Who molested/abused Jonbenet? #2

Discussion in 'JonBenet Ramsey' started by madeleine, Jun 7, 2011.

  1. madeleine

    madeleine Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,973
    Likes Received:
    73
    Trophy Points:
    48
    this issue always kept me from being sure that BDI.I always thought that the parents behaviour fits the BDI theory,her wounds as well,the garrote,the strangulation and some other things.
    But JB being previously molested/abused makes me rethink all this.
    PLUS all the trouble the killer/killers went through with redressing /whiping her off,the most important part of the staging IMO.This is what needed to be covered for.

    Thread #1 with poll
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Aug 6, 2021


  2. Swirlz

    Swirlz Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    14,870
    Likes Received:
    7,162
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Does anyone know where the info about a photo album possibly related to the infamous "feather boa pic" being among the items listed on the Charlevoix Search Warrant comes from?

    I found this online document but it is indecipherable: http://www.acandyrose.com/03061997charlevoix7.gif
     
    fcavanaugh, mrsselig and DeDee like this.
  3. SweaterGirl

    SweaterGirl Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    41
    Likes Received:
    274
    Trophy Points:
    53
    I've had so many theories regarding this case, but I do think there may be merit to JR or even PR being part of a CSAM cult or ring. On the Duggar thread, much of the film material is produced in the Philippines, which JR is intimately connected with. His "work" with kids/youth in Thailand also sends up red flags.
    And while reading an article about Matt Gaetz on Politico, it mentioned that one of his underage "associates" who took the stage with him in 2017 had competed in beauty pageants as a child with none other than JBR herself.
    These connections seem too connect-y to overlook without consideration, IMOO.
     
  4. BoldBear

    BoldBear Active Member

    Messages:
    649
    Likes Received:
    160
    Trophy Points:
    43
    Sigh.

    Jonbenet didn't have any fear of adults seeing her private parts. Fleet White reported she'd call for an adult to wipe her bottom when she was sitting on the toilet. If she couldn't get someone to do it (based on all of her underwear being stained), she'd go unclean. I have no answers or assumptions here. If a child was abused, wouldn't she have a fear of having an adult see her like that? I don't know. I have not read about child sexual abuse and have no experience with abused children. This is a question I'd like to post to a child sexual abuse expert.
    What I can guess is a girl of her size didn't have direct access to toilet paper in her bathroom. There was no dispenser next to the toilet. [Inconsiderate for the parents to do to a child her size.] That means the toilet paper roll was either on the floor, the bathroom counter, or on the back of the toilet. Being that small, I can't imagine it was an easy reach.
    She also allegedly had urinary tract infections supposedly from wiping in the wrong direction. This is only based on what I read reported from her pediatrician. So if Patsy did douche her, it could have been to try to control infections or corporal punishment. Maybe there was a little bit of both. I don't know.
    What I do know about Patsy is that she went through stage 4 chemo. Along with that comes chemo brain (a brain fog). It would have also changed how she would view life. She also wanted the appearance of perfection in her appearance, the house she lived in, and her daughter, especially during pageants.
    I can't determine if she was sexually abused and neither could the investigators. The questioning they were allowed was limited. They couldn't get too deep into the sexual abuse questions. They were blocked at even the most basic questions. Even the holding of the body for 1 more day after the autopsy was cut short due to Ramsey's rush to burial. Then again, the Boulder investigators didn't call for a sexual abuse expert during the autopsy and that was a mistake.
    Was she abused? That can go to motive. It can also have nothing to do with her murder. I have never seen a good answer to the question. That question may never be answered.
     
    sallye818, Tower, fcavanaugh and 4 others like this.
  5. UKGuy

    UKGuy Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    10,757
    Likes Received:
    3,124
    Trophy Points:
    113
    BoldBear,
    There is evidence to suggest JonBenet had been chronically abused, i.e. internal scarring from prior healed injuries.

    Also the two medical examinations undertaken by Dr. Andy Sirontak, Chief of Denver Children’s Hospital Child Protection Team and the Coroner Dr. Meyer both concluded that JonBenet had a foreign object inserted inside her and noted that her hymen was shriveled and retracted, probable sign of prior abuse?

    These guys saw JonBenet in the flesh everyone else has only ever looked at autopsy photographs.

    .
     
    Tadpole12, shefner and Quiet Time like this.
  6. BoldBear

    BoldBear Active Member

    Messages:
    649
    Likes Received:
    160
    Trophy Points:
    43
    I'm completely aware of this. So do you have evidence that proves molestation? Once physical evidence is found, then investigators need to do interviews to find out where it's coming from. They may even discover the damage is coming from the child themselves. There's the douching question, infections, and possible itching. Yes, there's evidence, but what does it say?
     
    Last edited: May 28, 2021
    Tadpole12 and DeDee like this.
  7. UKGuy

    UKGuy Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    10,757
    Likes Received:
    3,124
    Trophy Points:
    113
    BoldBear,
    The foregoing medical examination results are prima facie evidence of molestation. It's that simple.

    Outwith a homicide case you could argue this or that, e.g. douching, self-insertion, infection, etc.

    JonBenet was molested then an attempt was made to stage it away but not 100% as the medical examinations reported.

    The internal scarring and claims about a foreign object represent both chronic and acute molestation.

    This forms the basis for a felony sexual assault charge.

    All the other things folks can think up regarding how JonBenet might have been assaulted are on the table, but not yet confirmed by any current medical procedure.

    So for the injuries discovered and itemized by the medical examiners means one or more of the residents of the Ramsey household are likely responsible?

    For a 100% cast-iron opinion you would need to have been present at the grand-jury when Coroner Meyer presented his evidence, as he would have outlined precisely why he thought JonBenet had been digitally penetrated and subject to sexual contact.

    12-29-1996 Search Warrant for 755 15th Street, Excerpt
    .
     
    Tadpole12 and proust20 like this.
  8. proust20

    proust20 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    297
    Likes Received:
    455
    Trophy Points:
    63
    According to Dr. Wecht, JB had been abused 2 or 3 days before the murder. This would put it in sync with the 911 call on the 23rd. SA provides the most likely motive. However, that does not make it certain. Still, it is hard to believe that JB's killer wasn't aware of what had been done to her.
     
    Tadpole12 and DeDee like this.
  9. Quiet Time

    Quiet Time Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    914
    Likes Received:
    2,762
    Trophy Points:
    93
    Did you say Thailand?

    Visions of John Mark Carr come to mind......
     
    Tadpole12 likes this.
  10. BoldBear

    BoldBear Active Member

    Messages:
    649
    Likes Received:
    160
    Trophy Points:
    43
    This is amusing. I've been through this process. Yes, she was abused when she was murdered, but is it consistent with the abuse prior to her murder? Can you connect the prior abuse to the murder? Are they one in the same? Prove that to me as an absolute, and you've won your argument. Then this case is a simple child abuse murder. If so, you need to put sharp objects that would puncture, bleed and scar a little girl. Then you have a direct cause of JBR's Monday morning visits to the nurse as a direct cause. Put puncture scars into the picture and I'll withdraw. But without evidence, UKGuy, you're simply someone who attacks someone's outside theories as nonsense because you have the right library and the perfect experts--and everyone knows they can never be wrong.
    No one has solved this murder in more than 20 years (neither have you). I challenge you to put the pieces on the board that night. Look at the timeline as reported by the Ramseys. Dismiss anything put into place by Lou Smit. Look into the details of the people the days before the murder occurred. JonBenet wasn't meant to be murdered. There was pressure building before this ever happened. Put the pieces on the board and dismiss the broken window in the train room. I don't believe that Linda Arndt was wrong. Yes, she was new at investigations. Yes, she was hired to handle sexual assault cases in a college town that needed that type of investigator for female sexual assault victims. But let's give her the far-fetched benefit of the doubt. Maybe when she was staring John in the face, it was either based on intuition, experience or a combination of both. (That sends chills up my back and it should do that to you too.)
    When have you come forward here you declare everyone as wrong? I've read it all. I've looked over the timeline. I've come back here to see if there is anything new. I want something to declare that what I've discovered is wrong...and there isn't. It's between the parents.
    Yes, it's John because they were protecting Burke. Yes, John was protecting Burke because the child he loved the most, Elizabeth (Beth), had died mysteriously [by his multimillionaire's hand had died on a public highway.] But John loved Burke and would protect him as a murderer. Okay fine, but before this had happened what had happened to make Burke the murderer? He hit his sister with a golf club? [Let's lock up every kid who has hurt their sibling now because there's evidence they're monsters.] Was he killing cats or rabbits? No, he was wanting to get away from his clingy sister when he was with his friends. He was also too terribly shy. That makes him a murderer.
    Get back to what happened that night. Look it over from what John and Patsy said. Put the pieces on the board and play it through.
    UKGuy, please stop discrediting everyone else and start looking at what you've said to discredit them.
    I don't give anything you say any credibility because you take glee to discredit other people's points when you already understand all the counterpoints to discredit your own arguments.
     
