Why was JB killed?

[BBB167893]

Yes, indeed, SuperDave. It could be that PR had JB in JB's bathroom to clean her up since PR noticed her underwear was wet or soiled when PR was helping JB into pj pants/longjohns.

Perhaps PR had the water too hot, or scrubbed her too hard and JB, in a snit about the whole wash-up process and she was tired and cranky, so she screamed. PR, also tired & cranky may have slapped her, or slapped at her. JB either slipped after the slap, or slipped as she ducked to avoid it, and fell against the side of the bathtub, bashing her head. That fall could have severely injured JB and made her unconscious. And then all the rest happened.

That's not too far from what I think did happen.

 

[Venom]

Yes, indeed, SuperDave. It could be that PR had JB in JB's bathroom to clean her up since PR noticed her underwear was wet or soiled when PR was helping JB into pj pants/longjohns.

Perhaps PR had the water too hot, or scrubbed her too hard and JB, in a snit about the whole wash-up process and she was tired and cranky, so she screamed. PR, also tired & cranky may have slapped her, or slapped at her. JB either slipped after the slap, or slipped as she ducked to avoid it, and fell against the side of the bathtub, bashing her head. That fall could have severely injured JB and made her unconscious. And then all the rest happened.

I believe that is plausible.
But I just don't get the ransom note, garrote, sexual assault, re-dressing and all that cover up. I mean I understand if that's what happened PR panicking, and not wanting it to be known, but to add in all the rest? Couldn't they just say JB fell in the bathroom and they found her that way?

 

[BBB167893]

I believe that is plausible.
But I just don't get the ransom note, garrote, sexual assault, re-dressing and all that cover up. I mean I understand if that's what happened PR panicking, and not wanting it to be known, but to add in all the rest? Couldn't they just say JB fell in the bathroom and they found her that way?

Excellent questions, Venom. A couple of possibilities present themselves:

1) The simplest answer is that:

a) there were too many things needed to account for;

b) since these were not experienced criminals, they threw a mess of s*&! at the wall in the hope that some of it would stick.

2) This is where it really gets fancy. Considering the investment PR put in making her daughter famous, it wouldn't do to just have a mundane accident. There are several threads and posts which expand on this idea.

 

[questfortrue]

Excellent questions, Venom. A couple of possibilities present themselves:

1) The simplest answer is that:

a) there were too many things needed to account for;

b) since these were not experienced criminals, they threw a mess of s*&! at the wall in the hope that some of it would stick.

2) This is where it really gets fancy. Considering the investment PR put in making her daughter famous, it wouldn't do to just have a mundane accident. There are several threads and posts which expand on this idea.

The only hope to put the evidence at arms length from the family was to attribute all the horrible things to an intruder. In the mind of the stager(s) the more horrible the better, because who would then even consider good Christian parents and their little boy involved at all? Presto, the family are victims. moo

 

[BBB167893]

The only hope to put the evidence at arms length from the family was to attribute all the horrible things to an intruder. In the mind of the stager(s) the more horrible the better, because who would then even consider good Christian parents and their little boy involved at all? Presto, the family are victims. moo

It sounds so much more concise the way you say it.

 

[Venom]

Excellent questions, Venom. A couple of possibilities present themselves:

1) The simplest answer is that:

a) there were too many things needed to account for;

b) since these were not experienced criminals, they threw a mess of s*&! at the wall in the hope that some of it would stick.

2) This is where it really gets fancy. Considering the investment PR put in making her daughter famous, it wouldn't do to just have a mundane accident. There are several threads and posts which expand on this idea.

Apparently the mess of s*&! was a good one and stuck well.

 

[questfortrue]

One can thank the efforts of AH, LW, ML LS and the R’s themselves to use the media for the S*** to stick. Never have seen so much in untruths, fingerpointing, downright propaganda in any criminal story like this one. (As an example of classic innuendo: If a quote on the Internet is correctly attributed to AH by Singular, and I caveate it as IDK, AH once cast suspicion upon FW because FW had big shoulders, was tall with big hands and gave AH “a feeling”.) The R’s didn’t have to do as much ‘cuz there were people like AH amplifying all kinds of conjecture. moo

 

[BBB167893]

One can thank the efforts of AH, LW, ML LS and the R’s themselves to use the media for the S*** to stick. Never have seen so much in untruths, fingerpointing, downright propaganda in any criminal story like this one. (As an example of classic innuendo: If a quote on the Internet is correctly attributed to AH by Singular, and I caveate it as IDK, AH once cast suspicion upon FW because FW had big shoulders, was tall with big hands and gave AH “a feeling”.) The R’s didn’t have to do as much ‘cuz there were people like AH amplifying all kinds of conjecture. moo

Exactly. The only people who were fooled were those who WANTED to be fooled.

 

[borndem]

If she was dead then it didn't take them long to figure out putting her into the wine room. B didn't seem to know exactly where she was finally discovered by John. One question I have is about livor. If JonBenet was found more than twenty minutes after death, could she have been moved a short distance into the wine room in exactly the same position as found without altering the already set livor?

Under favorable temperature (not too hot, not too cool -- indoors with normal temp. control), livor usually starts about 1/2 -- 2 hours after death. It will set between 8 -- 12 hours after death. Livor can be redistributed if body is moved during the intervals given.

http://emedicine.medscape.com/article/1680032-overview

ETA:
CAUTION --> There are actual pictures of dead bodies in the above-referenced article. <-- CAUTION

 

[borndem]

Apparently the mess of s*&! was a good one and stuck well.

I know your remark above was entirely serious and you were totally on the mark, but it is late, and it made me chuckle just a bit (I'm doing it again). Thanks for the honest and right-on remark, Venom. We have to find some lightheartedness on this case wherever we can.

 

[borndem]

One can thank the efforts of AH, LW, ML LS and the R’s themselves to use the media for the S*** to stick. Never have seen so much in untruths, fingerpointing, downright propaganda in any criminal story like this one. (As an example of classic innuendo: If a quote on the Internet is correctly attributed to AH by Singular, and I caveate it as IDK, AH once cast suspicion upon FW because FW had big shoulders, was tall with big hands and gave AH “a feeling”.) The R’s didn’t have to do as much ‘cuz there were people like AH amplifying all kinds of conjecture. moo

What a web they wove.

Sadly, I'll say it again, qft: Money talks, BS walks.... :banghead:

 

[Mama2JML]

And I agree with you on all that, Mama. Forgive me if I misunderstood the point you questioned. If it is the prior abuse only, that is not as well defined in the AR, but it is there -- albeit, not quite as &#8220;glaringly obvious&#8221; as UKGuy noted.

I am not a medical type person, so a lot of this was all new to me when I started looking into it. But use of the word chronic versus acute in medical terms is not as you and I understand it (I&#8217;m assuming you&#8217;re not in the medical field either). Understanding this first helps to understand exactly what was being addressed in the AR. Rather than repeat it all, I&#8217;ll refer to posts where I tried to explain what I had come to understand about it here and here. The bottom line is that the terms refer to the stage of healing that an injury is at. Chronic does not necessarily mean that something has to be repeated multiple times, but rather that an injury is at a certain stage in healing and therefore it is distinguishable from a recent injury. The length of time in that healing process is dependent on several factors, but mostly the severity of the injury and where it occurs. The changes that happen during the healing process are not as grossly obvious (macroscopically) as they are under microscopic examination, which is why the coroner did this type of examination with the cells stained.

1. His findings were that the entire inside surface of JonBenet&#8217;s vagina (all sections of the vaginal mucosa) had vascular congestion (engorgement of blood at that level) 2. and the type of inflammation which indicated prior injury/injuries that had begun to heal (focal interstitial chronic inflammation).

1. Agreed. This is not indicative of previous sexual abuse. Or, do you feel differently?

2. Inflammation of the vaginal mucousa, vaginitis or vulvovaginitis, is most often attributed to infection:

"Vaginitis is an inflammation of the vagina that can result in discharge, itching and pain. The cause is usually a change in the normal balance of vaginal bacteria or an infection."
Source: http://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/vaginitis/basics/definition/con-20022645

&

"Bacteria, yeast, viruses, chemicals in creams or sprays, or even clothing can cause vaginitis. Sometimes, vaginitis occurs from organisms that are passed between sexual partners. In addition, the vaginal environment is influenced by a number of different factors including a woman&#8217;s health, her personal hygiene, medications, hormones (particularly estrogen), and the health of her sexual partner. A disturbance in any of these factors can trigger vaginitis."
Source: http://www.urmc.rochester.edu/Encyclopedia/Content.aspx?ContentTypeID=85&ContentID=P00595

&

"Respiratory pathogens are the bacteria isolated most often. Group A beta-hemolytic Streptococcus is the pathogen identified most commonly in all cases of vulvovaginitis and may cause, in addition to a nonspecific discharge, a dramatic scarlet, well-demarcated dermatitis of the vulva or perianal tissues. (7) Haemophilus influenzae (nonen- capsulated) is another common pathogen. These bacte- rial infections are likely to be caused by self-inoculation as a child carries bacteria from her nose and mouth via her hand to her vulva."
Source: http://depts.washington.edu/hcsats/...lems in Prepubertal Gyn Sugar Graham 2006.pdf

According to JonBenet's pediatrician, Dr. Francesco Beuf, she was last evaluated five weeks before her death during a follow-up visit as she had recently been diagnosed with, and treated for, a sinus infection. The "chronic inflammation" noted in the autopsy report is likely attributable to antibiotic treatment (reduced levels of healthy bacteria & increased levels of yeast) &/or to the respiratory bacteria itself.

There was an area of hymenal tissue that had a &#8220;1 cm red-purple area of abrasion&#8221; (the abrasion would be acute) from which he removed a sample for microscopic examination. His finding from it was that it contained &#8220;epithelial erosion with underlying capillary congestion.&#8221; IOW, it had an eroded surface (resulting from repeated exposure) with increased capillary activity (the body&#8217;s response indicating a healing injury).

[As an aside from the point of chronic injury, I should point out here that in that part of the AR addressing the section of hymen examined under a microscope, Meyer says, "A small number of red blood cells is present on the eroded surface," and, "Acute inflammatory infiltrate is not seen." He is pointing out here that the abraided surface has some red blood cells present indicating a recent injury (acute). But since there is no inflammatory infiltrate present, the body hasn't had a chance to respond to the injury -- meaning it was very close in time to her death.]

These are the things specifically stated that speak to the prior abuse. But beyond that, there are also implied things that require interpretation based on what the coroner states and what we are supposed to know. Remember though that the coroner states what he sees assuming anyone who reads the AR will know what it means -- he doesn&#8217;t write it for the layperson. So when he tells us that her &#8220;uterus measures 3 x 1 x 0.8cm,&#8221; and that the hymenal orifice is &#8220;1x1 cm,&#8221; and that the &#8220;hymen itself is represented by a rim of mucosal tissue extending clockwise between the 2 and 10:00 positions,&#8221; we are supposed to understand that she has very little left of a hymen (which is something Nancy Grace doesn&#8217;t seem to understand). In fact, it is completely missing in the upper one-third of its circumference (clockwise from 10 to 2). What is there in the lower two-thirds (clockwise from 2 to 10) is an eroded and retracted &#8220;rim&#8221; of tissue, meaning that it has been exposed repeatedly enough to cause this reaction. A single forceful entry will usually cause tears (none of which were noted in the AR) and bleeding in the membrane. (This is despite the misconceptions of pubescent boys about a mysterious organ called a &#8220;cherry&#8221; that gets &#8220;popped&#8221; during first intercourse.) After repeated exposure, the hymen erodes and retracts until it is no longer present.

This is all stuff that shouldn&#8217;t matter whether you or I are IDI or RDI. This is all information found in the AR. We can disagree politely with one another on who we think is responsible, but there really shouldn&#8217;t be any disagreement on the injuries and what they mean. Again, Medicalese is not my native language (I'm still learning it), so if I wasn&#8217;t clear in explaining what I was trying to say, or if you (or anyone) has any questions about what I meant, just let me know and I&#8217;ll be glad to discuss it more with you.

I will respond to your analysis point-by-point. I need to tend to a few domestic obligations at present, but I will get back to you this evening/EARLY a.m., depending on your time zone. Promise.

 

[Mama2JML]

SNIPPED RESPECTFULLY
...
There was an area of hymenal tissue that had a &#8220;1 cm red-purple area of abrasion&#8221; (the abrasion would be acute) from which he removed a sample for microscopic examination.

Agreed.

