Did JonBenet Have A Nosebleed The Night She Died?

[UKGuy]

KK, very sound and logical thinking. It would be interesting to know exactly how much blood was on that pillowcase? I have the feeling it was a very small amount. I'm not 100% convinced where the head wound occurred as I don't really believe the Rs story of the previous night and believe that JBR was awake when they returned home. That head wound could have happened anywhere in that house. And has there been any conclusive evidence of prior sexual abuse?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

andreww,
JonBenet had old internal injuries which displayed signs of the healing process. These were distinct from the acute injuries, inflicted that night, also her hymen was eroded, another chronic process, and her opening was unaturally enlarged for her age.

Conclusion: both chronic and acute sexual contact had taken place.


.

 

[elannia]

Of course we don't know where the head blow occurred and probably never will, but if the blood on the pillowcase was from that blow, it would be reasonable to theorize it happened somewhere near that room. Otherwise, why not lay her on a couch, or another nearby bed, of that's what was done once she collapsed?

On the other hand, it could have occurred on the bed, if there was a fight there or something like that. Remember the curtain sash was out of place on the headboard.

I would imagine the blood was only drops, as well, probably unnoticed by the stager(s). Haney asked about a nosebleed, however, so we may infer the blood was thought to be from her nose, logically.

The conclusive (to me and all the experts who are on the record or whose determination has been documented by reliable sources) evidence of prior molestation is in the autopsy. The medical examiner uses medical and forensic language, but through the years we've had many forensic medical experts interpret the autopsy for us. You can find detailed, phrase by phrase breakdowns here on this forum and at FFJ. DeeDee is an excellent source on this topic, as well as many others who have those descriptions and links at the ready. I have to make an appt. so don't have time right now to look it up.

[Oops, sorry, hit wrong reply button. Here's the quote:]

And (forgive me I dont remember on which thread it was) but when PR was being interviewed she was asked something about JB bedroom(I believe this is where it came about if she had nosebleeds) and she SAID I dont see any blood on the curtains, do you, to the interviewer. And I dont believe she was asked questions about this

 

[questfortrue]

It is nice to see KK again! (It's the only "dropped mic lady" I could find. But I kind of liked her riding in on the horse like that.)

:happydance:

 

[DeeDee249]

View attachment 62133

It is nice to see KK again! (It's the only "dropped mic lady" I could find. But I kind of liked her riding in on the horse like that.)

:happydance:

Same here, KK!

 

[questfortrue]

Of course we don't know where the head blow occurred and probably never will, but if the blood on the pillowcase was from that blow, it would be reasonable to theorize it happened somewhere near that room. Otherwise, why not lay her on a couch, or another nearby bed, of that's what was done once she collapsed?

On the other hand, it could have occurred on the bed, if there was a fight there or something like that. Remember the curtain sash was out of place on the headboard.

I would imagine the blood was only drops, as well, probably unnoticed by the stager(s). Haney asked about a nosebleed, however, so we may infer the blood was thought to be from her nose, logically.

~RSBM~

The mention of the blood drop on the pillowcase brought some other questions to mind. Recently was wondering about the small specks of blood on JB’s Barbie nightgown. Whatever one wishes to say about the housekeeping ability of PR, and apparently leaving of clothes on the floor was normal, the level of disturbance in the bedroom seems more than usual. There was one pair of black play pants with fecal matter laying in the bathroom, one pair of BR’s - per Kolar, larger and thought to be BR’s - PJs on the floor, also with fecal matter, one candy box smeared with feces. JB’s potholder ties scattered on the floor and identified by LHP as not supposed to be there like that. The crowns on the floor, identified by PR, seemed to make PR choke up. All of this contributes to my impression that there may have been something which happened between JB and BR in her bedroom. As to the nightgown, it is curious that it also had blood specks, when she was reportedly dressed in sweatshirt and long johns, per JR and PR. (The Bonita papers does also mention JB blood on the blanket she was wrapped in.)

So all this causes me to refocus on this nightgown, which had the specks of blood and the tDNA of PR and BR. BTW, others (like UKGuy) have dispelled the idea that the nightgown had been in the dryer and had just adhered to the blanket by static cling if it had the tDNA. (IOW, maybe one person’s tDNA, but not two, if it came from the dryer.)

