For UKGuy

[jameson245]

UKGuy wrote:


The curious aspect is Coroner Meyer's verbatim autopsy remarks

[i]Search Warrant 12/29/96. Excerpt[/i]

Quote:Detective Arndt told Your Affiant that she observed Dr. Meyer examine the vaginal area of the victim and heard him state that the victim had received an injury constant with [i]digital penetration of her vagina. Detective Arndt told Your Affiant that Dr. Meyer told her that it was his opinion that the victim had been subjected to sexual contact.[/i]

Which suggests a sexual assault using a finger and [b]not[/b] an injury caused by some unknown instrument, sometimes termed as [i]Instrumental Assault[/i] a bit like the [i]Blunt Force Trauma[/i] phraseology.

Yet nearly everyone assumes a piece of wooden splinter was found inside JonBenet, so how does that square with a Digital Sexual Assault?


^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

My response -   When the man broke the paintbrush so he could use part of it in his garrote, a splinter, quite small, stuck to his finger. The digital assault put the splinter in his victim.

[jameson245]

UK Guy wrote : "Burke's fingerprints are on the glass next to the pineapple bowl, which sugests he either lifted it to put the teabag in, or/and he drank tea from it?"

No one has said what residue was found in that glass - - did he have juice, milk or water in that glass when he had his snack? Personally, I think the tea bag was put in there on the morning of the 26th when a visiting adult made themselves a cup of tea and after letting the tea bag sit in a cup of hot water, I think they took the bag out and simply disposed of it in an empty glass found on the table.

No one makes hot tea in a glass.

Why didn't the police ask the guests and victims' advocates if they did that?