His finding from it was that it contained &#8220;epithelial erosion with underlying capillary congestion.&#8221;

I am not surprised by these findings, nor do I believe these observations indicate prior sexual abuse.

3. IOW, it had an eroded surface (resulting from repeated exposure)

Exposure to?... The hymen erodes naturally over time, and medical conditions, (i.e. vaginitis) contribute to epithelial erosion. 'Everyday activities' contribute as well. Children grow, hormone levels vary (drastically) from birth to age 6, and skin sheds. This is not atypical.

4. with increased capillary activity (the body&#8217;s response indicating a healing injury).

...a healing injury, like a bruise?

I DO know that 'capillary congestion', in the female sex organs, is a result of sexual arousal. EA, perhaps? Regardless of one's RDI/IDI leanings, this is plausible.

Source: http://books.google.com/books?id=Pi...a=X&ei=qI_YUoeYNcr22QXe_oCgDg&ved=0CCgQ6AEwAA

 

[Mama2JML]

5. So when he tells us that her “uterus measures 3 x 1 x 0.8cm,” and that the hymenal orifice is “1x1 cm,” and that the “hymen itself is represented by a rim of mucosal tissue extending clockwise between the 2 and 10:00 positions,” we are supposed to understand that she has very little left of a hymen (which is something Nancy Grace doesn’t seem to understand). In fact, it is completely missing in the upper one-third of its circumference (clockwise from 10 to 2). What is there in the lower two-thirds (clockwise from 2 to 10) is an eroded and retracted “rim” of tissue, meaning that it has been exposed repeatedly enough to cause this reaction. A single forceful entry will usually cause tears (none of which were noted in the AR) and bleeding in the membrane. (This is despite the misconceptions of pubescent boys about a mysterious organ called a “cherry” that gets “popped” during first intercourse.) After repeated exposure, the hymen erodes and retracts until it is no longer present.

The description of the hymen, provided by Dr. Meyer in the AR, does not indicate JonBenet "had very little of a hymen left." The configuration of the hymen, as described by Dr. Meyer, is known as 'crescentic', and it's one of a few normal hymenal configurations observed in pre-pubescent females.

Source: *Warning Graphic Images*
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/723678_3

This is all stuff that shouldn’t matter whether you or I are IDI or RDI. This is all information found in the AR. We can disagree politely with one another on who we think is responsible, but there really shouldn’t be any disagreement on the injuries and what they mean. Again, Medicalese is not my native language (I'm still learning it), so if I wasn’t clear in explaining what I was trying to say, or if you (or anyone) has any questions about what I meant, just let me know and I’ll be glad to discuss it more with you.

I agree, and I'm open to consider other ideas. This is simply my research-based interpretation of the observations noted by Dr. Meyer.

 

[MeanDonnaJean]

Wouldn't her pediatrician have known what was going on? I mean it seems like he would have known.

I highly doubt that. I have two grown daughters myself and never EVER has either one of their pediatricians done a vaginal exam on them at that age, nor at any age during their adolescence. I mean, why WOULD he/she? Even if there had been ongoing bouts of vaginitis or similar with JBR, urine and/or blood tests would have detected that. I just don't think a vaginal exam is SOP with children.

 

[MeanDonnaJean]

Source: *Warning Graphic Images*
http://www.medscape.com/viewarticle/723678_3

FYI: the above link requires a log-in.

I make that same mistake quite often myself. Please log out then re-post link.

 

[Venom]

I have 2 girls (3 and 6) and at every well visit the pediatrician does an exam down there.

 

[MeanDonnaJean]

I have 2 girls (3 and 6) and at every well visit the pediatrician does an exam down there.

I'm an ooooold Mom. My girls are 42 and 30. I reckon this is the new norm. And in this day 'n age, I suppose it should be.

 

[Tawny]

I have 2 girls (3 and 6) and at every well visit the pediatrician does an exam down there.

I guess this varies by pediatrician. Mine is between your girls' ages and her peds never do exams down there. She has seen 2, both from one group of peds in the same office.

 

[Venom]

I guess this varies by pediatrician. Mine is between your girls' ages and her peds never do exams down there. She has seen 2, both from one group of peds in the same office.

They don't really do a "full" exam down there I guess. They do take the time and look down there.