Who molested/abused Jonbenet?

[BBB167893]

all out of the blue?hm,seems an entire panel of doctors disagree with you,JB was previously abused/molested.

Go for it, maddy!

 

[madeleine]

No evidence of an intruder so that leaves only the three people KNOWN to be in the house the night JonBenet died -- Burke, Patsy and John.

AND MAYBE one person who was called over (the reason the phone records went missing??) to help clean the crime scene (the foreign unmatched DNA?)
I guess business/military people like JR know exactly who to call over in crisis situations .BUT on the other hand a profi would have created a scene that actually would have made some sense (staging,RN,etc).

 

[tennison]

and where exactly did I say all these things?
seems like you picked a line from one scenario,another line from another scenario and you make it sound like we all believe something that isn't supported by any evidence at all.
how does someone accidentally garrote someone anyway?
where does it say she was assaulted with the paintbrush?Meyer said digital penetration,the splinters could have ended up in her vagina through transfer,the one who broke the brush touched JB.
all out of the blue?hm,seems an entire panel of doctors disagree with you,JB was previously abused/molested.

An entire panel of doctors who did not perform the Áutopsy.

 

[tennison]

No evidence of an intruder

Really? No evidence. At all.

so that leaves only the three people KNOWN to be in the house the night JonBenet died -- Burke, Patsy and John.

And you crudely defined people's theories. The 'ligature' was most certainly no accident -- people such as myself who believe it was an EA device or those who think it was staging still agree that it was applied deliberately but with a different purpose intended in its use.

All the evidence does implicate the parents though - no-one has to "try" to make it fit. Most handwriting experts think Patsy wrote the ransom note -- why would an 'innocent' women write a ransom note?

Again..... Most Handwriting EXPERTS? Names please.
•No BPD-Hired Experts Identified Patsy as RN Author. "During the investigation, the Boulder Police Department and Boulder County District Attorney's Office consulted at least six handwriting experts. (SMF P 191; PSMF P 191.) All of these experts consulted the original Ransom Note and original handwriting exemplars from Mrs. Ramsey. (SMF P 205; PSMF P 205.) Four of these experts were hired by the police and two were hired by defendants. (SMF P 191; PSMF P 191.) None of the six consulted experts identified Mrs. Ramsey as the author of the Ransom Note. (SMF P 195; PSMF P 195.) [Emphasis added.]
Fibres from Patsy's red top she was wearing on the 25th December were found on the duct tape placed on JonBenet's mouth? How did they get there?
Fibres are everywhere , they Adhere they Transfer, scenes can easilly be contaminated.4.Internet poster Bill Salisbury has asserted: "Lin Wood is on record as saying he checked out that Bruce Levin allegation about a black fiber from John's shirt in JonBenet's crotch area. Lin Wood has said he knows for a fact that the Bruce Levin allegation is completely untrue. I believe Lin Wood about that. I don't think Lin Wood would say that if he didn't believe what he was saying and that his credibility could be questioned in court. I reckon Lin Wood has seen the forensic report about the black fiber matter and knows Bruce Levin was fabricating that evidence."


Sources Ruled Out
•"Earlier in the case, the police had thought the fibers from the body came from John Ramsey’s bathrobe or Patsy’s black pants or from the blanket found near JonBenét or from the blanket that had been found inside the suitcase under the broken basement window. The fibers might also have come from JonBenét’s own clothes or from one of her stuffed animals. By now, however, all of those possibilities had been excluded [emphasis added], and the only logical explanation was that the fibers came from whatever had been used to wipe JonBenét or possibly from someone who might have rubbed up against her when she was unclothed, which allowed fibers to find their way along her skin and eventually into the folds of her labia. In any event, the clothes worn by Patsy and John on Christmas would have to be compared with the fibers" (Schiller 1999a:563; quote and source provided by Internet poster


The list goes on and on. But most people, either those that believe the asphyxiation came first or the the head-blow preceded it, both agree that evidence is not shortcoming in implicating parental guilt and involvement and way you dice and slice it!

Again, it depends on which way you look at it.:twocents:

 

[madeleine]

An entire panel of doctors who did not perform the Áutopsy.

no,but them not being present doesn't make them stupid nor unprofessional.
maybe they've seen the photos and the autopsy report.
how many experts don't take the stand in each trial and didn't attend the autopsy,doesn't make them less credible.

if we're talking about an ERODED hymen of a 6years old....do you really need pictures or to be present to see it with your own eyes in order figure it out?
if the autopsy report says there were OLD scars down there....do you really need someone who was present to translate it to you?

 

[tennison]

no,but them not being present doesn't make them stupid nor unprofessional.
maybe they've seen the photos and the autopsy report.
how many experts don't take the stand in each trial and didn't attend the autopsy,doesn't make them less credible.

if we're talking about an ERODED hymen of a 6years old....do you really need pictures or to be present to see it with your own eyes in order figure it out?
if the autopsy report says there were OLD scars down there....do you really need someone who was present to translate it to you?

I never suggested they were stupid, however photographs do not and can not take the place of actually being present at an Autopsy, End of.

JB may have had an eroded Hymen for many reasons, sexual abuse is only one POSSIBILITY, this is why meyer erred on the side of caution her knew he could not say with any certainty there was prior sexual abuse.:banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead:

 

[Let_Forever_Be]

I never suggested they were stupid, however photographs do not and can not take the place of actually being present at an Autopsy, End of.

JB may have had an eroded Hymen for many reasons, sexual abuse is only one POSSIBILITY, this is why meyer erred on the side of caution her knew he could not say with any certainty there was prior sexual abuse.:banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead:

The autopsy does not say that no chronic molestation occurred.Most factual analyses of this case have been based on an interpretation of the autopsy. Thus, your inability to present evidence that no molestation occurred is manifestly refuted by the majority of experts who analysed the evidence available and said abuse did occur.

Either JonBenet was molested or she was not. The evidence clearly says she was. JonBenet's genital opening was twice the size of normal 6 year old girls;She had clear 'fiddling' in the 7 o;clock position and birefringement material found. Further, there was chronic inflammation (and Meyer does note that) as well as an acute injury whereby blood was drawn.

You were caught out being disingenuous when you posted a quote from the Carnes ruling trying to somehow conflate it to be what the autopsy says.The Carnes ruling is likewise an opinion from a judge who did not have access to all the evidence. For example, Cyril Wecht did not testify at that case.

The autopsy merely presents the clinical facts of what happened. It doesn't opine. It's job is to record in a clinical matter the 'effects' first and foremost. The 'cause's of those 'effects' are only stated if the coroner is manifestly sure/confident in what he is saying. Perhaps a better coroner would have been more forthright in his opinion than Meyer. Who knows.

Doctors, coroners and criminal pathologists drew their conclusions from the findings of the autopsy.Most of these experts came to the conclusion : JonBenet was chronically and sexually molested.

 

[BBB167893]

I never suggested they were stupid, however photographs do not and can not take the place of actually being present at an Autopsy, End of.

JB may have had an eroded Hymen for many reasons, sexual abuse is only one POSSIBILITY, this is why meyer erred on the side of caution her knew he could not say with any certainty there was prior sexual abuse.:banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead:

If it were ONLY the eroded hymen, tennison, I might agree with you.

 

[madeleine]

I never suggested they were stupid, however photographs do not and can not take the place of actually being present at an Autopsy, End of.

are you suggesting Meyer is the only one who can be right about this because he was present?

JB may have had an eroded Hymen for many reasons, sexual abuse is only one POSSIBILITY, this is why meyer erred on the side of caution her knew he could not say with any certainty there was prior sexual abuse.:banghead::banghead::banghead::banghead:

a weird crime ,the killer's nr.1 priority is to redress and wipe the genital area of the victim off,you got acute sexual damage,an eroded hymen and OLD scars.....yeah,those old scars were definitely inflicted by herself while playing with mommy's tampons.....and that's why her hymen was eroded as well,right

 

[madeleine]

btw,didn't Meyer say he had more but didn't write it down because he saves it for the trial?I know I read this somewhere and even posted it a while ago.

 

[Let_Forever_Be]

btw,didn't Meyer say he had more but didn't write it down because he saves it for the trial?I know I read this somewhere and even posted it a while ago.

Meyer was asked to re-phrase at least one part. Can't remember what bit it was tho.

 

[madeleine]

It's not like Meyer is one of those you can trust in this case anyway....I myslef don't,too many screw-ups.

Btw,I found what I was looking for,it was about the TOD

>>>>>>>


Wecht also questioned why there was no estimated time of death in the autopsy.

But Meyer said it isn't unusual not to include an estimated time of death in an autopsy report.

"The investigation is still ongoing," Meyer said. "There may be some point that comes up during the investigation that might have an influence on what that estimated time of death is. I don't like to put interpretive things in an autopsy report."

-----------------------------------------------------------

From a statement by Boulder County Coroner John E. Meyer, M.D.:

"The time of an 'unwitnessed' death is very difficult to determine with any precision, and at best is an estimate based not only on autopsy findings but also on investigative information.
"I consider estimation of time of death to be an interpretive finding rather than a factual statement, and it is not this Office's practice to include this estimate as part of any autopsy report. HUH?:waitasec:As has been stated in the past, it would also be inappropriate for me, as a potential expert and material witness, to make interpretive statements prior to testifying in court."

---------------------------------------


BUT


ST's book,pg 39

"Meyer stayed only 7 minutes ,not taking the time to perform two routine procedures that would have helped establish the time of death-taking vitreous fluid from the eye and obtaining the internal body temperature."
__________________




it's not the only mistake he made.....remember the contaminated nail clippings.......
I guess it was convenient for everybody that his report left us with so many unanswered questions...

 

[madeleine]

Meyer makes it sound like it's not something important,IMO it's crucial.....he basically made sure we don't have neither COD(what came first will always be an issue and could change everything) nor TOD,without this two this case is a mess.What case isn't.....

Look at what happens in the Anthony case,I read Spitz is gonna testify on behalf of Casey,he's gonna say,hey,you got no COD,how do you know it wasn't an accident?And he's kinda right,don't you think?


ETA:

"The medical examiner and the police (in Orlando, Fla.) determined that the cause of death was undeterminable and the manner of death was homicide," Dr. Werner Spitz of Grosse Pointe Shores told The Detroit News.

"If you don't know what she died of, how do you know it was a homicide?"

http://detnews.com/article/20110616/METRO/106160385/1409/rss36

 

[UKGuy]

Meyer makes it sound like it's not something important,IMO it's crucial.....he basically made sure we don't have neither COD(what came first will always be an issue and could change everything) nor TOD,without this two this case is a mess.What case isn't.....

Look at what happens in the Anthony case,I read Spitz is gonna testify on behalf of Casey,he's gonna say,hey,you got no COD,how do you know it wasn't an accident?And he's kinda right,don't you think?


ETA:

"The medical examiner and the police (in Orlando, Fla.) determined that the cause of death was undeterminable and the manner of death was homicide," Dr. Werner Spitz of Grosse Pointe Shores told The Detroit News.

"If you don't know what she died of, how do you know it was a homicide?"

http://detnews.com/article/20110616/METRO/106160385/1409/rss36

madeleine,
Although I like to debate what came first head injury or strangulation etc. In a sense they do not matter, since Coroner Meyer's autopsy clearly attributes COD to both the head injury and ligature strangulation. Clinically this is known as hypoxia.

e.g. Definition

Hypoxia (medical), a pathological condition in which the body as a whole or region of the body is deprived of adequate oxygen supply.

On the witness stand I reckon Coroner Meyer would interpret the ligature strangulation much as most RDI theorists do, probably offering reasons why an EA interpretation could never get off the ground, and elaborating on the head injury. And it is the latter along with his interpretation of any prior molestation that would be interesting. One question an compotent prosecutor would put to Coroner Meyer might be: In your estimation, did two different people molest JonBenet, that is one prior to the night of her death, and another on the night of her death? He might also opine on the likely sequence of events, head blow followed by strangulation and its reverse.



.

 

[madeleine]

madeleine,
Although I like to debate what came first head injury or strangulation etc. In a sense they do not matter,

maybe in court or in theory it wouldn't matter much but to me it does because in my opinion strangulation first tells me it was either premeditation ,sex game gone wrong or BDI (aggressive playing,domination) and the head bash was meant to finish her off or shut her up (she was screaming)

head bash first makes me think of other theories

so to me it's very important which came first and I think it would be very helpful for a prosecutor as well when building the case

One question an compotent prosecutor would put to Coroner Meyer might be: In your estimation, did two different people molest JonBenet, that is one prior to the night of her death, and another on the night of her death? .

very interesting.IMO this could also be a defence question,to raise reasonable doubt...you can't prove that whoever molested her the day before or so was the same person who assaulted her the night of the murder
even IF it's not likely there were 2 different persons,IMO it's not possible at all,I mean how unlucky was this little girl,2 different abusers.....

the thing is,even if it's not likely,in a defence lawyers mind it's always "possible" as long as it raises reasonable doubt.......

 

[UKGuy]

maybe in court or in theory it wouldn't matter much but to me it does because in my opinion strangulation first tells me it was either premeditation ,sex game gone wrong or BDI (aggressive playing,domination) and the head bash was meant to finish her off or shut her up (she was screaming)

head bash first makes me think of other theories

so to me it's very important which came first and I think it would be very helpful for a prosecutor as well when building the case





very interesting.IMO this could also be a defence question,to raise reasonable doubt...you can't prove that whoever molested her the day before or so was the same person who assaulted her the night of the murder
even IF it's not likely there were 2 different persons,IMO it's not possible at all,I mean how unlucky was this little girl,2 different abusers.....

the thing is,even if it's not likely,in a defence lawyers mind it's always "possible" as long as it raises reasonable doubt.......

madeleine,

maybe in court or in theory it wouldn't matter much but to me it does because in my opinion strangulation first tells me it was either premeditation ,sex game gone wrong or BDI (aggressive playing,domination) and the head bash was meant to finish her off or shut her up (she was screaming)

head bash first makes me think of other theories

so to me it's very important which came first and I think it would be very helpful for a prosecutor as well when building the case

Yes I do agree.

very interesting.IMO this could also be a defence question,to raise reasonable doubt...you can't prove that whoever molested her the day before or so was the same person who assaulted her the night of the murder
even IF it's not likely there were 2 different persons,IMO it's not possible at all,I mean how unlucky was this little girl,2 different abusers.....

the thing is,even if it's not likely,in a defence lawyers mind it's always "possible" as long as it raises reasonable doubt.......

I guess thats why its a good question to ask Meyer. He would have to address the chronic and acute abuse.

Something I forgot were all the other ancilliary injuries inflicted upon JonBenet, e.g. those unexplained bruises etc. Just wonder what Coroner Meyer's interpretation would be here?



.

 

[DeeDee249]

madeleine,

I guess thats why its a good question to ask Meyer. He would have to address the chronic and acute abuse.

Something I forgot were all the other ancilliary injuries inflicted upon JonBenet, e.g. those unexplained bruises etc. Just wonder what Coroner Meyer's interpretation would be here?

.

Too bad Mayer didn't address it himself. I think this was not an oversight. He's retired now. I wonder if this case ever came to trial, would he be compelled to testify?

 

[UKGuy]

Too bad Mayer didn't address it himself. I think this was not an oversight. He's retired now. I wonder if this case ever came to trial, would he be compelled to testify?

DeeDee249,
I agree, no steer on the bruising or sequence of events. He would be compelled to testify. He wrote the autopsy report so he would have to give an account of that and verify whether his verbatim remarks were as such. Including whether other internal BPD forensic evidence was consistent with his report.

He could become non-committal if he did not wish to answer hypothetical questions. He probably prefers a quiet life and says a thanks giving prayer everyday, since he has never been called as a witness for the prosecution in the case the State of Colorado vs Ramsey. Yet!


.

 

[LinasK]

The other thing that seals it as John molesting her for me- is that the black fibers from his unique Israeli-made shirt were found in her panties!!! There is no innocent explanation/laundry transfer for that!:snooty:

 

[LinasK]

Meyer makes it sound like it's not something important,IMO it's crucial.....he basically made sure we don't have neither COD(what came first will always be an issue and could change everything) nor TOD,without this two this case is a mess.What case isn't.....

Look at what happens in the Anthony case,I read Spitz is gonna testify on behalf of Casey,he's gonna say,hey,you got no COD,how do you know it wasn't an accident?And he's kinda right,don't you think?


ETA:

"The medical examiner and the police (in Orlando, Fla.) determined that the cause of death was undeterminable and the manner of death was homicide," Dr. Werner Spitz of Grosse Pointe Shores told The Detroit News.

"If you don't know what she died of, how do you know it was a homicide?"

http://detnews.com/article/20110616/METRO/106160385/1409/rss36

No, he's not right in the Casey Anthony case- it was NO accident that Casey murdered her by suffocation-clearly, it wasn't suicide , but we're not here to discuss that case!