Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Discussed this earlier (JB111)..... Maybe you forgot; there's no information available stating Dr Beuf performed vaginal exams.
It's in Woodward's recent book.
"...Five references in the medical file were about JBR's vaginal area. One was about a phone report her mother related to a possible bladder infection, another was about how to treat chicken pox in her vaginal area, another (which was filed under vaginal in medical notes) was about diarrhea. Medical records show JBR received two well-child checks by her pediatrician that included examinations of her vaginal area, and both results were "clear."
She includes a photocopy of the letter that Dr. Beuf wrote to the Boulder Police Department stating no prior sexual abuse.
"...Five references in the medical file were about JBR's vaginal area. One was about a phone report her mother related to a possible bladder infection, another was about how to treat chicken pox in her vaginal area, another (which was filed under vaginal in medical notes) was about diarrhea. Medical records show JBR received two well-child checks by her pediatrician that included examinations of her vaginal area, and both results were "clear."
She includes a photocopy of the letter that Dr. Beuf wrote to the Boulder Police Department stating no prior sexual abuse.
As has been pointed out before, that’s a Wiki page on which anyone can post. Some of those "sources" are simply what Internet posters have said. When you click on most of those links, they’re no longer active. Also, the rebuttal is a few paragraphs down on your link, entitled, "Evidence Against Prior Sexual Abuse/Medical Opinion."
Quote:
I believe there was prior sexual abuse. Not by an adult but by a young boy or a few boys--maybe Burke's friends who used to sleep over. Playing doctor, doing things to her.
So you think that all of this was covered up? Interesting that with all the pressure from LE, not one of these people came forward with this information. Those boys would now be nearly 30 years old.
Quote:
The paintbrush was probably stuck up inside her that night to make it look as though the abuse was recent, just happened that very night.
A coroner would not be aware of a staging? Determining that would be a requirement of the job.
Quote:
Of course the family pediatrician would have said there was no prior abuse--he had to stick with his story or he would have lost his license.
And you believe that his nurses were complicit in this cover-up that would have cost them their jobs as well as a possible criminal record?
“The family has made Burke Ramsey's interview with the psychiatrist - who was selected by the Boulder County Department of Social Services - and all of JonBenet's medical records available to the prosecutor. They also allowed pediatrician Dr. Francesco Beuf and his nurses to speak with investigators.” Article from BoulderNews Ramsey Archive
Quote:
the Ramseys tended to be lazy about getting things taken care of. Seems that they always had more important things to do than to fix the broken basement window or repair that broken door jamb...
A little different than having a medical problem attended to. Patsy Ramsey herself said that she was probably over vigilant about her kids’ medical issues, especially after she was treated for ovarian cancer and needed to make sure she stayed healthy.
Boulder brought in a panel of outside medical experts in 1997 to review the autopsy evidence. They signed affidavits stating that the injuries were consistent with "prior trauma and sexual abuse". There was chronic abuse.
Meyer participated with the panel of experts required by BPD, in agreement on prior sexual abuse.
He later conceded to probability of prior sexual abuse. I posted the info earlier in JB threads.
Meyer participated with the panel of experts required by BPD, in agreement on prior sexual abuse.
He later conceded to probability of prior sexual abuse. I posted the info earlier in JB threads.
Dr. Meyer did? Not from what I can recall.
From the Carnes decision, "12. The bleeding in JonBenet's genital area indicates she was alive when she was assaulted. (SMF ¶ 48; PSMF ¶ 48.) Her hymen was torn and material consistent with wooden shards from the paintbrush used to make the garrote were found in her vagina. (SMF ¶ 48-49; PMSF ¶ 48-49.) No evidence, however, suggests that she was the victim of chronic sexual abuse. (SMF ¶50; PSMF ¶50.)
And post #938 on JB II thread that starts out, “Here is the doctor they used to link the sexual assault to prior abuse, even though doctors who actually examined the body said only that she was assaulted that night....”
Along w/ Woodward's information a few posts back, I'm not seeing any other evidence pointing toward prior abuse.
We had this discussion previously as well, when you debated with a poster. I posted the information to the contrary. If theres been additional new info since thats fine, otherwise from my pov it stands as it is.
I guess I 'll have to go back and retrieve. The same material gets debated retrieved and posted over and over?
Along w/ Woodward's information a few posts back, I'm not seeing any other evidence pointing toward prior abuse.
Well, you've said you are only halfway through the book, right?
A panel of experts required by BPD definitely met and agreed; the information would be in police files where Woodwards gotten a great deal of info for the book.
If she's left out that information and not presented both sides....that shows Woodwards bias.
We had this discussion previously as well, when you debated with a poster. I posted the information to the contrary. If theres been additional new info since thats fine, otherwise from my pov it stands as it is.
I posted the # and the thread above, but it's not new information. I finished Woodward's book last weekend, but the evidence that JBR was not abused before that night was in the Carnes ruling.
More info about misconceptions regarding this, probably due to the Bonita Files, also on that same thread:
"Lots of Ramsey accusers point to the Bonita Papers as evidence of doctors finding prior sexual assault - - but those notes were incomplete notes taken during a BORG meeting set up to get doctors to write reports that could be used to shake up the parents later. "What if I tell you we have a doctor's report saying she had been molested many times - - before the murder - - she was being molested?" The secretary wrote the notes intending to write a BORG book later so this all-BORG meeting was a great opportunity for her to get nasty notes. Her nephew stole the notes, sold them to the tabloids.
Those notes aren't facts - - research the BONITA FILES for yourself. You sure wouldn't want to be on trial facing that kind of false testimony. And never would be - - those people were there to write reports that could push buttons in an interview. THEY would NEVER be used as witnesses. Just their reports might be used - - and I fear they may have been in the grand jury. But Hunter knew better than to indict based on that crap." -jameson
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
