View Poll Results: who molested/abused JB?

Voters
425. You may not vote on this poll
  • JR

    119 28.00%
  • BR

    109 25.65%
  • JAR

    22 5.18%
  • a close family friend

    25 5.88%
  • a stranger/stalker a la JMK

    16 3.76%
  • PR-it wasn't sexual abuse,it was corporal punishment

    73 17.18%
  • she wasn't previously abused/molested

    61 14.35%
Page 14 of 89 FirstFirst ... 4 12 13 14 15 16 24 64 ... LastLast
Results 196 to 210 of 1327
  1. #196
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    2,268
    Quote Originally Posted by runsdeep View Post
    what do you think her intent was?
    I think her intent was to make sure JBR was "clean" down there. I feel icky even typing this but I think PR was douching her and perhaps doing some sort of gynocological(sp?) exams on JBR.


  2. The Following User Says Thank You to Squishified For This Useful Post:


  3. #197
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    331
    Quote Originally Posted by Squishified View Post
    I think her intent was to make sure JBR was "clean" down there. I feel icky even typing this but I think PR was douching her and perhaps doing some sort of gynocological(sp?) exams on JBR.
    I would feel icky typing out that too. Where do people come up with these crazy theories? What makes you think that Patsy was playing gyno with her daughter? Why sit around a speculate such vile ideas, with absolutely no proof? Geez, do unto others............


  4. The Following User Says Thank You to Junebug99 For This Useful Post:


  5. #198
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    439
    Quote Originally Posted by Squishified View Post
    I think her intent was to make sure JBR was "clean" down there. I feel icky even typing this but I think PR was douching her and perhaps doing some sort of gynocological(sp?) exams on JBR.
    with the many dr appointments, that wouldnt be inconsistent with the conditions in her autopsy report.


  6. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to runsdeep For This Useful Post:


  7. #199
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    europe
    Posts
    36
    Quote Originally Posted by UKGuy View Post
    tennison,

    DeeDee249 enumerated the facts I note you do not address any of them.

    Your post merely tells us that there is environmental debri floating around the Ramsey household. That on its own does not explain any of the crime-scene evidence.


    You add nothing to the debate by citing unidentifiable trace evidence , whatever that is, if it is unidentifiable then it has no current value, just like the touch-dna inside JonBenet's underwear.

    Please do not waste the boards time with quotes regarding unidentifiable trace evidence because other than the relevance of its location you cannot infer anything at all from it with any confidence.

    Conversely we can infer something from forensic evidence found at the crime-scene precisely because BPD have identified the origin of the black fibers from John Ramsey's Israeli manufactured shirt, discovered inside JonBenet's underwear.

    As DeeDee249 indicates numerous items of forensic evidence found at the crime-scene link the Ramsey's directly to it.

    To date there is no forensic evidence linking any intruder to the crime-scene, curious that.



    .
    Your version of events seem to omit the existence of the points below


    1. Untraced animal hair found on duct tape AND jonbenets hands
    2. Unidentified palmprint on cellar door
    3. Baseball bat Not belonging to ramsays found near house WITH fibres from the basement carpet.
    4. Cotton fibres found On JB,Duct tape AND ligature not sourced to ramsays
    5. Pubic hair not sourced to ramsays found on blanket covering the Jonbenet
    6. Unidentified touch DNA found on Jonbenet

    Now you will notice that it seems a short list, others may have included evidence such as Stun guns, unidentified footprints, moved window grate, disturbed basement door, footprints in cellar, suitcase under the cellar window ect, but i am openminded enough to see these as possibly explainable by other means, i dont necessarily disbelieve these were evidence to "suggest" an intruder, but i believe we must work with the facts that have not been fully explained.

    maybe you could collate a factual list similar to see if your theory holds up as well.
    I doubt it.


