What do the profilers say?

[UKGuy]

HOTYH,

That's a good question, and the answer to it likely leads to the reason JonBenet is dead. IMO the person(s) who did this didn't know what they were doing. They were very young and probably experimenting with erotic asphyxiation, something they had heard about, but didn't appreciate the dangers (accidental asphyxiation) that go along with EA and AEA.

You're right about erotic asphyxiation being practiced almost exclusively among young males, but there are occasional female victims. In the JonBenet case the stun gun evidence suggests EA was involuntary on the part of JonBenet.

BlueCrab

Burke on that fateful night was a 9-year old pre-pubescent boy, unless he was being abused, his sexual experience I would rate as close to zero, probably around the doctors and nurses level?

JonBenet that night was a 6-year old pre-pubescent girl, who should have no experience of sexual matters at all.

So where does a 9-year old boy acquire the knowledge that his little 6-year old sister would really like some EA attention?

Lets suggest the AE mechanics for little girls will be very different from that of 9-year old boys.

So how does Burke know how to transfer his own gender specific AE knowledge over to JonBenet?

Surely if he does not know, then he is not going to do it, how can you begin to attempt that which you do not know?

He is 9-years old, she is 6-years old, what is it that allows him to assume what works for him will also work for JonBenet?

Now the central motivation behind AE, AEA is to enhance orgasm, yes?

Well Burke looks like a pretty typical pre-pubescent boy to me, he may have had an awareness of sexual matters, but a desire to practise AEA or AE, that I would suggest is more a teenage/adult thing.

Similar applies to JonBenet, at 6-years old, no debate is required, AE or AEA, would not even appear as abbreviations in her coloring book, the concept would be meaningless to her!

If Burke had been 15-year old and JonBenet around 12-years old or so, then this AE, AEA interaction would have been a plausible scenario.

But the ages of Burke and JonBenet on that night make the use of adult techniques contradictory!

In the past you have suggested a third party may have been involved, e.g. an older male, possibly a teenager, thats fine, but why did the GJ give this guy a get out of jail card?

 

[Linda7NJ]

IMO I have no idea what if any sexual history Burke had. It would not be impossible if he had himself been exposed to these sexual activities. In fact, it would make it likely. I have always considered Burke and the possibility of incest within the family a reasonable explanation. I posted about it under the theory thread. ( if anyones interested)

I am not 100% convinced there was a stun gun, chronic sexual abuse, or the garrote was a EA device.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

HOTYH,

There were seven nationally-recognized physicians who analyzed the autopsy report and studied the microscopic slides obtained by the coroner, Dr. John Meyer. All seven experts agreed there was evidence of chronic sexual abuse, although one of them was undecided. The seven were:

Dr. Cyril Wecht
Dr. David Jones
Dr. James Monteleone
Dr. John McCann
Dr. Ronald Wright
Dr. Richard Krugman, and
Dr. Werner Spitz.

Spitz was undecided.

The contraption wrapped around JonBenet's neck was indeed an erotic asphyxiation (EA) device. Even John Ramsey admits that while profiling the killer: "He is a pedophile with a preference for little girls. He is a sociopath experienced with autoerotic asphyxiation, the use of garrotes to enhance sex."

BlueCrab

I noticed you switched from using the term 'prior' abuse to 'chronic' abuse. I didn't think 'prior' is synonymous with 'chronic,' so I checked some of the discussions on this topic. Here's some of the terms I've seen used in some of these discussions, and how they seem to be interpreted, BC:

Chronic sexual abuse - sexual abuse repeated over time

Chronic vaginal inflammation - inflammation caused by repeated sexual abuse, repeated exposure to irritants, allergens, bacteria, etc., etc.

Prior sexual abuse - abuse which may have occured prior to the current abuse.

Sexual abuse - abuse which may or may not cause detectable damage.

It seems to me its a much bigger story for the tabloids if the chronic vaginal inflammation is blamed on chronic sexual abuse, even though there are other causes for this type of inflammation.

Did you know that one or more of the doctors on your list may have become involved in the case via a tabloid?

Going from chronic inflammation to chronic abuse is an opinion that not everyone shares. The doctor closest to JBR doesn't think there was chronic abuse.

The doctor who did the autopsy didn't report 'consistent with chronic abuse,' he reported 'chronic inflammation.'

 

[rashomon]

I noticed you switched from using the term 'prior' abuse to 'chronic' abuse. I didn't think 'prior' is synonymous with 'chronic,' so I checked some of the discussions on this topic. Here's some of the terms I've seen used in some of these discussions, and how they seem to be interpreted, BC:

Chronic sexual abuse - sexual abuse repeated over time

Chronic vaginal inflammation - inflammation caused by repeated sexual abuse, repeated exposure to irritants, allergens, bacteria, etc., etc.

Prior sexual abuse - abuse which may have occured prior to the current abuse.

Sexual abuse - abuse which may or may not cause detectable damage.

It seems to me its a much bigger story for the tabloids if the chronic vaginal inflammation is blamed on chronic sexual abuse, even though there are other causes for this type of inflammation.

Did you know that one or more of the doctors on your list may have become involved in the case via a tabloid?

Going from chronic inflammation to chronic abuse is an opinion that not everyone shares. The doctor closest to JBR doesn't think there was chronic abuse.

The doctor who did the autopsy didn't report 'consistent with chronic abuse,' he reported 'chronic inflammation.'

What other signs were there found pointing to chronic sexual abuse besides vaginal inflammation?

 

[rashomon]

Why leave a ransom note? Why not remove the child from the home first?

It is indeed that ransom note which knocks any pedophile scenario to pieces imo. So we would have a pedophile who not only had the nerve to molest JB on Christmas in her own home full of people (completely absurd scenario in itself!), what's more: after killing her, that guy then sat down to write a lenghty ransom note without any fear of being detected, a ransom note with which he would only leave behind additional evidence???

 

[Camper]

I would say the twenty-year-old young man surely must have known that pop was a millionaire several times over - so why only demand those $118,000 dollars?

You can call a twenty year old a man, which is true as far as appendages and appearance are concerned. However in the muddy world of corporate business, they never probably really know how much spendable cash is available by their own father. Finance is not something they have a real handle on. However, when the word BONUS is used along with the amount of $118,000.00, it could possibly take on another meaning to a young inexperienced 20 year old.

How much would a 'nice' boat to race in a regatta cost? This was an activity the Ramsey's pursued in MI. Could the young man have wanted his own boat for racing?

Will Rogers said, "Everyone is ignorant, only in different subjects."

Remember boatman said the person who represented himself as the young Ramsey, offered $10,000 to him to have an accident with JonBenet. So who was it that supposedly had the $10,000 for an accident? I wonder IF IF there was a life insurance policy on JonBenet, and how much it might have been IF IF there was one?



.

 

[aussiesheila]

Wellllll, the reason I think someone would squawk, was cuz someone did. When the person squawked they were hustled back to California, never to be heard from again. Do you remember that scenario, which came rather early on in this case? The squawker included airplanes transporting folks to and from 'sexual holiday meetings'. Holidays were the times for these 'get to gethers' so that groups of people entering homes would not appear to be anything other than holiday parties. There was a whole lot more information given by this 'apparent nutzoid'.

So who was this pedophile who squawked?

Remember when LBJ's secretary/asst ?, was blowing whistles about government thingies, and she ended up in a mental institution, never to be heard from again.

The person from California who told a sordid story about the JonBenet case, was deemed 'nutz', she had even been sequestered by an attorney to keep her safe then OOPS she was gone back to her 'family' in CA for 'safekeeping and care'..

No I haven't heard of these pedophiles. We dont get much coverage of these cases of yours in Australia. We have our own.

Curious what led you to your scenario aussiesheila?

I suppose it comes from life's experiences and reading around a subject that is of interest to me

Glad to hear about the hair, Camper

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

What other signs were there found pointing to chronic sexual abuse besides vaginal inflammation?

I don't know. I never really seriously considered JBR was chronically abused by anybody, because she was so obviously brutally murdered by a sadistic child murderer.

Besides, the doctor who did the autopsy would have blown the whistle on chronic abuse if there was any. All he talked about was inflammation. The abuse whistle was blown by the tabloids because the idea has shock value and sells.

 

[BlueCrab]

I don't know. I never really seriously considered JBR was chronically abused by anybody, because she was so obviously brutally murdered by a sadistic child murderer.

Besides, the doctor who did the autopsy would have blown the whistle on chronic abuse if there was any. All he talked about was inflammation. The abuse whistle was blown by the tabloids because the idea has shock value and sells.

HOTYH,

The evidence of chronic sexual abuse is overwhelming.

Besides chronic (old) inflamation of the vagina, according to the autopsy report JonBenet suffered erosion (worn away over a period of time) of the hymenal orifice; her hymen was almost totally gone (represented only by a partial rim); and the hymenal orifice was twice the size it should have been.

This conclusion was supported by a team of doctors appointed to study the autopsy report and the accompanying microscopic slides. They agreed there was evidence of chronic sexual abuse, although one doctor was undecided.

The doctors' names are Cyril Wecht, David Jones, James Monteleone, John McCann, Ronald Wright, Werner Spitz, and Richard Krugman.

The evidence makes it clear this was a sex murder and there had been sexual abuse occurring prior to the day of the crime. The severe tightening of the ligature on the neck and the bash on the head was obviously staging to make it appear to be the work of an intruder. But why would the Ramseys be engaged in a coverup to protect an intruder? The evidence points to a family member.

BlueCrab

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

HOTYH,

The evidence of chronic sexual abuse is overwhelming.

Besides chronic (old) inflamation of the vagina, according to the autopsy report JonBenet suffered erosion (worn away over a period of time) of the hymenal orifice; her hymen was almost totally gone (represented only by a partial rim); and the hymenal orifice was twice the size it should have been.

This conclusion was supported by a team of doctors appointed to study the autopsy report and the accompanying microscopic slides. They agreed there was evidence of chronic sexual abuse, although one doctor was undecided.

The doctors' names are Cyril Wecht, David Jones, James Monteleone, John McCann, Ronald Wright, Werner Spitz, and Richard Krugman.

The evidence makes it clear this was a sex murder and there had been sexual abuse occurring prior to the day of the crime. The severe tightening of the ligature on the neck and the bash on the head was obviously staging to make it appear to be the work of an intruder. But why would the Ramseys be engaged in a coverup to protect an intruder? The evidence points to a family member.

BlueCrab

You could have a hundred doctors all opposing JBR's pediatrician and the doctor who did the original autopsy. I noticed they aren't on your small list. That's because this panel didn't have access to JBR for an examination, while they did. Doesn't it concern you that the ones who were closest to JBR don't share this abuse idea? Doesn't it bother you that JBR was brutally murdered, the garrote tightened around her neck so tight to leave clear evidence of a struggle? Maybe you should spend more time looking into the injuries around her neck instead of you-know-where. Then you might appreciate just how brutal this killer was.

The discussion on abuse seems like crass speculation intended for shock value and sales. These third-party after-the-fact opinions contradicts overwhelming crime scene evidence that suggests JBR was brutally murdered.

 

[Nuisanceposter]

As distasteful as the discussion of whether or not JonBenet was sexually abused is, it is a key component to this entire murder. It was going on at the time she died, and there is evidence to support that it had been going on before she died. The strangulation gives every indication of being directly tied in with sexual abuse.

