Sexual behavior - Merged and Closed

[JMO8778]

I have also wondered about those three phone calls that Patsy made, in one day, to Dr. Beuf...just days before JB's death. Thats pretty weird...IMO

I think it's in one of the interviews that she even said she didn't remember WHY she called !! Surely not.The R's always forget when they need to.

 

[julianne]

ColoradoKares....

I totally understand your explanation of how actually living in or around Boulder can give you a perspective that maybe someone who isn't close to the area doesn't have, and how it's certainly more than possible to know little things, not crime details, but just little things that add up and emphasize certain points. I appreciate you taking the time to explain your perspective a bit more clearly to me, because after reading your post, I really DO understand more clearly than I did before.

I have always said that I don't know everything about this case, but I have followed it closely throughout the years, and have spent hours upon hours at acandyrose and FFJ, and I just honestly had never heard the fact about the multiple undies---or if I did it completely left my brain. Thank you for the link.

Again, I in no way meant to infer that you were "gossipy" and I certainly could've and should've used a better word. I realize the implication behind that word and if used to me, I would probably take it the same way you did regardless of how it was meant. It was a poor choice of words on my part, for sure.

I used to be an "IDI"---(don't flame, LOL) and I have left that position and am now on the fence, leaning towards RDI but trying desperately to stay on the fence and I'm not sure why??? This case is truly emotional and gut wrenching, and when I sit back and simply just THINK about it, it makes me sick to my stomach. I know that you and everyone else here wants justice for the beautiful little girl that was JonBenet.

Again, I thank you for your post and I can appreciate your local perspective and knowledge with respect to the case. :truce:

 

[julianne]

I think it's in one of the interviews that she even said she didn't remember WHY she called !! Surely not.The R's always forget when they need to.

OK, well I have to agree with you on this one. If Patsy said she didn't REMEMBER WHY she called, well, I just can't imagine not remembering WHY I called my childs pediatrician 3 times in one day. How could she not remember??? I do agree with your words "surely not".

As a mother, I could see maybe forgetting the reason for placing ONE call to my childs doctor (although I wouldn't, I guess I could fathom that I COULD forget), but NEVER would I forget WHY I felt the urgency to call the office 3 different times.
:waitasec:

 

[rashomon]

OK, well I have to agree with you on this one. If Patsy said she didn't REMEMBER WHY she called, well, I just can't imagine not remembering WHY I called my childs pediatrician 3 times in one day. How could she not remember??? I do agree with your words "surely not".

As a mother, I could see maybe forgetting the reason for placing ONE call to my childs doctor (although I wouldn't, I guess I could fathom that I COULD forget), but NEVER would I forget WHY I felt the urgency to call the office 3 different times.
:waitasec:

That's very odd indeed. Patsy making three phone calls in one day to JonBenet's pediatrician and then claiming not to remember what they were about. Hard to buy.
It is also highly unusual for a six-year-old child to ask whoever was around to wipe her after a bowel movement, like JB used to do.
I'm a kindergarten teacher, and not once has one of my six-year-olds ever asked for help with that.
For children of that age already have a sense of intimate privacy.
This points to JB possibly having boundary issues. And boundary issues are often related to sexual abuse. Some children may become too reclusive, to the point of not allowing anyone to even touch them, others may lose their sense of intimate privacy, showing overtly sexual behavior, etc.

Aside from that, a six-year-old child shouldn't need help with wiping anymore.
Patsy said of JB that she already did a great wiping job most of the time - as if JB were four years old, and not six.
And the many soiled pairs of underwear in JB's drawer contradict Patsy's allegation anyway.

 

[santos1014]

That's very odd indeed. Patsy making three phone calls in one day to JonBenet's pediatrician and then claiming not to remember what they were about. Hard to buy.
It is also highly unusual for a six-year-old child to ask whoever was around to wipe her after a bowel movement, like JB used to do.
I'm a kindergarten teacher, and not once has one of my six-year-olds ever asked for help with that.
For children of that age already have a sense of intimate privacy.
This points to JB possibly having boundary issues. And boundary issues are often related to sexual abuse. Some children may become too reclusive, to the point of not allowing anyone to even touch them, others may lose their sense of intimate privacy, showing overtly sexual behavior, etc.

Aside from that, a six-year-old child shouldn't need help with wiping anymore.
Patsy said of JB that she already did a great wiping job most of the time - as if JB were four years old, and not six.
And the many soiled pairs of underwear in JB's drawer contradict Patsy's allegation anyway.