    bob johnson likes this.
  11. UKGuy

    UKGuy Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    10,757
    Likes Received:
    3,124
    Trophy Points:
    113
    BoldBear,
    Yes, it is consistent as they are both unwarranted sexual assaults

    There might be no connection beyond the recurrence of ongoing sexual assault, i.e. periodic. JonBenet's Pediatrician, Dr. Francesco Beuf stated that he never witnessed signs of vaginal abuse being present during her visits. Dr. Beuf's medical records revealed that Patsy Ramsey had called his offices three times on the evening of December 17th. The reason for those calls was never determined. Dr. Beuf's alleged observations are at variance with those of Coroner Meyer and Dr. Sirontak, a pediatrician with Denver Children’s Hospital, both who examined JonBenet postmortem and observed signs of chronic abuse.

    Ventus Publishing Foreign Faction Who Really Kidnapped JonBenet by James Kolar, Excerpt
    The consensus on the above evidence suggested that someone close to JonBenét had been responsible for abusing her in the weeks or months preceding her murder.
    I reckon Linda Arndt detected something on JR's face that indicated his involvement in JonBenet's homicide. Then again Smit says he looked into JR and PR's eyes and saw innocence gazing back at him.


    Ventus Publishing Foreign Faction Who Really Kidnapped JonBenet by James Kolar, Excerpt
    Patently both Linda Arndt and Lou Smit cannot be correct?

    No it does not make Burke Ramsey a murderer. Speaking with Detective Arndt as Burke was being interviewed by Dr. Bernhard, Patsy stated that she would have nothing left to live for if she lost Burke. A motive for PR to protect Burke too?

    If you read or view by youtube Dr. Bernhard interviewing Burke you can witness the following account:
    Ventus Publishing Foreign Faction Who Really Kidnapped JonBenet by James Kolar, Excerpt
    Suggesting Burke knows about the head injury but not the ligture asphyxiation? There is forensic evidence to suggest Patsy ligature asphyxiated JonBenet so explaining Burke's omission.

    If you compare and contrast John Ramsey's initial postmortem statements these contradict some of his later accounts, e.g. the suitcase, broken window, the chair, partially opened gifts etc. He continually backtracks and introduces novel explanations for some forensic evidence.

    I reckon the explanation for this is that all three Ramsey's were operating with incomplete information, i.e. they were not all involved JonBenet's death from start to finish, so were compelled to offer ad hoc versions of events?

    So it might be the case is definitely JDI, consistent with JR fronting up JonBenet documentaries at his advanced age, his continual postmortem updating of events and revision of evidence could be construed as a sign of guilt, or is this behavior just a consequence of JR also operating with incomplete information, flowing from a desire to protect Burke?

    .
     
    proust20 likes this.
  12. proust20

    proust20 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    297
    Likes Received:
    455
    Trophy Points:
    63
    Linda Arndt had the advantage of observing JR after he carried up the body. Her reaction was to reach for her gun. Nothing could be more removed from an impression of innocence. In regard to LS's views, I am reminded of George W Bush looking into Putin's eyes.

    JB was already a crime victim before Christmas. The simplest explanation is that the abuser is also the killer. But perhaps, the simple is out of character for the Rs.
     
    Last edited: Jun 7, 2021
    Quiet Time and DeDee like this.
  13. DeDee

    DeDee Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,558
    Likes Received:
    11,687
    Trophy Points:
    113
    Lou Smit was brought into the case to specifically introduce the Intruder Theory.
     
    proust20 and Quiet Time like this.
  14. UKGuy

    UKGuy Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    10,757
    Likes Received:
    3,124
    Trophy Points:
    113
    proust20,
    I agree, it is what it looks like: a sexual homicide.

    My take is that it was Patsy who murdered JonBenet and denied her medical attention.

    Does this make the case PDI?

    Could be, then again was she covering for Burke or John both candidates where sexual motivation predominates?

    Looks like the case is either JDI or BDI, take your pick.

    .
     
    proust20 likes this.
  15. UKGuy

    UKGuy Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    10,757
    Likes Received:
    3,124
    Trophy Points:
    113
    DeDee,
    Sure, and it paid off with all the media coverage suggesting the case was IDI.

    Curiously Lou Smit did ask the Ramsey's some penetrating questions in their interviews, e.g. he caught JR out over the opened gifts.

    His family are looking for donations to do dna matching, best of luck with that.

    A new testing method on the block is protein matching, not as variable as dna but is another tool in the locker.

    .
     
  16. David Rogers

    David Rogers Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    279
    Likes Received:
    481
    Trophy Points:
    63
    I agree. With the Ramsey’s having lawyers the same day as the body was found shows complicity.
     
    DeDee likes this.
  17. proust20

    proust20 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    297
    Likes Received:
    455
    Trophy Points:
    63
    PR wrote the RN to shield herself and/or family. The RN indicates that its author knew that JB was dead. However, IMO there are no such signs in it that the writer (PR) was aware of the SA. So, it's possible that PR wasn't aware of what had been done to JB? On the other hand, there are all the visits and calls to Dr. Beuf.

    The thrust of the RN places the responsibility of following the instructions to rescue JB on to JR -"from your account"-"It's up to you John". The significance of this is underscored by the false start RN, which included PR as an addressee.
     
    Last edited: Jun 9, 2021
    DeDee likes this.
  18. DeDee

    DeDee Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    4,558
    Likes Received:
    11,687
    Trophy Points:
    113
    "the false start RN, which included PR as an addressee"

    Somehow, I was unaware of this.

    So, the author could not, initially, decide who to address in the RN. Such a fascinating case w/ lots of tiny pieces that all do not seem to fit; making it more difficult to know what's truly relevant to the event.

    Do you have a link or remember where you read that?
     
    proust20 likes this.
  19. proust20

    proust20 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    297
    Likes Received:
    455
    Trophy Points:
    63
    DeeDee,

    The s0-called practice RN is generally available. IDK where off hand; but, it shouldn't be hard to source. It was found in the notepad which was used for the RN and which JR handed to LE.
     
    DeDee likes this.
  20. Rain on my Parade

    Rain on my Parade Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    617
    Likes Received:
    1,062
    Trophy Points:
    93
    DeDee,

    04-18-2000 Steve Thomas, "JonBenet, Inside the Ramsey Murder Investigation,"

    Page 73:

    "Chet Ubowski at the CBI had pulled startling information from the tablet belonging to PR. By comparing tear patterns, Ubowski had determined that the first twelve pages were missing and the next four - pages 13 through 16 - contained doodles and lists and some miscellaneous writing."

    "But the next group of pages, 17 through 25, were also missing from the tablet. The following page, 26, was the practice ransom note (Mr. and Mrs. I), and that page showed evidence of ink bleedthrough from the missing page 25."

    Comparisons of the ragged tops of the ransom note pages with the remnants left in the tablet proved that it had come from pages 27, 28, and 29."

    To me, being able to prove that the ransom note came from her table was an incredible piece of evidence.

    "Furthermore, the ink bleedthrough discovered on page 26 indicated that perhaps still another practice note could have been written on page 25 and been discarded. Two possible practice notes and one real one covering three pages led me to believe that the killer had spend more time in the house composing the ransom note than we originally thought.
     
    londoncat and DeDee like this.

Share This Page



  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice