Troubling Details: garland, shoe laces, footprints, ponytails, barbie nightgown, etc

[MyrDawn]

Originally posted by Ames


Well, personally...my daughter's get the American Girl magazine, and I have NEVER seen one in there that can be made to look like an actual child. The MY TWINN doll, is the ONLY one that I know of that you can do that with. So, she may have had an American Girl Doll that resembled her, somehow...but, with the MY TWINN doll, you can actually fill out a questionaire, and pick the eye color, hair color, freckles/no freckles, glasses/no glasses, etc...to personalize it. To my knowledge, there is NOT an American Girl doll, that you can do that with. IMO

American Girl does have dolls you can have custom made and pick the hair color, eye color, skin color...it's called [B]"Just Like You"[B/]. Here's the link to the American Girl website where you can order them.

http://store.americangirl.com/shop/agt.php?catid=48533

[Athena]

Originally posted by MyrDawn


American Girl does have dolls you can have custom made and pick the hair color, eye color, skin color...it's called [B]"Just Like You"[B/]. Here's the link to the American Girl website where you can order them.

http://store.americangirl.com/shop/agt.php?catid=48533

Thanks Myr. :)

I was at work and could not respond to the posts earlier after I posted my response about it possibly being an American Girl Twin Doll. I called it the "Twin Doll" because I could not remember the actual name of it. I did say I KNOW the eyes closed because I bought my daughter one. After talking with my daughter this evening -- actually the name of it when I bought it for my daughter was the American Girl "Today Doll". The name has since been changed to American Girl "Just Like Me".

My daughter had the entire collection at the time - newer ones have come out since -- but gosh everytime I turned around I was buying accessories for those dolls and I rememeber even with the Today Doll it came with a little story and I subscribed to the magazines for my daughter. Funny she is now 20 and they must have kept her on the mailing list because she still gets advertisements.

[diplomat]

Originally posted by Athena


Sun - don't know who you are referring to re: bending the truth. But the only thing I've seen about this original 911 tape was that it WAS NOT released to the public and the only ones that heard them were those posters who you link to who can be bending the truth and we all know the BPD did. The media reports were just repeating BPD's leaks. So until I hear the original tape and can form a different opinion on my own -- there are no additional voices. JMO

Exactly. I don't know of anyone who is "bending the truth" either. If John and Burke's voices had been on that tape you can be sure the public would have access to it.

[LadyFisher]

I think all that stuff about hearing John and Burke's voice on the tape came out in the tabloids when they were trying to suggest Burke was the murderer......I remember reading some things about it.....it's really sickening that anyone would even suspect a 9 y/o of this murder. jmho

[sunsplashed]

Originally posted by LadyFisher
I think all that stuff about hearing John and Burke's voice on the tape came out in the tabloids when they were trying to suggest Burke was the murderer......I remember reading some things about it.....it's really sickening that anyone would even suspect a 9 y/o of this murder. jmho

I suppose a nine-year-old could push a six-year-old during play and unintentionally harm her.

However, had that been the case, I think JB would have been taken to the hospital.

I don't think Burke had anything at all to do with this crime. I think he's totally innocent.

JMO

[sunsplashed]

Originally posted by diplomat


Exactly. I don't know of anyone who is "bending the truth" either. If John and Burke's voices had been on that tape you can be sure the public would have access to it.

Not if the BPD and Mary Keenan were as corrupt as people are making them out to be.

I don't see that it even matters if Burke woke up during the call or not. He's innocent, and if his voice was on the tape, his words show he's innocent.

Now, Burke WAS cleared (and I mean cleared) by both the BPD and the DA's office. He was not involved.

JMO

[diplomat]

Originally posted by LadyFisher
I think all that stuff about hearing John and Burke's voice on the tape came out in the tabloids when they were trying to suggest Burke was the murderer......I remember reading some things about it.....it's really sickening that anyone would even suspect a 9 y/o of this murder. jmho

It is rather unsettling to read some of the theories.

[sunsplashed]

Originally posted by diplomat


It is rather unsettling to read some of the theories.

Everything about murder is unsettling.

JMO

[Athena]

Originally posted by sunsplashed


I was not referring to you bending the truth, Athena. I never see that in your posts even though we disagree. I just see two different conclusions.

No, I know the original 911 tape was not released to the public and I agree that the typing noises were probably coming from the 911 operator. That makes perfect sense to me.

I have never heard other voices on the tape because all I've heard is a copy, of course. And, none of us will ever hear the original tape.

However, if PM/PT is to be believed, Aerospace did hear Burke's and John's voices, so I'm not going to come to any conclusion about the tape.

And, I can't say the BPD lied or twisted the truth, either. I don't know the truth in this case. I only know what I think.

JMO

Sun, please read page 372 of PMPT again. Schiller does not say that Aerospace relays this information. It says that Melissa Hickman, BPD says that Aerospace enhanced the tape and she heard it. It is second hand information from Hickman and leaked to the media. jmo

[Athena]

Originally posted by LadyFisher
I think all that stuff about hearing John and Burke's voice on the tape came out in the tabloids when they were trying to suggest Burke was the murderer......I remember reading some things about it.....it's really sickening that anyone would even suspect a 9 y/o of this murder. jmho

Exactly. And it was the BPD who leaked ALL of the info to the media. Think about it; EVERY bit of information leaked to media was inculpatory of the Ramseys. That was a deliberate attempt of the BPD again trying to coerce them to "confess". Then people wonder why they did not want to cooperate with the BPD without their attorneys. They were certainly within their rights not to especially in light of what the BPD was doing :shrug:

[sunsplashed]

Originally posted by Athena


Sun, please read page 372 of PMPT again. Schiller does not say that Aerospace relays this information. It says that Melissa Hickman, BPD says that Aerospace enhanced the tape and she heard it. It is second hand information from Hickman and leaked to the media. jmo


Yes, it does say that, but when contacted, Aerospace said they "stand by their work."

JMO

[sunsplashed]

Originally posted by victims feel
Everything about the murder of a 6 year old is unsettling. More unsettling is if one or both the parents are guilty.

But the truth of the matter is, that when a murdered child is found in the home of her parents, and the parents were there at the time of the murder, it's the parents who, in more than 99% of the cases, are the ones guilty of the murder.

And in this case, there is NO evidence of an intruder and a lot of evidence of elaborate staging and even staging within staging.

JMO

[Ames]

Originally posted by MyrDawn


Ames, can you please show me where it says the one Patsy bought was a MY TWINN doll? I've looked everywhere, but can't find anything that says that. TIA

Hi...it was in John and Patsy's book, "A Death of Innocence"...here is a link to the table of contents...

http://www.jonbenetindexguide.com/doi-m.htm

[Ames]

Originally posted by MyrDawn


American Girl does have dolls you can have custom made and pick the hair color, eye color, skin color...it's called [B]"Just Like You"[B/]. Here's the link to the American Girl website where you can order them.

http://store.americangirl.com/shop/agt.php?catid=48533

Thanks! I had never seen them before in the magazine, maybe because I wasn't looking for them. JB's was a MY TWINN doll, though...here is a link to the table of contents of John and Patsy's book, "A Death of Innocence".

http://www.jonbenetindexguide.com/doi-m.htm

[harz]

Originally posted by sunsplashed


But the truth of the matter is, that when a murdered child is found in the home of her parents, and the parents were there at the time of the murder, it's the parents who, in more than 99% of the cases, are the ones guilty of the murder.

And in this case, there is NO evidence of an intruder and a lot of evidence of elaborate staging and even staging within staging.

JMO

Thats why I agree it has to be one of Ramseys. Other interesting detail, maybe I am behind, but about the baseball bat. I believe it was used to blow JB's head. I looked up about it and it said the wine cellar dust or dirt matched on the bat and the bat was found on patio by the house. Neighbor saw the patio light off which was first time he noticed that night JB died. So it means one of Ramsey used the bat that cracked JB's skull. I strongly believe that. IMO. Did one of Ramsey claimed they never see this bat before? Was it Burke's?

[rosebud]

Originally posted by sunsplashed


Not if the BPD and Mary Keenan were as corrupt as people are making them out to be.

I don't see that it even matters if Burke woke up during the call or not. He's innocent, and if his voice was on the tape, his words show he's innocent.

Now, Burke WAS cleared (and I mean cleared) by both the BPD and the DA's office. He was not involved.

JMO

Although I have speculated elsewhere that Burke may have hit his sister in the head, even if he did not have anything to do with it that night, there are other reasons why John and Patsy might want the police to think Burke slept all through the night and heard nothing.

That would be to prevent Burke from saying that he DID hear something. It is possible he heard his mother or father with JB in the nearby bedroom or bathroom. It might be easy to convince a 9 year old that "bad people are out to get Mommy and Daddy" and to simply say he heard nothing because he slept all through the night. If a 9 year old feels that his home life is about to be disrupted by police saying lies about his parents, he might just stick to the story.

JMO

[Mimi428]

Originally posted by Ames


Thanks! I had never seen them before in the magazine, maybe because I wasn't looking for them. JB's was a MY TWINN doll, though...here is a link to the table of contents of John and Patsy's book, "A Death of Innocence".

http://www.jonbenetindexguide.com/doi-m.htm

Now we need nuisanceposter or someone else with a copy of DOI to relate what is on each of the pages. The index guide indicates several references to the doll.

My Twinn Doll · 3, 4, 32, 242
My Twinn Doll was advertised at the Denver airport · 242
My Twinn Doll was hidden on shelf above laundry in basement · 242
My Twinn Doll was shipped to the Ramseys in a white shipping carton · 242

[MyrDawn]

Originally posted by Mimi428


Now we need nuisanceposter or someone else with a copy of DOI to relate what is on each of the pages. The index guide indicates several references to the doll.

My Twinn Doll · 3, 4, 32, 242
My Twinn Doll was advertised at the Denver airport · 242
My Twinn Doll was hidden on shelf above laundry in basement · 242
My Twinn Doll was shipped to the Ramseys in a white shipping carton · 242

If you folks that read DOI say the Ramseys said it was the My Twinn doll in their own book, that's good enough for me. I don't need anyone to spend all that time copying from the book. I have no reason to think the posters that say it's there are lying.

[Athena]

Originally posted by Ames


Hi...it was in John and Patsy's book, "A Death of Innocence"...here is a link to the table of contents...

http://www.jonbenetindexguide.com/doi-m.htm

Hi Ames,

I went back and read the passages and Patsy definitely appears to be referring to the "My Twinn" Doll. :)

I still do not understand what the fuss is about re: the eyes being open or closed. I just believe the point that Patsy was trying to make was how eerie it looked to see this doll that resembled JBR lying in that box just a couple of days before she was killed. She may have even blocked out that her eyes were open as it was already eerie enough.

I have to admit though I emailed two of the sellers on ebay for the 1996 versions of the doll to verify that the eyes do not close. It does appear that they don't especially after reading the eyelashes are real hair and are glued on. They even have a "MY TWINN" hospital.

[sunsplashed]

Originally posted by victims feel

I am surprised as they(NG) have done this in the past: why not have a discussion of intruders of like crimes and ASK THEM what they think about this crime scene.......I will put my name on it that they too will say NO INTRUDER DID THIS....

What a great idea! And it's been done?

I've always said, kidnappers are in and out in a second.

A pedophile would NOT have left a note.

There is NOTHING in the note that says "jealous of John." People who see that are seeing things that aren't there. I've yet to see someone who subscribes to this theory point out anything in the note that says "jealous of John" other than the $118,000 ransom amount. Yeah, that says jealousy, alright. LOL

I would stake a LOT that anyone who's been an intruder would say NO INTRUDER DID THIS as well.

JMO

[diplomat]

Originally posted by Athena


Exactly. And it was the BPD who leaked ALL of the info to the media. Think about it; EVERY bit of information leaked to media was inculpatory of the Ramseys. That was a deliberate attempt of the BPD again trying to coerce them to "confess". Then people wonder why they did not want to cooperate with the BPD without their attorneys. They were certainly within their rights not to especially in light of what the BPD was doing :shrug:

The BPD had started down the path that the Ramsey's were guilty so when they could not turn up enough evidence to corroborate this theory and the GJ did not find probable cause, the BPD all along had to find a way to make themselves look credible. So what did they do? Though they still did not look credible. Everyone suffered in this fiasco.