My daughters are grown now, but I can remember times that I had to call a DR more than once for them. It most certainly was something fairly concerning for that many calls. For her to say she "forgot" is simply another of her "patsyisms"

As for the wiping issue...again, my daughters are grown now, but I still remember when they were about 6, and would scream if anyone tried to come into the bathroom while they were using it. Even at that young age, girls have a sense of privacy, specially when voiding. I would have been highly upset if one of my girls would have asked anyone to wipe them. The only time they wanted me in there is if they were sick and needed help. Maybe my girls are just super independent, and were at that age as well, but, it still strikes me as very odd.

 

[Rhett]

Not me. My daughter is the baby in our family and she is seven years old. Although it has become less frequent she still occaisionally asks me to wipe her. I encourage her to do this herself but if she won't, I help. I think she has the sense at times it is particularly messy and is afraid that she will not do it adaquately(which at times she doesn't). She, however does not soil or wet her bed.

 

[ANGRYWOLF]

besides people posting , acting as if they know things the rest of us don't..is this reading of sinister motives into what Pasty said or did. Everything Patsy did or said..before the murder..and afterwards is being analyzed...by nonprofessionals here and on other boards..and somehow..in the minds of those of you who are convinced she is guilty of killing Jon Benet..used to affirm your theory. I find that so ludicrous. As a parent with an 11 year old daughter, I would hate the thought..that..if heaven forbid..something happened to her...and it became a national story...that you guys would read something sinister into everything I did that day..and the day after that and so on. People think differently..people express themselves differently..than other people..and it doesn't necessarily mean they did anything wrong. But some of you try to say it's "odd" behavior and read something sinister into it and it would be laughable if it hadn't been so tragic for the Ramsey family.
It also bothers me...that some of you take it for granted that people involved in the case..such as Boulder PD detectives who wrote books claiming the Ramseys did it...as well as other people peripherally involved..because they knew the Ramseys or were asked their views..are all right..and are all telling the truth. Many of those people have their own agendas.Many of them have written books and sought to enhance their own careers by using this case.So their views are not objective in any sense. But you use their views to affirm your own..that Patsy is guilty of killing Jon Benet.
The claims made about the state of Jon Benet's underwear...do we really know that's true ? If Jon Benet had some medical issues....gastrointestinal or urethral/gynecological....wouldn't that explain it...as opposed to the assumptions some of you want to make that it proves some sort of abuse was going on ? With their financial resources wouldn't Patsy have bought the child new underwear ? I had to roll my eyes when I read some of the stuff written and claimed on this board and others.
I also want to point out the Ramseys did sue various people.I think Lin Wood is their attorney...I believe he was successful in those suits..including one against the former Boulder PD detective who said the Ramseys killed Jon Benet. Someone can correct me if I am wrong on that.
There was a grand jury. There was testimony. If there was proof Patsy /John/ or their son did it..or some combination of them then why no indictments.
I believe Jon Benet was killed by an intruder..someone who knew about them...possibly someone who had done research so the killer knew what John Ramsey did for a living. None of the "PATSY DID IT" speculation on this board and others has convinced me otherwise.:bang:

 

[santos1014]

besides people posting , acting as if they know things the rest of us don't..is this reading of sinister motives into what Pasty said or did. Everything Patsy did or said..before the murder..and afterwards is being analyzed...by nonprofessionals here and on other boards..and somehow..in the minds of those of you who are convinced she is guilty of killing Jon Benet..used to affirm your theory. I find that so ludicrous. As a parent with an 11 year old daughter, I would hate the thought..that..if heaven forbid..something happened to her...and it became a national story...that you guys would read something sinister into everything I did that day..and the day after that and so on. People think differently..people express themselves differently..than other people..and it doesn't necessarily mean they did anything wrong. But some of you try to say it's "odd" behavior and read something sinister into it and it would be laughable if it hadn't been so tragic for the Ramsey family.
It also bothers me...that some of you take it for granted that people involved in the case..such as Boulder PD detectives who wrote books claiming the Ramseys did it...as well as other people peripherally involved..because they knew the Ramseys or were asked their views..are all right..and are all telling the truth. Many of those people have their own agendas.Many of them have written books and sought to enhance their own careers by using this case.So their views are not objective in any sense. But you use their views to affirm your own..that Patsy is guilty of killing Jon Benet.
The claims made about the state of Jon Benet's underwear...do we really know that's true ? If Jon Benet had some medical issues....gastrointestinal or urethral/gynecological....wouldn't that explain it...as opposed to the assumptions some of you want to make that it proves some sort of abuse was going on ? With their financial resources wouldn't Patsy have bought the child new underwear ? I had to roll my eyes when I read some of the stuff written and claimed on this board and others.
I also want to point out the Ramseys did sue various people.I think Lin Wood is their attorney...I believe he was successful in those suits..including one against the former Boulder PD detective who said the Ramseys killed Jon Benet. Someone can correct me if I am wrong on that.
There was a grand jury. There was testimony. If there was proof Patsy /John/ or their son did it..or some combination of them then why no indictments.
I believe Jon Benet was killed by an intruder..someone who knew about them...possibly someone who had done research so the killer knew what John Ramsey did for a living. None of the "PATSY DID IT" speculation on this board and others has convinced me otherwise.:bang:

You are not convinced that Patsy did it, and some of the posters on this board are. That is the beauty of this forum. Opinions are formed and stated here and everyone has a chance. You have the right to your opinion that an intruder got in and killed JonBenet, just as I have my opinion about Patsy. It's great to live in a country where we CAN debate and argue about it all. Thank you for sharing yours. Have a very happy New Year!