  8. The Following User Says Thank You to tennison For This Useful Post:


  9. #200
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    5,968
    Quote Originally Posted by tennison View Post
    Your version of events seem to omit the existence of the points below


    1. Untraced animal hair found on duct tape AND jonbenets hands
    2. Unidentified palmprint on cellar door
    3. Baseball bat Not belonging to ramsays found near house WITH fibres from the basement carpet.
    4. Cotton fibres found On JB,Duct tape AND ligature not sourced to ramsays
    5. Pubic hair not sourced to ramsays found on blanket covering the Jonbenet
    6. Unidentified touch DNA found on Jonbenet

    Now you will notice that it seems a short list, others may have included evidence such as Stun guns, unidentified footprints, moved window grate, disturbed basement door, footprints in cellar, suitcase under the cellar window ect, but i am openminded enough to see these as possibly explainable by other means, i dont necessarily disbelieve these were evidence to "suggest" an intruder, but i believe we must work with the facts that have not been fully explained.

    maybe you could collate a factual list similar to see if your theory holds up as well.
    I doubt it.
    I remember something from a long time ago sourcing the animal hair to the paintbrushes in the artists tray belonging to Patsy. I've tried finding it again and I can't, so maybe it was just an opinion all those years ago.

    The palm print belonged to Melinda Ramsey.

    The baseball bat was outside the house, not inside. Besides, wouldn't it be awkward to hit her with a baseball bat, given the size, while choking and stun-gunning (tic), her?

    Many fibers were identified, including fibers from Patsy's jacket that were found on the sticky side of the duct tape....that was left in the cellar.

    It was not a pubic hair.

    Stun guns? How many were there? This is news to me, I didn't realize they'd found stun guns.

    Moved grate? Disturbed basement door? Please, refresh my memory?


  10. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to vlpate For This Useful Post:


  11. #201
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    6,996
    Quote Originally Posted by tennison View Post
    Your version of events seem to omit the existence of the points below


    1. Untraced animal hair found on duct tape AND jonbenets hands
    2. Unidentified palmprint on cellar door
    3. Baseball bat Not belonging to ramsays found near house WITH fibres from the basement carpet.
    4. Cotton fibres found On JB,Duct tape AND ligature not sourced to ramsays
    5. Pubic hair not sourced to ramsays found on blanket covering the Jonbenet
    6. Unidentified touch DNA found on Jonbenet

    Now you will notice that it seems a short list, others may have included evidence such as Stun guns, unidentified footprints, moved window grate, disturbed basement door, footprints in cellar, suitcase under the cellar window ect, but i am openminded enough to see these as possibly explainable by other means, i dont necessarily disbelieve these were evidence to "suggest" an intruder, but i believe we must work with the facts that have not been fully explained.

    maybe you could collate a factual list similar to see if your theory holds up as well.
    I doubt it.
    tennison,
    Are you serious? Items on the list have all been explained away before.

    but i believe we must work with the facts that have not been fully explained.
    What facts have not been fully explained? If its a fact then you will know all about it?

    maybe you could collate a factual list similar to see if your theory holds up as well.
    I doubt it.
    Well I don't play games online, sorry!



    .


  12. The Following User Says Thank You to UKGuy For This Useful Post:


  13. #202
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    In the Federal Witness Protection Program
    Posts
    7,990
    Quote Originally Posted by vlpate View Post
    I remember something from a long time ago sourcing the animal hair to the paintbrushes in the artists tray belonging to Patsy. I've tried finding it again and I can't, so maybe it was just an opinion all those years ago.

    The palm print belonged to Melinda Ramsey.

    The baseball bat was outside the house, not inside. Besides, wouldn't it be awkward to hit her with a baseball bat, given the size, while choking and stun-gunning (tic), her?

    Many fibers were identified, including fibers from Patsy's jacket that were found on the sticky side of the duct tape....that was left in the cellar.

    It was not a pubic hair.

    Stun guns? How many were there? This is news to me, I didn't realize they'd found stun guns.

    Moved grate? Disturbed basement door? Please, refresh my memory?
    There were NO stun guns found. There WAS a video manual for a stun gun found in the home which JR admitted purchasing. (the video, not a stun gun). It was never determined why the Rs had a stun gun manual but no stun gun.
    The window grate was NOT found to have been moved. There was an intact, unbroken spider web still spun across it. LE noted this FACT.
    THIS time, we get it RIGHT!

    This post is my constitutionally-protected opinion. Please do not copy or take it anywhere else.


  14. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to DeeDee249 For This Useful Post:


  15. #203
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    In the Federal Witness Protection Program
    Posts
    7,990
    Quote Originally Posted by runsdeep View Post
    with the many dr appointments, that wouldnt be inconsistent with the conditions in her autopsy report.
    Many of JB's doctor visits were for "vaginal irritation". The pediatrician admitted he never used a speculum on JB nor did he do a pelvic exam. Her internal vaginal injuries were not seen until her autopsy.
    It was said by some in Patsy's circle that she used to douche JB because JB soiled her pants with fecal matter, and Patsy felt this also was a cause of her vaginal infections. But that type of fecal contamination usually causes UTIs (urinary tract infections) which can cause fever and require an antibiotic to treat. In JB's case, she was diagnosed with simple vaginitis which is different.
    There is no way to verify that Patsy used a douche on JB. Had the case gone to trial, witnesses may have been called to testify about this and a great many other things, but at this point, there is no way to prove it.
    There is speculation that Patsy used a douche the night of the murder and that was what caused JB to scream and bleed. The blood is a FACT- we just don't know what caused it. The scream, while I believe there was a scream, simply cannot be proven. It would have had to be recorded. However, had there been a trial, the neighbor who reported the scream around midnight may have been called to testify. Her husband heard "metal scraping concrete". There were metal paint cans in the wineceller that may have been moved to place the body.
    And as I have said- this is forum for discussion of a crime- it is ALL speculation because none of us were there (but you never know- the internet is SO anonymous we don't really know who we are, do we?)
    And all participants have the right to speculate on any matter pertinent to the case. JB had vaginal injuries that are unexplained. They could have been caused by douching or sexual abuse. We'll never know.
    THIS time, we get it RIGHT!

    This post is my constitutionally-protected opinion. Please do not copy or take it anywhere else.


  16. The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to DeeDee249 For This Useful Post:


  17. #204
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    europe
    Posts
    36
    Quote Originally Posted by UKGuy View Post
    tennison,
    Are you serious? Items on the list have all been explained away before.


    What facts have not been fully explained? If its a fact then you will know all about it?


    Well I don't play games online, sorry!



    .
    ALL? really? Add link to proof so.


  18. The Following User Says Thank You to tennison For This Useful Post:


  19. #205
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    europe
    Posts
    36
    Quote Originally Posted by vlpate View Post
    I remember something from a long time ago sourcing the animal hair to the paintbrushes in the artists tray belonging to Patsy. I've tried finding it again and I can't, so maybe it was just an opinion all those years ago.

    The palm print belonged to Melinda Ramsey.

    The baseball bat was outside the house, not inside. Besides, wouldn't it be awkward to hit her with a baseball bat, given the size, while choking and stun-gunning (tic), her?

    Many fibers were identified, including fibers from Patsy's jacket that were found on the sticky side of the duct tape....that was left in the cellar.

    It was not a pubic hair.

    PLEASSE add the link to evidence proving palm print was melinda ramsays.
    You presume too much yor opinion on the "akwardness" of hitting jb with bat holds no water.
    Is it possible the duct tape was torn in jb bedroom where it would have picked up patsy's fibres?
    Evidence explaining why pubic hair is not a pubic hair?

    Source of Print Unknown? "In addition, on the wine-cellar door, there is a palmprint that does not match either of defendants' palmprints. (SMF P 156; PSMF P 156.) The individual to whom it belongs had not yet been identified. (SMF P 156; PSMF P 156.)" (Carnes 2003:19-20).
    Stun guns? How many were there? This is news to me, I didn't realize they'd found stun guns.

    Moved grate? Disturbed basement door? Please, refresh my memory?
    youve heard the stories.


  20. The Following User Says Thank You to tennison For This Useful Post:


  21. #206
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    europe
    Posts
    36
    Quote Originally Posted by DeeDee249 View Post
    There were NO stun guns found. There WAS a video manual for a stun gun found in the home which JR admitted purchasing. (the video, not a stun gun). It was never determined why the Rs had a stun gun manual but no stun gun.
    The window grate was NOT found to have been moved. There was an intact, unbroken spider web still spun across it. LE noted this FACT.
    I put stun gunS meaning Stun GUN.
    I did not state ANYWHERE that a stun gun was found, i was alluding to the theory as to the origin of the two burn marks found on jb's face and torso.