[diplomat]

Originally posted by Athena


Maybe she did visit a psychiatrist. She was removed from the Ramsey case early on. :eek:

Very prudent of whoever removed her.

[Da Wench]

Look, the thought of lipstick on a pyjama-clad kid opening Christmas presents completely creeps me out. A lot of things about the Ramseys, their way of bringing up their daughter, and their clear obsession with appearances disgust me.

BUT that doesn't mean they killed her. It doesn't mean they ever did anything bad to her at all. It doesn't mean they didn't love her very deeply. It just means I despise their style of child-raising.

I think it's difficult, but very important, to distinguish between 'I despise this' and 'this indicates guilt'.

[Ames]

Originally posted by Athena


Hi Ames,

I went back and read the passages and Patsy definitely appears to be referring to the "My Twinn" Doll. :)

I still do not understand what the fuss is about re: the eyes being open or closed. I just believe the point that Patsy was trying to make was how eerie it looked to see this doll that resembled JBR lying in that box just a couple of days before she was killed. She may have even blocked out that her eyes were open as it was already eerie enough.

I have to admit though I emailed two of the sellers on ebay for the 1996 versions of the doll to verify that the eyes do not close. It does appear that they don't especially after reading the eyelashes are real hair and are glued on. They even have a "MY TWINN" hospital.

Yeah, really it doesn't matter if the eyes open or close...IMO...BUT, I thought it was strange that she would write or think something like that. Why didn't she say, it look like JB while she SLEPT? Or something like that? Why did that doll look like "JB in a COFFIN?" Do you not think thats a bit weird?? Why, if the eyes were OPEN, did she think that it looked like "JB in a coffin", anyway. I have never seen a person in a coffin with their eyes OPEN...and if I ever did...I would run as fast as I could in the opposite direction. But, then again...thats just ME. :D
Just thought that her statement was a bit odd, thats all. IMO

[Ames]

Originally posted by Athena



<snipped>

They even have a "MY TWINN" hospital.

Oh good grief, you have got to be kidding!! LOL Reminds me of the "Cabbage Patch Kids".

[MyrDawn]

Originally posted by victims feel
well sorta Sun...I do believe it was Nancy Grace who had a ped on her show to help understand other peds..The show was hard to deal with as it gave this ped power as an equal on her show but Nancy oddly remained in tact.

Anyway this ped gave insight to how different types of peds think and behave etc...I was thinking if they set up a plenary for LE to get like profiling of thinking patterns this would help eliminate this dang intruder theory once and for all....

the confound is that this ped had done jail time so we know they have at least been caught ONCE..this Ramsey intruder is the best of them all I guess....he has alluded all forms of justice to date and and we know this is not the ped pattern to do one crime and never again......so not only has he not been caught for this Ramsey case he has not been caught for ANY other crimes either...

the other perps must be standing in awe:rolleyes:

If this was hate on John where is all the hate terms, where is all the cursing and vileness?

So now we believe this is one raping murdering angry dude that is in control?

Do you know how out of the way one must go to believe that crap?

If they had even a small plenary of similar perps /intruders, hopefully they are all still in prison, I bet not one would say this is an intruder they would all show how this could not be an intruder and why.....

how did some of us know KARR could not have done this despite a confession, porn charges and questionable child patterns?

Because it does not fit the rage......the intensity...the opportunity...the motive.....anything....conversely the intruder/perps have the same informal checklist of how this could NOT be an intruder...

I bet you some have already tried to discuss their 'lists'....on how this is not an intruder


as Nancy says: a pig in perfume is still a pig....

How does anyone now the Ramsey intruder has elluded all forms of justice to date? He might be dead or in prison.

How does anyone know it was a pedophile and not someone that hated the Ramseys? Or if it was a pedophile, that he hasn't vicitimzed more little girls. He may even be in prison for that, for all we know. Would you expect him to confess to JonBenet's murder just because he was caught committing another crime?

Where does any of the facts say JonBenet was RAPED?

Why would the intruder curse and show vileness in the ransom note if he did it out of hatred and wrote the note to point the finger at John?

One might ask how Jeffrey Dahmer elluded capture so long, even though he kept his victims body parts in his own house! He murdered his first victim in 1978 and wasn't captured until 1991.

Or, one might ask how Ted Bundy elluded capture for over four years, even though he nabbed his victims, (estimated to be over 35), in broad daylight, in front of witnesses, in several instances?

Or, Gary Ridgeway, the "Green River" killer, who murdered at least 48 people, yet elluded capture for 20 years? He became a suspect in 1983 for the Green River killings, yet he wasn't arrested until late 2001. Meanwhile he continuted his murder spree killing MANY more people.

[LadyFisher]

Originally posted by rosebud


Although I have speculated elsewhere that Burke may have hit his sister in the head, even if he did not have anything to do with it that night, there are other reasons why John and Patsy might want the police to think Burke slept all through the night and heard nothing.

That would be to prevent Burke from saying that he DID hear something. It is possible he heard his mother or father with JB in the nearby bedroom or bathroom. It might be easy to convince a 9 year old that "bad people are out to get Mommy and Daddy" and to simply say he heard nothing because he slept all through the night. If a 9 year old feels that his home life is about to be disrupted by police saying lies about his parents, he might just stick to the story.

JMO First of all imho there is no way Burke inflicted a blow like this to JB's head....look at the size of the fractures...this was someone much much stronger than a nine y/o.....This child was ?d alone by LE....they could have tripped him up quite easily...later he even testified before a grand jury...there is no way he was hiding anything to protect his parents. imho

[LadyFisher]

Originally posted by victims feel
I did not say MD was a troll and I am sick ans tired of the way some of you twist posts, this case is not about anyone of you so back off and take a break...Having said that MD is one of the rudest posters on this case with moments of politeness as you are, I had you both on ignore until you both started being nice again. I just cannot keep up with all your moods everyday..so please feel free to ignore me for now on too. I WELCOME the break.

