- Jun 27, 2019
- Reaction score
Both your statements might be 100% correct, yet they may only apply to the past?
It is possible that JonBenet's acute internal injuries result from staging?
JonBenet underwent two physical examinations and the second examination agreed with Coroner Meyer's initial Autopsy findings.
i.e. JonBenet was Digitally Penetrated and that she was subject to Sexual Contact.
BPD describe the above as Vaginal Trauma, suggesting they think it might represent staging?
The latter phrase is repeated in Steve Thomas' book and the book Perfect Murder Perfect Town where it might be intended to either mask any Sexual Assault or be a phrase to avoid litigation from the Ramsey's?
I'm not sure what you're asking? Of course it's possible that the person who inflicted the vaginal injuries on Dec 25-26 was a different person than the person or persons who abused JBR prior to that date. However, it seems entirely too coincidental that said person (the person staging her abuse on Dec 26th) knew nothing about the prior abuse. But of course it's possible that it's two different people (or three or more different people, but in my view, the more people added to this scenario, the more unlikely it is - but not impossible).
Anything is possible. Since both Patsy and John's behavior (of covering up something) seems united, then seeking an explanation for what might have united them is appealing as an explanation. If in fact some investigators had a sense, early on, of what that explanation might be, then even the behavior of the DA's office could be explicable.
What explanation do you think is most likely? I personally am no longer working with intruder theories but still have an open mind. The redressing, the Barbie nightie, and many other things are telling me that the perp was very familiar with the Ramsey household. I can think of reasons why both adult Ramseys could be united in staging and cover-up, but we're in an area where people do see the evidence differently.
I do believe that whoever assaulted JBR vaginally that night was either the groomer/chronic abuser OR knew of the abuse and wanted to frame/point to that person who is the actual abuser. If it was the abuser who did all of it, then that person must have feared being found out (or had just been found out). If JBR's therapy was working and she was starting to talk about her abuse, it was a scary time for the abuser.
The parts of this case that interest me have to do with explaining some unusual and forever puzzling facts (the 911 call that had to have been made from the house phone on the 23rd still troubles me; the fact that someone took the time to build an odd tool like a garrote when something more simple would have done; the extreme length of the ransom note; Patsy's abandonment of manuscript "a's" after the event; JAB's bedding in the suitcase; the abandonment of the house and the dog immediately after the murder; the lack of immediate and thorough forensic investigation into the premises; the throwing of friends like the Whites under the bus...all of this and more is still puzzling. I've been following this case since Dec 26,1996 (was already involved in some forensic work myself and am the mother of two kids not far from the Ramsey kids in age, grew up in a similarly religious family and community, at the time did not know much about pageants or Southern pageants anyway).
Is it possible that only one adult Ramsey was involved that night? Yes, but that means the other one was capable of powerful amounts of denial and an acute grief phase that involved a lot of repression and disassociation. If no Ramsey was involved, and the Ramseys were dealing with both their daughter's murder and the fact that she had been sexually abused (if that was new to them), their actions regarding the investigation are unusual.
To think that a stranger had somehow had access to JBR over a period of time leading up to her murder, and was sexually abusing/grooming her...poses so many questions that you'd like the Ramseys would have been demanding answers from the police and DA, and would be cooperating fully in the goal of catching that person.
The fact that two DA's clearly did not understand the nature of the DNA in this case and that DNA was used to exonerate people who cannot be cleared by incomplete DNA sequences does not surprise me, but it does make me think.