I don’t know that this gets us any closer to determining where JB was struck, and subsequently redressed, but it seems, to me anyway, that the detectives were looking carefully at where the nightgown came from, especially since it had blood on it and if the story was that they put JB to bed in her long-johns and sweatshirt from the Ws’ party.

Note Trip DeMuth’s questioning of PR about the nightgown and where it was kept:

17 TRIP DEMUTH: This is her bathroom, her sink.
18 Which drawer would the Barbie doll nightgown have been
19 kept in?
20 PATSY RAMSEY: Probably that one or the one
21 below it.
22 TRIP DEMUTH: The one that is opened or below
23 it right there in photo 18? 24 PATSY RAMSEY: Uh-huh.
25 TRIP DEMUTH: Okay.

Then there is JR’s surprise about the nightgown next to her: He says in an interview the nightgown shouldn’t be there. JR claimed that JB would usually put one of her nightgowns on, if she were awake. If she were asleep, they would just make her comfortable, not change her shirt, e.g. At that point I wonder if he were surprised at additional staging?

Also, allegedly from a screen capture, there were blood specks on the white blanket and on her white shirt. How did all these specks arrive, if she had been redressed in the big Bloomies and long johns? Was it transfer drops from someone’s clean-up rag? It’s confusing to me. moo

 

[UKGuy]

The mention of the blood drop on the pillowcase brought some other questions to mind. Recently was wondering about the small specks of blood on JB’s Barbie nightgown. Whatever one wishes to say about the housekeeping ability of PR, and apparently leaving of clothes on the floor was normal, the level of disturbance in the bedroom seems more than usual. There was one pair of black play pants with fecal matter laying in the bathroom, one pair of BR’s - per Kolar, larger and thought to be BR’s - PJs on the floor, also with fecal matter, one candy box smeared with feces. JB’s potholder ties scattered on the floor and identified by LHP as not supposed to be there like that. The crowns on the floor, identified by PR, seemed to make PR choke up. All of this contributes to my impression that there may have been something which happened between JB and BR in her bedroom. As to the nightgown, it is curious that it also had blood specks, when she was reportedly dressed in sweatshirt and long johns, per JR and PR. (The Bonita papers does also mention JB blood on the blanket she was wrapped in.)

So all this causes me to refocus on this nightgown, which had the specks of blood and the tDNA of PR and BR. BTW, others (like UKGuy) have dispelled the idea that the nightgown had been in the dryer and had just adhered to the blanket by static cling if it had the tDNA. (IOW, maybe one person’s tDNA, but not two, if it came from the dryer.)

I don’t know that this gets us any closer to determining where JB was struck, and subsequently redressed, but it seems, to me anyway, that the detectives were looking carefully at where the nightgown came from, especially since it had blood on it and if the story was that they put JB to bed in her long-johns and sweatshirt from the Ws’ party.

Note Trip DeMuth’s questioning of PR about the nightgown and where it was kept:

17 TRIP DEMUTH: This is her bathroom, her sink.
18 Which drawer would the Barbie doll nightgown have been
19 kept in?
20 PATSY RAMSEY: Probably that one or the one
21 below it.
22 TRIP DEMUTH: The one that is opened or below
23 it right there in photo 18? 24 PATSY RAMSEY: Uh-huh.
25 TRIP DEMUTH: Okay.

Then there is JR’s surprise about the nightgown next to her: He says in an interview the nightgown shouldn’t be there. JR claimed that JB would usually put one of her nightgowns on, if she were awake. If she were asleep, they would just make her comfortable, not change her shirt, e.g. At that point I wonder if he were surprised at additional staging?

Also, allegedly from a screen capture, there were blood specks on the white blanket and on her white shirt. How did all these specks arrive, if she had been redressed in the big Bloomies and long johns? Was it transfer drops from someone’s clean-up rag? It’s confusing to me. moo

questfortrue,

Then there is JR’s surprise about the nightgown next to her: He says in an interview the nightgown shouldn’t be there.

JR is only speaking the obvious, everyone and their dog knows it should not be present, particularly assuming an Intruder Abduction.

R claimed that JB would usually put one of her nightgowns on, if she were awake. If she were asleep, they would just make her comfortable, not change her shirt, e.g. At that point I wonder if he were surprised at additional staging?

This quote simply mirrors the R's version of event, i.e. no problem!

For the unintiated and those with agendas the forensic evidence is unwelcome it suggests that PR and BR were associated with JonBenet at one point, then JR via his fibers was associated at another point, i.e. JonBenet's underwear.

So if you do the maths or the timeline it appears different R's attended to JonBenet at varying points after arriving back home, surely the forensic evidence does not lie?

Also, allegedly from a screen capture, there were blood specks on the white blanket and on her white shirt. How did all these specks arrive, if she had been redressed in the big Bloomies and long johns? Was it transfer drops from someone’s clean-up rag? It’s confusing to me. moo

Minimally one would assume forensic transfer as a consequence of the interested parties attempting to stage some kind of exterior crime-scene, all of which their internal forensic evidence refutes their claims to no involvement?

On this subject you have many actors suggesting it was an obvious homicide but this does not allow of any consideration that it was staged, and who it might advantage

Considered analytically the wine-cellar crime-scene allows you to partition events into BR-PR events and JR events, e.g. his fibers allegedly found on JonBenet's underwear, and the touch dna etx.

You Decide?

.

 

[questfortrue]

questfortrue,

JR is only speaking the obvious, everyone and their dog knows it should not be present, particularly assuming an Intruder Abduction.

~RSBM~

This quote simply mirrors the R's version of event, i.e. no problem!.

Yes, it is apparent that the nightgown shouldn’t be there. Neither should the blanket and most of all the little girl! It could be JR simply states the obvious, as you say, or he may not have been the one to place it there.

I too see different stagers at different times. My puzzlement about this crime scene is how JB ends up with drops of blood on her nightgown (if it was later staging) and on the blanket. JB had already been cleaned up and redressed. Presumably, the blanket and nightgown were subsequent to her redressing. Or is it that the nightgown was taken from the area where a sexual assault occurred? Just thinking out loud here. I obviously don’t know.
mho

 

[elannia]

The mention of the blood drop on the pillowcase brought some other questions to mind. Recently was wondering about the small specks of blood on JB’s Barbie nightgown. Whatever one wishes to say about the housekeeping ability of PR, and apparently leaving of clothes on the floor was normal, the level of disturbance in the bedroom seems more than usual. There was one pair of black play pants with fecal matter laying in the bathroom, one pair of BR’s - per Kolar, larger and thought to be BR’s - PJs on the floor, also with fecal matter, one candy box smeared with feces. JB’s potholder ties scattered on the floor and identified by LHP as not supposed to be there like that. The crowns on the floor, identified by PR, seemed to make PR choke up. All of this contributes to my impression that there may have been something which happened between JB and BR in her bedroom. As to the nightgown, it is curious that it also had blood specks, when she was reportedly dressed in sweatshirt and long johns, per JR and PR. (The Bonita papers does also mention JB blood on the blanket she was wrapped in.)

So all this causes me to refocus on this nightgown, which had the specks of blood and the tDNA of PR and BR. BTW, others (like UKGuy) have dispelled the idea that the nightgown had been in the dryer and had just adhered to the blanket by static cling if it had the tDNA. (IOW, maybe one person’s tDNA, but not two, if it came from the dryer.)

I don’t know that this gets us any closer to determining where JB was struck, and subsequently redressed, but it seems, to me anyway, that the detectives were looking carefully at where the nightgown came from, especially since it had blood on it and if the story was that they put JB to bed in her long-johns and sweatshirt from the Ws’ party.

Note Trip DeMuth’s questioning of PR about the nightgown and where it was kept:

17 TRIP DEMUTH: This is her bathroom, her sink.
18 Which drawer would the Barbie doll nightgown have been
19 kept in?
20 PATSY RAMSEY: Probably that one or the one
21 below it.
22 TRIP DEMUTH: The one that is opened or below
23 it right there in photo 18? 24 PATSY RAMSEY: Uh-huh.
25 TRIP DEMUTH: Okay.

Then there is JR’s surprise about the nightgown next to her: He says in an interview the nightgown shouldn’t be there. JR claimed that JB would usually put one of her nightgowns on, if she were awake. If she were asleep, they would just make her comfortable, not change her shirt, e.g. At that point I wonder if he were surprised at additional staging?

Also, allegedly from a screen capture, there were blood specks on the white blanket and on her white shirt. How did all these specks arrive, if she had been redressed in the big Bloomies and long johns? Was it transfer drops from someone’s clean-up rag? It’s confusing to me. moo

Excellent post!!! Makes alot of sense about why Patsy asked Haney if he noticed blood on the drapes(which I dont believe he bothered to say excuse me, why would there be???) And also everything you pointed out about the room being far more messy than usual. One thing that bugs me is the candy. Do we know if it was JB, were the R's ever questioned about the feces on it? Maybe this is where it all started(after they had pineapple and tea in the kitchen.) and yes I remember it being mentioned the nightgown having drops of blood on it. So imo(I posted this before) she came home and dressed herself in the nightgown and this is what she was wearing when in the kitchen, to when the fight started in her room. Then she was changed into the longjohns and back into the white shirt to make it IDI. This would also be the reason blood on her pillow and blood on the nightgown, plus PR and BR tDNA on it as well. And fit JR commenting on her barbie gown not supposed to be there, I can pretty much say that imo someone forgot to dispose of it after the redressing.

 

[DeeDee249]

Excellent post!!! Makes alot of sense about why Patsy asked Haney if he noticed blood on the drapes(which I dont believe he bothered to say excuse me, why would there be???) And also everything you pointed out about the room being far more messy than usual. One thing that bugs me is the candy. Do we know if it was JB, were the R's ever questioned about the feces on it? Maybe this is where it all started(after they had pineapple and tea in the kitchen.) and yes I remember it being mentioned the nightgown having drops of blood on it. So imo(I posted this before) she came home and dressed herself in the nightgown and this is what she was wearing when in the kitchen, to when the fight started in her room. Then she was changed into the longjohns and back into the white shirt to make it IDI. This would also be the reason blood on her pillow and blood on the nightgown, plus PR and BR tDNA on it as well. And fit JR commenting on her barbie gown not supposed to be there, I can pretty much say that imo someone forgot to dispose of it after the redressing.

The nightgown has always been something that has bothered me. I know it's been reported that the nightie had small drops of JB's blood, as well as DNA from Patsy and BR. We have JR's comment when shown a crime photo of the nightie on top of the white blanket: "that doesn't belong there". THAT was so odd- the white blanket didn't belong there either, neither did the dead child. So how did it get there? Stuck to the blanket by static cling as it was pulled from the basement dryer (where it was always laundered)? Or was she redressed into the longjohns and white shirt after removing the nightie? Did the blood get on it during the redressing or somehow in handling it? The only place we KNOW there was blood was on JB's body- her own blood on her thighs and pubic area and tiny drops on the NEW panties. The pillowcase is speculation- it has never been definitively proven blood was on her pillowcase/drapes, or exactly why police questioned Patsy about JB having nosebleeds. Could Patsy's comment about "I don't see any blood, do you?" have been in response to the question about the nosebleeds? This could all be a part of the 90% of the evidence that has supposedly been kept from the public. As far as that goes, ST made his "the public only knows about 10% of the evidence" many years ago. With the more recent publication of Kolar's book, some additional evidence was revealed (the feces in the candy box for one). I would find it hard to believe after all these years (it will be 18 years this December) that none of the supposedly suppressed evidence hasn't leaked out. I'd be hard pressed to think of what could possible still be unknown. Since the GJ indictments were revealed, making it VERY clear (IMO) that the parents covered up for another family member and were guilty of failing to keep her safe from the abuse that resulted in her death and not in the murder itself, there was only ONE other family member there! It couldn't be any plainer. Nor could it be any more obvious why this case is not prosecutable. I think LE knows "who did what".

Remember, there was even a partial fingerprint on her body..which the coroner felt was not important. Can you believe it? Dead, sexually assaulted little girl, blood wiped from her genital area, and a FINGERPRINT is not important. The parents aren't the only ones guilty of a coverup.

 

[UKGuy]

Yes, it is apparent that the nightgown shouldn’t be there. Neither should the blanket and most of all the little girl! It could be JR simply states the obvious, as you say, or he may not have been the one to place it there.