  22. The Following User Says Thank You to tennison For This Useful Post:


  23. #207
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    europe
    Posts
    36
    Quote Originally Posted by DeeDee249 View Post
    There were NO stun guns found. There WAS a video manual for a stun gun found in the home which JR admitted purchasing. (the video, not a stun gun). It was never determined why the Rs had a stun gun manual but no stun gun.
    The window grate was NOT found to have been moved. There was an intact, unbroken spider web still spun across it. LE noted this FACT.
    Actually this was a video manual "featuring" an ad for stun guns.
    iT WAS NOT A STUN GUN MANUAL.


  24. The Following User Says Thank You to tennison For This Useful Post:


  25. #208
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    2,268
    Quote Originally Posted by Junebug99 View Post
    I would feel icky typing out that too. Where do people come up with these crazy theories? What makes you think that Patsy was playing gyno with her daughter? Why sit around a speculate such vile ideas, with absolutely no proof? Geez, do unto others............
    It's no more vile than saying BR or JR or Santa were molesting her. There is no proof for that either. Although rare, some mothers DO molest their children.


  26. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to Squishified For This Useful Post:


  27. #209
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,399
    Going back to the title of this thread, I would like to submit for discussion something that has always weighed heavily on my mind concerning the matter of JonBenet and the issue of abuse - a paper written by Dr. Richard Krugman and Dr. Andrew Sirotnak titled "JonBenet's legacy: Protect our children."

    Dr. Andrew Sirotnak was present at JonBenet's autopsy, and according to this paper, believes JonBenet died as a result of child abuse - most likely at the hands of someone she knew, someone who cared for her.


    http://www.cyc-net.org/today2001/today011224.html



    JonBenet's legacy: Protect our children


    Our community has been reminded of her death in many ways over the past years: the lawsuits, the investigations, the supermarket tabloids. We have continued to focus on identifying JonBenet's killer, yet the real dilemma remains. Despite her high-profile death, over the past five years another 6,000 children have died nationally from fatal child abuse, nearly 200 in Colorado, most of them without attendant media attention.


    So what have we really learned over the past five years from the death of this young child?


    Clearly, her death has increased our awareness of child homicides. Just as the death of Matthew Eappen at the hands of his English nanny raised the awareness of Shaken Baby Syndrome, so JonBenet Ramsey's death increased the periodic attention paid to fatal child abuse to new heights.


    But what has this awareness ultimately done to prevent other children from dying?
    For the first time, some of us began to question our belief system about child abuse. With the death of JonBenet Ramsey, America was forced to think about child abuse in a new way. We saw the death of a child in an affluent neighborhood, with wealthy and powerful parents, reinforcing what Dr. C. Henry Kempe of the Kempe Children's Center taught us decades ago: No family, rich or poor, is immune from this problem.

    We were also forced to consider whether our own children were safe from intruders who might kidnap and kill them. Although there are a small number of such kidnappings in the United States every year, the vast majority of fatal abuse is perpetrated by someone known to the child, usually a caregiver, and it is rarely intentional or premeditated."

    *Rest of article at link*

    The drs. allow for the possibility of an intruder, but site it as a secondary possibility behind the probability of death by child abuse...at the hands of someone known to the child, usually a caregiver, and rarely intentional or premeditated.

    Which is exactly, IMO, what happened to JonBenet. She was being abused. There is no question of that, the autopsy itself proves that. She was killed as a result of the abuse she had to endure. But who?

    Who had that kind of access to JonBenet, not just one night, but enough times prior to the night she was killed that her hymen was eroded, as seen at autopsy? Is the ongoing abuse the reason she had regressed in toileting skills? Is it also the reason she felt the need to visit the school nurse three consecutive Mondays in December, leading up to the week she was killed?

    And is that why those school records have never been available in any format, at any source? Is that the same reason why her medical records from the dubious Dr., Beuf are also completely unavailable in any format, at any source?

    What are they hiding?


  28. The Following 6 Users Say Thank You to Nuisanceposter For This Useful Post:


  29. #210
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    6,996
    Quote Originally Posted by Nuisanceposter View Post
    Going back to the title of this thread, I would like to submit for discussion something that has always weighed heavily on my mind concerning the matter of JonBenet and the issue of abuse - a paper written by Dr. Richard Krugman and Dr. Andrew Sirotnak titled "JonBenet's legacy: Protect our children."

    Dr. Andrew Sirotnak was present at JonBenet's autopsy, and according to this paper, believes JonBenet died as a result of child abuse - most likely at the hands of someone she knew, someone who cared for her.


    http://www.cyc-net.org/today2001/today011224.html



    JonBenet's legacy: Protect our children


    Our community has been reminded of her death in many ways over the past years: the lawsuits, the investigations, the supermarket tabloids. We have continued to focus on identifying JonBenet's killer, yet the real dilemma remains. Despite her high-profile death, over the past five years another 6,000 children have died nationally from fatal child abuse, nearly 200 in Colorado, most of them without attendant media attention.


    So what have we really learned over the past five years from the death of this young child?


    Clearly, her death has increased our awareness of child homicides. Just as the death of Matthew Eappen at the hands of his English nanny raised the awareness of Shaken Baby Syndrome, so JonBenet Ramsey's death increased the periodic attention paid to fatal child abuse to new heights.


    But what has this awareness ultimately done to prevent other children from dying?
    For the first time, some of us began to question our belief system about child abuse. With the death of JonBenet Ramsey, America was forced to think about child abuse in a new way. We saw the death of a child in an affluent neighborhood, with wealthy and powerful parents, reinforcing what Dr. C. Henry Kempe of the Kempe Children's Center taught us decades ago: No family, rich or poor, is immune from this problem.

    We were also forced to consider whether our own children were safe from intruders who might kidnap and kill them. Although there are a small number of such kidnappings in the United States every year, the vast majority of fatal abuse is perpetrated by someone known to the child, usually a caregiver, and it is rarely intentional or premeditated."

    *Rest of article at link*

    The drs. allow for the possibility of an intruder, but site it as a secondary possibility behind the probability of death by child abuse...at the hands of someone known to the child, usually a caregiver, and rarely intentional or premeditated.

    Which is exactly, IMO, what happened to JonBenet. She was being abused. There is no question of that, the autopsy itself proves that. She was killed as a result of the abuse she had to endure. But who?

    Who had that kind of access to JonBenet, not just one night, but enough times prior to the night she was killed that her hymen was eroded, as seen at autopsy? Is the ongoing abuse the reason she had regressed in toileting skills? Is it also the reason she felt the need to visit the school nurse three consecutive Mondays in December, leading up to the week she was killed?

    And is that why those school records have never been available in any format, at any source? Is that the same reason why her medical records from the dubious Dr., Beuf are also completely unavailable in any format, at any source?

    What are they hiding?
    Nuisanceposter,
    Its quite likely both sets of records show the same recurring condition. Releasing the information might lend weight to those who think JonBenet's visits to the doctor and nurses were prompted by sexual abuse?

    Since JonBenet was sexually molested the night of her death, we can infer the same person was responsible for some prior events? There are only three options.


    I reckon nearly everyone on the planet can rank the probable suspects e.g. the parents followed by Burke?



    .


  30. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to UKGuy For This Useful Post:


Page 14 of 89 FirstFirst ... 4 12 13 14 15 16 24 64 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Molested with the handle?
    By Paradox in forum JonBenet Ramsey
    Replies: 396
    Last Post: 06-26-2014, 09:42 AM
  2. OK- girls molested at slumber party
    By peeples in forum Crimes-Spotlight on Children
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 04-08-2011, 09:49 AM
  3. 20+ Teens Molested by PA Cop
    By MrsBuckWeaver in forum Crimes in the News
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 10-28-2007, 11:11 PM
  4. Replies: 65
    Last Post: 09-06-2006, 01:55 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •