Justice Watch Discussion Board "LKL/JR/Beuf" [ Main ] [ Post New Thread ] [ Help ] [ Search ] Table of Contents ................................................................... LKL/JR/Beuf, Nandee, 10:57:13, 6/02/2000 nandee, pat, 11:14:19, 6/02/2000, (#1) question, ericasf, 11:15:22, 6/02/2000, (#2) I've posted, Sioux, 11:19:03, 6/02/2000, (#4) Nandee, Edie Pratt, 11:15:52, 6/02/2000, (#3) Sioux, et al, Nandee, 11:27:06, 6/02/2000, (#5) Drs, dixie, 11:50:04, 6/02/2000, (#6) Dixie, Nandee, 11:51:59, 6/02/2000, (#7) Dr. Visits, Sharon, 12:05:57, 6/02/2000, (#9) Sharon, Bobby, 12:56:21, 6/02/2000, (#17) clearing some things up, fly, 12:06:09, 6/02/2000, (#10) Nandee, Chickadee, 11:53:18, 6/02/2000, (#8) Sharon, fly, 12:10:14, 6/02/2000, (#11) Well fly, Sioux, 12:24:06, 6/02/2000, (#12) Sharon--the same with , fiddler, 12:27:01, 6/02/2000, (#13) I have to agree with that 100%!, ConnieToo, 11:06:01, 6/08/2000, (#106) exams, sebastian, 12:34:45, 6/02/2000, (#14) Sioux & sebastian, fly, 12:38:59, 6/02/2000, (#15) fly, Sioux, 13:20:33, 6/02/2000, (#19) Well, the good doctor Beuf led us to believe, sds, 12:48:04, 6/02/2000, (#16) sds, fly, 13:02:16, 6/02/2000, (#18) fly, maundy, 13:24:43, 6/02/2000, (#20) Maundy and fly, Sioux, 13:34:26, 6/02/2000, (#21) Sioux & maundy, fly, 14:36:58, 6/02/2000, (#22) Fly, v_p, 15:31:00, 6/02/2000, (#26) Covering his a**?, Nandee, 14:59:19, 6/02/2000, (#23) Since it's on the table..., RiverRat, 15:33:43, 6/02/2000, (#27) About the ped...., Jeanilou, 16:50:54, 6/02/2000, (#35) ?, meltdown, 15:08:03, 6/02/2000, (#24) Pills, Nandee, 15:23:55, 6/02/2000, (#25) Hang on, gang!, Ginja, 16:13:22, 6/02/2000, (#29) Why was the ped so obsessed about the sex ed?, Jeanilou, 16:56:49, 6/02/2000, (#37) Meltdown and Nandee, RiverRat, 15:36:58, 6/02/2000, (#28) WOW! Ginja, Nandee, 16:30:47, 6/02/2000, (#32) Exams, Coolteach, 16:27:49, 6/02/2000, (#31) Dr Boef, sabrina, 16:26:03, 6/02/2000, (#30) CoolTeach, Ginja, 16:47:44, 6/02/2000, (#34) Sabrina, Nandee, 16:34:42, 6/02/2000, (#33) Nandee, Ginja, 16:52:57, 6/02/2000, (#36) Beuf, sabrina, 17:03:49, 6/02/2000, (#38) The Doctor is In! Consultations 5 cents., szundi, 18:49:11, 6/02/2000, (#42) thanks for the info, sabrina, 21:35:31, 6/02/2000, (#59) Well, momo, 18:47:49, 6/02/2000, (#41) That depends on the doctor.., ConnieToo, 11:30:39, 6/08/2000, (#107) Thanks Ginja, RiverRat, 18:25:48, 6/02/2000, (#39) St weighed in, maundy, 18:36:41, 6/02/2000, (#40) "Newbies", Ginja, 18:54:43, 6/02/2000, (#44) Ginja, Nandee, 19:43:22, 6/02/2000, (#52) Please see Post #42, szundi, 18:51:22, 6/02/2000, (#43) Thats because he had no reason to look for it, seenal, 19:02:49, 6/02/2000, (#45) I have a 18 mo and a 3 yr old, seenal, 19:10:46, 6/02/2000, (#46) Ginja, v_p, 19:43:15, 6/02/2000, (#51) Seenal, Ginja, 19:25:51, 6/02/2000, (#47) What're you doin', Seenal? LOL, Ginja, 19:31:32, 6/02/2000, (#48) Zoon!, Ginja, 19:35:37, 6/02/2000, (#49) I have, Luvsbeagles, 19:39:35, 6/02/2000, (#50) medical issues, pat, 20:12:59, 6/02/2000, (#53) Aside from the sexual abuse issue..., Ginja, 20:29:42, 6/02/2000, (#54) Newbie here , Luvsa Mystery, 21:34:14, 6/02/2000, (#58) I also find it odd at the lengths of time, SJ, 21:06:24, 6/02/2000, (#55) Luvsbeagles, Ginja, 21:26:26, 6/02/2000, (#57) duh huh, dixie, 21:14:19, 6/02/2000, (#56) 9mm and 1 cm, AutumnBorn, 21:38:15, 6/02/2000, (#61) AutumnBorn, Ginja, 21:43:11, 6/02/2000, (#62) metric measurements, maddie, 06:21:47, 6/03/2000, (#66) This is interesting..., Ginja, 21:38:14, 6/02/2000, (#60) Pedoviles choose jobs around children, maundy, 00:34:31, 6/03/2000, (#63) Ginja's post #29, nana2, 03:27:48, 6/03/2000, (#64) Thank-you Ginja for your well-thoughtout, sds, 06:10:49, 6/03/2000, (#65) Where is he now?, scarab, 07:43:56, 6/03/2000, (#67) Well, I don't know much, canadiana, 08:12:59, 6/03/2000, (#68) Canadiana!, Ginja, 10:19:14, 6/03/2000, (#69) sds, Ginja, 10:30:25, 6/03/2000, (#70) Ginja, was the large bruise, sds, 13:00:22, 6/03/2000, (#71) scarab, canadiana, maundy, 13:14:45, 6/03/2000, (#72) there is a web site, pat, 18:07:45, 6/03/2000, (#73) sds, Ginja, 07:17:51, 6/04/2000, (#74) Specialist?, Nandee, 12:27:55, 6/04/2000, (#75) Post #29: Halitosis?, Dunvegan, 12:46:34, 6/04/2000, (#76) Another JR lie, Seashell, 13:54:04, 6/04/2000, (#79) Dunvegan..., szundi, 13:44:07, 6/04/2000, (#78) Dunvegan & ginja, fly, 13:37:05, 6/04/2000, (#77) Omigod, Fly!, Ginja, 14:30:49, 6/04/2000, (#82) Ginja........AND...., La Contessa, 15:00:40, 6/06/2000, (#104) Ginja, I am convinced, ConnieToo, 12:09:37, 6/08/2000, (#109) established accepted developmental exam, maundy, 14:13:58, 6/04/2000, (#81) there is no such thing as a MILD asthma..., ConnieToo, 12:15:09, 6/08/2000, (#110) Thank you, fly..., Dunvegan, 14:09:10, 6/04/2000, (#80) Maundy, Ginja, 14:51:55, 6/04/2000, (#84) allergic rhinitis, maundy, 14:45:48, 6/04/2000, (#83) Addendum to my Beuf Rant :-), Ginja, 15:03:59, 6/04/2000, (#85) Maundy, Ginja, 15:33:06, 6/04/2000, (#87) Ginja, maundy, 15:17:28, 6/04/2000, (#86) maundy, fly, 15:44:39, 6/04/2000, (#89) To my printer-impaired friend!, Ginja, 15:40:33, 6/04/2000, (#88) Question, South, 16:29:36, 6/04/2000, (#92) Fly, Ginja, 16:07:32, 6/04/2000, (#91) arrest docs?, Nandee, 15:58:25, 6/04/2000, (#90) Hmmmm...I'm going to re-read the FBI article on MSBP, Dunvegan, 16:39:36, 6/04/2000, (#93) Dunvegan, Nandee, 16:47:38, 6/04/2000, (#94) Not a Thread-Starter, janphi, 17:34:58, 6/04/2000, (#95) FYI, According to the AMA site,, AutumnBorn, 17:59:10, 6/04/2000, (#96) ginja, thanks, maundy, 20:24:01, 6/04/2000, (#97) maundy *& ginja, fly, 08:24:38, 6/05/2000, (#98) Sorry, fly, but I beg to differ..., ConnieToo, 12:24:02, 6/08/2000, (#111) exams, dundee, 10:29:57, 6/05/2000, (#99) gingia, jinja, gingea, and fly , darby, 11:07:11, 6/05/2000, (#100) New Thread, Please?, Dunvegan, 06:20:08, 6/06/2000, (#101) Ginja...Asthma, La Contessa, 14:33:25, 6/06/2000, (#103) LaContessa, fly, 06:43:44, 6/07/2000, (#105) Dr Goof, er Beuf, Holly, 07:54:36, 6/06/2000, (#102) "Accident Prone Children", Red, 11:55:55, 6/08/2000, (#108) ................................................................... "LKL/JR/Beuf" Posted by Nandee on 10:57:13 6/02/2000 A question for those of you with daughters. (I have sons.) During the LKL interview, John said, "Our pediatrician, who saw JonBenet a dozen times each year for the past three years before this happened, has sworn and testified in public that he saw no evidence of sexual abuse." First question.... Who gives sworn testimony in public?? Here is Dr. Beuf's exact quote, "No. Absolutely no signs of sexual abuse. I had no suspicion of it. I think "saw no evidence" and "had no suspicion" are two different things. If the doctor "had no suspicion" he had no reason to check, so those of you out there with girls, enlighten me. How often do peditritians do internal exams on 6 year olds??? If he never did one, how does he know, for sure?? And.....Why did he leave Boulder????? How many of you would not bathe your daughters for 3 days, especially at holiday time? This child was always on "display". I think this is very strange. just MHO [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 1. "nandee" Posted by pat on 11:14:19 6/02/2000 pediatricians don't do internal exams on little girs..if there is a problem they refer them to ped gynecologists. And what beuf didn't mention is the childs vaginitis and repeated problems with urination and fecal incontinence. If that didn't heighten his suspicion of child sexual abuse,,,well,,nothing would and that tells you what kind of ped he was. Children do not get vaginitis,,they just don't. That is a symptom, a red flag for child sex abuse. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 2. "question" Posted by ericasf on 11:15:22 6/02/2000 So if Beuf left Colorado, where is he and is he still practicing? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 4. "I've posted" Posted by Sioux on 11:19:03 6/02/2000 something like this before, but here it goes again: Beuf needs to be checked by the Medical Board or wahtever it's called. NOT ONLY he didn't have any suspicions about possible sexual abuse, but it has been stated that a nurse that worked with him thought strange he DID TOO MANY VAGINAL EXAMS to YOUNG GIRLS. (I don't know how young they were). Sioux [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 3. "Nandee" Posted by Edie Pratt on 11:15:52 6/02/2000 I don't have daughters, but I was one once, and I can tell you, I saw the pediatrician once a year like your little boys, I'm sure. To gleefully report that you sent your baby to the Dr 12 times a year tells me you are either a hypocondriac or you're doing something to sicken that baby. I know JR says he had a good healthplan, and the Dr was right down the street, but c'mon! The marina's right down the street, and I'm a good swimmer, but that doesn't mean I have to buy a boat. There was a reason to send "THAT CHILD" to THE SAME DOCTOR 12 times in a year. That doctor holds the key, because, afterall, who would keep sending their child to a doctor who clearly couldn't make it all better after the FIRST VISIT? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 5. "Sioux, et al" Posted by Nandee on 11:27:06 6/02/2000 YIKES.... Do you remeber where you read about the nurses comments???? Thanks everyone... I appreciate the comments. I thought this was strange and needed to be looked into more closely... [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 6. "Drs" Posted by dixie on 11:50:04 6/02/2000 Well my daughter is 12 now and still has yet to be checked down there. I AM a paranoid mother and I don't believe that even I succeded in 30 visits a year. One more thing along this line is ,my son who is 4 (just turned)he has to have his bottom wiped by me or he's just not clean, anyway he already will not let anyone else do this even his father I do not understand how JB and her parents had no personal boundries, to allow other people to touch the private parts of their 6 year old daughter. to me that is such a big red flag that is ignored. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 7. "Dixie" Posted by Nandee on 11:51:59 6/02/2000 Good point.... Did this family have any boundries? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 9. "Dr. Visits" Posted by Sharon on 12:05:57 6/02/2000 My daughter is 15. Yearly check-ups always included a VISUAL inspection of her groin area. There was a minimum amount of touching as the doctor parted the labia to quickly view whether everything appeared normal. Same with my boys, except the doctor would sort of squeeze the testicles or the area above them. On both sexes, this part of the exam took no more than 10 - 15 seconds. In addition, there were never any of the strange questions Dr. Beuf asked related to sexual awareness in a 5 year old. I'd be inclined to say maybe this is a 90's thing, but my youngest is a year younger than JonBenet, so that doesn't work. Maybe it's a New Age Colorado thing to ask questions about a 6 year old's sexual awareness??? I don't know what to make of Beuf. I can only say that had he been my child's doctor, I would've certainly wondered why he kept seeing the child for the same problems without referring us to a specialist. JonBenet needed to see a pediatric allergist, at the very least. But, nope. Dr. Beuf just keeps treating her for the same symptoms over and over again and never refers the family to a more qualified doctor that could've possibly gotten to the root of what her problems really were. I believe that JonBenet's medical records probably hold a motherlode of information but I'm not holding my breath, waiting for Beuf to release them. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 17. "Sharon" Posted by Bobby on 12:56:21 6/02/2000 I'm with you on exam. We were lucky enough to have the same female ped since bith. My daughter is 17 now. Yearly check-ups always included a VISUAL inspection of her groin area. There was a minimum amount of touching as the doctor parted the labia to quickly view whether everything appeared normal. Even though she's not sexually active the doc said it's time to get her a gyn or fam practice doc now to teach her about breast exams etc. JBR doc sounds weird. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 10. "clearing some things up" Posted by fly on 12:06:09 6/02/2000 (1) The original story about Beuf's misconduct was that he catheterized girls too often and unnecessarily, not that he did too many vaginal exams. I remember the vaginal exam accusation being posted but don't remember if it was a new report, or just a confused one (I suspect the latter). (2) JR meant, I think, that Beuf had sworn to the police and also stated on TV in his interviews, that he neither suspected nor saw abuse. You are right in saying a lack of suspicion might impact whether it was looked for, but he was specifically asked whether he thought he would have seen signs of abuse had it been occurring, and he replied Yes. That is reasonable whether you consider behavioral signs or physical signs. A damaged hymen conceivably could be seen in the EXTERNAL exams he did on JBR. Not necessarily, but possible. Certainly abrasions or contusions in the genital region could have been seen. (3) Independent pediatric specialists were asked to review Beuf's records of JBR, and they concurred with Beuf that there was nothing remarkable there. I agree that the number of doctor visits was high, but some parents drag their kids to the doctor more often than others. (4) Beuf did not do internal, pelvic exams. He did the standard sort of external, visual inspections of the genitals that are called for when a kid presents with irritation in the genital region. (5) Beuf noted that JBR was wetting her bed, but there was no notation that I remember about fecal soiling. He might well have been unaware of that. Bedwetting is common in kids her age and while it can accompany sexual abuse, it isn't a good diagnostic indicator of sexual abuse. No reason for him to suspect sexual abuse, especially when there were no other behavioral signs that anything was wrong. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 8. "Nandee" Posted by Chickadee on 11:53:18 6/02/2000 Well,John was a bit flustered on LKL. Dr. Beuf testified that he saw no abuse, as well as made public statements,but he didn't give sworn testimony publicly.That's just silly. I concur with everything Pat said (Good post,Pat).Chronic, or repeated vaginitis should be a signal to any responsible pediatrician.And if,as Patsy claimed,these infections were caused by bubblebaths, wouldn't any sane mother STOP GIVING HER DAUGHTER BUBBLEBATHS. Dr. Beuf is certainly among those who failed JonBenet.And he knows it. To answer your 1st question,my daughter didn't have a gynocological exam until she was a teen. The bathing question,I'm sure,is rhetorical...ew! [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 11. "Sharon" Posted by fly on 12:10:14 6/02/2000 Those "strange questions" about sexual interest are actually part of a commonly used psychosocial developmental check. This was confirmed by a someone who worked for a pediatrician back in the days of the original BoulderNews forum. Not all doctors use them, but they are legit. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 12. "Well fly" Posted by Sioux on 12:24:06 6/02/2000 You've convinced me: Beuf is a trustable, experienced and honest doctor.He is SO honest that he has no problem in releasing the medical files, right? Sioux [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 13. "Sharon--the same with " Posted by fiddler on 12:31:03 6/02/2000 NOTE: This message was last edited 12:31:03, 6/02/2000 my kids--in their yearly physical, the doctor checked them out visually and asked some general questions about good/bad touching, and sex education-type things. More of a screening for abuse, and checking for normal physical development, than anything "weird". I was always in the room with them, and the doctor would say step-by-step what she was doing, and why. I never had a problem with it, but then, there never were any indications that I should. My kids never got vaginitis, but the daughter of one of my friends did. It was after she'd been on a long course of antibiotics, and her doctor said it was a yeast infection--apparently little girls are sometimes vulnerable to them, too. I don't know for certain that sexual abuse wasn't involved, but neither her parents nor her doctor seemed to think so at the time. With all the sinus infections JBR had, I'd imagine she could well be suffering from the effects of extensive antibiotic therapy, too. What I think is weird about Beuf is that with all the allergic/sinus/respiratory stuff JBR had, he never referred her to an allergist or an ear/nose/throat specialist. Our pediatrician said it was general policy to refer after the third similar complaint in a year. Maybe Beuf thought PR was exaggerating JonBenet's physical ailments? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 106. "I have to agree with that 100%!" Posted by ConnieToo on 11:07:25 6/08/2000 NOTE: This message was last edited 11:07:25, 6/08/2000 My daughter had severe sinus and tonsil problems, that appeared very early, and were apparently herediy linked, as her father and aunt on his side were both very ill with the same problems. Her pediatrician had her at an ENT so fast my head spun. Her first visit to the ENT was at 5 months old! NO reputable pediatrician, unless he had a documented specialty in the allergy/sinus field, would treat that type problem more than twice. I firmly believe that Beuf knew something, and was paid off by the Ramseys to take a powder. Let's face it, a couple of million dollars to get rid of a potential problem that could land he and the Patsy in orange jumpsuits. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 14. "exams" Posted by sebastian on 12:34:45 6/02/2000 Well I am 30 now and I didn't have a vaginal exam until I was about 20 years old. It was administered as part of a complete physical, not for any particular problem. My daughter is 5 and she has been in for various things such as ear infections, bad coughs, yearly exams and vaccinations. She is a fairly healthy girl. She has never had any vaginal infections and frankly she takes bubble baths every time she baths and she doesn't wipe herself very well every time. She has never had an infection of any sort. The Dr. only checked her vaginal area 2 times, actually I think the nurse looked one of the times. And that is all it was, a very quick look. They simply had her lay down on the table, the nurse glanced and said "looks normal to me". I wonder how thorough the exam was for JonBenet. Frankly, if there was any sexual abuse of my child, that nurse would have never detected it. Just thought I would share my experiences. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 15. "Sioux & sebastian" Posted by fly on 12:38:59 6/02/2000 Sioux - JBR's medical records were released by Beuf to both the police and to 20/20 (or whatever TV show did the bit with him). That's how those pediatric specialists were able to make a judgement as to JBR's medical care/condition. sebastian - Given that your kids never got vaginal infections, there was no reason for more than the most cursory exam. JBR was different, and Beuf apparently looked a little more closely, although not to the extent of an internal exam. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 19. "fly" Posted by Sioux on 13:20:33 6/02/2000 Ooooops!! Sioux [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 16. "Well, the good doctor Beuf led us to believe" Posted by sds on 12:48:04 6/02/2000 that he did actual vaginal exams on jbr. I saw the interview. He did not state that it was the customary panty look-see. Patsy might have suspected that there was ongoing sexual abuse of her daughter or knew about it, and wanted the good doctor to check her out. When my daughter was young, it was the pull down the panties look-see. She did have vaginitis once from bubble baths. But something has struct me strange about this case with the emphasis on jbr's genitals. What do the rest of you think? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 18. "sds" Posted by fly on 13:02:16 6/02/2000 Beuf stated specifically at some point (I think the TV interview) that he did not do an internal exam. Perhaps it was in the crock or some other later interview, but he did state that. Promise. I don't know what you mean by panty check, but what he did most likely involved spreading the labia to get a view of the region of the vaginal opening. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 20. "fly" Posted by maundy on 13:30:11 6/02/2000 NOTE: This message was last edited 13:30:11, 6/02/2000 We went thru this before. in the interview with Diane Sawyer, it is never stated that the medical records were reviewed by independent peds. only the notes "where's the beef?" provided. As S Thomas noted on LKL, previous vaginal assault was determined by a review of independent peds after examining evidence. Not beef's notes, actual evidence. Edited to add: accordingto Beef's "notes", he did something like 6 vaginal exams in a few years. according to medical info i could find online, an examination of a little girl would be a genital exam. i found one abstract that said any child referred to a specialist for a genitourinary infection should be examined closely for signs of abuse. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 21. "Maundy and fly" Posted by Sioux on 13:34:26 6/02/2000 Thanks maundy for the Beuf's info. So, it seems I had it right although I was unable to back it up. Fly: Why do you confuse people like this? What's your point? Sioux [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 22. "Sioux & maundy" Posted by fly on 14:36:58 6/02/2000 Sioux - I'm not trying to confuse anybody. I'm trying to correct misinformation that confuses everything. maundy - You obviously missed/forgot Beuf's comment about internal exams. (see below) And doctor's "notes" usually refer to the handwritten entries put on the patient's records/chart/file. OK, folks, I finally found the transcript of the interview with Beuf. I won't repost the whole thing, or even the entire Beuf section. You can look at it yourself. I will post the segments of most relevance to the discussion at hand. If you won't believe that BPD has JBR's medical records without seeing it in black and white, I'll try to find that report later. That's a pretty ridiculous thing to believe, however, IMO. http://more.abcnews.go.com/onair/ptl/html_files/transcripts/ptl0910b.html DR FRANCESCO BEUF Before your call, I sat down with her chart and counted. It was 27 times. DIANE SAWYER (VO) This is the first time Dr Beuf has gone over his records publicly. . . . DIANE SAWYER If there had been an abrasion involving the hymen, you would have seen it? DR FRANCESCO 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. . . . DIANE SAWYER (on camera) 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. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 26. "Fly" Posted by v_p on 15:31:00 6/02/2000 Dr. Beuff "went over" his records for 20/20...I highly doubt he handed them JBR's Charts. They, 20/20 went over what Dr. Beuff had told them about JBR's records with other pediatricians -- again, I doubt her charts were shown to them. My daughter is 15 and has never had a vaginal exam or even a peek of any kind. I would be totally suspect of a Pediatrician who made a habit of taking a look-see so many times. My first gynecological exam was when I was 10 and I was traumatized! V. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 23. "Covering his a**?" Posted by Nandee on 14:59:19 6/02/2000 I wonder what Dr. Beuf might have failed to note in his "records"? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 27. "Since it's on the table..." Posted by RiverRat on 15:33:43 6/02/2000 Why was this pediatrician dispensing medication to Patsy the day JonBenet died? Apparently, Dr. B and wife were in the circle. PMPT (prpbck)page 27: "Around 7:oo P.M., John Ramsey went for a walk with John Fernie and Dr. Franesco Beuf, who had brought over some medication for Patsy. When they returned a half hour later, Ramsey asked Bynum to represent him. "I'm sorry, I'm sorry," Ramsey told his friends over and over." The Beuf's were back helping out the next day. Well now, my adult male friends can certainly prescribe my medication, however, they cannot under any situation, see my child's genitalia. This True Southern Gal knows that this is not proper. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 35. "About the ped...." Posted by Jeanilou on 16:50:54 6/02/2000 >Why was this pediatrician dispensing medication to >Patsy the day JonBenet died? I asked the same question several weeks ago. I think he was there interviewing/administering to Burke, as well as Patsy. I think the Ramseys bought the good Drs. silence a LONG TIME AGO. Jeani [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 24. "?" Posted by meltdown on 15:08:03 6/02/2000 ...and who was one of the first people to be called on the 26th?... [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 25. "Pills" Posted by Nandee on 15:23:55 6/02/2000 ... for the purpose of drugging the Ramsey's?? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 29. "Hang on, gang!" Posted by Ginja on 16:28:33 6/02/2000 NOTE: This message was last edited 16:28:33, 6/02/2000 I've got more information on this topic than you probably want to read or see. Suffice it to say, it's been gone over by JW members with a fine-toothed comb. Beuf doesn't have a 'great' history...as a matter of fact, you've already noted he's 'left town'. His notes that he gave "publicly" were his handwritten notes that he pulled together for the very purpose of going on Sawyer's show and the crockumentary. At the end of this post, I'll put up his records as given to Detective Harmer of the BPD. What you have to realize is that the Beufs are friends of the Ramseys and socialized on many occasions. Also, Beuf never asked "JonBenet" questions, and he never gave "JonBenet" any questionnaires or surveys. Patsy handled all of that! Fly said something that struck me...I can't remember exactly what it was except maybe to call in other 'experts' to go through Beuf's notes? The problem with these other experts is that they were taken out of context. For example, Krugman. Many pro-Rammers (maybe even fence sitters) will point to Krugman as concurring with Beuf that there was no sexual abuse. WRONG! Out of context. I'll find the exact quote if you want, but in essence, in full context, what Krugman was saying was that the crime was not sexually motivated. IOW, it wasn't a sex crime. There is not much doubt in any expert's mind that JonBenet was sexually abused. As far as Beuf giving JonBenet exams and then swearing he found no signs of sexual abuse...that's a crock! All of JonBenet's injuries and trauma were internal! What's amazing is that he didn't notice her hymen was missing. He also didn't notice that her vaginal opening was larger than it should have been. (Normal for her age would be 9mm; her actual measurement was 1cm!) Fly cited how Beuf examined JonBenet. Here's how a 'legitimate' doctor will examine prepubescent girls (from a recent medical study, compliments of Szundi, our resident surgeon): In the body of the paper, the author states that only 5 children refused examination and he performed all the exams with the child supine in "frog-leg" position with gentle separation of the labia just enough to visualize the entance to the vagina. No traction was placed on the labia as this would cause obvious enlargement. Measurements were made repeatedly with the child "relaxed and cooperative". The transhymenal diameter was defined as the width of the hymenal opening in the membrane between the 3 and 9 o'clock positions. Girls with no definitive signs of trauma (neg.exams) had a mean diameter of 2.3mm (average age, 5years). Girls WITH definitive signs of genital trauma had a mean diameter of 9.0mm (average age, 6.2years). Despite correcting for the difference in average age of the two populations, the difference in mean transhymenal diameter was highly statisically significant. Have we ever seen Beuf describe how he examined JonBenet for signs of possible abuse? One thing's for sure...he never had JonBenet on the table in a frog-like position. This study shows how the doctors examine the girls and what they look for. Note that they check the child's hymenal opening size by measuring the hymen between the 3 and 9 o'clock position. Well, gang...JonBenet didn't have anything between the 3 and 9 o'clock position! JonBenet had no hymen...it was merely represented by a mucosal rim between the 10 and 2 o'clock position. This was why I underlined the portion stating that signs of DEFINITIVE ABUSE were made by the measurements of the hymen. Hell...I think if there's no hymen at all, we can pretty much assume DEFINITIVE ABUSE. Also, don't get the hymenal opening size confused with the vaginal opening size (JBR's vaginal opening measured 1cm, vice the "normal" 9mm). They're two separate measurements of different areas. Another one of Beuf's problems (as with many pro-Rammers and/or fence sitters) is the "innocent" explanations for JonBenet's vaginal injuries. Make no mistake! There are NO INNOCENT EXPLANATIONS for JonBenet's injuries...including bubble bath. Sexual abuse in children will often leave no physical findings. Findings that are consistent but not diagnostic of abuse include chafing, abrasions or bruising of inner thighs or genitalia, scarring, tears, or distortion of the hymen, decreased amount of or absent hymenal tissue, scarring of the fossa navicularis, injury to or scarring of the posterior fourchette, scarring or tears of the labia minora and enlargement of the hymenal opening. DIFFERENTIATION: CHILD SEXUAL ABUSE VERSUS ACCIDENTAL GENITAL INJURY Conditions most commonly confused with child sexual abuse include vulvovaginitis from poor hygiene, bubble baths, nonsexually transmitted infection, foreign bodies, accidental trauma, and congenital variations in structure. Female genital trauma caused by accidental straddle injury typically affects the clitoris, clitoral hood, mons pubis and labial structures. These structures are mostly anterior and are injured when compressed between an object and the pubic bone. Straddle injuries are usually asymmetric and DO NOT involve the hymen. When there is tissue damage resulting from penetrating sexual abuse in girls,the injuries usually involve primarily the posterior hymen and other posterior structures. CLASSIFICATION OF PHYSICAL FINDINGS Findings Specific/Diagnostic for Sexual Contact (even in the absence of a history of abuse): ----evidence of ejaculation (semen, sperm, or semen specific antigens and/or enzymes ----pregnancy ----Syphilis, GC, HIV ----fresh genital or anal injuries in the absence of an adequate accidental explanation (laceration, hematoma,ecchymoses, bite mark, abrasion, transection, contusion, petechiae) ----enlarged hymenal opening for age with associated findings of hymenal disruption. Following, as promised, are Beuf's notes given to Det. Harmer. Another poster mentioned something about antibiotics being a possible cause for vaginitis. I would draw your attention to the fact that JonBenet, as you will see, wasn't on antibiotics until AFTER she was diagnosed with the vaginitis. JBR's medical history as related by Beuf to Det. Harmer of BPD. 8/6/90: JBR born. 12/6/91: First visit with Beuf. Treated for fever, cough, and wheezing. Over next 10 months, she had the usual colds and coughs of a toddler. 1/93: Diagnosed with ear infection (her first). Amoxicillin prescribed. By age 2 1/2, she had a history of coughs accompanied by low grade fever. 3/93: First serious illness, fever 102, difficulty breathing. Coughed up yellow mucus and looked droopey. 7/93: (Patsy diagnosed with cancer; JBR under Nedra's care). Regressed in toilet training and eating habits. 8/31/93: Responding to Beuf's questions, Patsy says JBR doesn't have any phobias and no aspect of JBR's sexual education needed to be discussed. 9/6/93: Buttocks and vaginal area chafed red from diarrhea. 11/93: Cough and stuffed nose. Sleeping poorly, grouchy from fatigue, bad breath. Chronic sinusitis. 12/31/93: Still drinking from bottle; parents having trouble weaning her. 1/94: Bad breath, cough and congestion. 2/4/94: Nedra suggests Fifth Disease. (Childhood viral illness, often accompanied by rash. Fifth in line of common childhood diseases, i.e., chickenpox, measles). No medication prescribed. 4/94: Breath still bad, runny nose, little appetite, slept poorly, bladder infection and vaginal discharge. Diagnosed with vaginitis. Amoxicillin prescribed and warned against bubble baths. 4/94: (3 weeks later) Still coughing, stuffy nose, congestion. Ear hurt, cranky. Diagnosed with allergic rhinitis, Benedryl prescribed. 4/94: (1 week later). Still coughing, Suprax prescribed. 10/5/94: Came in for checkup, doctor notices scar on left cheek. She'd been hit accidentally by a golf club when the family was in Charlevoix. A week after the accident, a plastic surgeon was consulted. No injury to cheekbone. Beuf is told (at this visit) that she's getting along with brothers and older sister. Wearing pullups at night because she's wetting bed. Patsy completes developmental questionnaire, and says there are no aspects of JonBenet's behavior or sex education she needed to discuss, and also notes JBR has no fears or phobias. 11/1/94: Had diarrhea five times and was lethargic. One bowel movement appeared bloody. 11/4/94: Badly congested, deep cough, bad breath. Diarrhea gone. 1/1/95: Chickenpox. Rash even appears in vaginal area. Recommended Avino, Benadryl and Lanocaine. 1/31/95: Still has bad cough and not sleeping well. Robitussin not helping. Mid-Feb/95: Cough. Temp 99.3. 3/95: Complained of stomachache but sleeping well. 4/95: JR calls in, says JBR has another cough, but he doesn't think daughter needs to be examined. 5/8/95: JBR falls in Alfalfa's food market, lands on nose, not broken. 12/95: Trips and hits head above left eye. Stuffy nose, bad breath, coughing. 3/96: Coughing a lot. 5/95: Bent nail back on fourth finger, left hand, in another fall. Swollen and painful, but no bruising. Ibuprofen recommended. 8/27/96: Patsy reports JBR's a good sleeper, wasn't hard to get to bed, and was easily awakened in the morning. Not interested in opposit sex, behaved modestly in public, and didn't engage in sex play with her friends. She was, however, asking about sex roles and reproduction. She was not rude or afraid of either parent. Didn't seem to be bossy with brother, didn't react with trantrums, and was active. Loved fruit and some vegetables. Patsy said she was delightful and doing very well. Burke had his annual checkup same day. 9/96: Cough back, Robitussin recommended. 10/96: Stuffy nose, bad breath. Diagnosed with allergic rhinitis. 11/12/96: Runny nose and cold sore, sneezing. 12/3/96: Sees eye doctor. 12/96: Misses pageant due to illness. Okay...so I guess this should be enough to work with for a while, eh? Notice the consistent upper respiratory problems and bad breath. Both Beuf and JR will tell anyone now who'll listen that they "thought" JBR might have asthma. Would have been nice if one of them followed up, eh? Something to note about the upper respiratory/asthma problem. Many factors play into asthma/UR attacks...including stress. Could it be possible this little girl was stressed out about something? Plenty to think about. Bottom line: Beuf's a quack, imho. Then again, maybe he's just another "friend" of the Rams who's been bought. That, of course, is my po. Edited to correct html...if it ain't right this time, tough! lol [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 37. "Why was the ped so obsessed about the sex ed?" Posted by Jeanilou on 16:56:49 6/02/2000 I have 3 children, 2 girls and 1 boy and NO PEDITRICIAN has ever asked about their sex education. I don't get it! Jeani [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 28. "Meltdown and Nandee" Posted by RiverRat on 15:36:58 6/02/2000 Looks like I'm not alone, I just take longer putting it together, typing that is. :) [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 32. "WOW! Ginja" Posted by Nandee on 16:30:47 6/02/2000 What an incredible post! You have covered the subject thoroughly. I am relatively new to this board, so I appreciate your taking the time to bring me up to speed. This one is definitely a keeper. Thank you!! [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 31. "Exams" Posted by Coolteach on 16:27:49 6/02/2000 I read the report that you mentioned above. I am no doctor, but I was a victim of sexual abuse, and my doctor NEVER figured it out. I also had a lot of urinary tract infections and lots of sinus infections too. Doctors can easily miss sexual abuse. My daughter, who, thank God, never had to go through sexual child abuse, was also never given a vaginal exam before she was a teen. She never had urinary tract infections that Dr. Beuf blames on bad wiping habits. Also, anyone who goes through child abuse training learns that bed wetting, and certainly defecation in bed are signals of possible child abuse. Once, for a certain job I had, I had to take a six-year old child to a specialist during a court case to find out if she was indeed being molested by her mom's boyfriend. She DID have an internal exam and she was not put under for this procedure. The results of the exam were really revealing. The doctor could tell by the age of the scar tissue about how long the abuse had gone on and when it happened for the last time. She was also able to determine that scarring was caused by a sharp instrument. She wrote in her report that there was "digital penetration." The little girl had told the social workers that the man had used his pipe. Her story was proven to be true, right up to the timeline. I heard that term "digital penetration" being used in the JBR case too. I share this because I learned first-hand how much a specialist in this field can see by this kind of exam. If Patsy was suspicious of someone, she easily could have found out as I did about the little girl I took to the doctor. If she was not the one doing this, she could have been suspecting it for a long time. I really would be surprised, however, if any doctor, including Dr. Beuf, could or would reveal everything this private about his patient. I'm sure the Ramseys would have had grounds to sue him if he had told everything. I also think it would have been rather hard for him to accuse them. After all, John said himself, "What in our past indicates we would have been capable of doing this kind of thing?" And even if nothing more happened than what he shared to Dianne Sawyer in the telephone conver- sation, it still is strange that a child younger than six has vaginal exams and that often. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 30. "Dr Boef" Posted by sabrina on 16:26:53 6/02/2000 NOTE: This message was last edited 16:26:53, 6/02/2000 How many doctors would prescribe medication which was probably a "controlled substance" (valium or something like that) for their patient's mother? Did he examine Patsy? This to me, borders on malpractice. And how many doctors make "house calls?" Sounds like he was part of the "inner circle." The conclusion of "prior vaginal trauma" could have occurred one or 2 weeks prior, maybe not months, so therefore this wonderful Dr. did not see any evidence. I always thought this whole aspect was very odd and from what I remember of seeing Dr Boef , he was very odd too. Sinister almost. I remember thinking when I saw him on that interview that I wouldn't take my cat to a vet like that! [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 34. "CoolTeach" Posted by Ginja on 16:47:44 6/02/2000 "The results of the exam were really revealing. The doctor could tell by the age of the scar tissue about how long the abuse had gone on and when it happened for the last time. She was also able to determine that scarring was caused by a sharp instrument. She wrote in her report that there was "digital penetration." I heard that term "digital penetration" being used in the JBR case too. A lot of folks will boo Cyril Wecht, but he put it all on the table...in layman's terms. Meyer put it all in medicalese in the autopsy report, but Wecht put it in terms we can understand. So the bottom line is that Meyer saw not only the acute injuries, but the chronic injuries as well. Meyer notes that no inflammatory infiltrates are found. Wecht says the inflammatory infiltrates are the white blood cells. He then explains that the lack of these infiltrates indicates JonBenet's body didn't have time to react...didn't have time to fight off the attack. IOW, she died before he body's defense mechanisms could kick in. Wecht then goes on to say that if he had access to the actual slides, he'd be able to tell with better certainty "when" the chronic injuries were sustained. Upfront, he believed it was within the last 72 hours (the party on the 23rd). Regarding the digital penetration, Wecht describes the hyperemia being caused in this fashion. Between that, the epithelial erosion, AND the chronic injuries, he determined the injuries to be consistent with a person penetrating her with their fingers and rubbing. Also helping him to get to that determination was the fact that her vaginal opening was not consistent with penile penetration. "Real" doctors know how to look and what to look for. Beuf didn't have a clue. Besides, the medical studies point out that you can't see sexual abuse injuries, unless of course, as you pointed out, the doctor does the "correct" internal exam. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 33. "Sabrina" Posted by Nandee on 16:36:05 6/02/2000 NOTE: This message was last edited 16:36:05, 6/02/2000 I thought Patsy getting meds from Beuf was a little strange. I was personal friends with my kids pediatrician, but he wouldn't be the first person I would call if I wanted to have my senses numbed. I especially thought it strange after being treated for stage 4 cancer. I'm sure the woman had a primary care physician. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 36. "Nandee" Posted by Ginja on 16:52:57 6/02/2000 Beuf was called in by the Ramseys for Patsy because he was a friend of the family and they knew he'd give her something to basically knock her out, so to speak. The Ramseys only call upon people who will help them -- without question. If they had called Patsy's primary care physician, he'd have asked questions. Beuf was a friend. Beuf wouldn't ask questions. That's why Buef was called to the house. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 38. "Beuf" Posted by sabrina on 17:03:49 6/02/2000 Yes, and ask any physician and I bet the legit ones will tell you they would not prescribe controlled substances for non-patients!! (friends or no friends) IS THERE A DOCTOR IN THE HOUSE??? WHAT DO YOU THINK? Maybe Boef needs to be reported to the AMA for dispensing controlled substances/narcotics! [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 42. "The Doctor is In! Consultations 5 cents." Posted by szundi on 18:49:11 6/02/2000 Yes, Sabrina, I'm here. Thankfully Ginja put all my laborious prior posts in her post earlier here. I guess this was all done before the newbies arrived. Chris can probably put all the medical stuff where you can get at it. There are a number of my posts including my mini-seminar entitled, "What You Always Wanted to Know About the Hymen But Were Afraid to Ask!" and, "Anatomy, 101". In general, doctors do not prescribe controlled substances for people other than their patients. The feds are pretty strict and reserve the right to check on your prescriptions which are numbered and have to be kept under lock and key, these days). Also, they can demand to see the chart you have on the perso you are writing the script for and therefore, if you are 'fudging' or otherwise not treating someone legitimately, you can lose your license, be fined, be suspended, or all three. It just isn't worth 'doing a friend a favor'. If there is no chart and you haven't documented the reason for the treatment, the feds and the state medical examiners will get you. So, it all boils down to Beuf doing a favor for Patsy because she definitely was not his patient. A VERY stupid thing to do. My friends and family know better than to ask me for anything. I do not treat family members and even real good friends would be referred to one of my colleagues. szundi (Resident Surgeon, Astrologer, and Tarot Reader) PS: Thanks Ginja! Get your e-mail fixed yet? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 59. "thanks for the info" Posted by sabrina on 21:35:31 6/02/2000 Szundi,you clarfied everything I was wondering about the drugs. It was un-ethical. And I just pulled valium out of a hat. Who knows whats she was on? I found Dr. Boef a very wierd character. And like I said, if he was a vet I would not entrust my cat to his care. Or my goldfish. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 41. "Well" Posted by momo on 18:47:49 6/02/2000 I know if my daughter was murdered I would think any doctor would be happy to give me xanax or valium. But a friend of the family wouldn't ask any questions. They would just dispense whatever you wanted. The "hard stuff" which could have been alot heavier than the above named drugs. She is still hot and heavy on them. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 107. "That depends on the doctor.." Posted by ConnieToo on 11:30:39 6/08/2000 My best friend's husband died of a massive heart attack, no prior symptoms, no nothing, just a massive heart attack in the garage of his rental property where he had been doing some maintenance. No one in the family had thought to call her physician. The people I first spoke to said she had to go to the Dr's office first. Since he was her primary care doctor, I demanded to speak with him personally. In order to do this, I had to bully the receptionist, by asking for her name, when she immediately put me on a message line again. The nurse practioner called back, and when I explained what had happened, and the degree of Ophelia's distress, they immediately called in a prescription for a MILD SEDATIVE. This woman was beside herself, and the sedative helped. For someone to be drugged into incoherence by their dead child's pediatrician seems to me to be "helping" his friends right off the hook. Beuf has lots of 'splaining to do. So do the stinking Ramseys, the Butchers of Boulder. Heh, with all the OJ coverage, I decided that the Rams should be the Butchers of Boulder, just like OJ is the Butcher of Brentwood. imvho, of course.. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 39. "Thanks Ginja" Posted by RiverRat on 18:57:23 6/02/2000 NOTE: This message was last edited 18:57:23, 6/02/2000 You guys must get a kick out of us newbies or want to kick us at times for what may be rehashing for you, yet still mysterious for the newb's. I bow in respect as I have been treated with same. Edited to add that, Szundi, my check is in the mail! Thanks for your input. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 40. "St weighed in" Posted by maundy on 18:36:41 6/02/2000 in the about.com chat, ST was asked about Beef providing valium. ST says they certainly questioned that....that's all he said, i.e. he doesn't absolve Beef's actions. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 44. ""Newbies"" Posted by Ginja on 18:54:43 6/02/2000 I've followed this case since I saw her body being carried out of the house the day after Christmas. I've read every article, and probably have most on disks if I didn't print them out and file them. I've read most of the books (I gagged in the middle of DOI and gave it to Szundi, hoping she could finish it. I understand she's still gagging!LOL) Anyway, what I'm getting at is that putting together the above post was no problem. As soon as I read Nandee's first post, I broke out my disks and just copied different portions. So it's no big deal for me to dig things up like this. No special accolades for me, please! I'm addicted and enjoy separating the truth from fiction, where I can. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 52. "Ginja" Posted by Nandee on 19:43:22 6/02/2000 ... and I really appreciate your willingness to share!! I find this board has the most intelligent posts!! [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 43. "Please see Post #42" Posted by szundi on 18:51:22 6/02/2000 We love you newbies! szundi [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 45. "Thats because he had no reason to look for it" Posted by seenal on 19:02:49 6/02/2000 >A question for those of you with >daughters. (I have sons.) >During the LKL interview, John said, "Our >pediatrician, who saw JonBenet a dozen >times each year for the past >three years before this happened, has >sworn and testified in public that >he saw no evidence of sexual >abuse." >First question.... Who gives sworn testimony in >public?? >Here is Dr. Beuf's exact quote, "No. >Absolutely no signs of sexual abuse. >I had no suspicion of it. > >I think "saw no evidence" and "had >no suspicion" are two different things. > >If the doctor "had no suspicion" he >had no reason to check, so >those of you out there with >girls, enlighten me. How often do >peditritians do internal exams on 6 >year olds??? If he never did >one, how does he know, for >sure?? And.....Why didhe leave Boulder????? >How many of you would not bathe >your daughters for 3 days, especially >at holiday time? This child was >always on "display". I think this >is very strange. just MHO [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 46. "I have a 18 mo and a 3 yr old" Posted by seenal on 19:10:46 6/02/2000 My girls do not go to see the doctor much, because I do not work, I stay at home with my children and feel blessed to do so, they are very healthy. My ped looked at them vaginally when they were young like at 3 mos and 6 mos to see if there genitals were growing properly. This did not bother me nor was it unusual. Now, they have gone to see him since then, for checkups and an occasional earache, not once has he ever checked their vagina. The only way IMHO a doctor will check a childs vagina is if there is a problem the child/parent has mentioned.... Ive always wondered why Dr. Beuf locked JBRs records up in a safe deposit box and why Dr. Beuf assisted Patsy with sedatives etc....I mean the woman had cancer, surely there was a family physician avail to accomodate her. If something were to go awry in my family involving me needing help Id call my doctor, not my childs pediatrician. Just another bizarre twist to the Scumseys logical way of thinking. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 51. "Ginja" Posted by v_p on 19:50:45 6/02/2000 NOTE: This message was last edited 19:50:45, 6/02/2000 As usual, a great post. I find it odd that JBR had so many physical "accidents." Two in one month. I'd be curious to know what was going on their, (Ramseys) life in May '95. I'm going to puruse the DOI and see if I can figure it out. Stress? I just don't have a good feeling about the accidents. Notice December being one of the months she had an accident. 5/8/95: JBR falls in Alfalfa's food market, lands on nose, not broken. 5/95: Bent nail back on fourth finger, left hand, in another fall. Swollen and painful, but no bruising. Ibuprofen recommended. 12/95: Trips and hits head above left eye. Stuffy nose, bad breath, coughing. ~*~*~*~ And she is THREE (8/31/93: Responding to Beuf's questions, Patsy says JBR doesn't have any phobias and no aspect of JBR's sexual education needed to be discussed)- when he discusses JonBenet's sex-education? Very odd bird indeed. My daughter had Pneumonia three times by age 5 and not once did her Doctor ask anything at all pertaining to sex-education. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 47. "Seenal" Posted by Ginja on 19:25:51 6/02/2000 I'd think about that, if I were you. Here's a doctor who has parents fill out questionnaires on their children's sexuality, yet doesn't bother to give a proper "frog position" exam? It's already been noted by experts that sexual abuse isn't visible. And between you and me, if he'd been paying attention, he'd have wanted to give that 'frog' exam to JonBenet when at age 5 she started asking questions about her own sexuality. Maybe he should have been asking JonBenet the questions, not her mother! Something was wrong with this doctor...he was knitting with only one needle. Look at how many times she went to his office, look at the symptoms. Just about everything listed could be...could be...stress related. How many 3, 4 or 5 year olds have stress? We're aren't talking kids from the projects, or from one-parent homes, or from inner-cities. If that doctor had half a brain, he'd have looked into why she had so many possible stress-related symptoms. What really slays me is that he ignored her upper-respiratory problems. I'm not saying that because I think it was definitely stress-related and maybe a symptom of abuse. I have asthma. I know what it can do. And I know what can set it off besides pollutants or perfumes or pollen. What's worse, is that he has stated he "thought" she had it...yet he did nothing! John gets on television and says he thought she had asthma. You don't "think" about it...you act! So sure, maybe he didn't look for signs of sexual abuse because he didn't think his "friends" would do such a thing. The real problem with this quack is he didn't treat her for the obvious medical problems she had. It's not a pretty picture when you start adding it all up. And it's a really horrific picture when you look at the autopsy report and find she was sexually abused consistently for some time. He saw her less than a month before she was murdered...and didn't suspect a thing! He's got balls getting on national television and swearing he checked her and found no signs. The bastard never looked! A simple frog exam would have shown him she had no hymen. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 48. "What're you doin', Seenal? LOL" Posted by Ginja on 19:31:32 6/02/2000 I was responding to your post 46. Now it doesn't make any sense following this latest post of yours! :-) So disregard it! I mean, disregard the fact it's directed to you. (Does that make sense?) [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 49. "Zoon!" Posted by Ginja on 19:35:37 6/02/2000 I tread carefully with my email program! I wrote you one helluva great email last weekend, bringing you up to date on EVERYTHING! Then...I touched my mouse to click "send" and the freakin' thing froze my system. So much for mail. Then I responded to you about half an hour ago in this thread...during a thunder and lightening storm. And.....the power went out before I hit "post". LOL Bottom line, Zoon...yes! I'll be your buddy! [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 50. "I have" Posted by Luvsbeagles on 19:39:35 6/02/2000 a 7 year old daughter. She visits the dr. once a year unless something big happens like strep or an ear infection, etc. She was checked visually in the groin area when she was a baby (ie under 2) the Dr. no longer does this. She has NEVER had any type of internal exam (and frankly neither did I until I was about 18) Also....I am a family counselor and many clients I have seen have been previously sexually abused. I worked with one client who we suspected was being abused by her father. I took this client to the dr. to be examined . He seemed uncomfortable, but did do a visual inspection of her genital area. He later informed me that no Dr can tell if there is sexual abuse just from looking...in fact even when hymens are missing it doesnt mean anything as some females are born without them or they break from inconsequential activity. For what it is worth.... [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 53. "medical issues" Posted by pat on 20:12:59 6/02/2000 In times of great stress,,deaths, etc,,,doctors routinely give friends or parents of patients medication to sleep of to deal witih anxiety,,this is humane and is a common practice. I don't think they mean to knock someone out of sedate them into insensibility but oon that count beuf really is on good ground. This was a small place, he knew them socially and i can't criticize him for that. Docs as part of a ped exam do a visual inspection but believe me,,while cystitis may be common in little girls, vaginitis is not and is a big red flag. And I don't think any moms today arent aware of the bubble bath issue,,you can get safe bubbles for little girls that don't cause cystitis. This child needed a referral to an ent doc and an allergist and the chronic diarrhea with a bloody stool really needed looking at,,kids at her age can get colitis, etc. and it is serious. And that to makes you wonder what is going on. Beuf seems to have let his personal ties with family lower his index of suspicion,,a good reason not to treat your buddy's kids. Or he was just unaware of how common childhood sex abuse is. The autopsy findings and the pics of the hugely dilated vagina,,i think i have seen those somewhere and the enlarged hymeneal opening were good enough for me to know this child was abused,,and more than once. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 54. "Aside from the sexual abuse issue..." Posted by Ginja on 20:29:42 6/02/2000 ...and Patsy's Dr. Feelgood... How do you feel about all the different (or similar) ailments of JonBenet, generally? Pat just touched on it. There are some serious ailments there...and so many...so often. Is this normal? This issue has been discussed before...but long ago. A lot of posters pretty much agreed it could happen innocently enough. But that was before we had as much detail about the sexual abuse. At that time, most thought JonBenet's genital injuries were probably innocent, and that her other ailments were also 'normal'...nothing to be alarmed about, iow. But now... Now that we know she was sexually abused, do all the other ailments seem 'innocent'? Or do they now take on a different perspective? I'm pretty curious to see the reaction now. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 58. "Newbie here " Posted by Luvsa Mystery on 21:34:14 6/02/2000 Just a newbie checking in with thanks to all for all the 411. Your efforts are well appreciated. May I ask any of you with medical knowledge if it is normal that JB body would smell of decay so soon after death? Thanks :) [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 55. "I also find it odd at the lengths of time" Posted by SJ on 21:06:24 6/02/2000 that go by between runs of frequent visits. She was all of a sudden "cured"? And out of nowhere, it all came back? I think the lack of visits over several months is as telling as the frequent visits. The entire situation reeks. JBR's chronic bad breath should have been looked into, as should her upper respiratory problems. This so called pediatrician was one p*ss-poor doc. For a wealthy family with a little girl in the spotlight, it seems strange that they wouldn't want the absolute best for JBR and Burke. Wonder what Burke's records look like? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 57. "Luvsbeagles" Posted by Ginja on 21:26:26 6/02/2000 "in fact even when hymens are missing it doesnt mean anything as some females are born without them or they break from inconsequential activity. For what it is worth. This was what I was talking about in my post before this. Before "knowing" about the sexual abuse, many posters said the same as cited above. Plenty of "innocent" explanations. It would certainly be a Ramsey defense, I'm sure: She wasn't born with a hymen. To look at "just" the hymen, you don't see the whole picture. All the vaginal injuries support the 'assumption' that JonBenet certainly was born with hers, and that it wasn't 'lost' accidentally, e.g., falling or gymnastics. The injuries surrounding the area of her hymen include erosion, abrasion, inflammation, bruising, hyperemia and foreign matter (birefringent material). What's "left" of her hymen is the mucosal rim. FWIW [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 56. "duh huh" Posted by dixie on 21:14:19 6/02/2000 OK I cut and pasted this from the 'other' place and put it here since this has to do with sexual abuse,this is what was said "I can see where the killer might be involved in S&M because of use of the garrote, but that doesn't necessarily mean that he was a pedophile as well. It might just address the fact that this person was into causing pain, for sexual as well as psycological pleasure." Are these people for real or what??? how could you have your S&M thrills with a 6yr old CHILD and not qualify as a PEDOPHILE? sheez I'm so glad I found this forum [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 61. "9mm and 1 cm" Posted by AutumnBorn on 21:49:01 6/02/2000 NOTE: This message was last edited 21:49:01, 6/02/2000 is only 1 mm difference. That's so tiny, I don't see how that could possibly be a sign of sexual abuse. Wouldn't a 9mm vaginal opening be average and some be smaller and some larger? 1mm is next to nothing, isn't it? Color me stupid, but that's the way I remember metrics... There is something weird going on, but it doesn't have anything to do with a 1mm size difference in her vaginal opening. Those things are designed to stretch and bounce back. Edited to add: My 6 year old's genitalia was *only* looked at when she was an infant (dr. probably checking for rash) and a bladder infection due to bubble bath (got a urine sample with a plastic baggy type thing). She hasn't had a cursory look since then. But, then, she never got vaginitis, either, and we stopped using the bubble bath immediately. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 62. "AutumnBorn" Posted by Ginja on 21:46:35 6/02/2000 NOTE: This message was last edited 21:46:35, 6/02/2000 I was lousy at metrics and had to ask! LOL But it's not 1mm, it's 1 cm. So the average size is 9mm. The math is 100-9=91. That is, if I've got this right, 9mm + 91mm = 1 cm. ROTFLMAO! Edited because I subtracted wrong! Told you I was lousy at math! LOL [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 66. "metric measurements" Posted by maddie on 06:21:47 6/03/2000 I noticed the same thing as AutumnBorn, but assumed it was a typo. 10mm = 1cm, so 9mm + 1mm = 1 cm So this would imply that the hymenial opening was abnormally large but the vaginal opening was of normal size? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 60. "This is interesting..." Posted by Ginja on 21:38:14 6/02/2000 The lapses between visits look to be all due to the fact that the Ramseys aren't in Boulder. From 1994 thru 1996, the lapses are in the summer. Hmmm...did JonBenet just not get sick in the summers? Or did she have a doctor in Charlevoix? And did she visit that doctor as often as Beuf? Interestingly enough, the only other noticeable lapse in visits is during the spring of '93. This really sticks out like a sore thumb considering JonBenet had upper respiratory problems and sinusitis. Not even a runny nose during the height of hay fever season. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 63. "Pedoviles choose jobs around children" Posted by maundy on 07:14:01 6/03/2000 NOTE: This message was last edited 07:14:01, 6/03/2000 Ginja, good catch! we have never heard about a Charlevoix doc. so was she not getting sick then? i heard JR say she had "mild" asthma. that's the temporary kind for which you don't need specialists. i searched thru medline quite a bit the last time this subject came up. one study found little girls do not tear their hymens during straddle falls. period. Beef is worse than incompetent. he's complicit, imho. regardless, his opinion s worthless as to whether there was prior sexual abuse. something hinky: check out JR's reaction to ST saying a panel of ped MDs conclusion there was prior abuse. He vociferously denies it, "That's a lie! That's a lie!" WhY? THOMAS: And why would pediatric medical experts that the Boulder Police Department brought into this case swear out, via affidavit, that JonBenet had been subjected to prior vaginal trauma. J. RAMSEY: You're lying. You're lying, Steve. That is a lie. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 64. "Ginja's post #29" Posted by nana2 on 03:27:48 6/03/2000 Having read the reasons for "le beefs" consultations, as it were, doesn't it strike you all as very odd this coordinated child, who was able to hold poses,dance and not trip on stage, managed to fall and hurt herself so many times, jmhq [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 65. "Thank-you Ginja for your well-thoughtout" Posted by sds on 06:10:49 6/03/2000 medical post about sexual abuse. There must have been some of those visual signs on jbr's body at the autopsy, or why would have Detective Arndt say at the autopsy that it was apparent that jbr was sexually abused? And will all of jbr's apparent allergy related problems, Beuf should have sent her to a pediatric allergist. It seems like there was something that Patsy was suspecting to take her to the doctor all those times and allow those vaginal exams to take place. The whole thing is odd and not your normal turn of events with a pediatrician. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 67. "Where is he now?" Posted by scarab on 07:43:56 6/03/2000 I'm trying to do some catch up. I hadn't heard that the "good doctor" had left Boulder. I've tracked his medical career from PA to WY to CO. So where is he now? When did he leave? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 68. "Well, I don't know much" Posted by canadiana on 08:12:59 6/03/2000 but this would worry me for sure! ACUTE = beginning abruptly CHRONIC = developing slowly and persisting for a long period of time The word CHRONIC in the original autopsy report, is very important. This can ONLY indicate that 'trauma' visible was not ACUTE or NEW, but chronic. That is, had been there before death, had not been inflicted recently. Use of the word chronic in the autopsy report is a way of saying that abuse of some kind was going on long (days, weeks, etc) prior to death and therefore was ABUSE. JMO of course. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 69. "Canadiana!" Posted by Ginja on 10:19:14 6/03/2000 As I read your post I was smiling like a cheshire cat. I enjoy watching those 'lights' turn on. :-) [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 70. "sds" Posted by Ginja on 10:30:25 6/03/2000 Arndt was involved with sexual crimes investigations when pulled in on this case. She attended the autopsy and readily recognized evidence of the acute injuries that were external (or at least showed up externally). There was the blood in JBR's panties as well as dried blood and a large bruise on the labia. When Meyer passed the fluorescent light over JBR's lower extremities, it lit up 'stains' of what could have been semen or blood or other bodily fluid, as well as fibers and a partial fingerprint that Trujillo managed to lift. Those would be the noticeable external evidence. While Meyer examined her internally, he commented as to what he was seeing and at some point told Arndt that the injuries indicated definite sexual contact. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 71. "Ginja, was the large bruise" Posted by sds on 13:00:22 6/03/2000 on jbr's labila listed on the autopsy report? From your chilling listing of her external bruises and what we know about her ongoing chronic sexual abuse, I can't understand why the Ramseys weren't interrogated and arrested in the first couple of days after the murder. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 72. "scarab, canadiana" Posted by maundy on 13:14:45 6/03/2000 scarb, do you know anything about Beef's prior occupation as a rocket scientist fro NASA? canadiana, Wecht made the same points about "chronic" in his book. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 73. "there is a web site" Posted by pat on 18:07:45 6/03/2000 listing docs and their location and any previous ethics complaints against them,,,I think if you pay like 20 bucks you can get a check in every state in which they are licenses,,sometimes interesting stuff surfaces. Will find the site,,I think it is docboard.com but am not sure. Increasingly states are posting complaints resulting in disciplinary action against docs. And I think the custom of a doctor giving a tranquilizer or sleeping pill to a friend, relative in dire traumatic condition probably varies from place to place but it is very common in the south. And I have never heard of anyone disciplined for this. Now prescribing for friends or relatives is verboten if done chronically and I for one would never give a controlled or any drug to a family member.And in the case of a friend or mom of a patient that I knew well who had a murdered child and was screaming and unable to sleep I would give them something one time and get them to a counselor immediately. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 74. "sds" Posted by Ginja on 07:17:51 6/04/2000 Here's what Wecht had to say after reading the autopsy report, WITH the redactions!: As Cyril Wecht thought about what he had read, he came to a grim conclusion. If a six-year-old girl had arrived at a hospital emergency room for treatment of those same vaginal injuries, the attending doctors and nurses would have been required by law to report their suspicions of child sexual abuse. The police in most places would have conducted an intense interrogation of the parents, followed perhaps by the arrest of the father or other adult male in the house. From the document now before Wecht, the medical examination had established probable cause -- for a prosecution for sexual abuse. The problem we have to keep in mind here is that these injuries weren't discovered until the autopsy on the 27th. While Meyer and Arndt and Trujillo, several members of Meyer's staff, and several members of the DA's staff were conducting this autopsy, Mike Bynum was busy hiring Haddon & Co. It's pretty obvious why, after the autopsy, Arndt teamed up with her supervisor, Sgt. Mason, and headed straight for the Fernies...they had questions! Of course, this is when Bynum answered the door, informed the two the Ramseys had retained lawyers and weren't talking to anyone, and then slammed the door in their faces! Likewise, there were additional problems here, as I've noted hundreds of times, most notably last weekend in my "probable cause" thread, or the week before in NYL's "Hoffman sues" thread, which both seemed to be turned into a slam fest against me rather than responsible discussion! Wecht continues: The medical disclosures had not told Wecht who was responsible for the sexual abuse and the actions that killed JonBenet. The information didn't necessarily point to a man. Although the vast majority of sexual molesters are men, women also have been known to molest girls, even their daughters. But Wecht was just as sure about another troubling legal point. What if more than one person was involved? What if two peole were somehow linked in that night's reprehensible activities? How could the police and prosecutors determine which one was responsible for what -- which one had inflicted the sexual abuse or which one had caused the death? How could criminal liabliity be assigned and pursued to justice? To Wecht, apportioning individual blame was not the issue. If one person caused the death, the other helped cover it up. He wondered about those edited sections of the report, and eagerly anticipated their release some months down the road. Would they give him the rest of the story? Would they answer that single, maddening question: Who killed JonBenet? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 75. "Specialist?" Posted by Nandee on 12:27:55 6/04/2000 It seems very telling that the only time Patsy got the advice of a specialist was when it involved JonBenet;s looks!! (the golf club accident) [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 76. "Post #29: Halitosis?" Posted by Dunvegan on 12:46:34 6/04/2000 Referencing Ginja's detailed post #29 above: 11/93: Cough and stuffed nose. Sleeping poorly, grouchy from fatigue, bad breath. Chronic sinusitis. 1/94: Bad breath, cough and congestion. 4/94: Breath still bad, runny nose, little appetite, slept poorly, bladder infection and vaginal discharge. Diagnosed with vaginitis. Amoxicillin prescribed and warned against bubble baths. 11/4/94: Badly congested, deep cough, bad breath. Diarrhea gone. What's up with that? Why presenting with such prominent halitosis for so long? Interesting point: according to Ginja's Beuf visit timeline, the one mention in Beuf's records of JR acting as caretaker has him simply calling in for advice...not bringing her in, even though Beuf was so close. Could be John didn't need the "office visit fix", or could be he didn't want to bring her in for some reason. Very suspicious (like everything else Ramsey) medical history, all-in-all. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ EMAIL Dunvegan ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 79. "Another JR lie" Posted by Seashell on 13:54:04 6/04/2000 How would JR know if JBR had been abused prior to her death? He was gone a lot and claims he didn't even know she wet her bed. Are we now to believe that every day he would ask PR or JBR or Dr. Buffoon, "Was JonBenet abused today?" Yeah, John, she was not abused the way you know PR didn't kill JBR even tho you were sleeping, so you said. How can he vehemently deny that? An innocent father would want to kill the SOB who may have done that. JR was an absentee father/husband, physically and emotionally. In re-reading about all the Beuf visits, I'm struck by her insomnia. Children usually sleep well. Was she frightened of something in the night? And what is Patsy doing saying that JBR had no interest in the opposite sex when she was 3 years old? Was Patsy projecting perhaps? :-) How did JBR go to school and work the pageants during these years of illness and insomnia and breathing problems? How she must have suffered at the hands of that horrible family - always being pushed and prodded and forced to perform, perhaps both on and off the stage. Beuf should have his license revoked. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 78. "Dunvegan..." Posted by szundi on 13:44:07 6/04/2000 I think I can answer your question re: the halitosis. This is from an infection probably in her sinuses or her tonsils. It can also come from a coating on the tongue or infected teeth. In her case, it was probably from her sinuses. Also, someone asked about the odor of decay on the body. She had been dead about 12 hours and bodies start decaying immediately when death ensues. I often have to operate on people with dead bowel and believe me, it smells to high heaven after just a few hours! szundi [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 77. "Dunvegan & ginja" Posted by fly on 13:37:05 6/04/2000 dunvegan - bad breath can be associated with sinus problems ginja (and a lot of you) - You are forgetting one very important thing as you cite all the physical injuries noted in the autopsy as evidence that Beuf is a horrible doctor who missed JBR's sexual abuse: she was very definitely abused the night she was injured, and some of the abnormalities leading the Arndt's "diagnosis" probably are attributable to that. Yes, there were signs of possible previous abuse (although the experts differ on this - and not just in terms of Krugman's "sexual intent" based definition), but even Wecht guesses the timing as a few days earlier. So, Beuf was a doctor seeing a seemingly happy little girl with pretty much run of the mill accidents and illnesses (confirmed by the outside experts who reviewed her history). That is not the scenario for which Beuf should be expected to do any thorough sex-abuse exam in the first place, and given that it is very possible the sex abuse did not predate her last doctor's visit, it might not have been there to be seen even if he had done such an exam. Of course it is possible that Beuf missed signs of abuse. That doesn't make him incompetant or evil. As to the sex education questions, etc... I was not lying in my earlier post: that type of question is part of an established, accepted developmental exam (as I think somebody else tried to tell you on this thread) that some doctors use. Not all doctors use it - our first pediatrician happened to, our current one does not. Asking those questions is entirely normal and not indicative of a twisted interest in the sexual interests of little girls or being a quack. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 82. "Omigod, Fly!" Posted by Ginja on 14:35:18 6/04/2000 NOTE: This message was last edited 14:35:18, 6/04/2000 You finally spelled my name right! LOL FWIW, I'm not forgetting the important fact that many of the physical signs of abuse were the acute ones from the night of the murder. However, the reason why you may get the impression that "I" personally think the doctor "is a horrible doctor who missed JBR's abuse" is because "the doctor" was so adamant in proclaiming that she was never abused AND that there was absolutely nothing to even suggest to him to look, to wit: After the autopsy release, her pediatrician would reject any possibility that she had been a victim of sexual abuse. Dr. Francesco Beuf would firmly insist that he had never seen any physical or behavioral indications of that. "I can tell you, as far as her medical history is concerned, there was never any hint whatsoever of sexual abuse. I didn't see any hint of emotional abuse or physical abuse. She was a very much loved child, just as her brother," he told KUSA-TV. He said he would have reported any suspicion of sexual abuse, as he was required to do by law and as he had done in appropriate cases. That was unnecessary here, he said, because he had always admired the close relationship between JonBenet and Patsy. On Primetime Live, Beuf told Diane Sawyer that JonBenet had complained of pain while urinating during three of the twenty-seven visits to his office over the last three years; the rest were for colds, sinus problems, or other normal complaints. He believed the vaginal inflammation he diagnosed had been due to poor bathroom hygiene or common irritation from bubble bath. He also listed bedwetting as an occasional problem, but said that was common in a high percentage of girls of that age. Sawyer asked if Beuf would have detected a vaginal injury of the sort found during the autopsy if it had existed when he examined her. Probably, he said, but he wasn't certain because he had not given JonBenet a full internal gynecological examination." I'll be absolutely honest with you, Fly. In retrospect, that is, if the good doctor had even bothered to look back, and admitted or at least commented that as it was happening, that is, isolated, he didn't see it, I wouldn't be so harsh on him. I don't know...he could have said anything...and I'd be quite forgiving and understand. Monday morning quarterbacking can show you quite a bit ... but he wouldn't even give it a chance. Hell...I would have forgiven PR and/or JR up front if they had 'confessed' it was an accident, or that they were covering for Burke. But none of these people want to take responsibility for anything! Even to something as simple as admitting, "I didn't realize at the time... ." Again, isolated, plenty looks normal or okay or innocent...tag it however nicely you like. But in retrospect, when looking at the whole, there's just too much there to be ignored. To pretend there's not, is almost as criminal as the crimes committed against JBR! (To me, anyway). I'm the first one to give anyone a break. I'm also the first to rake them over the coals if they insist they're right and the world's wrong. This isn't just a case of sexual abuse oversight, Fly. Look at the record. Actually, these are just the notes...I'd love to see the actual records! 3 episodes of painful urination? An assumption the child has an upper-respiratory disease with no follow-up? There were no 'baby monitors' in the house and the parents have both stated they could hear nothing when up in the bedroom. This poor kid could have had an asthma attack and choked to death! She's clunked in the head by a hamster cage, her brother smacks in her the face with a golf club, she trips and falls in a grocery store, and collapses at a photo shoot. Perhaps the doctor thinks these aren't signs of physical abuse, but I'm willing to bet that if she had been taken to the ER with these injuries and those excuses (even if true!), the staff would have made a call to police or social services or whoever it is they call when they suspect something's not quite kosher. On the one hand, Patsy's telling the doctor JonBenet is active and healthy, but the evidence is that she's tripping in stores and collapsing in studios. This may not be a sign of physical abuse, and even I can't link it in any way to sexual abuse, but dammit! balance problems and feinting can be signs of a medical problem, maybe a serious one! Or...maybe she just needed glasses! But we'll never know because the doctor wasn't concerned enough to test her. Don't you think it strange she had upper-respiratory problems...the doctor himself attributed 27 visits to this! yet during the height of hay fever season, not one single visit for a three month period? She was in his office at least once a month, sometimes two and three times! Yet when she summered in Charlevoix, there's no record of a single visit for any kind of problem? And be honest. He had to see her hair bleached platinum blonde. He knew her from the time she was a baby and knew she had mousy brown hair. I don't see a single note of his warning Patsy not to use harsh chemicals on this child. Yet at the first sign of vaginitis he warns against freakin' bubble bath? Uh oh...I'm starting to get angry with my colorful expletives! LOL Bottom line, Fly, is that I wasn't ignoring the fact that the sexual injuries were acute and internal. But hell, he's the one who went on national television and said he'd probably see some of those injuries. He's also the one who's adamant he's a good a caring doctor. I don't think so. I think he's a pitiful excuse for a pediatrician...of all things! He can say whatever he wants. But that's his patient of three years who's six feet under. And I have to ask, what if? What if just once, he'd have taken a couple of extra minutes after an exam and maybe asked JonBenet "how" things were going for "her"...or ask Patsy why she was suddenly falling and feinting. IOW, I think you get my drift. Edited because I forget to turn off some of my codes! [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 104. "Ginja........AND...." Posted by La Contessa on 15:00:40 6/06/2000 a VAGINAL DISCHARGE in a six year old child?? This wasn't a BIG red flag for Beuf?? Didn't this warrant an internal examination?? A baby girl has a vaginal discharge and the pediatrician doesn't bother to investigate from whence that discharge is coming? Beuf should not only have his license revoked, he should be in jail. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 109. "Ginja, I am convinced" Posted by ConnieToo on 12:09:37 6/08/2000 that any reputable physician would at the VERY LEAST have cultured vaginal discharge in a child that young, especially with the painful urination and "accidents" that seemed to happen to JonBenet with regularity. And, by the way, where's the Beuf? In the Caymans' living on JRs money?? I wouldn't doubt it a bit, especially when the Beuf gave the Patsy drugs that knocked her out. I still wonder about him knocking the Patsy out, so she couldn't talk to the police. Design or accident? JR takes a walk with Fernie and the Beuf, apologizes over and over again, and the Patsy is incoherent for days?? Or at least until the photo op at JBRs funeral. God, I hate that woman for all she wasn't to her daughter. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 81. "established accepted developmental exam" Posted by maundy on 14:13:58 6/04/2000 fly, if that developmental exam is so established, how come not one parent at this forum has ever seen one? beuf's actions re: his so-called "vaginal" exams are either suspicious, or indicative that the good doctor needs to reeducate himself on accurate medical terminology. what he was peforming were genital exams. he was, however, quite incompetent when it came to treating JB's respiratory problems. i did not have the "excellent medical insurance" that JR brags about when my kids were small. yet my kids was referred to a pediatric specialist by the age of four when he exhibited signs of recurrent sinus problems. the ped allergist gave me all kind of suggestions to allergen-proof the house (one of which was getting rid of the cats...which we didn't do). another is obviously keeping the house extremely clean. the Ramsey house was over 7000 sq ft. i do not see how it was kept clean with one person coming in 3 (?) days a week to clean. JR said on baba (?) that JB had a "mild" case of asthma. i don't muchabout asthma, but i believe it can be lifethreatening, "mild" or not. that is not something for a general practioner to mess with. he was a fool, a quack or complicit not to have sent that child to a specialist to rule out or in that diagnosis. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 110. "there is no such thing as a MILD asthma..." Posted by ConnieToo on 12:15:09 6/08/2000 even MILD asthma can be, and is on occasion, deadly. At the very least, I'd expect him to have prescribed an inhaler, in case of breathing difficulty. Once more, the JR is prevaricating to make some sort of point. I imagine the RAMSPINNERS will be out in force with some new "vision" on JBRs health. The Ramseys say nothing in public that is NOT to create a spin. I hope they eventually make the second fatal slip they've made relative to JonBenet in the past 3.5+ years. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 80. "Thank you, fly..." Posted by Dunvegan on 14:09:10 6/04/2000 ...and other seasoned JW denizens. I very much appreciate your patience with newbie questions or confusions...this board has done a great deal in pursuit of JfJBR. Thanks for your willingness to keep it open to new posters...and your diligence in keeping things as clear and on-track as posslble. Regards, Dunvegan [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ EMAIL Dunvegan ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 84. "Maundy" Posted by Ginja on 14:51:55 6/04/2000 Naturally, I agree with your post! LOL (Rumor has it I only post back to others to rip them apart...which is totally and completely untrue!). I'm not sure how "established" these tests are; however, there have been several parents who have posted that they've been presented with these questionnaires when taking their children to the pediatrician. It may be just a thing where it's a standard exam for those who wish to utilize such. As far as sending JBR to a specialist for the possible asthma or allergies problem, I would agree Beuf shouldn't have dropped the ball. However, again, many parents on the board here have said upper-respiratory problems can be common in kids this age so maybe referrals to specialists aren't mandated. But again, I don't think they were suggesting that the problems be ignored. I don't have kids, so I can't say what I would or wouldn't do, and therefore usually always defer to parents. However, I've been involved in law enforcement and the legal arena for almost 30 years and have had my share (more than plenty!) of going through medical records and making determinations as to quality of care. As far as Beuf's concerned, I don't see quality in any way, shape or form! jmho as always [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 83. "allergic rhinitis" Posted by maundy on 14:45:48 6/04/2000 Why did Beuf diagnose JB with allergic rhinitis twice - 30 months apart? why wasn't she referred to a pediatric allergist? why wasn't she tested to see what she was allergic to? 27 visits for upper-respitory problems - illnesses which she might not have suffered from if given adequate medical care. why wasn't she seen by a urologist for her recurrent vaginal and urinary tract problems? why weren't physical causes for incontinence ruled out medically, especially since there was an older sibling with similar problems? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 85. "Addendum to my Beuf Rant :-)" Posted by Ginja on 15:07:35 6/04/2000 NOTE: This message was last edited 15:07:35, 6/04/2000 He also listed bedwetting as an occasional problem, but said that was common in a high percentage of girls of that age. I wonder. Is this comparable to Patsy's remark that "it was just a few Sundays"? I'm being facetious! My real point here is that Beuf considered her bedwetting problem an "occasional" problem. What the hell is he talking about? The kid was wearing pullups to school!!!! Her bed was covered in plastic sheets! And I'm sure there was nothing in his 'questionnaire' where Patsy could fill in that JonBenet didn't have overnighters because of her "occasional problem"! And cripes, he doesn't even mention the enuresis! Perhaps it was described to him as diarhea? No wonder John gets on television and insists someone like Thomas show him signs of any kind of prior abuse. For cripes sakes, he's got a doctor on the payroll who's deaf, dumb and blind! Edited because the initial cite deleted itself...I'm sure it did, cuz I didn't delete it and it wasn't there when I posted! LOL [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 87. "Maundy" Posted by Ginja on 15:33:06 6/04/2000 Regarding all the questions you're asking... See my last post...I just called Beuf deaf, dumb and blind, aka hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil. I see plenty of opportunities, as you do, where Beuf should have either investigated further, did some testing, or referred her to specialists. When you look at each instance by itself, I can understand how some posters (and even Beuf, but to a point) could say it's normal for a kid that age or it's no big deal, she'll grow out of it...pick an excuse. The problem I have is that I, as you, probably, am looking at the whole picture. So maybe the rhinitis was 30 months apart, or an allergic reaction was two months apart. It's not so much the problem itself...but I should think the doctor would be concerned enough to look to the circumstances surrounding these visits. What I'm getting at is that many of the problems JonBenet had are not only what they're described to be, e.g., diarhea, but many of them are also known to be symptomatic of other problems, including most notably abuse, that is, they're stress-related/induced, including bouts of sinusitis, rhinitis, asthma, diarhea, etc. JBR had the good life, so to speak. So how much is there for her to have possibly been stressed out? I've given Beuf an out every now and then by saying he was looking at each case in and of itself...as a stand alone circumstance. But I really have a problem with letting him get away with this so lightly. First, I thought the move in the medical field was toward holistic (or is that wholistic?) treatment, where the 'whole' patient is treated, not just the ailment. Second, Beuf claims there were no patterns. Isn't a doctor supposed to review your chart before he starts his examination? Of course, I'm not being treated by a pediatrician, but every time I go to the doctor, he brings my file into the examining room, says hello, and sits down and reads the file. He'll look up, ask me how I'm feeling, nod, and go back to the file. Then he'll come over to me and start the examination. And while he's doing that, he'll start asking me questions about previous visits and treatments...did this work, how do you feel, did you have that symptom anymore? (He's a talker...besides being the absolutely most handsome (unattached) hunk this side of the Mississippi! He's French and has a gorgeous accent, oo la la!):-) He doesn't shut up! He continues his exam while explaining results of previous tests from my previous visit. IOW, this guy's looking at the entire picture! At the very least, I would want the same kind of treatment for my children (if I had any). Of course, in this respect, I'm not much different from Steve Thomas. I take my dogs to a holistic vet! LOL Back to Beuf though...he never looked at the whole picture, even in retrospect! [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 86. "Ginja" Posted by maundy on 15:19:58 6/04/2000 NOTE: This message was last edited 15:19:58, 6/04/2000 re: developmental exam. I stand corrected. Interesting that there is a questionnaire that asks about normal sexual development when doctors don't know what that is. There is a study about just that on the web. If I can find it, I'll post the url. Re: allergies. maybe they are normal, but they still require treatment. Her upper respiratory infections were causing her duress. Twnty-seven visits in 36 months. Obviously benadryl wasn't cutting it. Why wasn't she tested to see what she is allerigic to? what if it was dogs? I think you mean ecopresis (?) for stool incontinence. and every symptom list i have ever read says that is a waving red flag for abuse. i don't remember reading that in Beuf's notes (i am printer-impaired). it doesn't mean it wasn't reported to him. also re: Beuf and inappropriate behavior with little girls. this is reported in Hodges book (which i seem to have misplaced). his source is an unnamed nurse of Beuf. how can a rocket scientist be such an incompetent physician? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 89. "maundy" Posted by fly on 15:45:38 6/04/2000 NOTE: This message was last edited 15:45:38, 6/04/2000 How come no parent has seen that exam? I don't count? And, as I said, another poster DID post that his/her doctor had used the same thing. I also cited in my previous post (on this thread, I think) that someone who worked for a pediatrician said it was an accepted procedure. You might not agree with my conclusions, but let me assure you of one thing: when I say I have first-hand knowledge of something, that is exactly the case. I do not lie or make things up to support my arguments. I'm not perfect and do have errors in memory-based things occasionally, of course, but not about my own experiences. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 88. "To my printer-impaired friend!" Posted by Ginja on 15:44:28 6/04/2000 NOTE: This message was last edited 15:44:28, 6/04/2000 >I think you mean ecopresis (?) for >stool incontinence. I'm not sure if that makes me spelling-impaired or just plain stupid! LOL You may be printer-impaired, but you're a genius to have recognized my enuresis as ecopresis! Good work! :-) >I stand corrected. Interesting that there >is a questionnaire that asks about >normal sexual development when doctors don't >know what that is. LOL...you're a hoot! But how true! >and every symptom list >i have ever read says that (ecopresis) >is a waving red flag for >abuse. I think you'll agree, Maundy, there's more than one red flag waving on that poor child's file! Edited to add it's a damn shame doctors can't be arrested or otherwise charged with something (anything!) for ignoring red flags! [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 92. "Question" Posted by South on 16:29:36 6/04/2000 If JB WAS being abused and it included the use of a garOAT, could that explain some of the upper respiratory complaints? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 91. "Fly" Posted by Ginja on 16:07:32 6/04/2000 My very very best intentions are in this, so please don't read me wrong. It sounds like you're having a bad day or something...either that, or like me, you get slammed or falsely accused of some inane whatever so much that out of the blue and out of context, it erupts. IOW, uh, I think you overreacted to Maundy. I thought she asked a simple question...that is, I didn't see any malice behind it. I corrected her, and she came back and stood corrected. C'mon, lighten up. I'm still enjoying the fact you finally spelled my name right! :-) Besides, I have a question. I read the autopsy report wrong (I'm sure you're loving this! lol). Jonesy posted something today that I thought was in error and went to the AR to point out why...which is how I found my error. All this time I thought there had been "interstitial chronic inflammation" in the neck area, which of course, would mean this wasn't the first time she had something tightened around her throat. As a matter of fact, I think we've even posted to that fact at some point or another. Anyway...the AR really says "interstitial inflammatory infilitrates"!!!!! Whaddya think of that???? I mean, my god, that changes everything! (Have I posted to this in this thread already? Probably not, seeing as how you haven't posted to it.) I mean, the bulb has lit in my head here...has yours? I'm reeeeeeaaallllllyyyy curious as to what you make of that! [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 90. "arrest docs?" Posted by Nandee on 15:58:25 6/04/2000 They probably could if the parents gave a chit! [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 93. "Hmmmm...I'm going to re-read the FBI article on MSBP" Posted by Dunvegan on 16:39:36 6/04/2000 ...from the FBI Law Enforcement Bulletin, Aug-1995: "Munchausen Syndrome By Proxy," by Detective Kathryn A. Artingstall. Originally posted over on the "Confusing Stage IV Cancer Time-Line" thread: Full article available here - http://www.fraud-watch.com/leb_msbp.htm#characteristics ...because the child's illness has no medical cause, doctors have difficulty making a diagnosis. As the baffling symptoms continue, doctors or hospital administrators may call on law enforcement to investigate the mysterious circumstances surrounding such cases.... The growing list of MSBP cases underscores the need for investigators to understand the various, and often complex, issues related to MSBP. During the past several years, a number of variations to the normal offender patterns have emerged, accompanied by a clearer understanding of how law enforcement should respond to cases believed to involve MSBP. The more investigators know about MSBP, the better able they will be to identify perpetrators, clear innocent suspects, and most important, protect children. The article does go on to discuss crossover from Munchausen Syndrome to Munchausen Syndrome by Proxy, e.g., evolving from the counterfeiting one's own illness to becoming a caretaker by manufacturing an illness in someone who is in your guardianship. Whatever happened, I reflect on JonBenet, and I grieve for her. Is MSBP a possible scenario? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ EMAIL Dunvegan ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 94. "Dunvegan" Posted by Nandee on 16:47:38 6/04/2000 In this case, ANYTHING is possible!! [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 95. "Not a Thread-Starter" Posted by janphi on 17:34:58 6/04/2000 Who'll start the new thread for this? I'm just weighing in with one or two little opinions and they would sound funny starting off a whole new thread. To me, the importance of JBR's medical records is the pattern of frequency that had been increasing and increasing up until her death. There were 2-3 visits per year (to Beuf, anyway) at first, then by 1994 there were more, then in 1995 there were how many, 5-6? Then in 1996, there are 8 occurrences listed in a 9-month period (I'm assuming that "5/95" is a typo, since it seems to be out of sequence, but would be in the right place if it was supposed to be 5/96). And the three calls in one day on 12/17/96 aren't even listed. That all adds up to crisis coming, if you ask me. Also, it is my understanding that JR met Dr. Beuf on the golf course not too long after moving to Boulder (don't know where I heard this, so don't ask me, lol!) and then it turned out that he also went to the same church as JR & PR (or maybe they went there at his urging or recommendation after meeting him? I don't know. I do see the "plan," though, to fit in and be seen in the right places by playing golf at the right country club--just guessing they didn't meet on a muni--and joining the Episcopal Church--the "society" church. Networking.) and they bonded from those two things. To me, it's important to remember that--JR met Beuf first in the "men's" circle, then Beuf became JB's pediatrician. I still don't get why Beuf is always called the Ramseys' "family doctor" in all the generalized media accounts. Why don't we know Patsy's gynecologist's name? Why don't we know Patsy's oncologist's name? Why don't we know the family's general practitioner's name? Who was their dentist? Naturally, you don't make friends with all the professionals who treat you, even or especially in a small town, but I just think it's weird that Beuf is on the scene and always the doctor of record. Also weird that the only other doctor Patsy references is in her Stage IV cancer narrative and is a plastic surgeon friend in GA. None of this adds up. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 96. "FYI, According to the AMA site," Posted by AutumnBorn on 18:09:05 6/04/2000 NOTE: This message was last edited 18:09:05, 6/04/2000 NOTE: This message was last edited 18:04:19, 6/04/2000 Beuf is still in Boulder. He is not a member of the AMA, but his office address and telephone number are listed there, as well as a bit of other information regarding his education. Here's the link: http://www.ama-assn.org/iwcf/iwcfmgr206/SESSION_ID=62046/SESSION_AR=89/frm_name=aps_result?action_detail.x=hello&row=0&key=1&amap=N&form_type=r Edited to say: Did a metric conversion from mm to cm on a pc utility. 10mm = 1cm...Maddie wins the math competition! [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 97. "ginja, thanks" Posted by maundy on 20:24:01 6/04/2000 fly, i read thru too quickly and missed that part of your post. sorry. ginja, thanks for the help. :) i'm not sure what the difference is with the interstitial tissue. no clue, actually. time for a new thread. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 98. "maundy *& ginja" Posted by fly on 08:24:38 6/05/2000 maundy - Sorry if I jumped you. It is very frustrating to see the same mistakes being made (not just you) over and over again, and then having the correct information be missed/ignored/etc. You might not have been around to see the developmental questions be shown to be normal, but ginja has. ginja - Hey, I don't misspell you name very often. Of course, I never would if you used just a little consistency in your sound-to-letter relationships. :-) You are going off the deep end again, ginja, in your interpretation of JBR's medical history. (1) Beuf isn't the only person to say they saw no signs that would lead them to suspect JBR was being sexually abused. That's basically the same things the teachers and family friends have said. (2) Beuf did acknowledge that he might not have seen damage to the hymen had it been there, although he generally thought he would have. (3) As you sort of suggested in a post, you probably shouldn't comment on the "abnormality" of JBR's illnesses and accidents and her pediatrician's procedures given that you have no kids. A lot of what you've said is highly suspicious is not, and a lot of what you say about kids' medical problems is flat out wrong. Much of this has been pointed out to you before, by me and by other people with kids. One of these days perhaps you will pay attention to the information. Kids get hurt, both from their own actions and by other kids. Small bruises, especially to the legs or arms are not sinister. Although a baby monitor in her room might have been a good idea, not having one isn't a sign of a bad/abusive parent. Most kids I know would be highly offended if they had to have a baby monitor in their room at age 6. Also, maybe there'd never been an occasion when there had been a problem (e.g., sick kid calling for help) and they hadn't been able to hear it. They might not have realized there was a need for a monitor. Mild asthma does not necessarily require treatment or evaluation by a specialist. A pediatrician is able to give the same general advice and prescribe the same medications as an pulmonary specialist. Mild asthma certainly is not likely to cause a life-threatening problem - at least not one that immediately incapacitates the child or that very quickly becomes life threatening. Also, some people's asthma isn't triggered by "hayfever," so her lack of problems during those seasons isn't necessarily weird. Upper-respiratory problems are not as common during the summer, so JBR's lack of problems then is pretty typical, I'd say. My son goes off his asthma medication most summers because he is so unlikely to have problems during that time, so it's also not terribly surprising that JBR didn't have problems then. Where the heck do you see evidence for "balance problems?" And why is Beuf negligent for not warning PR about lightening JBR's hair? I don't think JBR was wearing Pullups to school. She had worn them at night later than some kids, but obviously hadn't been wearing them at night for some time, or PR wouldn't have been washing sheets after "accidents" quite so often, right? Young girls who do not practice good toilet hygiene or who are wetting themselves at night do get bladder or vaginal infections or irritation. Bottom line, ginja, the pediatrics specialists who looked at JBR's history found nothing particularly unusual for a kid her age. And don't give the line about JBR being found dead being important. It's possible that the TV folks didn't tell them whose records they were evaluating, but I'd bet that wasn't the case. I'd say the pediatric experts' judgement is more to be trusted than yours, or mine. To continue to disregard their conclusions and to berate Beuf's competance is just plain unjustified. (4) About the thryroid... Here's what the autopsy report said concerning the microscopic analysis: The thyroid gland is composed of normal-appearing follicles. An occasional isolated area of chronic interstitial inflammatory infiltrate is seen. How significant is an occasional isolated area of abnormality? Does it signify previous strangulation? Who knows? Not me, and I suspect, not you. As I posted before, I did look up what could cause this, and I found previous viral infection as one possibility. Strangulation was not mentioned, as I recall, but that might be more a factor of the domain of the search than of whether or not strangulation could be a cause. In any case, I think this one is best left to a real forensic pathologist. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 111. "Sorry, fly, but I beg to differ..." Posted by ConnieToo on 12:24:02 6/08/2000 My secretaries husband died of mild asthma, because the Emergency Room entrance had been moved, and she couldn't get to the new entrance before he was so far gone, he never recovered. His asthma was mild. No problems an inhaler couldn't control, until the time he had an acute attack. His asthma had been considered mild and treatable with inhalers, until that final attack. Mild asthma can turn fatal in an instant. The fact that JonBenet didn't have an inhaler, and her pediatrician didn't prescribe one for her tells me that she either didn't have asthma, or her trachea was somehow damaged (the garrOATe" and caused her to wheeze when inflamed. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 99. "exams" Posted by dundee on 10:29:57 6/05/2000 when my daughter was 5 she feel down and a stick went through her pants and cut her. I took her to the docter, who said at her age, it would have been more traumatic for her to be examined by a doctor, and told me to let her sit in a bath to cleanse it. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 100. "gingia, jinja, gingea, and fly " Posted by darby on 11:07:11 6/05/2000 The alternate spellings of ginja in my subject line work, and they keep the sound-to-letter relationships pure. But one can never spell it "ginga" without an unfortunate pronunciation, because the second g only can be soft when followed by i or e and sometimes y (ie, gigantic is never pronounced jijantic). Catholic education, you know. My problem, however, has always been the first g. It can be g as in ginseng OR g as in give. Which is it? One who knows nothing of the "snap" that sometimes follows may never know. I vote that Ginja change the spelling of her name to Jinja. About the Beuffoon: The thing about all of this discussion is that each and every facet of Beuf vis a vis JBR could be construed as normal. None of it can even be called remotely suspect with absolute certainty. Therefore, we can think what we want, but we can prove nothing. Just like almost everything else about this case. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 101. "New Thread, Please?" Posted by Dunvegan on 06:20:08 6/06/2000 Beuffoon! Udderly hilarious, Darby! Whatever else one can say about this physician, he's certainly not the sharpest marble in the bag. New thread, anyone? [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 103. "Ginja...Asthma" Posted by La Contessa on 14:33:25 6/06/2000 A professor of psychology, a PHD., himself, said in class, that asthma, which has no physical basis, should be considered "a child's cry for help." [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 105. "LaContessa" Posted by fly on 06:43:44 6/07/2000 LaC - Unless that professor was talking about situations where the trigger (a specific allergen, etc.) for asthma couldn't be identified, well, maybe. However, if the prof was saying asthma has no physical basis, s/he obviously doesn't know what s/he is talking about. To suggest that asthma does not have a physical origin is about as far off as you can get. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 102. "Dr Goof, er Beuf" Posted by Holly on 07:54:36 6/06/2000 might want to "examine" one of the internet porn sites. I'm told there is one called "Catheter Porn". Sick... [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ] 108. ""Accident Prone Children"" Posted by Red on 11:58:52 6/08/2000 NOTE: This message was last edited 11:58:52, 6/08/2000 A physician in the major metropolitan area in which I live recently wrote a very compelling and important article on accident prone children. The upshot of the article, along with statistics to bear it out,was that essentially there is no such thing as accident-prone children. This physician, who saw continuously reoccurring "accidents" in children, began examining the child's family life as part of his plan to get to understand why a child or a number of children in the family kept coming in for many drs visits. His conclusion was that family dymanics, lack of appropriate supervision and concern, and this sort of thing generally was the reason some kids were considered accident prone. Think it's a perfect fit for the Ramseys. Patsy knew of or suspected that JR was molesting JonBenet. She prayed that Dr. B would discover the molestation and tell her about it. He never did. So Patsy continued to live in a world of denial, because it was convenient, and wierdly comfortable. ---until the autopsy report revealed the sexual abuse. Then the whole world knew. [ REMOVE ] [ ALERT ] [ EDIT ] [ REPLY ] [ REPLY WITH QUOTE ] [ TOP ] [ MAIN ]