I too see different stagers at different times. My puzzlement about this crime scene is how JB ends up with drops of blood on her nightgown (if it was later staging) and on the blanket. JB had already been cleaned up and redressed. Presumably, the blanket and nightgown were subsequent to her redressing. Or is it that the nightgown was taken from the area where a sexual assault occurred? Just thinking out loud here. I obviously don’t know.
mho

questfortrue,
BBM: ITA. What is interesting about the staging is how quickly it was undertaken.

The bloodstains on the blanket and nightgown may have arrived accidentally, but this I doubt otherwise why leave the nightgown in the wine-cellar?

The nightgown is also interesting for another reason: it never went the same way as JonBenet's size-6 underwear.

It looks as if JonBenet was wearing the nightgown when Patsy fashioned her asymmetric ponytails, which might represent prior staging.

So it might be the nightgown becomes bloodstained as JonBenet is being redressed, so is rejected as staging clothing, or she was wearing it when she was sexually assaulted?

Placing the nightgown in the wine-cellar offers a glimpse into the R's mindset prior to the 911 call, since they must know it will eventually be found, but hopefully not before they pull off their Kidnapping presentation!

It appears as if JR was the person who redressed JonBenet in the size-12's and forgot or deliberately never told PR he had removed all the evidence, hints of the flashlight here.

What I think most shocking is that I reckon it was Patsy who ligature asphyxiated JonBenet. JR was really just a cleanup guy who undone most of PR's forensic mistakes, in this he was successful, and probably the reason why the case never ever made it to the court-room?

This is why JR was always intimating that it was an inside job etc. He could see that the evidence all pointed in one direction and given a shove he would testify against PR, to save BR!

Assuming Kolar is correct, the primary crime-scene seems to be located in JonBenet's bedroom. The disarray of the bedroom lends itself to this idea, adding in the feces and the discarded clothing then we have a pathology that is being hidden from us, via legal strictures on evidence disclosure, but JonBenet's injuries as annotated in the autopsy report suggest a physical struggle.

So if the case, as alleged, is BDI and you have this sexual pathology playing itself out on JonBenet, with disastrous results, has anything changed in the years that followed, is this pathology still meandering on a path towards another tragedy?


.

 

[elannia]

The nightgown has always been something that has bothered me. I know it's been reported that the nightie had small drops of JB's blood, as well as DNA from Patsy and BR. We have JR's comment when shown a crime photo of the nightie on top of the white blanket: "that doesn't belong there". THAT was so odd- the white blanket didn't belong there either, neither did the dead child. So how did it get there? Stuck to the blanket by static cling as it was pulled from the basement dryer (where it was always laundered)? Or was she redressed into the longjohns and white shirt after removing the nightie? Did the blood get on it during the redressing or somehow in handling it? The only place we KNOW there was blood was on JB's body- her own blood on her thighs and pubic area and tiny drops on the NEW panties. The pillowcase is speculation- it has never been definitively proven blood was on her pillowcase/drapes, or exactly why police questioned Patsy about JB having nosebleeds. Could Patsy's comment about "I don't see any blood, do you?" have been in response to the question about the nosebleeds? This could all be a part of the 90% of the evidence that has supposedly been kept from the public. As far as that goes, ST made his "the public only knows about 10% of the evidence" many years ago. With the more recent publication of Kolar's book, some additional evidence was revealed (the feces in the candy box for one). I would find it hard to believe after all these years (it will be 18 years this December) that none of the supposedly suppressed evidence hasn't leaked out. I'd be hard pressed to think of what could possible still be unknown. Since the GJ indictments were revealed, making it VERY clear (IMO) that the parents covered up for another family member and were guilty of failing to keep her safe from the abuse that resulted in her death and not in the murder itself, there was only ONE other family member there! It couldn't be any plainer. Nor could it be any more obvious why this case is not prosecutable. I think LE knows "who did what".

Remember, there was even a partial fingerprint on her body..which the coroner felt was not important. Can you believe it? Dead, sexually assaulted little girl, blood wiped from her genital area, and a FINGERPRINT is not important. The parents aren't the only ones guilty of a coverup.

I did not know about the partial fingerprint on her body.... Wow. It would be nice if we knew more of the evidence. Like you said only about 10% we know and what Kolar has told us. What do you make about (or know more of the feces on the candy?)

 

[DeeDee249]

I did not know about the partial fingerprint on her body.... Wow. It would be nice if we knew more of the evidence. Like you said only about 10% we know and what Kolar has told us. What do you make about (or know more of the feces on the candy?)

The feces-smeared candy is something we learned from Kolar's book that hadn't really been widely known before. Not much to say about it- but I will say that I cannot BELIEVE police never questioned the parents about this in any of their interviews. Most interviews were conducted while showing Patsy or JR crime scene photos. Police can be seen asking about things in the photos. Yet- no mention of the box of candy. Crime scene photographers were the ones who took all those photos. Now- if any of you have ever tracked even a TINY bit of dog poop into the house on your shoe or any moms here have ever had a little "present" deposited in the house by a pet (or toddler!) - trust me- you KNOW when there is poop in a room! You know the second you walk in the room. I can't believe a photo wasn't taken of it or LE didn't take note of it.

 

[UKGuy]

The feces-smeared candy is something we learned from Kolar's book that hadn't really been widely known before. Not much to say about it- but I will say that I cannot BELIEVE police never questioned the parents about this in any of their interviews. Most interviews were conducted while showing Patsy or JR crime scene photos. Police can be seen asking about things in the photos. Yet- no mention of the box of candy. Crime scene photographers were the ones who took all those photos. Now- if any of you have ever tracked even a TINY bit of dog poop into the house on your shoe or any moms here have ever had a little "present" deposited in the house by a pet (or toddler!) - trust me- you KNOW when there is poop in a room! You know the second you walk in the room. I can't believe a photo wasn't taken of it or LE didn't take note of it.

DeeDee249,
Yes, lots of questions about the wine-cellar and its contents, but what about JonBenet's bedroom, not a lot, just round about queries regarding forensic dead ends, certainly nothing about feces!

There was even questions asked about JR's bedroom, but BR's bedroom, well silence, other than was it Fleet White who made up BR's bed that morning?

Its as if everything was steered in a particular direction without any conclusions being reached. Mirroring Alex Hunter's strategy of no prosecution being pursued.

Was the candy smeared with feces by JonBenet, what about all those feces stained pants in her bedroom, whats all that about, i.e. was the fecal pathology specific to JonBenet or did BR contribute?

All these years later and I am left with a distinct feeling that we have been conned and the real or relevant forensic data is yet to be released?

.

 

[elannia]

DeeDee249,
Yes, lots of questions about the wine-cellar and its contents, but what about JonBenet's bedroom, not a lot, just round about queries regarding forensic dead ends, certainly nothing about feces!

There was even questions asked about JR's bedroom, but BR's bedroom, well silence, other than was it Fleet White who made up BR's bed that morning?

Its as if everything was steered in a particular direction without any conclusions being reached. Mirroring Alex Hunter's strategy of no prosecution being pursued.

Was the candy smeared with feces by JonBenet, what about all those feces stained pants in her bedroom, whats all that about, i.e. was the fecal pathology specific to JonBenet or did BR contribute?

All these years later and I am left with a distinct feeling that we have been conned and the real or relevant forensic data is yet to be released?

.

Not answering for DeeDee, but I dont ever remember reading about BR bedroom either. Good point. Makes me curious... And whose fecal matter it was as well. Could JB have left feces on her candy to keep B out of it? I highly think not. I can see BR going in there and doing it out of jealousy or anger towards JB. And all the fecal matter in her pants and also the pj,s (not sure whose they were). I think there was alot of jealousy between JB and BR and I honestly think this along with other things contributed to her death

 

[KoldKase]

You all have as good a grasp of the evidence as we can have, at this point. There are several logical scenarios that can be built from what we know of the evidence if we don't allow the red herrings to mislead us.

For example, as has been mentioned from what Kolar revealed in his book: the boy's pj bottoms in JB's bedroom, which I believe have to have been Burke's, unless there was another male child in this sordid murder tale we have not seen any evidence to place at the scene, connected to those bottoms. [Wild speculation doesn't count.]

There is no innocent reason I can imagine or postulate as to why a boy's pj bottoms would have been left on the floor in JB's bedroom and found there after her murder. Since she was sexually assaulted INARGUABLY that night, with a paintbrush, that will always be highly suspicious. No other boy's clothing was in her room, none stored there in drawers or on hangers of which I am aware, so why would a boy remove pjs there?

I, however, believe it was the sexual assault before that night that is the key. It is that autopsy evidence which always and forever will point towards someone in her inner circle as guilty of these crimes against this child.

Because that is the person who undoubtedly and undeniably had access to this child in a private setting in which she could be repeatedly sexually abused in the days, weeks, perhaps even months before she was murdered.

What are the odds that this low risk, closely supervised six year old had TWO molesters over a period of time who were independent of each other, unconnected and unknown to the inner circle of her family and friends?

In addition, what are the odds that there was an intruder who could be so fortunate as to commit these horrific acts on this child, and leave no evidence behind at the scene after hours in the home and with the body? No one has ever identified even a whisper of any intruder; yet lucky him, to have his victim's family petulantly destroy LE's investigation, bringing the taint of guilt on themselves by making sure LE never got the unvarnished truth from them in all these years, while publicly destroying LE's credibility for trial in every way they could. Not to mention, how kind of Patsy to write a ransom note for him.

It's absurd on its face. The body tells the tale: someone was sexually assaulting the child for some time before that night; related or unrelated, she had her head bashed in some kind of altercation, cracking her skull in half; then the cover up was staged, in lieu of having the abuse discovered and dirty little secrets exposed at the ER. It all boiled down to the attempt to cover up the prior sexual abuse with the paintbrush, adding the remainder of the staging to make it appear it was an intruder who did all of this--hoping the prior molestation would be undetectable and/or some powerful lawyers and connections could scramble that critical evidence enough to deny it existed and hide it from the public.

If the head injury occurred in or near her bedroom, someone carried her down 2 sets of stairs to the basement, and I don't believe Burke could have done that alone or that a parent would have taken him along to do what was done next. Therefore I believe the strangulation was applied by an adult by the paint tray, possibly because she was close to death but not dead, and the clock was ticking. If she were found alive, a trip to the ER could fly out of control very quickly when the prior molestation was discovered. Professionals prodding around in their lives; what would happen to Burke? Or them? The clock was ticking: take control or lose control.

I cannot say who did exactly what to JonBenet, because the evidence can be interpreted in a number of ways combined with the pathology and history of those in the house that night; but I am personally convinced that it was a family affair.

Based on a lot of years of research and analysis, this is my opinion only.

 

[andreww]

You all have as good a grasp of the evidence as we can have, at this point. There are several logical scenarios that can be built from what we know of the evidence if we don't allow the red herrings to mislead us.

For example, as has been mentioned from what Kolar revealed in his book: the boy's pj bottoms in JB's bedroom, which I believe have to have been Burke's, unless there was another male child in this sordid murder tale we have not seen any evidence to place at the scene, connected to those bottoms. [Wild speculation doesn't count.]

There is no innocent reason I can imagine or postulate as to why a boy's pj bottoms would have been left on the floor in JB's bedroom and found there after her murder. Since she was sexually assaulted INARGUABLY that night, with a paintbrush, that will always be highly suspicious. No other boy's clothing was in her room, none stored there in drawers or on hangers of which I am aware, so why would a boy remove pjs there?

I, however, believe it was the sexual assault before that night that is the key. It is that autopsy evidence which always and forever will point towards someone in her inner circle as guilty of these crimes against this child.

Because that is the person who undoubtedly and undeniably had access to this child in a private setting in which she could be repeatedly sexually abused in the days, weeks, perhaps even months before she was murdered.

What are the odds that this low risk, closely supervised six year old had TWO molesters over a period of time who were independent of each other, unconnected and unknown to the inner circle of her family and friends?

In addition, what are the odds that there was an intruder who could be so fortunate as to commit these horrific acts on this child, and leave no evidence behind at the scene after hours in the home and with the body? No one has ever identified even a whisper of any intruder; yet lucky him, to have his victim's family petulantly destroy LE's investigation, bringing the taint of guilt on themselves by making sure LE never got the unvarnished truth from them in all these years, while publicly destroying LE's credibility for trial in every way they could. Not to mention, how kind of Patsy to write a ransom note for him.

It's absurd on its face. The body tells the tale: someone was sexually assaulting the child for some time before that night; related or unrelated, she had her head bashed in some kind of altercation, cracking her skull in half; then the cover up was staged, in lieu of having the abuse discovered and dirty little secrets exposed at the ER. It all boiled down to the attempt to cover up the prior sexual abuse with the paintbrush, adding the remainder of the staging to make it appear it was an intruder who did all of this--hoping the prior molestation would be undetectable and/or some powerful lawyers and connections could scramble that critical evidence enough to deny it existed and hide it from the public.

If the head injury occurred in or near her bedroom, someone carried her down 2 sets of stairs to the basement, and I don't believe Burke could have done that alone or that a parent would have taken him along to do what was done next. Therefore I believe the strangulation was applied by an adult by the paint tray, possibly because she was close to death but not dead, and the clock was ticking. If she were found alive, a trip to the ER could fly out of control very quickly when the prior molestation was discovered. Professionals prodding around in their lives; what would happen to Burke? Or them? The clock was ticking: take control or lose control.

I cannot say who did exactly what to JonBenet, because the evidence can be interpreted in a number of ways combined with the pathology and history of those in the house that night; but I am personally convinced that it was a family affair.

Based on a lot of years of research and analysis, this is my opinion only.

I don't think you said a word that I disagree with. I just wonder how Burke could have grown up to be such a seemingly respectable young man with what he knows to have happened. I would have pegged him to be a future alcoholic or drug abuser. Could he really be that cold?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[midwest mama]

KK...just a tidbit with regard to your excellent post. I wonder if we can look at the other brother for a tie in to additional abuse of JB? There was that stained comforter and Suess book in the suitcase JR claimed to have moved. Is it possible JR learned one of the dirty secrets and knew why the paintbrush assault would be necessary? Sometimes big brothers are good teachers of younger siblings.

 

[DeeDee249]

I don't think you said a word that I disagree with. I just wonder how Burke could have grown up to be such a seemingly respectable young man with what he knows to have happened. I would have pegged him to be a future alcoholic or drug abuser. Could he really be that cold?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not so much cold as distant. I wouldn't think of his behavior as cold as much as I think he has pushed the events of that night, as well as any ongoing sexual activity with his sister, to the deepest recesses of his mind. It is almost as if it happened to someone else. Like who he is NOW is not the same as who he was THEN.
People often remember events of their childhood the way they WANT to remember them, and the way they have been TOLD they happened, and not always the way they really happened.

 

[midwest mama]

Not so much cold as distant. I wouldn't think of his behavior as cold as much as I think he has pushed the events of that night, as well as any ongoing sexual activity with his sister, to the deepest recesses of his mind. It is almost as if it happened to someone else. Like who he is NOW is not the same as who he was THEN.
People often remember events of their childhood the way they WANT to remember them, and the way they have been TOLD they happened, and not always the way they really happened.

BBM. Yes, and according to a couple of accounts, one from JR himself during one of his show interviews, Burke had professional therapy for a period of time after the murder. Also, it has been theorized by a few, that if BR dealt the head blow, his parents set up the staging especially to make Burke think he was NOT responsible for her death, but that she was the victim of a demented kidnapping intruder killer.

I could believe quite easily that the R's selected a therapist for Burke who would have been able to help him understand he could be considered "not responsible" for his sister's death.

 

[KoldKase]

Whoever put that suitcase under that window drew JAR into a lifetime of suspicion he'll probably never shake.

Statistically, older brothers are the largest percentage of abusers of younger siblings who are abused.

JAR also was in a prime age range for abusers, statistically. That doesn't prove anything, but his friends told a reporter not long after the murder how much JAR loved JB and talked about JB's beauty. To other young men in college. I don't think they even imagined the implications of that.

JAR was missing from the Ramseys' book about the murder, which was noticed, as well. He was very aggressive with the media--and I can understand that, but it wasn't the prudent attitude, all things considered.

The more the Ramseys circled the wagons, the more suspicion they drew upon each and every one of their own.

I don't know how Burke managed to grow up without a straightjacket, considering what he must have lived through from the day his sister was murdered. So I'll give him credit and admit I have felt sympathy for him.

If Burke were the one to strike his sister, I imagine his parents would have quickly sent him to his bedroom once they realized how seriously the injury was and began to explore what to do next. So all he would have remembered or forgotten would be confusing and incomplete, hardly connected to what took place in the basement later.

IF Burke even did that much. The dynamics that led to the head blow could be speculated on infinitely as to who wielded the weapon--and have been.