1571 users online (334 members and 1237 guests)  


The Killing Season - Websleuths

Websleuths News


Page 1 of 7 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 102
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    2,533

    Sexual assault

    I see a lot of people here talking about how Karr couldn't be her because he said he had sex with her and there are no signs that she was raped.

    Well....trying not to be graphic.....but sexually assualted can mean many many different things.

    Just because there was little evidence of traditional insertive sex doesn't mean that she wasn't sexually assaulted. I mean if some guy grabs a little school girl walking home from school and fondles her, was she not sexually assaulted?

    Let's be cautious here kicking around innuendo and assumptions about the facts as being told by anonymous posters and overhyped media types. Let's wait for the facts to come out. I am going to reassert my position that the DA's office would NOT have let this circus go on if they didn't have something concrete.

    Cal

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    4,983

    Smoking Gun Link

    Point Taken...

    In reference to 'what the DA knows that we are unaware of...', your post brought up a question for me...

    The link to the Smoking Gun on a thread here listed various pages of warrants including findings at JBR's crime scene. It mentioned a black light used to see if semen was present on JBR's body. The recorder of the information stated that what was present when viewing it with a black light was consistant with finding semen present, but when the same area was swabbed, no semen was found.

    Was this inconsistancy in crime scene tests ever explained? Were there speculations made as to why the black light showed the presence of what is concistant with that of semen yet the swab test did not??? Is the black light test speculative and the swab test definitive...and human error was to blame?
    Do any threads here discuss this?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Melbourne Australia
    Posts
    4,175
    Quote Originally Posted by angelwngs
    Point Taken...

    In reference to 'what the DA knows that we are unaware of...', your post brought up a question for me...

    The link to the Smoking Gun on a thread here listed various pages of warrants including findings at JBR's crime scene. It mentioned a black light used to see if semen was present on JBR's body. The recorder of the information stated that what was present when viewing it with a black light was consistant with finding semen present present but when the same area was swabbed, no semen was found.

    Was this inconsistancy in crime scene tests ever explained? Were there speculations made as to why the black light showed the presence of what is concistant with that of semen yet the swab test did not??? Is the black light test speculative and the swab test definitive...and human error was to blame?
    Do any threads here discuss this?
    i remember reading this also but can shed no light on it for you.

  4. #4
    I doubt an intruder would go through the trouble of breaking in and not rape her. Unless she died before it got that far.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Melbourne Australia
    Posts
    4,175
    Quote Originally Posted by InnocentBystander
    I doubt an intruder would go through the trouble of breaking in and not rape her. Unless she died before it got that far.
    A penis is not needed to rape someone. There are always other items one can use e.g. paint brush handle. I think who ever assualted JBR was possibly a 'non performer'.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    2,533

    Hold it.....could this be it?

    Kazzbar on another post about sexual assault posted this but it was so important, I thought it needed its own post. About the sexual assault, we were talking about what constituted it. Kazz wrote this:

    "A penis is not needed to rape someone. There are always other items one can use e.g. paint brush handle. I think who ever assualted JBR was possibly a 'non performer".


    I don't think I have ever seen this theory:

    Karr is clearly two balls worth short of manhood. He looks like a woman and is confused sexually. He watches the Polly Klass murder trial and either feeds or incubates his desire for little girls and their murders. He somehow becomes fixated on JBR....perhaps through his on-line porn searches he hits childs beauty pagents. He sees JBR and becomes fascinated with her and decides she will be his victim. After months of plotting and planning, he sees his chance. He breaks in or gets in, one way or the other, takes JBR to the basement and....whadda you know, he can't perform. Because of stress, gender confusion, or whatever he can't do the deed. He becomes so enraged that he grabs the nearby materials and visciously chokes her to death/near death and is still mad. He takes the flashlight and bashes her over the head in a rage.

    I think I am onto something. The autopsy is clear that it was death by stangulation followed closely by or completed by being hit by an object (the flashlight was an exact match for the cracks in the skull). While I could see that someone in the family could bash the skull in in a fit of rage, I don't see that they could do all that to JBR.

    One of the hardest things to explain if you believed the IDI theories were the nurturing pieces of the evidence found with JBR. Her favorite nightgown, etc. being placed nearby....almost reeked of a guilt ridden parent trying to console their child in death. But it could also be someone who believed they deeply cared for JBR...as in "we were in love" and "I loved JBR".

    I think this kook fits just perfectly.

    Cal

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Oriental, North Carolina
    Posts
    939
    Yep, I've thought this scenario through before myself, but I still find it hard to believe this guy did it. Guess the "evidence" or lack thereof will tell the tale.
    Simplicity...patience...compassion

  8. #8
    A non-performer is a person who is so enraged by it, he simply is on the prowl to kill women. He blames all his sexual problems on women.

    Jack the Ripper is the perfect example in my opinion.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Melbourne Australia
    Posts
    4,175
    Quote Originally Posted by InnocentBystander
    A non-performer is a person who is so enraged by it, he simply is on the prowl to kill women. He blames all his sexual problems on women.

    Jack the Ripper is the perfect example in my opinion.
    Whoever killed JBR was performing , just not with his penis. How do we know Jack the Ripper was a non-performer?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    6,569
    Quote Originally Posted by calus_3
    Kazzbar on another post about sexual assault posted this but it was so important, I thought it needed its own post. About the sexual assault, we were talking about what constituted it. Kazz wrote this:

    "A penis is not needed to rape someone. There are always other items one can use e.g. paint brush handle. I think who ever assualted JBR was possibly a 'non performer".


    I don't think I have ever seen this theory:

    Karr is clearly two balls worth short of manhood. He looks like a woman and is confused sexually. He watches the Polly Klass murder trial and either feeds or incubates his desire for little girls and their murders. He somehow becomes fixated on JBR....perhaps through his on-line porn searches he hits childs beauty pagents. He sees JBR and becomes fascinated with her and decides she will be his victim. After months of plotting and planning, he sees his chance. He breaks in or gets in, one way or the other, takes JBR to the basement and....whadda you know, he can't perform. Because of stress, gender confusion, or whatever he can't do the deed. He becomes so enraged that he grabs the nearby materials and visciously chokes her to death/near death and is still mad. He takes the flashlight and bashes her over the head in a rage.

    I think I am onto something. The autopsy is clear that it was death by stangulation followed closely by or completed by being hit by an object (the flashlight was an exact match for the cracks in the skull). While I could see that someone in the family could bash the skull in in a fit of rage, I don't see that they could do all that to JBR.

    One of the hardest things to explain if you believed the IDI theories were the nurturing pieces of the evidence found with JBR. Her favorite nightgown, etc. being placed nearby....almost reeked of a guilt ridden parent trying to console their child in death. But it could also be someone who believed they deeply cared for JBR...as in "we were in love" and "I loved JBR".

    I think this kook fits just perfectly.

    Cal
    -----------

    I have heard of this type of rape.


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Corpus Christi, TX
    Posts
    743
    Quote Originally Posted by calus_3
    I see a lot of people here talking about how Karr couldn't be her because he said he had sex with her and there are no signs that she was raped.

    Well....trying not to be graphic.....but sexually assualted can mean many many different things.

    Just because there was little evidence of traditional insertive sex doesn't mean that she wasn't sexually assaulted. I mean if some guy grabs a little school girl walking home from school and fondles her, was she not sexually assaulted?

    Let's be cautious here kicking around innuendo and assumptions about the facts as being told by anonymous posters and overhyped media types. Let's wait for the facts to come out. I am going to reassert my position that the DA's office would NOT have let this circus go on if they didn't have something concrete.

    Cal
    I agree with this completely Cal. First, that sexually assualted can mean many different things. Second, that I can't imagine that the DA's office would let this get so blown out of proportion if they didn't have something concrete.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    2,397
    Your theory doesn't explain how the writer of the ransom note knew that JR had received a bonus of $118,000. In order to link your theory with the facts, Karr would have had to have made contact with someone close enough to the Ramseys to know this information.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2004
    Posts
    4,983
    Quote Originally Posted by angelwngs
    ..

    In reference to 'what the DA knows that we are unaware of...', your post brought up a question for me...

    The link to the Smoking Gun on a thread here listed various pages of warrants including findings at JBR's crime scene. It mentioned a black light used to see if semen was present on JBR's body. The recorder of the information stated that what was present when viewing it with a black light was consistant with finding semen present, but when the same area was swabbed, no semen was found.

    Was this inconsistancy in crime scene tests ever explained? Were there speculations made as to why the black light showed the presence of what is concistant with that of semen yet the swab test did not??? Is the black light test speculative and the swab test definitive...and human error was to blame?
    Do any threads here discuss this?
    ~~~At the risk of appearing narcissistic, I am quoting myself above... My actual question is, "Could 'he' have been performing, sexually in addition to the proof of sexual activity using an instrument consistant with the paintbrush? (We know there were slivers of brown material inside her consistant with the paint brush.) Could the black light have shown only trace evidence of semen contacting JBR's thighs, and swab evidence having been virtually destroyed when she was 'cleaned up' in that area? We know that the evidence shows she was 'wiped down'. ????

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    579
    Quote Originally Posted by calus_3
    Kazzbar on another post about sexual assault posted this but it was so important, I thought it needed its own post. About the sexual assault, we were talking about what constituted it. Kazz wrote this:

    "A penis is not needed to rape someone. There are always other items one can use e.g. paint brush handle. I think who ever assualted JBR was possibly a 'non performer".


    I don't think I have ever seen this theory:

    Karr is clearly two balls worth short of manhood. He looks like a woman and is confused sexually. He watches the Polly Klass murder trial and either feeds or incubates his desire for little girls and their murders. He somehow becomes fixated on JBR....perhaps through his on-line porn searches he hits childs beauty pagents. He sees JBR and becomes fascinated with her and decides she will be his victim. After months of plotting and planning, he sees his chance. He breaks in or gets in, one way or the other, takes JBR to the basement and....whadda you know, he can't perform. Because of stress, gender confusion, or whatever he can't do the deed. He becomes so enraged that he grabs the nearby materials and visciously chokes her to death/near death and is still mad. He takes the flashlight and bashes her over the head in a rage.

    I think I am onto something. The autopsy is clear that it was death by stangulation followed closely by or completed by being hit by an object (the flashlight was an exact match for the cracks in the skull). While I could see that someone in the family could bash the skull in in a fit of rage, I don't see that they could do all that to JBR.

    One of the hardest things to explain if you believed the IDI theories were the nurturing pieces of the evidence found with JBR. Her favorite nightgown, etc. being placed nearby....almost reeked of a guilt ridden parent trying to console their child in death. But it could also be someone who believed they deeply cared for JBR...as in "we were in love" and "I loved JBR".

    I think this kook fits just perfectly.

    Cal
    Before you get carried away, read K777Angels post "The Big Question" and give reasonable explainations to all the qeustions.

    Also explain why he would choose to kidnap her on Christmas eve instead of just snatching her from or on the way to school.

    Why he found it necessary to whipe the flashlight AND batteries even though he was wearing gloves, or if he were not wearing gloves manages to avoid leaving a single fingerprint.

    Why he found it necessary to latch the winecellar door.

    How he was able to give birth four times if he was an underperformer.

    And finally what catch did he have on the R's to make them start hiering lawers to keep them from being arrested instead of looking for him.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    2,533
    That or he was in the house long enough to find it....perhaps John had it sitting on his desk waiting to take it to the bank or maybe the killer found the stub.

    Just as that tends to exclude an intruder, I don't think the Ramseys (on their best day) could envision the layers of deflection putting in the actual dollar amount of John's bonus. Even in my best attempt at deception...if it was a harrowing night at the Ramseys.....could I figure out how putting that in the ransom note would implicate someone else. Just like you said, it almost implicates them.

    I think whoever did it...if it wasn't a ramsey....was in that house for a LONG time before the Ramseys got home. I don't think that he wrote it during the actual kidnapping/murder.

    Cal

Page 1 of 7 1 2 3 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. PA - Daycare Sexual Assault
    By Filly in forum Crimes-Spotlight on Children
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 12-30-2015, 09:22 PM
  2. Sexual behavior - Merged and Closed
    By santos1014 in forum JonBenet Ramsey
    Replies: 265
    Last Post: 01-03-2007, 11:32 AM