Who molested/abused Jonbenet?

who molested/abused JB?

  • JR

    Votes: 180 27.1%

  • BR

    Votes: 203 30.6%

  • JAR

    Votes: 28 4.2%

  • a close family friend

    Votes: 41 6.2%

  • a stranger/stalker a la JMK

    Votes: 20 3.0%

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

    Votes: 89 13.4%

  • she wasn't previously abused/molested

    Votes: 103 15.5%
  • Total voters
    664

New Posts

Status
Not open for further replies.
DeeDee249 said:
In Kolar's book he stated that he also believed the head blow came first, as do most of the investigators and forensic specialist who have studied it.
Click to expand...

That's my understanding as well. But when reading the other theory - that asphyxiation came first - my first thought was that it wasn't possible if she was bathed/cleaned/moved (in addition to being contrary to prevailing medical opinion/autopsy evidence).
 
belimom said:
I started reading through this thread at the beginning a few days ago but never made it all the way through - not yet anyway. A year or so ago, there was a debate pages back about which came first - asphyxiation or blunt-force trauma to the head. Those claiming asphyxiation came first also brought up how she had been washed down or cleaned (which has been mentioned elsewhere). I do believe she was cleaned up before the 911 call.

I have always thought the head trauma came first and here's something else to think about in that regard: it would be very hard to move her around and especially clean her/wash her off with the garrotte in place. Seems like it would come undone, etc. Also, considering how loose the other bindings were, I think they would have fallen off.

Just doesn't seem likely that the asphyxiation was first. I think the blunt force trauma happened elsewhere, she was cleaned up, then taken the basement for staging.
Click to expand...

belimom,
Whilst I accept the current view that the head blow came first. There is nothing to prevent manual asphyxiation happening first which then leads to the head blow, and finally the ligature asphyxiation to mask the original manual asphyxiation.

If you read the autopsy report conclusion you find that Coroner Meyer says that JonBenet's death was as a result of oxygen depletion caused by the combination of asphyxiation and head injury.

.
 
UKGuy said:
belimom,
Whilst I accept the current view that the head blow came first. There is nothing to prevent manual asphyxiation happening first which then leads to the head blow, and finally the ligature asphyxiation to mask the original manual asphyxiation.

If you read the autopsy report conclusion you find that Coroner Meyer says that JonBenet's death was as a result of oxygen depletion caused by the combination of asphyxiation and head injury.

.
Click to expand...

True regarding manual asphyxiation - I was talking about the ligature coming first. I think the theories I was referring to that were posted earlier discussed the blow coming last, and was the staging, vs the ligature being the staging.
 
belimom said:
True regarding manual asphyxiation - I was talking about the ligature coming first. I think the theories I was referring to that were posted earlier discussed the blow coming last, and was the staging, vs the ligature being the staging.
Click to expand...

belimom,
I think the ligature is staging. Its not required to asphyxiate JonBenet, the manner of the knotting would make it difficult for it to operate as advertised.



.
 
UKGuy said:
belimom,
I think the ligature is staging. Its not required to asphyxiate JonBenet, the manner of the knotting would make it difficult for it to operate as advertised.



.
Click to expand...

ITA... Perhaps what I was saying was confusing, because I am in agreement with this. I was responding to those who thought otherwise, saying that - in addition to the autopsy report - it didn't seem possible to be any other way (i.e., they were saying that the ligature came first and the blow was the staging, which I don't agree with).

Sorry for any confusion about the point I was trying to make. :seeya:
 
belimom said:
ITA... Perhaps what I was saying was confusing, because I am in agreement with this. I was responding to those who thought otherwise, saying that - in addition to the autopsy report - it didn't seem possible to be any other way (i.e., they were saying that the ligature came first and the blow was the staging, which I don't agree with).

Sorry for any confusion about the point I was trying to make. :seeya:
Click to expand...

belimom,
No problem, its just that Coroner Meyer's conclusion allows for both the manual and ligature strangulation, they are not exclusive.


