Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 105

Thread: Sexual Abuse of JonBenet

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    4,808

    Sexual Abuse of JonBenet

    I thought this topic warranted a new thread, since it is such a hot one. I am going to post a site that has the pros and the cons. Just for everyone's information. In the interest of fairness, it should be posted:

    http://jonbenetramsey.pbwiki.com/Evi...Sexual%20Abuse

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Ceti Alpha V
    Posts
    11,238
    I happen to be on good terms with the guy who supplied much of that info.

    This got me:

    These findings imply an "expected" hymenal opening size of 6 mm for someone JBR's age; her actual opening size, 1 cm, placed her in the mid-range of sizes observed in this study among six-year olds known to have been abused (see Fig. 3 of the study). 99% specific means that using this reference standard (1 mm per year of age), 99% of those with hymenal opening sizes above this standard were actually abused (i.e., the test is 99% accurate in identifying such individuals: only 1 percent are incorrectly labelled as abused). 79% sensitive means that 21% of victims of abuse were missed using this standard.
    All posts made by me are MY exclusive property, and are NOT to be used or reproduced without my permission. DAVE SMASH THIEVES!

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    4,808
    Quote Originally Posted by SuperDave View Post
    I happen to be on good terms with the guy who supplied much of that info.

    This got me:
    I found that interesting also, but it does not convince me.

    Yes, but then you have:

    1. "A number of genital anatomical features and hymenal measurements were described and found consistent with previous studies. An important finding was outward folding of the posterior hymenal rim in many girls, a feature that could be difficult to distinguish from attenuation of the posterior hymen. A gaping hymenal orifice, previously suggested to be a supportive sign of sexual abuse, was fairly frequently found and significantly associated with a large horizontal hymenal diameter." AK Myhre, K Berntzen, D Bratlid (2003). Genital anatomy in non-abused preschool girls. Acta Paediatrica 92 (12), 14531462. doi:10.1111/j.1651-2227.2003.tb00831.x
    And there is this,

    "There are doctors (even pediatricians) who claim that any inflammation of a little girl's vulva is a manifestation of sex abuse. Most, however, note that this is an extremely common finding and can result from sweat, tight pants, certain kinds of soap, and the occasional mild rubbing (sometimes masturbatory) activity of the normal girl."

    JonBenet wore all these tight fitting costumes; she had an ongoing rash from damp underwear - I just am skeptical of the allegations.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    408
    Quote Originally Posted by Solace View Post
    I found that interesting also, but it does not convince me.

    Yes, but then you have:
    1. "A number of genital anatomical features and hymenal measurements were described and found consistent with previous studies. An important finding was outward folding of the posterior hymenal rim in many girls, a feature that could be difficult to distinguish from attenuation of the posterior hymen. A gaping hymenal orifice, previously suggested to be a supportive sign of sexual abuse, was fairly frequently found and significantly associated with a large horizontal hymenal diameter." AK Myhre, K Berntzen, D Bratlid (2003). Genital anatomy in non-abused preschool girls. Acta Paediatrica 92 (12), 1453–1462. doi:10.1111/j.1651-2227.2003.tb00831.x
    And there is this,

    "There are doctors (even pediatricians) who claim that any inflammation of a little girl's vulva is a manifestation of sex abuse. Most, however, note that this is an extremely common finding and can result from sweat, tight pants, certain kinds of soap, and the occasional mild rubbing (sometimes masturbatory) activity of the normal girl."

    JonBenet wore all these tight fitting costumes; she had an ongoing rash from damp underwear - I just am skeptical of the allegations.
    Would rubbing (masturbatory or from irritation) caused a larger than normal hymenal opening? I would think that would be caused by penetration, not rubbing, irritation or chronic damp underwear. A rash, most certainly, and I think allegations of abuse on irritation alone would be presumptuous.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    4,808
    Quote Originally Posted by mrsjonnob View Post
    Would rubbing (masturbatory or from irritation) caused a larger than normal hymenal opening? I would think that would be caused by penetration, not rubbing, irritation or chronic damp underwear. A rash, most certainly, and I think allegations of abuse on irritation alone would be presumptuous.
    A gaping hymenal orifice, previously suggested to be a supportive sign of sexual abuse, was fairly frequently found and significantly associated with a large horizontal hymenal diameter."

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    408
    Quote Originally Posted by Solace View Post
    A gaping hymenal orifice, previously suggested to be a supportive sign of sexual abuse, was fairly frequently found and significantly associated with a large horizontal hymenal diameter."
    One can find a study to support or discredit any position.

    I think a gaping hymenal opening, vaginal irritation, inflammation and daytime soiling could all very normal. However, in a case where a child is murdered and sexual abuse may have been a motive, those symptoms have to be looked at with greater scrutiny.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,403
    That's an IDI argument - JonBenet's hymen was eroded and the opening enlarged because of bubble baths and rashes.

    I don't buy it. Irritation of the vulva and/or vagina from a rash does not cause a hymen to erode and the opening to enlarge. Perhaps if it could be proven that JonBenet's hymeneal measurement was in proportion to the rest of her vaginal/reproductive structure, I could see it....but otherwise, there are just too many signs that someone was molesting her to not draw that as the most likely conclusion as to why her measurements and structure seem abnormal.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    538
    Wouldn't these parents know that the surest way for the world to find out that JonBenet was being sexually abused would be to kill her? An autopsy would reveal everything.

    Wouldn't they also know medical examiners can date injuries? If you break a kids arm today, that won't hide the fact the arm was broken a month ago. So the idea they staged the sexual abuse to hide prior abuse is highly doubtful.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    4,808
    Quote Originally Posted by Nuisanceposter View Post
    That's an IDI argument - JonBenet's hymen was eroded and the opening enlarged because of bubble baths and rashes.

    I don't buy it. Irritation of the vulva and/or vagina from a rash does not cause a hymen to erode and the opening to enlarge. Perhaps if it could be proven that JonBenet's hymeneal measurement was in proportion to the rest of her vaginal/reproductive structure, I could see it....but otherwise, there are just too many signs that someone was molesting her to not draw that as the most likely conclusion as to why her measurements and structure seem abnormal.
    It may be an IDI argument, but I am not so sure sexual abuse occurred and that is why I posted the site. I don't believe a rash can cause an enlarged hyman unless it does swell up the whole area as an infection might. But she did not have infections from what we know. We know she had rashes. A rash can cause irritation and a swollen vulva.

    However, the site does say the following:

    A gaping hymenal orifice, previously suggested to be a supportive sign of sexual abuse, was fairly frequently found and significantly associated with a large horizontal hymenal diameter."

    I think this is important because the suggestion that she was abused is an important one. I don't think she was, sexually that is. I think you could call the pageants abuse, no doubt. And I think the fact that Patsy was douching her daily is abuse. But I just don't feel that there is enough evidence to prove that JB was sexually abuse, just mo.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    408
    Quote Originally Posted by Solace View Post
    I think you could call the pageants abuse, no doubt. And I think the fact that Patsy was douching her daily is abuse. But I just don't feel that there is enough evidence to prove that JB was sexually abuse, just mo.
    I think routinely douching a 6 year old is sexual abuse and could totally explain the enlarged hymenal opening. I wasn't aware of that fact.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,403
    You know, Solace, one of the things that gets me about the question of was JonBenet sexually abused, is that I don't think Patsy's response to hearing of evidence of prior abuse is one of a mother who had no idea at all that someone may have been doing something to her daughter. I don't have it on hand, but she just doesn't seem that surprised to me at hearing there was evidence that JonBenet had been molested before the night she was killed.

    All the doctor visits, with that weird Dr Beuf, the school nurse visits, the three calls in one day that Patsy can't recall the topic of, the sexualization, the toileting issues, the abnormal structure....plus Patsy's lack of shock at hearing of suspected prior abuse....the story that she had changed when she came back from that Texas trip......I really think maybe someone was doing something nasty to JonBenet. I have no idea who.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,403
    Quote Originally Posted by mrsjonnob View Post
    I think routinely douching a 6 year old is sexual abuse and could totally explain the enlarged hymenal opening. I wasn't aware of that fact.
    Maybe the douching was tied into someone abusing her. Patsy psychologically undoing the abuse she knew was happening by cleansing. Just a thought.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    4,808
    Quote Originally Posted by Nuisanceposter View Post
    You know, Solace, one of the things that gets me about the question of was JonBenet sexually abused, is that I don't think Patsy's response to hearing of evidence of prior abuse is one of a mother who had no idea at all that someone may have been doing something to her daughter. I don't have it on hand, but she just doesn't seem that surprised to me at hearing there was evidence that JonBenet had been molested before the night she was killed. I remember it. It is in the Enquirer book, which is great by the way. Haney asks her if she would be surprised to learn that there was sexual abuse (not verbatim). She says dam surprised and then asks the detective SHE HIRED if he had heard about it and he says yes there was talk. I cannot imagine that she did not hear about this, that the detective she and John hired certainly told someone.