 

[Linda7NJ]

You could have a hundred doctors all opposing JBR's pediatrician and the doctor who did the original autopsy. I noticed they aren't on your small list. That's because this panel didn't have access to JBR for an examination, while they did. Doesn't it concern you that the ones who were closest to JBR don't share this abuse idea? Doesn't it bother you that JBR was brutally murdered, the garrote tightened around her neck so tight to leave clear evidence of a struggle? Maybe you should spend more time looking into the injuries around her neck instead of you-know-where. Then you might appreciate just how brutal this killer was.

The discussion on abuse seems like crass speculation intended for shock value and sales. These third-party after-the-fact opinions contradicts overwhelming crime scene evidence that suggests JBR was brutally murdered.

It doesn't concern me in the least that those closest to her could be in denial concerning sexual abuse. Denial is VERY common when sexual abuse is involved, doesn't mater if it's a family member or not doing the abusing. It's a none issue for me.



I think it's safe to say no one here thinks Jon Benet WAS NOT brutally murdered.

 

[Camper]

Personal opinions are like noses, everyone has one to start out with.

Getting out my old broken violin, with two strings on it.

Violent and brutal murders are oft done by people under the influence of alcohol, or drugs.

Just how mad would a young man be IF IF he were denied his money need request because - because he possibly was the cause of the sexual tampering with JonBenet. The 911 call on the 23rd, still has unresolved answers on the who, why and how come of that particular call, at least for WS'ers.

Drinking by the young man was reported, was this a rumor or substantiated information. Someone help us all out here, was it Shapiro or another reporter who went to interview the young man, and found him in his cups as the olde saying went?

Perfection is difficult to find in human beings, and the truth is an even more difficult thing to seek out and obtain.



.

 

[rashomon]

As distasteful as the discussion of whether or not JonBenet was sexually abused is, it is a key component to this entire murder. It was going on at the time she died, and there is evidence to support that it had been going on before she died. The strangulation gives every indication of being directly tied in with sexual abuse.

Still, the strangulation scenario could be a cover-up within a cover-up: stage a scenario which would point to sexually motivated crime, and inflict the vaginal injury on JonBenet to hide signs of prior sexual abuse.

 

[Nuisanceposter]

The vaginal injuries were inflicted before her death, not after. Her body was responding to the injury, so it had to have happened before she died.

 

[rashomon]

The vaginal injuries were inflicted before her death, not after. Her body was responding to the injury, so it had to have happened before she died.

You mean that there was active bleeding? The injuries could have been inflicted while she was unconscious (and therefore would have still been alive).

 

[BlueCrab]

The vaginal injuries were inflicted before her death, not after. Her body was responding to the injury, so it had to have happened before she died.

Nuisanceposter,

A strong case can be made that JonBenet died WHILE dangerous erotic asphyxiation, using a ligature to purposely restrict oxygen to the brain, was involuntarily being performed on her.

Dr. Werner Spitz also believes JonBenet died while she was being penetrated by someone or something.

The last two sentences in the autopsy where the coroner is explaining the microscopic description of the vaginal mucosa (lining of the vagina) reveal this. It reads:

"A small number of red blood cells is present on the eroded surface, as is birefringent foreign material. Acute inflammatory infiltrate is not seen."

In other words, the vagina had been bleeding (presence of red blood cells) but apparently ceased to bleed when the body died and stopped pumping blood. There were NO white blood cells (infiltrate) at the injury, which normally rush to the site of a bodily injury. Therefore, JonBenet likely died of ligature strangulation before her body could send help and while the perp was still penetrating her.

Therefore, IMO JonBenet accidentally died of asphyxia while EA was being forced on her. The perp did not intend to kill her.

BlueCrab

 

[rashomon]

HOTYH,

The evidence of chronic sexual abuse is overwhelming.

Besides chronic (old) inflamation of the vagina, according to the autopsy report JonBenet suffered erosion (worn away over a period of time) of the hymenal orifice; her hymen was almost totally gone (represented only by a partial rim); and the hymenal orifice was twice the size it should have been.

This conclusion was supported by a team of doctors appointed to study the autopsy report and the accompanying microscopic slides. They agreed there was evidence of chronic sexual abuse, although one doctor was undecided.

The doctors' names are Cyril Wecht, David Jones, James Monteleone, John McCann, Ronald Wright, Werner Spitz, and Richard Krugman.

The evidence makes it clear this was a sex murder and there had been sexual abuse occurring prior to the day of the crime. The severe tightening of the ligature on the neck and the bash on the head was obviously staging to make it appear to be the work of an intruder. But why would the Ramseys be engaged in a coverup to protect an intruder? The evidence points to a family member.

BlueCrab

This was probably what the killer's intention was: to make us believe that this was a sex murder, and it seems he/she has been successful, in view of the inane and absurd 'pedophile intruder' scenarios that have obviously been swallowed hook, line and sinker by quite a few Ramsey supporters.
Don't get me wrong: the evidence you listed pointing to JonBenet being a victim of prior sexual abuse is overwhelming and leaves no doubt at all imo that she had been suffering from long-time sexual abuse.
But this doesn't automatically imply that the murder itself was a sex murder.
You said that the evidence points to a family member, which is just my opinion too. Fibers from Patsy Ramsey's red sweater found in the paint tray for example. JMO, but I think both Ramseys are involved in this up to their neck, which would perfectly explain their not comforting each other on Dec 26th 1996, when their daughter's dead body was finally found in their own home.

Could it be definitely established which came first: the blow to JonBenet's head or the garotting? For this would be crucial info and the royal road to solving the case, because if the blow to the head came first, all that 'garotte asphyxiation' scenario bites the dust.
But all I've been able to read so far was something like "a blow to her head associated with asphyxiation", which doesn't lead anywhere.

But just because this doesn't seem to lead anywhere doesn't imply that this case should be put to rest, like Lin Wood more or less suggested when he complained of internet sites still discussing Jon Benet's case.
Yes, Lin Wood would like to have it that way, because he of course is aware that these forums are veritable 'brain power houses', as I like to call them.
The internet is a powerful tool, and we should keep using it until JonBenet's murderer is brought to justice!

 

[UKGuy]

Nuisanceposter,

A strong case can be made that JonBenet died WHILE dangerous erotic asphyxiation, using a ligature to purposely restrict oxygen to the brain, was involuntarily being performed on her.

Dr. Werner Spitz also believes JonBenet died while she was being penetrated by someone or something.

The last two sentences in the autopsy where the coroner is explaining the microscopic description of the vaginal mucosa (lining of the vagina) reveal this. It reads:

"A small number of red blood cells is present on the eroded surface, as is birefringent foreign material. Acute inflammatory infiltrate is not seen."

In other words, the vagina had been bleeding (presence of red blood cells) but apparently ceased to bleed when the body died and stopped pumping blood. There were NO white blood cells (infiltrate) at the injury, which normally rush to the site of a bodily injury. Therefore, JonBenet likely died of ligature strangulation before her body could send help and while the perp was still penetrating her.

Therefore, IMO JonBenet accidentally died of asphyxia while EA was being forced on her. The perp did not intend to kill her.

BlueCrab

BlueCrab,

Methinks, all this EA is a red-herring and unnecessary. If you apply a little of Occam's Razor, you can remove the EA, by suggesting JonBenet was simply being restrained by the ligature.

She may have been being abused digitally, whilst standing up, she may have over-balanced and fell over, and banged her head, then been asphyxiated to both to silence her and hide previous abuse!

All this EA on a 6-year old is superfluous both in theory and in reality!

 

[rashomon]

BlueCrab,
All this EA on a 6-year old is superfluous both in theory and in reality!

JMO too! That EA stuff is a red herring which serves the purpose of hiding previous sexual abuse.
You can call it applying Occam's Razor or the KISS (Keep It Simple Stupid) principle.
The most likely explanation is the royal road to the truth in the vast majority of murder cases.
The ransom note, the garotte killing scenario: all this just screams 'staged scene'.