I used to suggest that a manual strangulation led to JonBenet falling and bashing her head, followed by the ligature asphyxiation.

I can only assume at some point when JonBenet was being sexually assaulted she attempted to break away, which led to her being restrained by an arm or hand around her neck, she loses consciousness, falls to the ground and whacks her head.

The rest is mostly staging ...



.
 
Manual strangulations leave marks. It is unavoidable. There were no marks on JB's neck, nor internal injuries to the structure of her neck, that suggest she was strangled manually. This was just what it was stated to be....ligature strangulation (with the cord) in association with blunt force trauma to the head (she was struck with a bludgeon of unspecified origin).
While it is certainly valid to speculate about other method of strangulation that possibly COULD have occurred (like a scarf or hands), we need to remember that there was ONLY ONE method that was PROVEN to have occurred- the ligature.
 
DeeDee249 said:
Manual strangulations leave marks. It is unavoidable. There were no marks on JB's neck, nor internal injuries to the structure of her neck, that suggest she was strangled manually. This was just what it was stated to be....ligature strangulation (with the cord) in association with blunt force trauma to the head (she was struck with a bludgeon of unspecified origin).
While it is certainly valid to speculate about other method of strangulation that possibly COULD have occurred (like a scarf or hands), we need to remember that there was ONLY ONE method that was PROVEN to have occurred- the ligature.
Click to expand...

DeeDee249,
There are marks on her neck as you know full well. Marks that are below the circumferential furrow for example.

JonBenet was not ligature strangled in response to her being sexually assaulted.

The ligature strangling is staging and may mask the very marks you suggest are non-existent.

The manual strangulation may have been applied via restriction of clothing, use of the arm, or hand etc.

JonBenet either fell to the ground unconscious or when her head hit the ground, this resulted in her becoming unconscious leading to coma?

That JonBenet may have been manually strangled is not inconsistent with Coroner Meyer's autopsy conclusion, but its obviously inconsistent with the standard recieved RDI theory.



.
 
UKGuy said:
DeeDee249,
There are marks on her neck as you know full well. Marks that are below the circumferential furrow for example.

JonBenet was not ligature strangled in response to her being sexually assaulted.

The ligature strangling is staging and may mask the very marks you suggest are non-existent.

The manual strangulation may have been applied via restriction of clothing, use of the arm, or hand etc.

JonBenet either fell to the ground unconscious or when her head hit the ground, this resulted in her becoming unconscious leading to coma?

That JonBenet may have been manually strangled is not inconsistent with Coroner Meyer's autopsy conclusion, but its obviously inconsistent with the standard recieved RDI theory.



.
Click to expand...

You know the lack of marks I was referring to were BRUISES from manual strangulation because that is the post I was replying to. You know how long I've been on this case- do you really think I didn't know there were petechiae there? I actually LOOK at the autopsy photos. :furious:
 
There are as many theories about this case, as there are people who read about it. I don't believe JB was molested by only one person. I think when she was young, DP may have been a perpetrator.

As JB got older, I think there were others. Possibly JR, JAR, BR. I think the level of abuse would have been different with each incident or who was involved.

I think BR was possibly molested also. I always thought the comment PR said he made about his comparing himself to JB was strange. Made me wonder what really was going on within the family.
 
SunnieRN said:
There are as many theories about this case, as there are people who read about it. I don't believe JB was molested by only one person. I think when she was young, DP may have been a perpetrator.

As JB got older, I think there were others. Possibly JR, JAR, BR. I think the level of abuse would have been different with each incident or who was involved.

I think BR was possibly molested also. I always thought the comment PR said he made about his comparing himself to JB was strange. Made me wonder what really was going on within the family.
Click to expand...

Interesting that BR was also a bed-wetter (and he may have had soiling problems too) until Patsy turned her attention to JB's pageant persona. Could it be that at that point, a more sexualized JB became the focus for the molester?
 