    All the doctor visits, with that weird Dr Beuf, the school nurse visits, the three calls in one day that Patsy can't recall the topic of (I thought it was written down on the report that it concerned the bed wetting and the rashes - could be wrong), the sexualization, the toileting issues, the abnormal structure....plus Patsy's lack of shock at hearing of suspected prior abuse....the story that she had changed when she came back from that Texas trip......I really think maybe someone was doing something nasty to JonBenet. I have no idea who.
    Believe me I am not defending Patsy, but she did act shocked about it and very angry. Maybe she is not as shocked as you would expect. But she is definitely upset that he tells her about this.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    4,808
    Quote Originally Posted by mrsjonnob View Post
    I think routinely douching a 6 year old is sexual abuse and could totally explain the enlarged hymenal opening. I wasn't aware of that fact.
    That is my point. I think it could also. Linda Hoffman Paugh, their housekeeper, said it was daily that she heard JonBenet and Patsy in the bathroom with JonBenet crying and Patsy yelling at her. She could be exaggerating but I think it was going on and also Colorado who use to post here said she knew it was said to be a big issue, the douching - by people who knew the Ramseys. Of course that is hearsay, but she lives in Boulder and might know more than most of us who do not.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    408
    Quote Originally Posted by Solace View Post
    That is my point. I think it could also. Linda Hoffman Paugh, their housekeeper, said it was daily that she heard JonBenet and Patsy in the bathroom with JonBenet crying and Patsy yelling at her. She could be exaggerating but I think it was going on and also Colorado who use to post here said she knew it was said to be a big issue, the douching - by people who knew the Ramseys. Of course that is hearsay, but she lives in Boulder and might know more than most of us who do not.
    If this is the case, then the question is WHY? Was she doing it because she thought JB was dirty or was she trying to cleanse her from suspected abuse by a male person?

    What a sad life that poor girl had.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    4,808
    Quote Originally Posted by mrsjonnob View Post
    If this is the case, then the question is WHY? Was she doing it because she thought JB was dirty or was she trying to cleanse her from suspected abuse by a male person?

    What a sad life that poor girl had.
    Well she did have ovarian cancer and probably had a few paranoias about that and JonBenet did have ongoing rashes and was always damp and Patsy mentioned that to her friend that she was concerned about her underwear always being damp and the rashes. So maybe she thought she was cleaning her and as Steve Thomas said it might have been "corporal punishment" - to mean - everytime you do this, you are going to get douched because this is what I have to do to make sure that you stay clean. That is how I see it.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    408
    Quote Originally Posted by Solace View Post
    Well she did have ovarian cancer and probably had a few paranoias about that and JonBenet did have ongoing rashes and was always damp and Patsy mentioned that to her friend that she was concerned about her underwear always being damp and the rashes. So maybe she thought she was cleaning her and as Steve Thomas said it might have been "corporal punishment" - to mean - everytime you do this, you are going to get douched because this is what I have to do to make sure that you stay clean. That is how I see it.
    That is some twisted thinking on PR's part if that was the case. How does one believe that inserting a douche into a 6 yr old's body would clear up a skin rash? She must have had some major resentment issues towards JB. I don't know anyone who douches their child. That is just disgusting.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    4,808
    Quote Originally Posted by mrsjonnob View Post
    That is some twisted thinking on PR's part if that was the case. How does one believe that inserting a douche into a 6 yr old's body would clear up a skin rash? She must have had some major resentment issues towards JB. I don't know anyone who douches their child. That is just disgusting.
    I agree with you. But look at what she does. She puts her in pageants. I know there are a lot of people who do it, but it is in the "worst" interest of the child. And Patsy and John both knew this and Patsy's friends were about to embark on an intervention with Patsy about this. So she is extremely selfish and is living vicariously through her. So it would not surprise me to see her using douches on JonBenet, especially if she had ongoing rashes, which the douches is aiding and abetting by drying her out. So she had to be completely uncomfortable and all the tight fitting outfits have to be driving her crazy.

    The more I think about this case, the more I think Steve Thomas is right on about everything. I have been back and forth full circle and now I am back to agreeing with Steve on everything from the way the murder happened to the corporal punishment and they vehemently went after him. He is not the only one who wrote a book, Hodges wrote two blaming Patsy, Wecht wrote one and it was a doozy, his theory. But they vehemently went after Thomas and I think it is because he was a detective on the case and he got too close to the truth. I don't want to sound like a conspiracy monger, but why not go after Cyril Wecht as viciously. He says there was a sex act going on that night. That is a whole lot worse than a rage accident. But know they go after Thomas. Any thoughts. I think he got very close to the what happened.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Posts
    408
    Quote Originally Posted by Solace View Post
    I agree with you. But look at what she does. She puts her in pageants. I know there are a lot of people who do it, but it is in the "worst" interest of the child. And Patsy and John both knew this and Patsy's friends were about to embark on an intervention with Patsy about this. So she is extremely selfish and is living vicariously through her. So it would not surprise me to see her using douches on JonBenet, especially if she had ongoing rashes, which the douches is aiding and abetting by drying her out. So she had to be completely uncomfortable and all the tight fitting outfits have to be driving her crazy.

    The more I think about this case, the more I think Steve Thomas is right on about everything. I have been back and forth full circle and now I am back to agreeing with Steve on everything from the way the murder happened to the corporal punishment and they vehemently went after him. He is not the only one who wrote a book, Hodges wrote two blaming Patsy, Wecht wrote one and it was a doozy, his theory. But they vehemently went after Thomas and I think it is because he was a detective on the case and he got too close to the truth. I don't want to sound like a conspiracy monger, but why not go after Cyril Wecht as viciously. He says there was a sex act going on that night. That is a whole lot worse than a rage accident. But know they go after Thomas. Any thoughts. I think he got very close to the what happened.
    I definately do not believe they were having a sex party or pimping out JB in some underground pedo ring thing.

    I do think it's possible JR was molesting JB...but knowing about the douches, it is entirely possible PR inflicted those injuries on JB.

    The part I can't wrap my brain around is one parent covering for another unless they felt they could be exposed for something too. I think either PR had something on JR or JR just didn't care that much for his daughter and he was worried more about his image and his business and what would happen if it became public that his wife killed their child.

  20. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by mrsjonnob View Post
    Would rubbing (masturbatory or from irritation) caused a larger than normal hymenal opening? I would think that would be caused by penetration, not rubbing, irritation or chronic damp underwear. A rash, most certainly, and I think allegations of abuse on irritation alone would be presumptuous.
    Penetration causes the hymen to be broken...not masturbation.
    ...We have said to ourselves, look, there is never going to be a victory in this, there is no victory...John Ramsey: 6/24/98

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    4,808
    [quote=Toltec;1471165]Penetration causes the hymen to be broken...not masturbation.[/quote

    Toltec, that is just not true. I am sorry, it is not. That is one of those falicies that exist like bringing cold water to a boil is faster than bringing hot water to a boil.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    4,808
    Quote Originally Posted by mrsjonnob View Post
    I definately do not believe they were having a sex party or pimping out JB in some underground pedo ring thing.

    I do think it's possible JR was molesting JB...but knowing about the douches, it is entirely possible PR inflicted those injuries on JB.

    The part I can't wrap my brain around is one parent covering for another unless they felt they could be exposed for something too. I think either PR had something on JR or JR just didn't care that much for his daughter and he was worried more about his image and his business and what would happen if it became public that his wife killed their child.
    I am not sure when John found out, if it were the night before or the morning after - Steve Thomas says he had a phone call with one of Melinda's friends who said John got into the car when they arrived (I Believe) and said (and I am paraphrasing) that JB had gone to heaven, that she was dead and they found her at 11:00 (Steve asks the friend do you think he meant Boulder time or your time - meaning where the friend was from - and the friend said "I assumed he meant Boulder time".

    So, that means that he found her around 11 when he looked the first time, and that Steve Thomas is right and that he decided then and there that he was going to help Patsy. Steve believes that is the reason for the separation of the two that day.

    I tend to lean toward he helped her and he saw how remorseful she was and felt sorry for her. A think that is possible.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,403
    That person was Melinda's fiancee, Stewart Long.

    I used to think JR woke up that morning not knowing anything, then figured it out as the day went on...but I can't reconcile the RN with that theory.

    If Patsy wrote it, he would have noticed that, wouldn't he? If we think it sounds like her style of speech, and looks like her handwriting, wouldn't her own husband pick up on that as well? Like, the second he started reading it?

    So then did JR see the RN, and believe it was from a kidnapper? Why didn't he act like it was a real RN, if that was the case?

    I definitely think Steve Thomas knows a lot more than he said in his book, but I never understood why he gave JR such a pass.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Posts
    4,808
    Quote Originally Posted by Nuisanceposter View Post
    That person was Melinda's fiancee, Stewart Long.

    I used to think JR woke up that morning not knowing anything, then figured it out as the day went on...but I can't reconcile the RN with that theory.

    If Patsy wrote it, he would have noticed that, wouldn't he? If we think it sounds like her style of speech, and looks like her handwriting, wouldn't her own husband pick up on that as well? Like, the second he started reading it?

    So then did JR see the RN, and believe it was from a kidnapper? Why didn't he act like it was a real RN, if that was the case? Because he knew already. I don't think Patsy is not going to tell John. They are very close - they are. JonBenet is dead already, what can you do about it? It is over. Patsy is probably hysterical and out of her mind and he feels sorry for her. However, that does bring into account, if he had nothing to do with it, why would he not worry about Berke, if Patsy could inflict that kind of violence on JonBenet. But he could overlook it and say well this was an accident and Berke is much bigger than JonBenet was.

    I definitely think Steve Thomas knows a lot more than he said in his book, but I never understood why he gave JR such a pass.
    I think he knows more also, but then why would he not tell it? what does he have to lose; he already quit his job.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Somewhere In Time
    Posts
    5,842
    Quote Originally Posted by Nuisanceposter View Post
    You know, Solace, one of the things that gets me about the question of was JonBenet sexually abused, is that I don't think Patsy's response to hearing of evidence of prior abuse is one of a mother who had no idea at all that someone may have been doing something to her daughter. I don't have it on hand, but she just doesn't seem that surprised to me at hearing there was evidence that JonBenet had been molested before the night she was killed.

    All the doctor visits, with that weird Dr Beuf, the school nurse visits, the three calls in one day that Patsy can't recall the topic of, the sexualization, the toileting issues, the abnormal structure....plus Patsy's lack of shock at hearing of suspected prior abuse....the story that she had changed when she came back from that Texas trip......I really think maybe someone was doing something nasty to JonBenet. I have no idea who.
    NP, are you talking about this part of her interview??

    25 TOM HANEY: Okay. Ms. Ramsey, are
    0581

    1 you aware that there had been prior vaginal
    2 intrusion on JonBenet?
    3 PATSY RAMSEY: No, I am not.
    4 Prior to the night she was killed?
    5 TOM HANEY: Correct.
    6 PATSY RAMSEY: No, I am not.
    7 TOM HANEY: Didn't know that?
    8 PATSY RAMSEY: No, I didn't.
    9 TOM HANEY: Does that surprise you?
    10 PATSY RAMSEY: Extremely.
    11 TOM HANEY: Does that shock you?
    12 PATSY RAMSEY: It shocks me.
    13 TOM HANEY: Does it bother you?
    14 PATSY RAMSEY: Yes, it does.
    15 TOM HANEY: Who, how could she have
    16 been violated like that?
    17 PATSY RAMSEY: I don't know. This
    18 is the absolute first time I ever heard that.


    Notice that Tom Haney says.."Who, how could she have been violated like that?" I still think that its possible that PR had been douching JB...but, she is certainly NOT going to admit to it. She doesn't sound shocked at all...but, that could be because she KNEW that she had been douching JB, and when Tom says..."Okay. Mrs. Ramsey, are you aware that there had been prior vaginal intrusion on JonBenet?" she KNEW what he was talking about. Prior vaginal INTRUSION doesn't mean that JR was molesting her, or do you or anyone else know of any other interview where actual molestation of JB is discussed? A vaginal intrusion could be a douche.
    "This time we get it right."

Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast

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
  •