Sexual behavior - Merged and Closed

Status
Not open for further replies.

santos1014

Nana to Madelynn and Ethan
Joined
Oct 25, 2006
Messages
372
Reaction score
5
Website
profile.myspace.com
I recently read that one of the signs of sexual abuse in a child is the child acting out sexually. Besides the way she acted in the pagents, had there ever been sexually behavior exihibited by JB in any way?
I hope this makes sense, I can't put my words together with my thoughts today.
 
I have never heard or read of any sort of sexual behavior being displayed other than in the pageants, and as far as the pageants go, there are many people--well, many women (mothers) in the pageant world that would argue til they turned blue that it's not sexual.....but we all know the truth. These little girls are displayed and dolled up in pageants to feed the insecurities and inadequacies of their moms. IMO, of course, and anyone with a level head.
 
Child's Behavior:

Appears withdrawn or engaged in fantasy or infantile behavior; Begins wetting or soiling the bed; Has poor peer relationships; Is unwilling to participate in physical activities; Is engaging in delinquent acts; Reports sexual abuse; Engages in inappropriate sexualized behavior; Devalues sexual acts and acts sexually permissive; Fears a certain person or certain places; Gives an unusual or unexpected response when asked if he or she was touched by someone; Has an unreasonable fear of a physical exam; Creates drawings that show sexual acts or that seem overly focused on sexual body parts; More knowledge about sex than is normal for the child's age; Pain, bruising, or bleeding in the genitals; Seems preoccupied with or overly concerned about sexual acts and words; Runs away.2,


I am not sure if she ever exhibited any of the other signs.
 
santos1014 said:
Child's Behavior:

Appears withdrawn or engaged in fantasy or infantile behavior; Begins wetting or soiling the bed; Has poor peer relationships; Is unwilling to participate in physical activities; Is engaging in delinquent acts; Reports sexual abuse; Engages in inappropriate sexualized behavior; Devalues sexual acts and acts sexually permissive; Fears a certain person or certain places; Gives an unusual or unexpected response when asked if he or she was touched by someone; Has an unreasonable fear of a physical exam; Creates drawings that show sexual acts or that seem overly focused on sexual body parts; More knowledge about sex than is normal for the child's age; Pain, bruising, or bleeding in the genitals; Seems preoccupied with or overly concerned about sexual acts and words; Runs away.2,


I am not sure if she ever exhibited any of the other signs.
So much of this is pretty unknown. She definitely exhibited signs that were of concern. IE Barbara Fernies along with other friends wishing to speak to Patsy about the MEGA JonBenet thing when they returned from the Disney Cruise. She of course had recognizable enough signs that the Sexual Abuse team was brought in immediately upon not only the autopsy but the discovery of things in the home that signaled alert. Refer to the Julie Hayden interview with the sexual abuse officer. Soiled underware being in her drawers Link has been provided to this forum several times however if you need it let me know. I'll refurnish. I have never from anyone in Boulder heard them express that JonBenet was fearful of any particular set of people or friends. Only that she was showing some signs of rebellion and she had the rather unusual habit of asking anyone to wipe or change her after her accidents and soiling herself. She also made comment that she didn't feel pretty anymore. Than is also a well known sign. They wish not to be found attractive that is where the soiling and wetting of themselves comes in its a way to appear less appealing and attractive according to experts in this field. We know that there was apparent sexual abuse. What we don't know is who or how long.
 
coloradokares said:
So much of this is pretty unknown. She definitely exhibited signs that were of concern. IE Barbara Fernies along with other friends wishing to speak to Patsy about the MEGA JonBenet thing when they returned from the Disney Cruise. She of course had recognizable enough signs that the Sexual Abuse team was brought in immediately upon not only the autopsy but the discovery of things in the home that signaled alert. Refer to the Julie Hayden interview with the sexual abuse officer. Soiled underware being in her drawers Link has been provided to this forum several times however if you need it let me know. I'll refurnish. I have never from anyone in Boulder heard them express that JonBenet was fearful of any particular set of people or friends. Only that she was showing some signs of rebellion and she had the rather unusual habit of asking anyone to wipe or change her after her accidents and soiling herself. She also made comment that she didn't feel pretty anymore. Than is also a well known sign. They wish not to be found attractive that is where the soiling and wetting of themselves comes in its a way to appear less appealing and attractive according to experts in this field. We know that there was apparent sexual abuse. What we don't know is who or how long.

Please if you can, post the link (s) regarding this, if it is not too much trouble. I am catching up on all of this information. Until recently I only had info from news and magazine articles over the years. Thank you very much.
 
There was this dream JonBenet related to Arriane Pugh in which she had a baby and lived with her mom in a castle with a big wall around it. Interesting that there was no mention of her father living in the castle.

Reports sexual abuse;
One would expect this to be the case, but it doesn't always happen. Let me put it this way. Suppose JonBenet was being sexually abused by her father. Maybe he was having her perform sex acts on him. She tells her teacher, and John is taken away and put in prison. Everything's all hunky-dory now, right? Well, remember that Patsy had been extremely ill from her cancer. What if she then died? Then JonBenet wouldn't have any parents. She may have had to present the image that everything was okay.


-Tea
 
Supposedly LHP caught Burke and JonBenet playing doctor one time.
 
coloradokares said:
She of course had recognizable enough signs that the Sexual Abuse team was brought in immediately upon not only the autopsy but the discovery of things in the home that signaled alert.
Are the discovery of "things" in the home that signaled alert, are you referring to the soiled underpants in the drawers? Is that the only thing? Because that, although it COULD be a sign of sexual abuse, it can also be simply a girl who soiled her underpants and was embarrassed about it, so she simply "hid" them.

Nuisanceposter--the act of "playing doctor" is a completely normal part of childhood--and the fact that her and Burke were caught doing this once isn't indicative of a problem. It's natural curiosity, and I think that we, as adults, tend to make it "bad". Now, it does become a problem if it is something done continuously, or even many times, but if, in all those years they were only caught once, I would chalk it up to natural childhood curiousity.
 
icedtea4me said:
There was this dream JonBenet related to Arriane Pugh in which she had a baby and lived with her mom in a castle with a big wall around it. Interesting that there was no mention of her father living in the castle.
I don't think anything can or even should be inferred due to a dream that JonBenet had where she lived with her mom, and made no mention of her dad living with them. I mean, should that dream somehow be interpreted to mean that she was being sexually abused by her dad? I think that is really reaching, whether you (generally you, not you personally) are an IDI or RDI. I mean, my son had a dream last night that a UFO landed on the freeway, and an alien came out, and the alien and police got in a fight, and my son went to shoot the alien but accidentally shot the cop. Does that mean my son is a gun happy cop killer? Of course I am being facetious, but seriously, dreams are kooky things, and while I think that sometimes you can read something into them, I think for the most part they are just kooky things. I think if someone has a dream where someone important in their life is absent in that dream, it doesn't necessarily mean squat. It's a dream.
 
julianne said:
the act of "playing doctor" is a completely normal part of childhood--and the fact that her and Burke were caught doing this once isn't indicative of a problem. It's natural curiosity, and I think that we, as adults, tend to make it "bad". Now, it does become a problem if it is something done continuously, or even many times, but if, in all those years they were only caught once, I would chalk it up to natural childhood curiousity.
I agree, julianne. It was most likely a case of "I'll show mine if you show me yours".


-Tea
 
julianne said:
Are the discovery of "things" in the home that signaled alert, are you referring to the soiled underpants in the drawers? Is that the only thing? Because that, although it COULD be a sign of sexual abuse, it can also be simply a girl who soiled her underpants and was embarrassed about it, so she simply "hid" them.

Nuisanceposter--the act of "playing doctor" is a completely normal part of childhood--and the fact that her and Burke were caught doing this once isn't indicative of a problem. It's natural curiosity, and I think that we, as adults, tend to make it "bad". Now, it does become a problem if it is something done continuously, or even many times, but if, in all those years they were only caught once, I would chalk it up to natural childhood curiousity.
Those underwear weren't "hidden", they were in her drawer. LHP also said that Patsy had had to soak JB's undies.

I don't think playing doctor between siblings or even playmates is anything other than normal and natural curiosity, either. I didn't mention it to imply that it was a sign of sexual abuse - I just meant it's a sign of sexual behavior. I'm sure all kids do it - it's part of discovering the other sex as well as your own. I didn't meant to imply it was a bad thing at all.
 
julianne said:
Are the discovery of "things" in the home that signaled alert, are you referring to the soiled underpants in the drawers? Is that the only thing? Because that, although it COULD be a sign of sexual abuse, it can also be simply a girl who soiled her underpants and was embarrassed about it, so she simply "hid" them.

Nuisanceposter--the act of "playing doctor" is a completely normal part of childhood--and the fact that her and Burke were caught doing this once isn't indicative of a problem. It's natural curiosity, and I think that we, as adults, tend to make it "bad". Now, it does become a problem if it is something done continuously, or even many times, but if, in all those years they were only caught once, I would chalk it up to natural childhood curiousity.
That amongst other things, but that is certainly part of it. You must remember that JonBenet was 6 years old, most children are not accepted into school exhibiting need poor toileting habits. It is not something that a child of her age shouldn't have well under control. She was not 3 but 6. It could be a sign of a little tirl who soiled her underpants who hid them. Two things are inconsistent in that ideology, one her shame in it. She openly had anyone available to wipe and change her all the time. That was noted and of concern. So that rather negates her hiding this problem. However the sheer number of soiled undies in the drawer was a flag that went up. This was not a minor problem that JonBenet was experiencing. She'd been seen at the doctors for problems along these lines creating irritations and yeast infections etc. There was the reported sessions of verbalization at loud volumes between her and Patsy in the bathroom etc. It is a MAJOR flag of sexual abuse. To suggest otherwise is simply negligent in acknowledging the warning signs or not wishing to look at the possibility that JonBenet was being sexually abused. Also the vaginal opening being twice that of normal and other things indicate prior and acute sexual abuse. It is true her doctor had not noted sexual abuse. Dr. Beuf. However he notes as well he'd not done internal vaginal exam on her.

As to playing doctor some of that is normal I suppose in I'll show you mine if I can see yours. As long as that normal curiosity was not a continuous problem and certainly it was not reported as a problem. However any activity that would enlarge the vaginal opening is not normal playing doctor but sexual abuse and incest. Which at Burkes younger age I would hesitate to point suspicion in that direction if unwarranted and undocumented. I think its reasonable to be concerned regarding sexual abuse and was JonBenet being sexually abused however I think there could be other explanations for this beside Burke.
 
"Also the vaginal opening being twice that of normal and other things indicate prior and acute sexual abuse."

I read the autopsy report, and I don't recall that there was anything like this mentioned. Please elaborate. Where was this info reported? Thanks much.
 
LionRun said:
Please if you can, post the link (s) regarding this, if it is not too much trouble. I am catching up on all of this information. Until recently I only had info from news and magazine articles over the years. Thank you very much.
http://www.myfoxcolorado.com/myfox/pages/News/Detail?contentId=1475842&version=2&locale=EN-US&layoutCode=TSTY&pageId=3.2.1

This is the link to the interview with Julie Hayden. She was interviewing Holly Smith the one that was called in to investigate the scene for signs of sexual abuse as she is a sexual abuse officer.
 
LionRun said:
"Also the vaginal opening being twice that of normal and other things indicate prior and acute sexual abuse."

I read the autopsy report, and I don't recall that there was anything like this mentioned. Please elaborate. Where was this info reported? Thanks much.
That would be in the detailed report. Also it is common knowledge along with the hymenal penetration reports etc. I believe you can get that information at acandyrose.com It does not say sexual abuse so that is not what you need to look for. Just look where it describes the size and all that. I wont be home till midday tomorrow. so if anyone else here could help LionRun in the meantime. I am so sorry. I hate like the dickens to inform then cut and run. Its just I have obligations that are taking me out till then. Sorry:doh:
 
coloradokares said:
That amongst other things, but that is certainly part of it. You must remember that JonBenet was 6 years old, most children are not accepted into school exhibiting need poor toileting habits. It is not something that a child of her age shouldn't have well under control. She was not 3 but 6. It could be a sign of a little tirl who soiled her underpants who hid them. Two things are inconsistent in that ideology, one her shame in it. She openly had anyone available to wipe and change her all the time. That was noted and of concern. So that rather negates her hiding this problem. However the sheer number of soiled undies in the drawer was a flag that went up. This was not a minor problem that JonBenet was experiencing. She'd been seen at the doctors for problems along these lines creating irritations and yeast infections etc. There was the reported sessions of verbalization at loud volumes between her and Patsy in the bathroom etc. It is a MAJOR flag of sexual abuse. To suggest otherwise is simply negligent in acknowledging the warning signs or not wishing to look at the possibility that JonBenet was being sexually abused. Also the vaginal opening being twice that of normal and other things indicate prior and acute sexual abuse. It is true her doctor had not noted sexual abuse. Dr. Beuf. However he notes as well he'd not done internal vaginal exam on her.

As to playing doctor some of that is normal I suppose in I'll show you mine if I can see yours. As long as that normal curiosity was not a continuous problem and certainly it was not reported as a problem. However any activity that would enlarge the vaginal opening is not normal playing doctor but sexual abuse and incest. Which at Burkes younger age I would hesitate to point suspicion in that direction if unwarranted and undocumented. I think its reasonable to be concerned regarding sexual abuse and was JonBenet being sexually abused however I think there could be other explanations for this beside Burke.
Well, not that it's of monumental importance, but you're wrong regarding the part about children not being accepted into school if they have toileting issues. The public school system HAS to accept every child within their boundaries. Asking about possible toileting issues prior to starting school doesn't happen. However, if her "issues" in regards to toileting were indeed that major, why haven't we ever heard anything from the school or teachers? If it was a major issue, the teacher would know, the school administrators would know, and her fellow students most certainly would know.

"She openly had anyone available to wipe and change her all the time"----can you provide a link that states that JonBenet had whoever happended to be around wipfe and change her, and that it happened with such frequency that it could be termed "all the time????" I've never heard that. I've heard that she asked LHP before, but she was someone who had a relationship with JonBenet, was in the home daily. So, who are all these other people she asked to wipe and change her, all of the time???? You state that was "noted and of concern"----WHO noted it, and WHO expressed concern???Links, please.

Also, you say "the sheer numbers of soiled undies in the drawer" was a flag that went up. By using the term "the sheer numbers", it leads one to believe that there were many many many pairs. How many???? Where are you getting this information? Please provide me with a link....

Not saying what you are saying is wrong---it's just that so many things that are rumor have been turned into fact in this case just by a simple forum posting. Things get so twisted that sometimes the end result is the farthest thing from the truth, so when I read claims that I am not familiar with, I always like them backed up with a factual link. Sometimes those "factual links" have been links to other forum postings, LOL, which as you know, doesn't make it a "factual" link...
 
julianne said:
Not saying what you are saying is wrong---it's just that so many things that are rumor have been turned into fact in this case just by a simple forum posting. Things get so twisted that sometimes the end result is the farthest thing from the truth, so when I read claims that I am not familiar with, I always like them backed up with a factual link. Sometimes those "factual links" have been links to other forum postings, LOL, which as you know, doesn't make it a "factual" link...
Yes Julianne. I am interested in facts also, not what is seen as fact that actually came from accepted rumors based on some, incomplete, partial or no truths at all. I am interested in the actual links, and then still I must sift through them to make up my mind as to whether or not it is accurate. In any case, especially one this complicated facts can be blurred, omitted, and stretched. And, "facts" sometimes turnout not to be facts at all. I think most people want the truth. But our perceptions, beliefs, thoughts, and imaginations can get in the way of seeing the true picture in many situations--this case included.
 
Remember that we also don't know why JB saw the school nurse 2x in the month of Dec.,and both times on a Monday(per ST in 'JonBenet').It seems he was trying to tell the reader there was something more going on.
We also don't know why PR called Dr Beuf 3x in one day,that Dec. as well(I think it was the 17th?).
As well as,why did he hide her records,if there wasn't anything damaging in them????
I think I recall that PR picked up JB up from school (early?) on one of the same days she saw the nurse,and that also occured on one of the same days that she had visited the hardware store,or called Dr Beuf (I need to look that up to be sure tho).
Just a few thoughts here.
 
JMO8778 said:
Remember that we also don't know why JB saw the school nurse 2x in the month of Dec.,and both times on a Monday(per ST in 'JonBenet').It seems he was trying to tell the reader there was something more going on.
We also don't know why PR called Dr Beuf 3x in one day,that Dec. as well(I think it was the 17th?).
As well as,why did he hide her records,if there wasn't anything damaging in them????
I think I recall that PR picked up JB up from school (early?) on one of the same days she saw the nurse,and that also occured on one of the same days that she had visited the hardware store,or called Dr Beuf (I need to look that up to be sure tho).
Just a few thoughts here.
In what WAY was he trying to tell the reader there was something more going on?? What makes you state that?? Can you give me a particular sentence or snippet from that part of the book that leads you to believe that?

We may not know WHY JonBenet saw the school nurse, but if anything, I think it's safe to say that the school nurse DID NOT suspect sexual or physical abuse in any way. Why do I say that? Because the school nurse is LEGALLY BOUND to report any SUSPECTED cases of child abuse---and if she had reported anything, this most likely would've been out in the open by now.

As far as Patsy calling the doctor 3x in one day---I have done that myself when I had a sick child and my first two calls weren't returned, I called again for a third time. Doesn't have to mean anything sinister.

As far as the doctor "hiding" her records...Did he really HIDE them? And, if so, WHO did he hide them from? Are you saying that the records were subpoenaed and he refused to abide by the subpoena and refused to give the records to LE or the DA????? Or, did he simply refuse to give out her medical records to those who were interested in the case, such as writers, journalists, tabloid folks, etc? If he didn't turn them over to regular folks like that who just wanted info for themselves, then he was in the right to keep her personal medical records a private matter. Because the only way I could concur that he intentionally HID them was if he refused to turn them over if he was subpoenaed, and I don't think I've read that he was. I could be wrong, though. Do you have a reliable link?

I guess what I am saying is that I find it highly doubtful that the school nurse and her personal doctor would be willing to put their professional careers, licensure, reputation and even freedom on the line to hide a suspected sexual abuse. Therefore, I can only think that it was never suspected to begin with.
 
julianne said:
Well, not that it's of monumental importance, but you're wrong regarding the part about children not being accepted into school if they have toileting issues. The public school system HAS to accept every child within their boundaries. Asking about possible toileting issues prior to starting school doesn't happen. However, if her "issues" in regards to toileting were indeed that major, why haven't we ever heard anything from the school or teachers? If it was a major issue, the teacher would know, the school administrators would know, and her fellow students most certainly would know.

"She openly had anyone available to wipe and change her all the time"----can you provide a link that states that JonBenet had whoever happended to be around wipfe and change her, and that it happened with such frequency that it could be termed "all the time????" I've never heard that. I've heard that she asked LHP before, but she was someone who had a relationship with JonBenet, was in the home daily. So, who are all these other people she asked to wipe and change her, all of the time???? You state that was "noted and of concern"----WHO noted it, and WHO expressed concern???Links, please.

Also, you say "the sheer numbers of soiled undies in the drawer" was a flag that went up. By using the term "the sheer numbers", it leads one to believe that there were many many many pairs. How many???? Where are you getting this information? Please provide me with a link....

Not saying what you are saying is wrong---it's just that so many things that are rumor have been turned into fact in this case just by a simple forum posting. Things get so twisted that sometimes the end result is the farthest thing from the truth, so when I read claims that I am not familiar with, I always like them backed up with a factual link. Sometimes those "factual links" have been links to other forum postings, LOL, which as you know, doesn't make it a "factual" link...
We had to sign a form that said our kids could tie their shoes unassisted. Did not have habitual toileting issues requiring adult supervision and assistance. Now granted my kids are 36 and 34 things may have changed but I doubt it. My grandchildren required the same in preschool.

Re read the link provided earlier to the interview by Julie Hayden to the sexual abuse office Holly Smith who commented on this matter of soiled underwear in the drawers. That way you get it from the source so you don't doubt the validity

I think each of the books make reference to JonBenet frequently and openly requesting any adult to wipe her. Fleet White often sent JonBenet home in his daughter Daphne's undies due to accidents. Have you read the Books Perfect Murder Perfect Town. or the others by Sinclair or Steve Thomas etc? Its referred to factually in most. I could give you a couple names to call as well if they'd talk to you. You may not be aware that I live rather local to the Boulder area. I have friends who knew the Ramseys ... I don't give names out as that is their right to privacy and I have no right to violate that privacy. This is basic common knowledge that JonBenet had toileting issues.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
158
Guests online
2,444
Total visitors
2,602

Forum statistics

Threads
590,025
Messages
17,929,153
Members
228,041
Latest member
Rainydaze17
Back
Top