 

[ANGRYWOLF]

such speculation was extremely destructive to Patsy Ramsey and the Ramsey family.So it wasn't simply some academic exercise in free speech.
There are limits to free speech.Just like you can't yell fire in a crowded theater because someone might get hurt..you also need to consider who might get hurt when you speculate who killed whom.
Happy Neu Jahr to you too friend.:banghead:

 

[Jayelles]

I have always been of the opinion that the case would only be solved by a group of people with a variety of perspectives and POVs. If we were a group of "nodding dogs", our thinking wouldn't be challenged because we'd all be sitting agreeing with each other about our identical theories.

I like my thinking to be challenged. I think we should apply tolerance and respect for each other and be grateful that we can belong to a forum which encourages a variety of opinions.

 

[Jayelles]

such speculation was extremely destructive to Patsy Ramsey and the Ramsey family.So it wasn't simply some academic exercise in free speech.
There are limits to free speech.Just like you can't yell fire in a crowded theater because someone might get hurt..you also need to consider who might get hurt when you speculate who killed whom.
Happy Neu Jahr to you too friend.:banghead:

The same could be said for the White family, the Pugh family, the McReynolds family and others.

In my opinion, the Ramseys invited criticism when they refused to participate in police interviews or take polygraphs without a multitude of conditions. No-one denied them their right to hire lawyers and they could have taken their lawyers into the police interviews with them. What kind of person says "Yes, I'll answer your critical questions about the murder of my child, but only for two hours"?

The Whites, Pughs and McReynolds didn't refuse police interviews. Tragically, the ONLY people who did were the victims own parents.

 

[JMO8778]

such speculation was extremely destructive to Patsy Ramsey and the Ramsey family.So it wasn't simply some academic exercise in free speech.
There are limits to free speech.Just like you can't yell fire in a crowded theater because someone might get hurt..you also need to consider who might get hurt when you speculate who killed whom.
Happy Neu Jahr to you too friend.:banghead:

You sound a lot like Wudge,the one who was trying to silence our 1st amendment rights on a prior thread.(a lawyer or spokesperson for the R's I presume.) (<---rolling eyes) Oh,good,I'm so glad youre back !
WELL,the R's should've thought about *that when they trashed the reputations of FW,PW,Santa Bill,Jeff Merrick,Jay Elowsky...and the list goes on....WHY is it *they can trash anyone they want,and the rest get threatened to shut up?????BTW,I have no job and no assests...good luck
And are we supposed to be afraid of that name or somethin'????
And as far as yelling fire,you are talking about physical hurt,not just talking.We all have a right to talk and to express our opinions.

 

[JMO8778]

That's very odd indeed. Patsy making three phone calls in one day to JonBenet's pediatrician and then claiming not to remember what they were about. Hard to buy.
It is also highly unusual for a six-year-old child to ask whoever was around to wipe her after a bowel movement, like JB used to do.
I'm a kindergarten teacher, and not once has one of my six-year-olds ever asked for help with that.
For children of that age already have a sense of intimate privacy.
This points to JB possibly having boundary issues. And boundary issues are often related to sexual abuse. Some children may become too reclusive, to the point of not allowing anyone to even touch them, others may lose their sense of intimate privacy, showing overtly sexual behavior, etc.

Aside from that, a six-year-old child shouldn't need help with wiping anymore.
Patsy said of JB that she already did a great wiping job most of the time - as if JB were four years old, and not six.
And the many soiled pairs of underwear in JB's drawer contradict Patsy's allegation anyway.

3 calls in one day sounds like she was pretty frantic for a reason yet unknown.

 

[coloradokares]

ColoradoKares....

I totally understand your explanation of how actually living in or around Boulder can give you a perspective that maybe someone who isn't close to the area doesn't have, and how it's certainly more than possible to know little things, not crime details, but just little things that add up and emphasize certain points. I appreciate you taking the time to explain your perspective a bit more clearly to me, because after reading your post, I really DO understand more clearly than I did before.

I have always said that I don't know everything about this case, but I have followed it closely throughout the years, and have spent hours upon hours at acandyrose and FFJ, and I just honestly had never heard the fact about the multiple undies---or if I did it completely left my brain. Thank you for the link.

Again, I in no way meant to infer that you were "gossipy" and I certainly could've and should've used a better word. I realize the implication behind that word and if used to me, I would probably take it the same way you did regardless of how it was meant. It was a poor choice of words on my part, for sure.

I used to be an "IDI"---(don't flame, LOL) and I have left that position and am now on the fence, leaning towards RDI but trying desperately to stay on the fence and I'm not sure why??? This case is truly emotional and gut wrenching, and when I sit back and simply just THINK about it, it makes me sick to my stomach. I know that you and everyone else here wants justice for the beautiful little girl that was JonBenet.

Again, I thank you for your post and I can appreciate your local perspective and knowledge with respect to the case. :truce:

Thanks I know we all want the same thing. Justice for JonBenet. I'll always try to be clear thanks for slowing me down and helping me know I really need to be clear as well.

 

[JBRMod2]

Please do not speculate about the identity of other members.

 

[santos1014]

such speculation was extremely destructive to Patsy Ramsey and the Ramsey family.So it wasn't simply some academic exercise in free speech.
There are limits to free speech.Just like you can't yell fire in a crowded theater because someone might get hurt..you also need to consider who might get hurt when you speculate who killed whom.
Happy Neu Jahr to you too friend.:banghead:

Well, I was trying to be nice...speculation is always a high point in any case, and if there is destruction, it is usually brought on by actions of those involved, not the ones who are speculating. No, you can't yell fire in a crowded theater because someone might get hurt, but sorry to say, someone always gets hurt by words, no matter who they are or what they have done..... It's human nature to speculate and again...that is why it's good to have forums like this.
Sorry you felt the need to :banghead: ....I would speculate that it hurts

 

[icedtea4me]

What kind of person says "Yes, I'll answer your critical questions about the murder of my child, but only for two hours"?

And wasn't another condition that they be interviewed together in the same room?


-Tea

 

[rashomon]

such speculation was extremely destructive to Patsy Ramsey and the Ramsey family.So it wasn't simply some academic exercise in free speech.
There are limits to free speech.Just like you can't yell fire in a crowded theater because someone might get hurt..you also need to consider who might get hurt when you speculate who killed whom.

The Ramseys have never been cleared as suspects in their daughter's death, and speculation as to what possibly happened and why it happened is an integral part of every true crime forum discussion.

 

[ANGRYWOLF]

gives a false impression of guilt . The Boulder DA has said they aren't the focus of the investigation. You can make your own mind about what that means.
When the discussion involves speculation about what somebody said not being what they ..the poster..would have said in that situation...a socalled Patsyism...one poster called it...and insinuations that their behavior..simply because the poster didn't like it and views it with suspicion..implies guilt...makes me wonder if it is a discussion....or a verdict in the mind of someone who isn't interested in any reasonable evaluation...or look at the facts of the case....but simply people interested only in pronouncing sentance. Patsy Ramsey isn't around to defend herself anymore..some people still seem to only want to beat up on her even though they know she isn't here....so I don't see any justice in it for the Ramsey family.Maybe some people think they are seeking justice for Jon Benet....they're really only messaging their own egos.."tripping out...in my view. So I don't see much of a real discussion from those who believe Patsy is guilty.

 

[Jayelles]

gives a false impression of guilt . The Boulder DA has said they aren't the focus of the investigation. You can make your own mind about what that means.

It's all semantics. It's probably the truth to say that the Ramsey's "aren't the focus" of the investigation. It's also probably the truth to say that NOBODY is the focus of the investigation! The investigation is in limbo.

When the discussion involves speculation about what somebody said not being what they ..the poster..would have said in that situation...a socalled Patsyism...one poster called it...and insinuations that their behavior..simply because the poster didn't like it and views it with suspicion..implies guilt...makes me wonder if it is a discussion....or a verdict in the mind of someone who isn't interested in any reasonable evaluation...or look at the facts of the case....but simply people interested only in pronouncing sentance. Patsy Ramsey isn't around to defend herself anymore..some people still seem to only want to beat up on her even though they know she isn't here....so I don't see any justice in it for the Ramsey family.Maybe some people think they are seeking justice for Jon Benet....they're really only messaging their own egos.."tripping out...in my view. So I don't see much of a real discussion from those who believe Patsy is guilty.

There wasn't enough evidence to charge anyone with and as long as there exists the possibility that the DNA might not be the killer's, then the only people who can be cleared are those with an airtight alibi. That does NOT include the Ramseys. Those of us who genuinely desire justice for JonBenet will be mindful of that and give no-one a "pass". Nothing about this case makes sense.