Does this make sense?

Okay, if JBR was garroted to death, then the paintbrush used to violate her was used before killing her or when she was already dead from the blow to the head.Therefore, this was more of a "necrophilia" case, than a pedophilia case. Therefore, her garroting couldn't have been used in erotic asphyxiation because she wasn't being raped while she was being strangled.
That's why I think she was already dead from the blow to her head and that's how the parents found her. To cover it up, they used the paintbrush to violate her and then made the garrote out of the paintbrush and rope. Or vice-versa: she was strangled already and had a blow to the head. All in all, I think it was a cover-up. And, this is why the Rams were so quick to say it was a pedophile. I guess I just don't buy the EA theory because the paintbrush couldn't be up her vagina and being used to garrote her at the same time and there is no evidence that anything else was inside of her.
Am I making sense??
In other words, how could the paintbrush be used for two different purposes at the same time?
Blue Crab, do you have a theory on this??

Two points:

1 - There is a piece of the paintbrush which was never found. That is what is believed to have been used to sexually abuse JonBenet.
2 - There was signs of bleeding from the sexual abuse. This means she was alive when abused. I believe that all the experts agree on that.

Hope this helps.

Voice of Reason said:

Two points:

1 - There is a piece of the paintbrush which was never found. That is what is believed to have been used to sexually abuse JonBenet.
2 - There was signs of bleeding from the sexual abuse. This means she was alive when abused. I believe that all the experts agree on that.

Hope this helps.

Click to expand...

My understanding is there actually was very little blood, IMO the vaginal injury was inflicted postmortem

Linda7NJ said:

My understanding is there actually was very little blood, IMO the vaginal injury was inflicted postmortem

Click to expand...

Well, I'm no doctor, but I didn't think this was ever in dispute. It may have been more than blood that led to the conclusion that the vaginal injury preceded death.

Here's some excerpts from the autopsy report that I think are relevant, although I couldn't begin to interpret them:

In the inner aspect of the crotch are several red areas of staining measuring up to 0.5 inch in maximum dimension.

On the anterior aspect of the perineum, along the edges of closure of the labia majora, is a small amount of dried blood. A similar small amount of dried and semifluid blood is present on the skin of the fourchette and in the vestibule. Inside the vestibule of the vagina and along the distal vaginal wall is reddish hyperemia. This hyperemia is circumferential and perhaps more noticeable on the right side and posteriorly. The hyperemia also appears to extend just inside the vaginal orifice. A 1 cm red-purple area of abrasion is located on the right posterolateral area of the 1 x 1 cm hymenal orifice.

On the right labia majora is a very faint area of violet discoloration measuring approximately one inch by three-eights of an inch.

Vaginal Mucosa: All of the sections contain vascular congestion and focal interstitial chronic inflammation. The smallest piece of tissue, from the 7:00 position of the vaginal wall/hymen, contains epithelial erosion with underlying capillary congestion. A small number of red blood cells is present on the eroded surface, as is birefringent foreign material.

Click to expand...

IMO the paintbrush handle was employed to sexually assault JonBenet, because this person did NOT want to use their own finger, since this may have meant leaving forensic evidence.

To further influence the manner in which the crime-scene would be viewed afterwards, the same person tied the remainder of the paintbrush to the cord, in such haste as to entwine strands of JonBenet's hair within the knotting.

This is not the profile of a predatory pedophile experienced in the practise of EA, those strands of hair in the knotting would have caused JonBenet pain, not pleasure which I assume is the purpose of EA?

Its probable the person staging this crime-scene saw the ligature and rod to be representative of a classical garroting!

.

Voice of Reason said:

Well, I'm no doctor, but I didn't think this was ever in dispute. It may have been more than blood that led to the conclusion that the vaginal injury preceded death.

Here's some excerpts from the autopsy report that I think are relevant, although I couldn't begin to interpret them:

Click to expand...

The handle wasn't repeatedly inserted. Once perhaps twice at most. I sincerely doubt she was alive at the time. I do not think she was sexually assaulted by anyone that derived pleasure from that act. IMO It was done solely to make it appear she was the victim of a deranged pedophile. I do not believe it was done to cover prior abuse.

The sexual assault, the note and the garrote & wrist tie were all staging and poor ones at that. Too many scenarios going on all at once to be believable...

I am going to find you a chart and some definitions to help you better understand the autopsy findings. I am not that great trying to explain it by myself...

Ok, this is gonna take longer than I thought, I can't find exactly what I am looking for online. I have a textbook here with the diagram I want, I just have to find it & scan it. I'll do it tomorrow.

Linda7NJ is looking that up you may want to check out this link about Jonbenets vaginal abuse. If you don't want to read the whole thing you can scroll down to "Experts Opinions of Prior Abuse Was Present."

Thanks again to Sundance Kids site.

http://hellpainter.tripod.com/jbr/ex_abuse.htm

trixie said:

Linda7NJ is looking that up you may want to check out this link about Jonbenets vaginal abuse. If you don't want to read the whole thing you can scroll down to "Experts Opinions of Prior Abuse Was Present."

Thanks again to Sundance Kids site.

http://hellpainter.tripod.com/jbr/ex_abuse.htm

Click to expand...

From the website:

PR: And I would like to see where it says that and who reported that.

TH: Okay.

PR: Do you have that?

TH: Well, I don't have it with us, no. As you can imagine, there is a lot of material, and we surely didn't bring all the photos, but .....

PR: Well, can you find that

-----------------------------------------------------------

Here's PR apparently putting TH (whoever that is) on the spot, and TH's interview taking a big major flop at the "Well, I dont have it with us, no".

Why would this interviewer bother to even bring up a subject without anything to back it up at all?

Don't put too much stock in the fact that interrogators ask a Ramsey about evidence, the Ramseys refuse to answer until they see the evidence, and the interrogator moves on. In a criminal investigation, LE has no obligation to show the evidence to the suspect. I'm not saying that they had this evidence, but just because they refuse to produce it is no indication that they don't. It would be poor police work to give all the evidence against a suspect to the suspect.

ellen13 said:

In other words, how could the paintbrush be used for two different purposes at the same time?

Blue Crab, do you have a theory on this??

Click to expand...

ellen13,

Yes, I do have a theory on the use of the paintbrush handle and the cords tied to it. However, it's sort of on the extreme side of possible theories on how the paintbrush handle may have been employed. But here goes:

The missing tip (one or two inches long) of the paintbrush handle could have been whittled into the shape of the head of a penis. During the post-murder staging, the goal appears to have been to hide and eliminate all sexual aspects of the crime (the wiping down of the body, the changing of the panties, etc) to direct suspicion away from house members. Therefore, the obscene carving on the end of the stick had to be removed, and was, presumably by whittling it off. The shards of it would be the shards found on the basement floor near the wine cellar door.

I believe JonBenet could have been strung up into an obscene sexual position and displayed by the perp using the nylon cords to help keep her in place. If you measure the distance between the ligature around JonBenet's neck to her crotch it is about 17 inches. The tail end of the ligature cord with the stick tied onto it also measures 17 inches. In this theory the perp posed JonBenet in a semi-fetal position with the stick in the vagina and the cord taut between the ligature around the neck and the stick in the vagina.

Also, it is likely the ligature around JonBenet's wrists and the ligature around her neck was one continuous length of cord, thus allowing her to be propped up and posed. When John found her (probably some time around 3 or 4 AM) he cut her down creating two separate lengths of cord (one around the wrists and one around the neck). This is why there is a frayed end on each of the two cords.

BlueCrab

This gives me a lot more info on the paintbrush and what
they found post-mortem. I appreciate you responding to
a newbie like me. Perhaps you all have debated this before,
but had the patience for me.

wasn't a silver of paint brush found inside of JonBenet's vagina?

Voice of Reason said:

Two points:

1 - There is a piece of the paintbrush which was never found. That is what is believed to have been used to sexually abuse JonBenet.

Click to expand...

Why was John up looking for JonBenet at 3 or 4 a.m.? Was he asleep prior to then? If so, who tipped him off that there was need for him to be awake and cutting down his daughter, and if not, why not?

Linda7NJ said:

The sexual assault, the note and the garrote & wrist tie were all staging and poor ones at that. Too many scenarios going on all at once to be believable...

Click to expand...

Exactly: there's too many scenarios, which should raise a thousand red flags.
Often people trying to stage a murder scene make the mistake of staging too much.

trixie said:

Linda7NJ is looking that up you may want to check out this link about Jonbenets vaginal abuse. If you don't want to read the whole thing you can scroll down to "Experts Opinions of Prior Abuse Was Present."

Thanks again to Sundance Kids site.

http://hellpainter.tripod.com/jbr/ex_abuse.htm

Click to expand...

Thanks for posting that link, trixie. It seems that of all the doctors, Dr. McGann is the medical expert in child abuse cases, a world-wide renowned specialist.
And he concluded that the forensic evidence indicates chronic sexual abuse.

I am unable to locate the book I need....I will keep looking and post as soon as I find it.

rashomon said:

Thanks for posting that link, trixie. It seems that of all the doctors, Dr. McGann is the medical expert in child abuse cases, a world-wide renowned specialist.
And he concluded that the forensic evidence indicates chronic sexual abuse.

Click to expand...

McCann? My understanding is he stated that the injury to Jon Benet's hymen occurred after she died.

Holdontoyourhat said:

From the website:

PR: And I would like to see where it says that and who reported that.

TH: Okay.

PR: Do you have that?

TH: Well, I don't have it with us, no. As you can imagine, there is a lot of material, and we surely didn't bring all the photos, but .....

PR: Well, can you find that

-----------------------------------------------------------

Here's PR apparently putting TH (whoever that is) on the spot, and TH's interview taking a big major flop at the "Well, I dont have it with us, no".

Why would this interviewer bother to even bring up a subject without anything to back it up at all?

Click to expand...

Perhaps the interviewers expected that Patsy would offer a reasonable/innocent explanation for whatever they were talking about here and that it wold clear up something that was puzzling them.

Her non-response just means that they are remain puzzled.

Linda7NJ said:

McCann? My understanding is he stated that the injury to Jon Benet's hymen occurred after she died.

Click to expand...

According to the source given in the link trixie posted, this was Dr. Krugmann who stated this, not Dr. McCann.