Bonita Papers

Bonita papers:

"The upper front surfaces of Jonbenets left shoulder contained horizontal scrapes with blue-green bruising apparent in the area of the injury."

I've never heard of this injury before. I wonder what could have caused something like this?

snip

"Patsy had chosen a white sleeveless ballerina dress with sequins, but consulted with John before making her final decision. "Are there any bruises on Jonbenets arms," she asked John. John assured her there were not, but Patsy asked him again, "Are you sure?" John replied, "Jonbenets arms were not bruised."

(I've read this somewhere before but I don't remember where.)Well of course the obvious question here is why would Patsy think John would know something like that? She was wearing the long sleeved top when he found her in the basement. How would he know what condition her arms were in? And why would Patsy think he would know?

 

Yesterday I only got thru half of the papers. I didn't remember spin, but it is there.

This comes from the interview with Burke; I've taken out the doctor's inferences:

On January 8, John and Patsy took Burke to the Child Advocacy Center in Niwot, Colorado, through arrangements made by the Boulder Police department, to be interviewed by Dr. Suzanne Bernard, a specialist in child psychology. As is customary in interrogations of children, Dr. Bernhard played a game with Burke throughout the interview and the entire interview was videotaped.

Burke told the doctor that be felt safe

Burke described his father as quiet and that he was "always at work", and that his mother "worked as a mom'. The thing he liked most about his mom was that she gave him lots of hugs and kisses, and the thing he liked most about his dad were "planes". According to Burke, the worst thing they did was not buy him, expensive toys.

Social Services had previously provided Dr. Bernhard with some history on Burke which indicated an ongoing bedwetting problem, but Burke denied this saying that it happened a long time ago.

'When asked to draw a picture of his family, he drew a father figure who was distanced from Burke, a mother figure which was the smallest figure in the picture, and JonBenet was not in the picture at all.

Burke also told Dr. Bernhard that he was “getting on with his life.”,

Dr. Bernhard asked what he thought happened to his sister. "I know what happened, she was killed.” Burke's explanation to the doctor was “someone took her quietly and took her down in the basement took a knife out or hit her on the head." He said that the only thing he asked his dad was "where did you find her body"

 

Linda Wilcox worked for the Ramseys before Linda Hoffman Pugh. She mentions Burke's bedwetting in her interview with Peter Boyles.

Peter Boyles Radio Show - July 21, 1998

07211998lindawilcoxon-PETER BOYLES.htm

Hope the above link works. I have this on disk.

N.B.I just tested the link, it doesn't work. It may be found through Google. If not, I'll copy and paste it for anyone who hasn't read the article before.

 

This is not normal behavior.

Roxie Stine had become the most protective and secretive of all the Ramsey friends. She even invented code names for everyone staying in her home and those who were still considered friends, so that they could talk freely without giving away identities. John and Patsy were dubbed Ozzie and Harriet but Patsy was also often referred to as Queenie. Roxie and her husband called themselves June and Ward Cleaver, and Nedra was identified Dr. Ruth.

 

Karen, you make some very good points.

I have a theory about why there was bruising and horizontal scrapes on the front of JonBenet's left shoulder.

But first, I realize I have been remiss in welcoming some very good posters, such as yourself, to FFJ. So "welcome" ... I'm glad you're here.

Now, as for the bruising. I have always believed that JonBenet was "strangled" with her shirt collar during a protracted struggle. That the perp (probaby Patsy) grabbed JBR's shirt (at the upper left corner) with her right hand and twisted it in order to get control of a struggling JonBenet who was pulling away from her. I believe the Patsy tried to pull JonBenet towards herself with this strangle hold, and in so doing, her right hand bruised JonBenet's shoulder. In addition, the rings Patsy always wore on her right hand would have scraped the skin on JBR's shoulder.

I also believe the ligature was applied to JonBenet's neck not just to point away from the head injury, but was also an attempt to cover up any possible strangulation marks from the shirt.

 

Are you thinking along the same lines as Steve Thomas here, Cherokee, when it came to the head injury? That Patsy dragged JonBenét into the bathroom after finding her in a mess, and her head injury was caused by being thrown into the tub? I think this is what happened.

http://crimemagazine.com/jonbenet.htm

An excerpt is included in this article from Steve Thomas' book "JonBenét

 

Delmar England's analysis of the garrote doesn't coincide with Steve's thoughts here of how the handle was used.

