Was BR involved? #2

[DeeDee249]

I'm of the belief that whoever molested Jonbenet probably killed her. With that in mind, I can only entertain the BDI theories if Burke himself had been sexually abused. The nature of Jonbenet's injuries (torn hymen, vaginal opening twice the normal size, etc) are more than a normally developing 9-year-old could ever inflict. The key word being "normal". Kids experiment sexually, but it usually ends at looking and light touching...not penetration powerful enough to change the vaginal structure.

If Burke was raping his sister, where did he learn such things from? There had to be some serious denial/neglect going on in that family. At the very least, the parents failed to protect their daughter from sexual abuse. If the tales of Jonbenet's urinary and fecal incontinence are true, she exhibited nearly every sign of child sexual abuse. Somebody knew something. For that alone the parents should've been charged.

(FWIW, I don't think Burke did it. I think the simplest explanation is the correct one in this case).

Remember there was a older, college -age half brother. He attended the local U of C and often spent weekends at the house. Interesting to note that MANY of JB's visits to the school nurse were on a Monday. Even more interesting- the school refused to provide JB's records of those visits. Coincidence? There are no coincidences.
This was the murder of one of their little first-grade girls. Wouldn't you think the school would want to HELP? Had to be something in those records that they did not want public. Because if it wasn't something incriminating, why hide it? Who cares about a tummy ache or skinned knee. I believe what they are hiding is directly related to abuse by someone (and yes, it could be BR) in that family.
An almost-10 year old boy KNOWS about sex. Most do not engage in sexual a activity, but a simple Google search on how young some kids are when they begin to have sexual contact will surprise you. Most boys that age can figure out what goes where.
Forensic experts did note her unusually enlarged vaginal canal. The coroner believed her injuries were from digital penetration. Many boys that age have adult-size feet and hands, or nearly so, even if they are not that tall. My 8-year old grandson wears a men's size 7 shoe.
If you read the GJ indictments, you'll see that it mentions "abuse leading to death". Someone in that house (and we have to consider EVERYONE in that house.
Kids sometimes penetrate, usually with an object or finger, rarely with a penis. This is a 6-year old girl. It wouldn't take much to widen her vaginal canal.

 

[DeDee]

If records of JonBenét's school nurse visits were subpoenaed, they must be released to the authorities.

My baby sister went to the school nurse almost every Monday for months of first grade because she wanted to go home to be with our mother after being home all weekend. Her first grade teacher would bring my youngest sister, who was crying, to my sixth grade classroom door to get me in hopes that I could soothe my baby sister. I find nothing sinister at all with the Monday school nurse visits.

JonBenét's hymen area was rubbed/eroded in the same location with each intrusion. A 10yom would be all over the place if he were sticking it to her. I firmly believe sly Patsy did the insertions prior to the murder with the purpose of leading the police to believe that sexual abuse was a possible reason for the murder that would lead AWAY from her being the culprit.

 

[887sMtreme]

I believe it's possible that BR's Swiss Army knife (all folded up, of course) could have been used for penetration. It would have enough unsmooth edges to inflict the types of superficial, but very irritating, damage noted by the ME. Whether BR himself did this or not is anyone's guess. There is also question about where it was located the night of the murder. I've heard reports that it was on a counter in the basement near the "wine cellar," where it might have been used to cut the ties that bound JB. What's the latest ideas on that?

 

[Compassionate Reader]

I don't usually post in this forum, but this came across my Facebook news feed and I thought people on this forum might be interested.

Admins, please feel free to move this post to a more appropriate area.

http://www.cnn.com/videos/justice/2015/02/26/dailyshare-jonbenet-ramsey-police-chief-reddit-ama.hln

 

[DeeDee249]

If records of JonBenét's school nurse visits were subpoenaed, they must be released to the authorities.

My baby sister went to the school nurse almost every Monday for months of first grade because she wanted to go home to be with our mother after being home all weekend. Her first grade teacher would bring my youngest sister, who was crying, to my sixth grade classroom door to get me in hopes that I could soothe my baby sister. I find nothing sinister at all with the Monday school nurse visits.

JonBenét's hymen area was rubbed/eroded in the same location with each intrusion. A 10yom would be all over the place if he were sticking it to her. I firmly believe sly Patsy did the insertions prior to the murder with the purpose of leading the police to believe that sexual abuse was a possible reason for the murder that would lead AWAY from her being the culprit.

The problem is that the DA (Hunter) refused to issue ANY warrants in this case- including phone records and medical records, so there was no subpoena.
JB was not a baby, and had been in Kindergarten the previous year as well. The Monday school nurse visits may not have been sinister in YOUR case, but in this case they are important because THIS child was found to have been repeatedly sexually assaulted at her autopsy​. Big difference. It is necessary to see whether she was going to the nurse because she was experiencing genital irritation or discomfort. If the records showed that is why she was at the nurse on many Mondays, it is reasonable to conceive that a sexually abused child may be targeted by her abuser on the weekends. This is especially true when a POSSIBLE abuser was not present at the home during the week, but was present on weekends. Again- there has to be something in those records that the R lawyers and the DA wanted to remain hidden. There is simply NO rational reason to refuse to present them to police, who are attempting to solve the murder of the child in question.

 

[scratch33]

I believe it's possible that BR's Swiss Army knife (all folded up, of course) could have been used for penetration. It would have enough unsmooth edges to inflict the types of superficial, but very irritating, damage noted by the ME. Whether BR himself did this or not is anyone's guess. There is also question about where it was located the night of the murder. I've heard reports that it was on a counter in the basement near the "wine cellar," where it might have been used to cut the ties that bound JB. What's the latest ideas on that?

The housekeeper said she had taken BR's Swiss Army Knife away from him and hidden it in the linen closet with the sheets (so she thought only PR could have found it), but if I remember correctly, it was found in a corner on the floor of the wine cellar.

I think the paintbrush was used to molest her, since there was a splinter found in her vagina -- *ugh*!

 

[DeeDee249]

The housekeeper said she had taken BR's Swiss Army Knife away from him and hidden it in the linen closet with the sheets (so she thought only PR could have found it), but if I remember correctly, it was found in a corner on the floor of the wine cellar.

I think the paintbrush was used to molest her, since there was a splinter found in her vagina -- *ugh*!

That the paintbrush was used to molest her was confirmed just recently by former Boulder Police Chief Mark Beckner. This was the first time I had ever seen it stated as fact, though I have long felt it was the source of the wood splinters found in her vagina.

 

[887sMtreme]

I do know that the cellulose found in JBR's vagina suggests that something wooden (if only a splinter on a finger) found its way in there that night. I was thinking of what might have been used before that, if chronic abuse/sex play had taken place. And I did remember that reference to the linen closet, which was what first put the thought in my mind. I don't know what size it was, but I thought it could have been used that way if it were not one of those really big ones, and it would certainly have caused the evidence of chronic abuse noted by the ME.

I had a "fellow" female playmate who made a shocking suggestion to me when we were both just 9 years old about what she might do to me with my (folded, at least) Girl Scout knife. It freaked me out so much that I avoided her ever after, but I never told my parents either. This was in the late 1950s, when there were few ways for kids to pick up those kinds of ideas if not through personal experience. That kid might well have been a victim of abuse in her own home and may have thought it was perfectly normal.

 

[icedtea4me]

I recall reading she said she placed the knife in a cabinet above the sink in the second floor laundry area.

 

[UKGuy]

That the paintbrush was used to molest her was confirmed just recently by former Boulder Police Chief Mark Beckner. This was the first time I had ever seen it stated as fact, though I have long felt it was the source of the wood splinters found in her vagina.

DeeDee249,
If you add in Coroner Meyer's verbatim remarks to LA about digital penetration along with:

On Dec. 27, 1996 Patsy Ramsey, exhausted and lying down, reached up and touched the face of a friend, Pam Griffin, the woman who had made JonBenet’s pageant costumes. Griffin thought Patsy was delirious when she asked, “Couldn't’t you fix this for me?” as though a sewing machine could bring back her daughter. She then remembers Patsy saying, “We didn't mean for this to happen” and Griffin got the definite feeling that in her weakened condition, Patsy had revealed that she knew who the killer was.

I reckon the we here is PR and JR leaving BR as the main suspect, hence the staging?

.

 

[Tawny]

The DNA is being discussed again elsewhere in a thread I'm not allowed to expand on my question.

Does anyone know if investigators were able (legally?) to acquire DNA from a minor? Was the unsourced DNA ever compared to BR's? All anyone ever says is "it wasn't Ramsey DNA".

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

The DNA is being discussed again elsewhere in a thread I'm not allowed to expand on my question.

Does anyone know if investigators were able (legally?) to acquire DNA from a minor? Was the unsourced DNA ever compared to BR's? All anyone ever says is "it wasn't Ramsey DNA".

They would know if it was burkes because it would have markers of the parents. It is unknown which means NOT BURKE>

 

[Tawny]

In the other thread you said they had his DNA.

Do they have his DNA or do they think it's not him because of his parents' markers?

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

In the other thread you said they had his DNA.

Do they have his DNA or do they think it's not him because of his parents' markers?

No, you asked if minors can be tested. But they did have his DNA and even if they didn't. They could tell whether or not he could be involved by the parents DNA samples.

The unknown DNA is unknown DNA.

 

[DeeDee249]

They cannot get DNA samples from a minor without parental consent. There are, of course, ways of getting it surreptitiously- for example. saliva from the glass, etc. Maybe even skin cells from a comb or hairbrush. He is old enough to give it now, but of course he never will. Yet, they did match his fingerprints to those on the glass. And there is said to be his DNA on the pink nightie (Patsy's too). Cynic is the DNA expert here- it is possible to match BR's from Patsy's I think. Not the prints, though. Doesn't mean he had to give prints at that time, but he may have had prints taken at another time.

 

[Tawny]

Thanks Deedee249!

 

[otg]

The DNA is being discussed again elsewhere in a thread I'm not allowed to expand on my question.

Does anyone know if investigators were able (legally?) to acquire DNA from a minor? Was the unsourced DNA ever compared to BR's? All anyone ever says is "it wasn't Ramsey DNA".

A control sample was taken of Burke's DNA, as well as all others' whose DNA presence might have an innocent explanation (e.g. JR, PR, friends, LEOs, and CSIs). And therein lies the problem. Since a Ramsey's DNA could have an innocent explanation, it could easily be overlooked in a place where someone else's DNA would be incriminating. I think this is the only reason John Ramsey's tDNA has never been mentioned as being found mixed in with the tDNA found on the outside of JonBenet's long-johns. After all, we know he held her by the waist when he carried her stiff body up from the cellar.

Here are a couple of pertinent comments from Kolar's recent censored AMAA:

QUESTION: Can you comment on the usefulness of the new DNA testing that apparently exonerated the parents? I read Foreign Faction by James Kolar and he asserts that the DNA in no way exonerates them and, in fact, points to such an odd scenario (6 intruders) as the only possible solution outside of coincidental depositing that the idea that it exonerates the parents is ludicrous. I'd be very interested to see a rebuttal, if there is one. Thanks for doing this!
Also, in Patsy's Christmas cards she sent that year, I read somewhere that she used an unfamiliar word, (can't remember what the word was) that was also used in the ransom note. Is this true?

ANSWER: Sorry, I can't provide the rebuttal, as I agree with Jim Kolar. Exonerating anyone based on a small piece of evidence that has not yet been proven to even be connected to the crime is absurd in my opinion. You must look at any case in the totality of all the evidence, circumstances, statements, etc. in coming to conclusions. Mary Lacy, the DA who said the DNA exonerated them made up her mind years before that a mother could not do that to a child, thus the family was innocent. Even though we pointed out that it is not unheard of for mothers do such things.....and you would know that if you just watched the news.
​

And then there is this:

QUESTION: Does it seem strange to you that neither of the parent's DNA was found on the body? Would not a grieving parent touch the body on discovery and spend some time holding the body sobbing? Surely one would expect some parental clothing fibers, hair, or DNA on the body, under normal circumstances, even if they weren't the killers? Does the absence suggest staging?

ANSWER: There was some evidence that could have come from the parents. These could be indicative of involvement or simply the natural transfer that occurs when people live together. Trace evidence belonging to family members does not tell us much when they all live together.

​

(I think it's safe to assume this last response would apply to Burke as well.)

 

[DeeDee249]

It is also interesting to note that JR seemed to be VERY careful not to touch her body. He carefully carried her upright, like a mannequin. He held her around the waist, about a foot away from his own body. Linda Arndt was greeted by the horrific sight of JB seeming to "walk" up the stairs from the basement, grotesquely stiff, discolored, and stinking, with a cord dangling from her throat. Her mouth open, forever fixed in a silent scream of horror, not the least of it caused by her knowing WHO had done this to her- the last face she saw was someone she loved. Nope- he wanted NO part of his daughter now.

 

[JeannaT]

She was absolutely certainly NOT stinking, DeeDee. She had been dead for less than 12 hours, and she was a healthy very small child.

She did NOT stink when her father carried her remains upstairs.

I'm really offended by your characterization of what happened when her father brought her remains upstairs.

By the way, none of us know how we would react if we found our preschooler tortured to death in our home. I don't know how I would react, at all. I certainly would grab up the remains and bring them into the public area. Are the people who think the Ramseys murdered her thinking that they should have said hey cops, come here, wow we've found her? There is no way to categorize what a grieving father would do, finding her remains in the state they were in.

 

[questfortrue]

WARNING – GRAPHIC DESCRIPTION OF DECOMPOSITION FROM A FORENSIC PATHOLOGIST – DO NOT READ ANY FURTHER IF SUCH A TOPIC CAUSES DISTRESS

From what I’ve read on forensic pathology sites about putrefaction or decomposition facts:
-Decomposition or putrefaction happens at the cellular level immediately after death, by the action of bacterial enzymes. Surprisingly, bodies of children putrify rapidly and if the surface of the body has been injured in any way, decomposition proceeds even more quickly.
-Temperature has an effect on the speed of decomposition. Putrefaction begins above 50F and is optimum between 69F and 100F. (Sidenote: It was said the basement boiler room, adjacent to the wc, was quite warm.)
-Air. Free access of air will also hasten putrefaction.
-Moisture. If there is mold in the wc, there is likely moisture in the environment. For putrefaction moisture is necessary.
___________
As to JonBenet‘s state of decomposition, there are a couple of references in books:
Linda Arndt felt the body for a neck pulse, noticed the odor of decay . . .Thomas, IRMI
Ramsey placed JonBenét on a rug, just inside the front doorway. Arndt could see the child’s lips were blue. It was obvious that JonBenét was dead. There was an odor of decay, and dried mucus from one of the child’s nostrils was visible. Schiller PMPT