she was being shook by Patsy? I believe that the head wound came first, and it knocked her unconscious, so I don't think that it was after that.....when do you think she was crying??

 

[rashomon]

Someone once suggested perhaps there are two ligature marks due to hesitation - the person tying the cord started out tightening it, slacked off in hesitation, then summoned the courage to continue and got it right the second time. But I also think it's possible that someone was choking JonBenet before and/or at the time the head wound was inflicted. That huge bruise on her neck has me puzzled as to source, but it looks like she was being roughed up around the head and neck area, and it looks like she had been crying.

At first sight, the red mark on her neck looks like a real bad wound. But according to the autopsy report, it is not even a bruise, but merely an abrasion.

 

[UKGuy]

Someone once suggested perhaps there are two ligature marks due to hesitation - the person tying the cord started out tightening it, slacked off in hesitation, then summoned the courage to continue and got it right the second time. But I also think it's possible that someone was choking JonBenet before and/or at the time the head wound was inflicted. That huge bruise on her neck has me puzzled as to source, but it looks like she was being roughed up around the head and neck area, and it looks like she had been crying.

Nuisanceposter

I tend to find your second suggestion not only more convincing but it seems to fit in with the rest of the evidence.

If you are staging a homicide and does anyone disagree that the wine-cellar was staged, then to explain away your original brusing and abrasions on JonBenet's neck, then surely you would attempt to make that region of the neck, the site for the fake garrote strangulation.

But no, a higher point was selected along with a neat circumferential furrow, which nearly any forensic pathologist will tell you hardly ever occurs in a real crime since the force applied will bias the ligature upwards and to the left or right.

One explanation may be that JonBenet's killer did not realize that she was still alive, and only discovered this on inserting the paintbrush, e.g. she bled, so re-fashioned the garrote etc, somehow this seems too complex?

Also the lower abrasions are so low on her neck I doubt a ligature could produce such a pattern, bearing in mind that they are not circumferential.

So the forensic evidence suggests that JonBenet was initially asphyxiated, then whacked on the head, or the reverse , I dont care, then she was sexually assaulted with the paintbrush or similar causing her to bleed, then she was again ligature strangled with the garrote, how can that be portrayed as an accident?

Also if the head blow came first, why was medical help not sought, JonBenet would have been clearly injured, why was this opportunity bypassed to be followed by at least two separate strangulations, and a sexual assault?



.

 

[Solace]

Nuisanceposter

I tend to find your second suggestion not only more convincing but it seems to fit in with the rest of the evidence.

If you are staging a homicide and does anyone disagree that the wine-cellar was staged, then to explain away your original brusing and abrasions on JonBenet's neck, then surely you would attempt to make that region of the neck, the site for the fake garrote strangulation.

But no, a higher point was selected along with a neat circumferential furrow, which nearly any forensic pathologist will tell you hardly ever occurs in a real crime since the force applied will bias the ligature upwards and to the left or right.

One explanation may be that JonBenet's killer did not realize that she was still alive, and only discovered this on inserting the paintbrush, e.g. she bled, so re-fashioned the garrote etc, somehow this seems too complex?

Also the lower abrasions are so low on her neck I doubt a ligature could produce such a pattern, bearing in mind that they are not circumferential.

So the forensic evidence suggests that JonBenet was initially asphyxiated, then whacked on the head, or the reverse , I dont care, then she was sexually assaulted with the paintbrush or similar causing her to bleed, then she was again ligature strangled with the garrote, how can that be portrayed as an accident?

Also if the head blow came first, why was medical help not sought, JonBenet would have been clearly injured, why was this opportunity bypassed to be followed by at least two separate strangulations, and a sexual assault?


.

A possible answer to that question is the enormously loud crack that was heard when her head was bashed and the ensuing fear that followed. Cyrill Wecht believes in her absolute terror she shook JonBenet so hard to get a response that she (Patsy) left two bruises on each side of her head. It is just possible that the rage that caused this scenario was such that a fatal wound was caused and Patsy knew it by the sound of that very loud crack. Since there was no blood, she may have been able to feel it. I know I would have felt her head very very carefully looking for such a crack if I had heard that sound. It was loud.

 

[JMO8778]

So the forensic evidence suggests that JonBenet was initially asphyxiated, then whacked on the head, or the reverse , I dont care, then she was sexually assaulted with the paintbrush or similar causing her to bleed, then she was again ligature strangled with the garrote, how can that be portrayed as an accident?

Also if the head blow came first, why was medical help not sought, JonBenet would have been clearly injured, why was this opportunity bypassed to be followed by at least two separate strangulations, and a sexual assault?



.

I think most of us are using our own frame of reference for that...ie-WE could not to that to our own child, or to any child,for that matter,therefore...it MUST have been an accident ! However,I think it would be safe to throw that one out, considering the evidence,which is,I think..someone or someones WANTED her dead.JMO.

 

[Albert18]

Regarding the mark on the front of her neck, it would be interesting to know Dr. Meyer's definition of an abrasion. I don't see how an abrasion could have it's outline so clearly defined. Bruises aren't usually so clearly defined like that either. It looks like a brand more than a scrape or a bruise.

In fact, I think it is so odd looking it should have told the experts something about how it may have been made.

I've come to the conclusion the words abrasion and contusion have very specific meanings to medical examiners and I don't know that meaning. What I mean by that is could the word contusion refer to a deep bruise and abrasion refer to a more shallow bruise.

 

[Albert18]

These words do mean what I thought they did.

This is from the Sexual Assault Forensic Examiner Technical Assistance website.

Abrasion-
Superficial damage to the skin. It is the scraping away of a portion of skin or mucous membrane, resulting when the skin contacts a rough object with sufficient force.

Bruise-
A blotchy, superficial discoloration due to hemorrhage into the tissues from ruptured blood vessels beneath the skin surface, caused by force, without the skin itself being broken; also called a contusion.

Contusion- bruise-
An injury in which the skin is not broken, there may be discoloration, pain and swelling as a result of blood seepage under the surface of the skin.


Wouldn't you intrepet this to mean Dr. Meyer is saying that mark was caused by friction or scraping, not from pressure or force applied to that area. It should only be skin deep, a very light wound.

 

[UKGuy]

Regarding the mark on the front of her neck, it would be interesting to know Dr. Meyer's definition of an abrasion. I don't see how an abrasion could have it's outline so clearly defined. Bruises aren't usually so clearly defined like that either. It looks like a brand more than a scrape or a bruise.

In fact, I think it is so odd looking it should have told the experts something about how it may have been made.

I've come to the conclusion the words abrasion and contusion have very specific meanings to medical examiners and I don't know that meaning. What I mean by that is could the word contusion refer to a deep bruise and abrasion refer to a more shallow bruise.

Albert18,

I had intended to refer to the lower abrasion, but since my conclusions differ from the autopsy reports, I decided not to.

The lower bruising is most commonly known as a compressed abrasion, abrasions are the result of the skin being rubbed, pressed etc, resulting in the tell-tale reddening, when the skin is broken they tend to be named lacerations. imo the lower bruising is the result of some kind of fabric being compressed against JonBenet's neck?

A contusion is a form of bruising that punctures or breaks the underlying blood vessels, without breaking the skin, which gives contusions their distinctive coloring, contusions and their associated coloring are most noticable when people have been punched on the face around the eyes, as these contusions heal, they change color, brown/black, red, purple, yellow etc. The color can help determine whether a contusion was ante-mortem or post-mortem.

Since the lower bruising is not circumferential, this can plainly be seen:

Note the gap in the bruising at the bottom of the picture.

Now if you look at her neck from the back, there is only one ligature furrow e.g.

So if you look at a plan view:

You can see how misleading the lower marking appears, some things to note is how low on her neck the lower abrasion appears, so low as to possibly not be the result of a ligature, since how could it get so low, also the break in the bruising is not apparent, and that from the back view, there is no corresponding marking on her neck, also imo the lower bruising was caused by something different from that causing the upper ligature furrow.

I would conclude that the lower bruises were the result of a compressed fabric abrasion, and that the upper ligature furrow is a separate injury e.g. JonBenet was asphyxiated twice, and at separate points in time.

Also in this last picture the black circular mark on JonBenet's cheek may be an example of a post-mortem contusion, these take on this dark color, since the blood is no longer being refreshed?

.

 

[Albert18]

Too bad when Larry King had John and Patsy on his show he didn't show them the picture of the front of her neck and then ask, "Exactly how did you make THAT mark?".

We could have then watched while Patsy swallowed her tongue, followed by John smiling and saying, "You know Larry, my family has been attacked...".

 

[Solace]

Too bad when Larry King had John and Patsy on his show he didn't show them the picture of the front of her neck and then ask, "Exactly how did you make THAT mark?".

We could have then watched while Patsy swallowed her tongue, followed by John smiling and saying, "You know Larry, my family has been attacked...".

Larry does not have what it takes to do that. It is painful to watch him interview anyone. He invaribly interrupts at the exact time the answer is interesting. Anyone see Marlon Brando being interviewed by that moron Larry. Brando said "watch how he interrupts".

 

[rashomon]

Regarding the mark on the front of her neck, it would be interesting to know Dr. Meyer's definition of an abrasion. I don't see how an abrasion could have it's outline so clearly defined. Bruises aren't usually so clearly defined like that either. It looks like a brand more than a scrape or a bruise.

In fact, I think it is so odd looking it should have told the experts something about how it may have been made.

I've come to the conclusion the words abrasion and contusion have very specific meanings to medical examiners and I don't know that meaning. What I mean by that is could the word contusion refer to a deep bruise and abrasion refer to a more shallow bruise.

From the autopsy report:

The area of abrasion and petechial hemorrhage of the skin of the
anterior neck includes on the lower left neck, just to the left of
the midline, a roughly triangular, parchment-like rust colored
abrasion which measures 1.5 inches in length with a maximum width
of 0.75 inches.

I think Dr. Meyer would know how to distinguish a burn mark from an abrasion.
From what I have read on forums, abrasions are commonly caused by friction and are very superficial wounds.
But it is indeed strange that none of the experts consulted on the case ever offered an explanation as to how the wound in this area was made.

 

[Ames]

Regarding the mark on the front of her neck, it would be interesting to know Dr. Meyer's definition of an abrasion. I don't see how an abrasion could have it's outline so clearly defined. Bruises aren't usually so clearly defined like that either. It looks like a brand more than a scrape or a bruise.

In fact, I think it is so odd looking it should have told the experts something about how it may have been made.

I've come to the conclusion the words abrasion and contusion have very specific meanings to medical examiners and I don't know that meaning. What I mean by that is could the word contusion refer to a deep bruise and abrasion refer to a more shallow bruise.

Agree...and didn't Dr. Meyer call the "stun gun" marks abrasions too....wouldn't a stun gun have left little burn marks??

 

[Ames]

Too bad when Larry King had John and Patsy on his show he didn't show them the picture of the front of her neck and then ask, "Exactly how did you make THAT mark?".

We could have then watched while Patsy swallowed her tongue, followed by John smiling and saying, "You know Larry, my family has been attacked...".

HA...good one. And thats exactly what would have happened if they had been confronted with the picture. You hit the nail on the head.....

 

[Ames]

Larry does not have what it takes to do that. It is painful to watch him interview anyone. He invaribly interrupts at the exact time the answer is interesting. Anyone see Marlon Brando being interviewed by that moron Larry. Brando said "watch how he interrupts".

Yep, I hate his show....because of his interupting, and dumb questions....maybe its because he is "100".

 

[rashomon]

Also in this last picture the black circular mark on JonBenet's cheek may be an example of a post-mortem contusion, these take on this dark color, since the blood is no longer being refreshed?

According to Dr. Meyer, this too was merely an abrasion.

Agree...and didn't Dr. Meyer call the "stun gun" marks abrasions too....wouldn't a stun gun have left little burn marks??

I think it would. Nothing supports Lou Smit's stun gun fantasy.

 

[Solace]

According to Dr. Meyer, this too was merely an abrasion.


I think it would. Nothing supports Lou Smit's stun gun fantasy.

There is no stun gun. Patsy and John did not need one.