 

Hi Cherokee and thank you for the welcome!
Your scenario of Patsy grabbing a JB's collar and twisting would be a possible explanation for the scrapes on her shoulder because of the rings. I could see that. But why would Patsy think John would know if her arms were bruised? Could she possibly have been wearing the red turtleneck when Patsy grabbed her collar and twisted but then enlisted John to help stage because she couldn't bring herself to do it and he changed her shirt to the white one with the star and therefore HE would've been the only one to see her arms? (I also think John would have been dumb enough to put on oversized panties.)

 

If you'll look at the autopsy photos of JBR, you'll also see bruising on the left side of her neck that could have been made by someone's right hand knuckles pushing hard into the neck muscles while they held the shirt in a twisted vise grip.

I do believe the JonBenet was wearing the red turtleneck when her head was injured. I think it was taken off her, and the white one put on as part of the cleaning up and redressing that was done to JonBenet. That's why Patsy changed her story ... from saying JBR was put to bed in the red top to saying it was the white top.

It's entirely possible that John helped with the staging.

But once again, we have Patsy trying to distance herself from JonBenet's body by asking John if JBR had any bruising on her arms ... as if she hadn't taken a good look at JBR, had nothing to do with the whole situation. It's classic Patsy. Just like she and John emphasized they never picked up the ransom note. What parent wouldn't? But they were so afraid they would be LINKED with the ransom note, they tried to distance themselves from it to an illogical extreme.

An innocent parent wouldn't care if their fingerprints were on the note from taking it up in haste and panic and reading it. They wouldn't be thinking of that at the moment of finding their child missing. But the Ramseys made sure they DIDN'T touch it. Why? Because their guilt told them it could be incriminating evidence.

(As an aside, I think Patsy wrote it with gloves on which further helped in the attempt to disguise her handwriting.)

In fact, the ransom note was so pristine, it didn't even have a crease or a wrinkle. The problem is ... it didn't have ANYONE'S fingerprints on it ... no intruder, nothing. The Ramseys knew there would be no "intruder" fingerprints on the ransom note, so they darn sure weren't going to have their fingerprints be the only ones on it.

 

Hi Cherokee,

You bring up a point that I wonder about. At this time, I'm still of the belief that Patsy's acted alone and that John became suspicious of Patsy (from the hand writting on the note and her behavior) as the morning of Dec. 26th. wore on.

Like you, I suspect Patsy wrote the note wearing gloves. However, if John wasn't involved in the cover up prior to the police arrival that morning, as I believe, why weren't his finger prints on the ransom note? It seems reasonable that if he wasn't involved, he should have handled the note, spreading it out on the floor and kneeling down to read it under the ceiling light. (Spreading the note out on the floor and kneeling down to read it under a ceiling light in itself still seems pretty bizarre to me.)

Here's what I wonder: According to both John and Patsy, John took a shower before he came downstairs. If this was true, would freshly washed hands leave any finger prints on white legal-pad paper?

 

The point about not picking up the ransom note always hit me as strange too. Any normal person would have picked it up, turned it over to see if there was anything on the back, etc.
Patsy would have not picked it up so she wouldn't leave any fingerprints and John may have just followed Patsy's lead there. If I was him and saw she was not touching it, I sure as heck would not want my fingerprints on it.
I think it's likely that John was not involved in the original staging. I think if he had been, what turned out to be the final "ransom" note would have just been another draft. I think he would have seen the problems in such a long, rambling ransom note and edited it down to less than a page.

I don't think clean hands would be less likely to leave fingerprints, but if they were looking for DNA, many of the loose skin cells would be washed away. I found an article that sort of says that:
http://journalsip.astm.org/JOURNALS/FORENSIC/PAGES/4193.htm

 

Here's a link to an interview for Dateline with Diane Sawyer that includes the Doctor talking about his exams of Jonbenet in her last few years:
http://jfjbr.tripod.com/truth/bynum.html
The parts I thought were pertinent were:
SAWYER: But what about those reports that JonBenet's pediatrician, Dr Beuf, saw JonBenet 30 times in three years?

BEUF: Before your call, I sat down with her chart and counted. It was 27 times.

SAWYER: This is the first time Dr Beuf has gone over his records publicly.

And is that unusual to see a child that many times?

BEUF: Not with the kinds of problems which this child had. The majority of them were for sinus infections and for colds.

SAWYER: And by majority you mean?

BEUF: Probably 20 of the lot. I counted three in which she'd complained of some pain in urination. And the rest of them were cold, strep throats, sinus infections.

SAWYER: So many he said, there was some concern about asthma.

How many times did you give her a vaginal examination?

BEUF: Well, it was five or six times in that three year period.

SAWYER: We asked him to specifically review all notes that might pertain. He agreed, citing the frenzy of uninformed speculation. Be warned, these are a doctor's clinical notes about a young patient.

September 1993 a call about vaginal redness, possibly associated with recent diarrhea.

April 1994 a visit about a problem perhaps related to the use of bubble bath, which can be an irritant.

October 1994 a routine physical. No problems noted, though some indication of occasional bedwetting. Dr Beuf says 20 percent to 25 percent of children that age wet the bed.

March 1995 abdominal pain and fever. Tests and exam showed no problem.

August 1996another routine physical with a vaginal exam. The doctor said everything checked out as normal. We asked what he made of this number of complaints?

Would that be unusual?

BEUF: For a child that age, certainly not. They don't wipe themselves very well after they urinate. And it's something which usually is curable by having them take plain water baths or learning to wipe better. But if you have 4yo kids, you know how hard that is. The amount of vaginitis which I saw on the child was totally consistent with little girls her age.

SAWYER: If there had been an abrasion involving the hymen, you would have seen it?

BEUF: Probably. I can't say absolutely for sure because you don't do a speculum exam on a child that young at least unless it's under anesthesia.

SAWYER: Did you see in any of these examinations any sign of possible sexual abuse?

BEUF: No, and I certainly would have reported it to the social service people if I had. That's something that all of us in pediatrics are very acutely aware of.

SAWYER: And some other notes. Dr Beuf says he last saw JonBenet Ramsey in November 1996, and that was a checkup for a sinus infection. A couple of other things. Dr Beuf says he has turned in people he has suspected of physical and sexual abuse in his career, and that he not only looks for physical evidence, but personality changes in the children involved. And he says he saw none of that with JonBenet Ramsey. And PrimeTime consulted other pediatric experts about JonBenet's records, and they agreed with Dr Beuf's analysis that there was nothing unusual there for a girl her age. When we come back, we will take you to the Ramsey home.[/quote]
How many 5 or 6 year old girls have had any vaginal exams? I know mine didn't. But, here is a little girl who had 5 or 6 in 3 years.
One of the things I was thinking about (besides sexual abuse) that would cause things that look like sexual abuse seen on the autopsy was douching.
If it's an adult female doing it, she's just doing something that the medical community pretty much feels is unneccessary. Someone doing it to a little girl would be abuse, but since in some areas of the country, douching is looked at as a part of normal cleanliness, the mom might see it as something she should do to the daughter, especially if the girl is "irritated" (especially the Southern US - see this article
http://www.uspharmacist.com/index.aspshow=article&page=8_1331.htm ).
A little girl have douches performed against her will would be likely to repond in some of the same ways as a victim of sexual abuse (bedwetting, etc).

So, what if the signs of "sexual abuse" found on the autopsy are actually from douching and from rough cleaning of JB. Maybe the doctor knew Patsy had been done that, and that's why he didn't report anything he saw as sexual abuse. But, if he had ever questioned Patsy about it, she would know what it might look like after JB's death and that's why some "sexual components" were added to the staging.

 

I think the grabbing and twisting scenerio fits a lot. The red turtleneck may have been taken off and rinsed out because JB coughed up or vomited during the struggle.
I think she probably had both the oversized panties and the long underwear pants on when she went to bed. My idea is that the oversized panties were to cover the pull-ups. Now, they make pull ups called Goodnights in more grown up sizes and patterns. But, at that time, the pull-ups would have been for toddlers with cartoon pictures appropriate to toddlers. I think JB probably wore the oversized panties to cover them up. I don't know whether she did this all the time, or had just recently "found" some larger panties that her mom (supposedly) had bought for her cousin for Christmas.
If pull ups (or Goodnights) get saturated, the liquid will migrate out to clothing covering them. I think that's how the underwear and pants got wet. Depending on how JB was lying in bed, the bed may or may not have been wet (experience with a disabled child using these kinds of products gives different insites).

 

How many 5 or 6 year old girls have had any vaginal exams? I know mine didn't. But, here is a little girl who had 5 or 6 in 3 years.
One of the things I was thinking about (besides sexual abuse) that would cause things that look like sexual abuse seen on the autopsy was douching.
If it's an adult female doing it, she's just doing something that the medical community pretty much feels is unneccessary. Someone doing it to a little girl would be abuse, but since in some areas of the country, douching is looked at as a part of normal cleanliness, the mom might see it as something she should do to the daughter, especially if the girl is "irritated" (especially the Southern US - see this article
http://www.uspharmacist.com/index.aspshow=article&page=8_1331.htm ).
A little girl have douches performed against her will would be likely to repond in some of the same ways as a victim of sexual abuse (bedwetting, etc).

So, what if the signs of "sexual abuse" found on the autopsy are actually from douching and from rough cleaning of JB. Maybe the doctor knew Patsy had been done that, and that's why he didn't report anything he saw as sexual abuse. But, if he had ever questioned Patsy about it, she would know what it might look like after JB's death and that's why some "sexual components" were added to the staging.[/QUOTE]
Very ineresting, Sue. And if you liked that try this on for size:

From the Bonita Papers:

"Interview of Dr. Beuf pediatricion 3/25 : Jonbenet had over 33 visits to the pediatrician in the last two years. Diagnosis was "yeast infections". In November 1997 the BPD made a verbal request to reinterview Dr. Beuf and his staff. Armistead, private detective on the Ramsey team, provided the childrens medical records from Michigan with a written consent form to obtain copies of the medical records, but permission was never granted for follow up interviews with the treating physicians."

Thats exactly how it it written in the Bonita Papers. I still have to say I have some reservations about whether or not this is all true. (Not that JB was molested, but 33 visits to the doc for that alone is a bit more than I can swallow.)It seems like they really were notes that were worded strangely sometimes where only the author knew what she meant.

 

Bonita Papers RE: THE NOTE

"Barbra Fernie who was one of the close freinds called immediatly by Patsy and stayed by Patsys side through the morning of the reported kidnapping, in an interview with detectives on 12123 stated that Patsy had discussed with her the ransom note. Patsy told her that it was written on the samew kind of paper that she had in the kitchen. The women had discussed the possibility of it being written bythe housekeeper since the notepad was inside the house, and Patsy stated that the handwriting did look like Linda Hoffmans. However when Patsy looked at the photocopy of the note later ahe said, "That doesn't look like her handwriting at all." Detectives found it odd that Patsy said the Ransom note paper was similar to the notepad located ib the kitchen Patsy before said she did not read much of the original note when it was found, and if she was refferring to the photocopy returned to the residence, a photocopy of a legal notepad page appears generic. It is unknown why Patsy would have speculated about the similar paper on the morning of the reported kidnapping."

Okay I'vebeen looking for something to add to this post but I can't find it. In one of Patsys police nterviews she's told the note was written on her pad from her house and she says" It was?" She acts totally shocked and surprised. She is such a liar. And not even a beliveable one, eithor.

 

The next morning, the family and close friends flew to Marietta, Georgia.
John's Cessna, flown by Mike Archuletta, family friend and personal pilot, carried friends Priscilla, Barbara, Jay Elowsky, Pinque Barber, and the mother of Burke's closest school friend. The immediate family and Burke's schoolmate rode in a corporate jet, piloted by John and carrying the casket with JonBenet for her final trip home to Georgia.

The mother of Burke's closest school friend and Burke's schoolmate - why aren't they named?

Is his closest friend the Stine boy?

And his friend's mother who flew with the others - is that the Stine woman, this one - "Roxie Stine had become the most protective and secretive of all the Ramsey friends"?

 

Sue, the more I read of your posts, the more I realize you and I think alike.

Many months ago, back when I used to post at Tricia's other site, Websleuths (with ONE 'b') ... I posited the theory that the reason JBR was wearing oversized panties at night was because they covered her pull-ups.

Of course, another theory is that JBR was used to wearing day of the week undies, and her regular size "Wednesday" panties were either wet or soiled that night, and Patsy had to break into the oversized package they'd bought for someone else in order to redress JBR in "Wednesday" panties.

 

HI JC!
Maybe they weren't named for the same reason Bill and Heather Cox were never mentioned in any book or interview or report we've had access to. Eithor it isn't true or "someone" doesn't want to get sued. I can imagine Fleet and Priscilla asking Steve Thomas not to include their (Bill & Heather Cox)names in his book to protect their privacy. Like I say it's probably eithor that or it isn't true.
Roxie Stine is the wrong name obviously. The name would be Susan Stine or Roxy Walker, Patsys friends. The author somehow combined these two names. Maybe she was going to invent a new character! Maybe she didn't know the names of Burkes scoolmate and his mother. I don't know but I do know that Doug Stine was Burkes best friend back when all this happened. At least that's what they wrote in DOI.

 

Hoping no one would notice.... like hoping no one would notice the REALl way she was strangled with the red turtleneck? They were consistant (if not naiive) in some things weren't they?

 

Hi, Karen - so there is no Roxie Stine.