That idea has occurred to me.
Later that night Meyer and Dr. Andrew Sirotnak, assistant professor of pediatrics returned to re-examine JonBenet's gentitals and they confirmed Meyer's earlier finding of vaginal injury, which according to Lawrence Schiller would be open to interpretation at trial.
Also ...
1996-12-29: Search Warrant 755 15 Street, Boulder, Colorado
Detective Arndt told Your Affiant that she witnessed the autopsy of JonBenet Ramsey which was conducted by Dr. John Meyer on December 27, 1996. Detective Arndt told Your Affiant that she observed Dr. Meyer examine the vaginal area of the victim and heard him state that the victim had received an injury constant with digital penetration of her vagina. Detective Arndt told Your Affiant that Dr. Meyer told her that it was his opinion that the victim had been subjected to sexual contact. For further details on the autopsy see the attached document entitled Addendum To
I'm assuming Meyer is not conflating a vaginal injury with sexual contact?
When he returns to do the second examination, the results from the splinter as referred to by Steve Thomas would not yet be available?
Meyer's prior opinion had been an injury consistent with digital penetration.
Along with Dr. Andrew Sirotnak he confirms the vaginal injury, so if the splinter arrived via a finger, e.g. a digit, then did someone stage digital penetration thereby causing a vaginal injury as per Meyer?
If all that appears to describe what might have taken place, what do you think about the sexual contact as outlined verbatim by Meyer?
.