SunnieRN said:
I think BR was possibly molested also. I always thought the comment PR said he made about his comparing himself to JB was strange. Made me wonder what really was going on within the family.
Click to expand...
BBM Totally agree. Which comment are you referring to?
DeeDee249 said:
Interesting that BR was also a bed-wetter (and he may have had soiling problems too) until Patsy turned her attention to JB's pageant persona. Could it be that at that point, a more sexualized JB became the focus for the molester?
Click to expand...

Do you connect BR's "issues" with abuse? Abuse by PR? By JR?

:banghead: Can't find the emoticon for "pick DD's brain"!
 
Nom de plume said:
BBM Totally agree. Which comment are you referring to?


Do you connect BR's "issues" with abuse? Abuse by PR? By JR?

:banghead: Can't find the emoticon for "pick DD's brain"!
Click to expand...

At the very least he was overwhelmed by his overbearing mother. As to abuse, I don't necessarily feel there was sexual/physical abuse, but emotional abuse was very likely. The reaction if soiling is said to me more indicative of sexual abuse (especially when it happened in a child that had previously been potty trained) than bedwetting.
Remember, JB didn't just wet the bed. She pooped in it too, and wet and pooped her clothes too. THAT is a huge red flag. Not so much if it was just bedwetting- after all, that is not all that rare in kids and is not usually a sign if sexual abuse.
 
DeeDee249 said:
At the very least he was overwhelmed by his overbearing mother. As to abuse, I don't necessarily feel there was sexual/physical abuse, but emotional abuse was very likely. The reaction if soiling is said to me more indicative of sexual abuse (especially when it happened in a child that had previously been potty trained) than bedwetting.
Remember, JB didn't just wet the bed. She pooped in it too, and wet and pooped her clothes too. THAT is a huge red flag. Not so much if it was just bedwetting- after all, that is not all that rare in kids and is not usually a sign if sexual abuse.
Click to expand...

It IS a huge red flag about BOTH kids. BR had a soiling issue too! Remember he smeared the bathroom walls, his PJ pants dirty on JB's floor, etc.?
 
Nom de plume said:
It IS a huge red flag about BOTH kids. BR had a soiling issue too! Remember he smeared the bathroom walls, his PJ pants dirty on JB's floor, etc.?
Click to expand...

Nom de plume,
ITA. But just what is BR's soiled pajama bottoms doing in JonBenet's bedroom?

The more information that is revealed the more it seems to link BR with JonBenet


.
 
UKGuy said:
Nom de plume,
ITA. But just what is BR's soiled pajama bottoms doing in JonBenet's bedroom?

The more information that is revealed the more it seems to link BR with JonBenet


.
Click to expand...

Those pajama bottoms MAY be BR's, but they have never been proven to be. Just because they seemed too big for JB doesn't mean they weren't hers. I don't recall wether those soiled pajama bottoms made into an evidence locker, but it would be a simple matter to test that fecal material. They have JB's DNA , not sure whether they ever were allowed to get BR's.
 
I was reviewing autopsy photos today and I had forgotten about the pink 'triangle' under the ligature marks on JonBenet's neck. These are commonly seen in victims of strangulation with a soft object, such as a scarf. Remember JR's 'keepsake', put into the coffin when JonBenet was buried?

It was a scarf. I couldn't ever understand that. It's not as if a scarf was a favorite clothing item that was a 'trademark' for Jon Benet. I really question his reasoning for a scarf. Blanket, maybe. Scarf, not so much.

http://crimeshots.com/CrimeScene1.html

Fifth row down on the left.
 
SunnieRN said:
There are as many theories about this case, as there are people who read about it. I don't believe JB was molested by only one person. I think when she was young, DP may have been a perpetrator.

As JB got older, I think there were others. Possibly JR, JAR, BR. I think the level of abuse would have been different with each incident or who was involved.

I think BR was possibly molested also. I always thought the comment PR said he made about his comparing himself to JB was strange. Made me wonder what really was going on within the family.
Click to expand...

I hadn't considered this idea SunnieRN, but now that I think about it, it makes sense. Maybe BR & JB did some "exploring", "playiing doctor", you know. It happens. But the more I get to understand the whole Ramsey family dynamic, it seems to me that sexual misconduct or inappropriate conduct might have been the "norm" in that family, from JAR, PR, JR, or a myriad of others. It's a horrid thought, but makes sense. And if we add the transgenerational aspect to the picture (i.e. a sexually abused child might be inclined to do it to others later), perhaps it stems back from PR's side of the tree and/or JR's. Or, sadly, both.

And as vile as sexual abuse is, it does happen, but doesn't usually lead to murder. Something else was so broken in that family that there was a snap on the behalf of one or more of the three surviving R's in the house the JB was killed. It sad for all concerned-- even sad for the one or more who killed her. (Not excusing the crimes in any way, shape, or form, merely expressing a bit of sympathy here for what must have been a painful life for all of them.)

I dearly wish we lived in a world where we didn't have to think about such things. :(
 
SunVenus said:
I hadn't considered this idea SunnieRN, but now that I think about it, it makes sense. Maybe BR & JB did some "exploring", "playiing doctor", you know. It happens. But the more I get to understand the whole Ramsey family dynamic, it seems to me that sexual misconduct or inappropriate conduct might have been the "norm" in that family, from JAR, PR, JR, or a myriad of others. It's a horrid thought, but makes sense. And if we add the transgenerational aspect to the picture (i.e. a sexually abused child might be inclined to do it to others later), perhaps it stems back from PR's side of the tree and/or JR's. Or, sadly, both.

And as vile as sexual abuse is, it does happen, but doesn't usually lead to murder. Something else was so broken in that family that there was a snap on the behalf of one or more of the three surviving R's in the house the JB was killed. It sad for all concerned-- even sad for the one or more who killed her. (Not excusing the crimes in any way, shape, or form, merely expressing a bit of sympathy here for what must have been a painful life for all of them.)

I dearly wish we lived in a world where we didn't have to think about such things. :(
Click to expand...

The housekeeper reported that she had come into BR's bedroom and found JB and BR under the covers "playing". When she did, the kids screamed at her to get out. I assume she would have told Patsy, but I have not seen that in print.
 
DeeDee249 said:
The housekeeper reported that she had come into BR's bedroom and found JB and BR under the covers "playing". When she did, the kids screamed at her to get out. I assume she would have told Patsy, but I have not seen that in print.
Click to expand...

Yes, odd isn't it? You'd think she'd have said something... but for all we know, maybe she did. But maybe she was embarrassed too. Sexual matters make many people uncomfortable, and would the housekeeper have been willing to say to her employers: "umm, I think you need to have a frank birds & bees discussion with your kids". I'd like to think that had it been me, I'd have spoken up-- I am fairly "clinical" about sex and not shy about such matters... but to an employer? Especially ones that prided themselves on an appearance of moral rectitude & overt Christian values? And in an environement of such tension with focus on "go-go-go important family on the move" and PRs recovery from cancer and so on? I just don't know. Maybe she (the housekeeper) sensed-- intuitively-- it would cause a tempest in the household. And looking back, perhaps related sexual conduct did cause the ugly, ending tipping point.

But yes, as you point out, we have that confirmation of a known sexual aspect between JBR & BR. With that & other innuendos, statements, the deliberate sexualisation/objectification by PR of JBR in pagentry and so on, it paints a dysfunctional picture of the family in matters of sex, sexual boundaries & sexual conduct.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 138 more.
Total: 3,818 (members: 139, guests: 3,679)

Online statistics

Members online
139
Guests online
3,679
Total visitors
3,818
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
591,677
Messages
17,957,405
Members
228,586
Latest member
chingona361
Back
Top