THIS BOARD IS ABOUT JON BONET!!!! To be fair, Victim, We ALL come to this board for JB....we all want to see this murderer caught...it is very emotional for all of us and obviously that includes you, too..I've seen posts from you that can be considered moody at times...heck. we all get that way....!

[harz]

http://denver.yourhub.com/BOULDER/Blogs/News-Politics/News/General-News/Blog~116113.aspx

Interesting about animal hair, Im confused, it said beaver hair, but I read other message board site said animal hair was wolf or wolf dog found on duct tape. I wonder if Patsy had fur coat? or some rugs of dead animals? Perhaps gloves?

Also a bat found at north side of house with fibers from carpet near JB's body. Ramseys have many sporting stuffs but claimed they didn't own that bat which I believe bat was used on JB's head by one of Ramseys. IMO

[Louisadelmar]

Originally posted by rashomon
I'm not sure if JB is wearing lipstick but I think she is wearing black mascara. The picture also shows that her hair was dyed blond. This can also be seen in the autopsy pictures (from the back of her neck), and the coroner mentioned it too.

Where does the coroner mention it?

[rosebud]

Originally posted by LadyFisher
First of all imho there is no way Burke inflicted a blow like this to JB's head....look at the size of the fractures...this was someone much much stronger than a nine y/o.....This child was ?d alone by LE....they could have tripped him up quite easily...later he even testified before a grand jury...there is no way he was hiding anything to protect his parents. imho

If Burke had hauled off and swung a baseball bat and hit JB in the head, he had more then enough strength to do the damage.

And just how do you know that Burke was not hiding something to protect his parents?

[rosebud]

Originally posted by MyrDawn


How does anyone now the Ramsey intruder has elluded all forms of justice to date? He might be dead or in prison.

How does anyone know it was a pedophile and not someone that hated the Ramseys? Or if it was a pedophile, that he hasn't vicitimzed more little girls. He may even be in prison for that, for all we know. Would you expect him to confess to JonBenet's murder just because he was caught committing another crime?




At this point I would settle for any evidence whatsoever that an intruder committed the crime. I have seen none. But apparently to the IDI crowd no evidence means an intruder did it.

[MissOtisRegrets]

Originally posted by rosebud



At this point I would settle for any evidence whatsoever that an intruder committed the crime. I have seen none. But apparently to the IDI crowd no evidence means an intruder did it.

Occam's razor:

1. An accident of which there is no indication.

2. The assumption that two adults thought their daughter was dead, when she wasn't.

3. The staging of a cruel death by an intruder on the assumption that no one would think them capable.

4. The involvement of Patsy's paintbrush (a second part of which was boldly replaced in the paintbox for police to find) in the staging of the cruel death by an intruder.

5. The staging of the sexual violation of their daughter.

6. A fake ransom note composed almost exclusively from movie lines and themes the Ramseys would have to have committed to memory. (Computers would be expected to be seized and, so, couldn't be used.)

7. The use of Patsy's pad (boldly replaced and, subsequently volunteered) for the writing of the fake ransom note.

8. The use of Patsy's pen (boldly replaced) for the writing of the fake ransom note.

IMO one has to accept too much to believe the blow on the head was an accident, the garrotting staged, the sexual molestation staged, and the ransom note faked. I think they all were what they were.

MOO

[rosebud]

Originally posted by MissOtisRegrets


Occam's razor:

1. An accident of which there is no indication.

2. The assumption that two adults thought their daughter was dead, when she wasn't.

3. The staging of a cruel death by an intruder on the assumption that no one would think them capable.

4. The involvement of Patsy's paintbrush (a second part of which was boldly replaced in the paintbox for police to find) in the staging of the cruel death by an intruder.

5. The staging of the sexual violation of their daughter.

6. A fake ransom note composed almost exclusively from movie lines and themes the Ramseys would have to have committed to memory. (Computers would be expected to be seized and, so, couldn't be used.)

7. The use of Patsy's pad (boldly replaced and, subsequently volunteered) for the writing of the fake ransom note.

8. The use of Patsy's pen (boldly replaced) for the writing of the fake ransom note.

IMO one has to accept too much to believe the blow on the head was an accident, the garrotting staged, the sexual molestation staged, and the ransom note faked. I think they all were what they were.

MOO

No offense MissOtis, but I don't think anything you have listed is "evidence" of an intruder.

[sunsplashed]

Originally posted by harz


Thats why I agree it has to be one of Ramseys. Other interesting detail, maybe I am behind, but about the baseball bat. I believe it was used to blow JB's head. I looked up about it and it said the wine cellar dust or dirt matched on the bat and the bat was found on patio by the house. Neighbor saw the patio light off which was first time he noticed that night JB died. So it means one of Ramsey used the bat that cracked JB's skull. I strongly believe that. IMO. Did one of Ramsey claimed they never see this bat before? Was it Burke's?

Harz, I didn't know about the dust and dirt on the baseball bat matching the dust and dirt on the wine cellar floor nor about the patio light. Thanks for letting us know.

The Ramseys did deny ever seeing the baseball bat at first, then they later admitted they "forgot" that Burke owned it.

I think it could very well have been what was used to inflict the skull injury on JB.

JMO

[sunsplashed]

Originally posted by MissOtisRegrets


Occam's razor:

1. An accident of which there is no indication.

2. The assumption that two adults thought their daughter was dead, when she wasn't.

3. The staging of a cruel death by an intruder on the assumption that no one would think them capable.

4. The involvement of Patsy's paintbrush (a second part of which was boldly replaced in the paintbox for police to find) in the staging of the cruel death by an intruder.

5. The staging of the sexual violation of their daughter.

6. A fake ransom note composed almost exclusively from movie lines and themes the Ramseys would have to have committed to memory. (Computers would be expected to be seized and, so, couldn't be used.)

7. The use of Patsy's pad (boldly replaced and, subsequently volunteered) for the writing of the fake ransom note.

8. The use of Patsy's pen (boldly replaced) for the writing of the fake ransom note.

IMO one has to accept too much to believe the blow on the head was an accident, the garrotting staged, the sexual molestation staged, and the ransom note faked. I think they all were what they were.

MOO

MissOtis, you are NOT annoying, you add much to the discussion and always in a very polite way, and I do respect you very much, but honestly, I don't see what you've listed as evidence of an intruder.

1. The skull fracture could have been the result of an accident, a very, very bad fall, but it could have been accidental.

2. I think two adults might have been afraid to take JB to the hospital for other reasons.

3. I'm sorry, but I don't understand three.

4. The Ramseys would have to use what was available to them. They couldn't very well go out and buy new things in the middle of the night. I think the fact that part of the paintbrush has never been found is indicative of destruction of it by one of the Ramseys.

5. The sexual violation WAS staged. No pedophile did this. No kidnapper did this. No one "jealous of John" did this. If someone with such an overriding hatred of John Ramsey and his piddly little six million would have killed JB, he would have killed Burke, too, then left NO note and both bodies under the Christmas tree. The Ramseys would have gotten the message.

6. The ransom note was NOT composed almost entirely of movie quotes and themes. We could both sit down right now and write a bizarre, three-page ransom note and it would evoke some films and themes. There are NO direct movie quotes in the ramson note.

7. What other paper are the Ramseys going to use?

8. What other pen are the Ramseys going to use?

And intruder would have brought his own stuff. An intruder "jealous of John" would have thought the murder through. He wouldn't have counted on finding what he needed inside the house and counted on having the time to utilize it all.

JMO

[harz]

Originally posted by sunsplashed


Harz, I didn't know about the dust and dirt on the baseball bat matching the dust and dirt on the wine cellar floor nor about the patio light. Thanks for letting us know.

The Ramseys did deny ever seeing the baseball bat at first, then they later admitted they "forgot" that Burke owned it.

I think it could very well have been what was used to inflict the skull injury on JB.

JMO

It wasn't dirt or dust, actually it was a carpet fiber in basement near wine cellar. I found alot links about evidences to be old and behind on updates. I believe John carried baseball bat upstairs, and left it outside as he left patio light off so no one see him placing baseball bat outside. The part you said Ramsey denied ever seen this bat, they admitted they forgot Burke owned it is new to me, thanks for info. I really wish all sites about JB would update tho. IMO

[sunsplashed]

Originally posted by harz


It wasn't dirt or dust, actually it was a carpet fiber in basement near wine cellar. I found alot links about evidences to be old and behind on updates. I believe John carried baseball bat upstairs, and left it outside as he left patio light off so no one see him placing baseball bat outside. The part you said Ramsey denied ever seen this bat, they admitted they forgot Burke owned it is new to me, thanks for info. I really wish all sites about JB would update tho. IMO

I don't think most of them ever will update, harz. I think a lot of them published their information when the case was new and have now lost interest in maintaining and updating.

Thanks for the information on the baseball bat.

JMO

[rashomon]

Originally posted by Louisadelmar


Where does the coroner mention it?
I read on another forum that it was either in the autopsy report or that Dr. Meyer commented on it during the autopsy.

But it is no secret at all that JB's hair was dyed blonde regularly. And I'm afraid that many pageant kids have to go through that chemical procedure to make them look like a Barbie doll.

[rashomon]

Originally posted by Da Wench
Look, the thought of lipstick on a pyjama-clad kid opening Christmas presents completely creeps me out. A lot of things about the Ramseys, their way of bringing up their daughter, and their clear obsession with appearances disgust me.

BUT that doesn't mean they killed her. It doesn't mean they ever did anything bad to her at all. It doesn't mean they didn't love her very deeply. It just means I despise their style of child-raising.

I think it's difficult, but very important, to distinguish between 'I despise this' and 'this indicates guilt'.
But their style of child raising could have made JB interesting as a sexual object for many people, including her own father.
Remember that absolutely bizarre comment by Patsy who, after being in hospital for a long time because of her cancer treatments, said she was reassured that her mother Nedra slept in JB's bedroom during that time, and if John had ever wanted to molest JB, he wouldn't have had a chance to? Chilling.

[MyrDawn]

Originally posted by victims feel
I can assure you any moodiness from me is the direct result of the crap allowed to be posted and the digs or sarcastic remarks to other posters that are uncalled for....I have issue with ONLY one type of poster: that is a rude poster, I have no issue with those that respectly post even if we do not agree. I ignore about 75 %of posters on this case..


I have read some of your posts and frankly you scare me with your unsubstantiated global statements on trauma and victimization. You represent the portion of the public that are not tuned into report child abuse. I can also assure you, you are not qualified to assess why or when I am moody.

What's scares me is that someone can be so positive that Jonbenet was sexually abused by one of her parents, just because some other children are sexually abused by a parent.

To imply LadyFisher wouldn't report report child abuse is beyond rude or moody. It's a very nasty thing to say about her, IMO.

[sunsplashed]

Originally posted by LadyFisher
To be fair, Victim, We ALL come to this board for JB....we all want to see this murderer caught...it is very emotional for all of us and obviously that includes you, too..I've seen posts from you that can be considered moody at times...heck. we all get that way....!

I'm a little moody right now, LadyFisher. Got sick last night after eating so I'm tired.

I'm going boating to relax. :)

Have a terrific Sunday, everyone! :)

[Da Wench]

Good point, Rashomon. Scarily, there are people out there who would be more likely to view a sexualised child as a sex object. I'm still not sure it cuts either way as far as the murder goes (it could be a relative, an acquaintance or a total stranger who came to see her in a sexual light).

I'd never heard about that comment by Patsy. That's...wow. That's phenomenally creepy.

[MissOtisRegrets]

Originally posted by sunsplashed


MissOtis, you are NOT annoying, you add much to the discussion and always in a very polite way, and I do respect you very much, but honestly, I don't see what you've listed as evidence of an intruder.



Sun, none of what I posted is hard evidence of an intruder, but I am uncomfortable with the whole of it. I think the staging legend began because it was not released in the autopsy report that the cord was wrapped around JB's neck twice. "Experts" said publically and repeatedly that the garrotte was staged because a true garrotte required that the handle be run through a loop that wasn't there and that a 17" cord was too long for the handle to be used for twisting. They said the handle served no purpose. That isn't true, if the cord was wrapped around twice. And it was. They said the presence of the garrotte was meant to give an impression and that no intruder would have a reason and so it had to be the Ramseys pointing the finger away from themselves and at a faceless intruder who was a sexual deviant. The staging legend grew to incorporate every piece of evidence that made no sense. If something was illogical when ascribed to the Ramseys, it became staging. There is just, for me, too much that goes against the grain to accept to believe the Ramseys did it. An accident had to have occurred. That is nothing but speculation. Both parents had to have mistakenly thought their breathing, pulsing daughter was dead. So, they decided to stage a deviant crime to point the finger elsewhere. They wrote a three page lunatic ransom note and had no trouble using words like "beheading" after just garrotting their daughter. They sexually violated her as she lay dying in order to fool police. They used Patsy's pen and paper. They used 1/3 of Patsy's paintbrush, replaced another 1/3 but took the trouble to hide (successfully) the remaining 1/3. One or two things never make sense. But, for me, all of this is too much. Too much staging imo. And using their own belongings to do it. Some of which they inexplicably (and successfully) disposed of while others remained openly displayed on the body and the counter.


Have a great day boating, Sun!

:seeya:

MissO

[Mimi428]

Originally posted by rashomon

But their style of child raising could have made JB interesting as a sexual object for many people, including her own father.
Remember that absolutely bizarre comment by Patsy who, after being in hospital for a long time because of her cancer treatments, said she was reassured that her mother Nedra slept in JB's bedroom during that time, and if John had ever wanted to molest JB, he wouldn't have had a chance to? Chilling.

Rashomon - do you recall where you read or heard about that comment? I had not heard anything about that before.

TIA

[breezy1234]

Originally posted by rashomon

But their style of child raising could have made JB interesting as a sexual object for many people, including her own father.
Remember that absolutely bizarre comment by Patsy who, after being in hospital for a long time because of her cancer treatments, said she was reassured that her mother Nedra slept in JB's bedroom during that time, and if John had ever wanted to molest JB, he wouldn't have had a chance to? Chilling.

You never tire of spreading false stories do you?

Freshwater
Super Moderator

Registered: May 2006
Location:
Posts: 447
Let's Review
Welcome to Crime Library - I see a lot of nics not common at Crime Library and thought this would be a good time to describe how things work at CL. Naturally all Posters are expected to following CTV and TOS rules and regulations.

AT CL we ALSO expect there to be NO PERSONAL ATTACKS of posters on our boards.

Links to credible sources ONLY (credible operationalized as - a source where the content creator is held to an ethical standard and accountability for accuracy of content.)

Statements of fact must be associated with a link (unless the fact is commnm case knowledge)

Statements of Opinion must be identified as such (IMO etc..)

Speculations should be logically deductible and stated as such.

Case theories should not violate known facts in the case but rather must be consistent with those facts or a reasonable understanding or interpretation of those facts.

Accusations of criminal behavior are poster opinions and should be identified as an opinion only.


When these expectations are met the case discussion is productive and informative. When they are not met the discussion devolves into bickering and becomes mean spirited. We strive for an open forum where intelligent discussion on crime cases and issues can be debated and investigated in a civil and respectful environment.

Thanks FH20

[LadyFisher]

Originally posted by MyrDawn


What's scares me is that someone can be so positive that Jonbenet was sexually abused by one of her parents, just because some other children are sexually abused by a parent.

To imply LadyFisher wouldn't report report child abuse is beyond rude or moody. It's a very nasty thing to say about her, IMO. Don't worry about it, Myr, I'm not....but nobody knows what I am qualified to assess...although I've share a lot on this board...I haven't ever shared my occupation....there is too much pontificating on here already...I come to this board to learn more about the case...and I have from both sides...:)

[LadyFisher]

Originally posted by rosebud


If Burke had hauled off and swung a baseball bat and hit JB in the head, he had more then enough strength to do the damage.

And just how do you know that Burke was not hiding something to protect his parents? I answered your ?s already in my post you quoted...imho Burke was not an exceptionally large 9 y/o....he couldn't imo have inflicted the blunt force trauma that was done to JB...as I said it is just my OPINION! I really do not like discussing children on any board I've been on...I find it distasteful...it isn't necessary! imo

[LadyFisher]

Originally posted by MissOtisRegrets


Sun, none of what I posted is hard evidence of an intruder, but I am uncomfortable with the whole of it. I think the staging legend began because it was not released in the autopsy report that the cord was wrapped around JB's neck twice. "Experts" said publically and repeatedly that the garrotte was staged because a true garrotte required that the handle be run through a loop that wasn't there and that a 17" cord was too long for the handle to be used for twisting. They said the handle served no purpose. That isn't true, if the cord was wrapped around twice. And it was. They said the presence of the garrotte was meant to give an impression and that no intruder would have a reason and so it had to be the Ramseys pointing the finger away from themselves and at a faceless intruder who was a sexual deviant. The staging legend grew to incorporate every piece of evidence that made no sense. If something was illogical when ascribed to the Ramseys, it became staging. There is just, for me, too much that goes against the grain to accept to believe the Ramseys did it. An accident had to have occurred. That is nothing but speculation. Both parents had to have mistakenly thought their breathing, pulsing daughter was dead. So, they decided to stage a deviant crime to point the finger elsewhere. They wrote a three page lunatic ransom note and had no trouble using words like "beheading" after just garrotting their daughter. They sexually violated her as she lay dying in order to fool police. They used Patsy's pen and paper. They used 1/3 of Patsy's paintbrush, replaced another 1/3 but took the trouble to hide (successfully) the remaining 1/3. One or two things never make sense. But, for me, all of this is too much. Too much staging imo. And using their own belongings to do it. Some of which they inexplicably (and successfully) disposed of while others remained openly displayed on the body and the counter.


Have a great day boating, Sun!

:seeya:

MissO Miss O...I knew exactly what you were saying...this murder has to be looked at on the whole....for the very reasons you explained so well...it just doesn't make sense to me that the parents did this! Thanks for your post.......and to Sun..LOL...don't feel alone...I've not felt so great today either...but I actually did make it to church...have fun boating!!! Have a great afternoon JB boarders :)

[rashomon]

Originally posted by breezy1234

You never tire of spreading false stories do you?

I have no interest whatsoever in spreading any false stories. I'll leave that to Jameson and her forum.
I remember having read this comment (it was either Nedra or Patsy who said this), but I can't recall where I read about it, for I don't constantly take notes. But I have asked on another forum if anyone knows more about it, and will post the info here.

[MyrDawn]

Originally posted by rashomon

But their style of child raising could have made JB interesting as a sexual object for many people, including her own father.
Remember that absolutely bizarre comment by Patsy who, after being in hospital for a long time because of her cancer treatments, said she was reassured that her mother Nedra slept in JB's bedroom during that time, and if John had ever wanted to molest JB, he wouldn't have had a chance to? Chilling.

Please give us a link or tell us your source of that comment by Patsy. I've never heard that before.

[breezy1234]

Originally posted by rashomon

I have no interest whatsoever in spreading any false stories. I'll leave that to Jameson and her forum.
I remember having read this comment (it was either Nedra or Patsy who said this), but I can't recall where I read about it, for I don't constantly take notes. But I have asked on another forum if anyone knows more about it, and will post the info here.

You "remember" reading it? LOL You STILL have not learned that things we "read" are not always facts? ANYONE could start a rumor that Patsy confessed or they know that there was a witness to the murder but that does NOT make it fact.

Once again..................

Statements of fact must be associated with a link (unless the fact is commnm case knowledge)

[breezy1234]

Originally posted by MyrDawn


Please give us a link or tell us your source of that comment by Patsy. I've never heard that before.

IMO it is simply gossip that somone dreamed up and others spread as if it is gospel. VERY sad.

[rashomon]

Originally posted by MyrDawn


Please give us a link or tell us your source of that comment by Patsy. I've never heard that before.
This is what a poster from the Crime and Justice forum just answered me:

"I remember reading this too on a forum somewhere.

I'm thinking that it's either in PMPT, or was a globe/newspaper article interview..... I know it wasn't in Steve's book."

You "remember" reading it? LOL You STILL have not learned that things we "read" are not always facts?
You should take your own advice then, Breezy, considering the biased links you have often provided here.

[breezy1234]

Originally posted by rashomon

This is what a poster from the Crime and Justice forum just answered me:

"I remember reading this too on a forum somewhere.

I'm thinking that it's either in PMPT, or was a globe/newspaper article interview..... I know it wasn't in Steve's book."


You should take your own advice then, Breezy, considering the biased links you have often provided here.

You call them biased, I call them facts from court documents, NOT someones opinion. :rolleyes: I will take court documents over "books" or "forums" any day if you don't mind. :shrug:

[Mimi428]

Originally posted by breezy1234


You never tire of spreading false stories do you?


It is not a false story - it was stated by Patsy when she & John granted an interview to the National Enquirer.

http://www.acandyrose.com/04032001enquirer.htm

Notice the QUOTATION MARKS??

During The ENQUIRER interview, Patsy admitted she considered and rejected the possibility that John was sexually abusing JonBenet. She openly admitted that during her struggle to defeat ovarian cancer between 1993 and 1994, John and Patsy's sex life suffered. She totally rejects the notion of John abusing JonBenet, but her reasoning is odd.

She said her mother "came to take care of the kids (when I had cancer). She slept in the other bed in JonBenet's room. I mean, if John was coming in to molest JonBenet, you know that's not going to happen 'cause Grandma was right there every night."

[breezy1234]

Originally posted by Mimi428


It is not a false story - it was stated by Patsy when she & John granted an interview to the National Enquirer.

http://www.acandyrose.com/04032001enquirer.htm

Notice the QUOTATION MARKS??

During The ENQUIRER interview, Patsy admitted she considered and rejected the possibility that John was sexually abusing JonBenet. She openly admitted that during her struggle to defeat ovarian cancer between 1993 and 1994, John and Patsy's sex life suffered. She totally rejects the notion of John abusing JonBenet, but her reasoning is odd.

She said her mother "came to take care of the kids (when I had cancer). She slept in the other bed in JonBenet's room. I mean, if John was coming in to molest JonBenet, you know that's not going to happen 'cause Grandma was right there every night."


:lol: The NE? Yeah right, that is NOT a credible link and you know it. There are other lies in that article as well.


Once again, it is NOT fact, it is GOSSIP from a gossip tabloid only!

[Mimi428]

Originally posted by breezy1234



:lol: The NE? Yeah right, that is NOT a credible link and you know it. There are other lies in that article as well.


Once again, it is NOT fact, it is GOSSIP from a gossip tabloid only!

So are you saying that is not a direct quote from Patsy? We are not discussing whether or not the Enquirer puts their own spin on any story - we are discussing that the Ramseys gave an interview to the Enquirer and that there is a DIRECT QUOTE from Patsy regarding her mother sleeping in the same room with JonBenet.

[harz]

Originally posted by Mimi428


It is not a false story - it was stated by Patsy when she & John granted an interview to the National Enquirer.

http://www.acandyrose.com/04032001enquirer.htm

Notice the QUOTATION MARKS??

During The ENQUIRER interview, Patsy admitted she considered and rejected the possibility that John was sexually abusing JonBenet. She openly admitted that during her struggle to defeat ovarian cancer between 1993 and 1994, John and Patsy's sex life suffered. She totally rejects the notion of John abusing JonBenet, but her reasoning is odd.

She said her mother "came to take care of the kids (when I had cancer). She slept in the other bed in JonBenet's room. I mean, if John was coming in to molest JonBenet, you know that's not going to happen 'cause Grandma was right there every night."

Interesting, could it be Patsy, who loved her precious JB so dearly, had to kill JB before Patsy died to prevent John from treating JB as sex object while JB in the hands of John that Patsy is gone? She might have huge fear what would happened to JB after Patsy died. This would remind me of Nazi mother Magda Goebbels who believed her children won’t survive in National Socialism or feared of Russia Red Army coming and raping & brutally murdering her children, so she had to kill her children before commit suicided with her husband.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magda_Goebbels
JMO

[diplomat]

Originally posted by LadyFisher
I answered your ?s already in my post you quoted...imho Burke was not an exceptionally large 9 y/o....he couldn't imo have inflicted the blunt force trauma that was done to JB...as I said it is just my OPINION! I really do not like discussing children on any board I've been on...I find it distasteful...it isn't necessary! imo

The blow was described as being able to take down a heavy weight. And I agree with your rationale that Burke was not able to inflict that kind of blow. JMO

[breezy1234]

Originally posted by Mimi428


So are you saying that is not a direct quote from Patsy? We are not discussing whether or not the Enquirer puts their own spin on any story - we are discussing that the Ramseys gave an interview to the Enquirer and that there is a DIRECT QUOTE from Patsy regarding her mother sleeping in the same room with JonBenet.


Yes that IS what I am saying. It is NOT a direct quote! That article has more lies than this one.

[breezy1234]

Originally posted by harz


Interesting, could it be Patsy, who loved her precious JB so dearly, had to kill JB before Patsy died to prevent John from treating JB as sex object while JB in the hands of John that Patsy is gone? She might have huge fear what would happened to JB after Patsy died. This would remind me of Nazi mother Magda Goebbels who believed her children won’t survive in National Socialism or feared of Russia Red Army coming and raping & brutally murdering her children, so she had to kill her children before commit suicided with her husband.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magda_Goebbels
JMO

How sick! :rolleyes: Patsy was in remission when JonBenet was killed.

[Mimi428]

Originally posted by breezy1234



Yes that IS what I am saying. It is NOT a direct quote! That article has more lies than this one.

Then what is your explanation for it showing up IN QUOTATION MARKS?

There is a difference between making up stories & making up DIRECT QUOTES. I don't disagree that the tabs have had problems creating stories - but this is not what we are discussing here. The Ramseys DID give an interview to the Enquirer. And that IS a DIRECT QUOTE from Patsy.

[harz]

Originally posted by breezy1234


How sick! :rolleyes: Patsy was in remission when JonBenet was killed.

Well her remission might not matter to her for other reasons. JMO

[breezy1234]

Originally posted by Mimi428


Then what is your explanation for it showing up IN QUOTATION MARKS?

There is a difference between making up stories & making up DIRECT QUOTES. I don't disagree that the tabs have had problems creating stories - but this is not what we are discussing here. The Ramseys DID give an interview to the Enquirer. And that IS a DIRECT QUOTE from Patsy.

In YOUR opinion only. The NE is NOT a credible link IMO and in the opinion of any thinking individual.

[breezy1234]

Originally posted by harz


Well her remission might not matter to her for other reasons. JMO

What? :shrug:

[breezy1234]

Originally posted by Mimi428


Then what is your explanation for it showing up IN QUOTATION MARKS?

There is a difference between making up stories & making up DIRECT QUOTES. I don't disagree that the tabs have had problems creating stories - but this is not what we are discussing here. The Ramseys DID give an interview to the Enquirer. And that IS a DIRECT QUOTE from Patsy.

National Enquirer and Media Distribution
The National Enquirer is high impact. People in grocery-store lines read the headlines and indulge their urge to read about the 200-pound baby or the dog-faced boy. But do they believe? Most smile, browse, and some even buy. But they do not believe. The National Enquirer is currently trying to lure mainstream advertisers to its magazine. Distribution is high at 5.5 million readers, so why wouldn't advertisers want to spend money on a page? Most wouldn't consider the Enquirer, because their persona would become associated with such tabloid magazines. Until The National Enquirer becomes more credible, credible advertisers will avoid its pages.


http://www.personako.com/nationalenquirerandmedia.html

The National Enquirer

One key reason that conspiracy theories survive is that they are nurtured. These days the Internet is such that even the most bizarre opinion is likely to find a following somewhere (if you don't believe this, read up on Mike Corley). And one of the key nurturers is the National Enquirer, a magazine which combines the unbelievable with the merely unpalatable. This is the natural reading matter for those who sincerely believe that Elvis was abducted by aliens, this being more comforting than the traditional explanation that he simply took too many drugs.

The National Enquirer has its imitators, such as the UK's Sunday Sport, with its 'exclusive' story about a Second World War bomber being found on the moon, but has no real equals.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/dna/h2g2/A476741

[WallyCleaver]

Originally posted by MissOtisRegrets


Sun, none of what I posted is hard evidence of an intruder, but I am uncomfortable with the whole of it. I think the staging legend began because it was not released in the autopsy report that the cord was wrapped around JB's neck twice. "Experts" said publically and repeatedly that the garrotte was staged because a true garrotte required that the handle be run through a loop that wasn't there and that a 17" cord was too long for the handle to be used for twisting. They said the handle served no purpose. That isn't true, if the cord was wrapped around twice. And it was.


There was a loop around her neck. There should have been a different type of knot, one which would allow the "noose" to slacken when force was lessened - perhaps that's what you meant by loop.

It's not that the piece the handle was tied to was too long to twist - twisting wouldn't have accomplished anything at half the lenght, or 1/4 the length, or any length. This was made to be used by pulliing on the handle, not twisting. It would be very effective for strangulation, but not for errotic asphyxiation, because for EA the idea isn't to actually strangle but to lessen air supply, or even cut it off, but only temporarily. The way this worked, every pull made it tighter, but the knot wouldn't allow it to loosen.

It certainly could have been wrapped twice, as you said. But it would be quite effective with only one trun around her neck.

It's also been said that 17" is too long for pulling, but it isn't. I made a similar garrotte as a test, and 17" isn't too long for an average sized man - though it's longer than necessary. I'm 6' tall and of average build. I'd have prefered about 12" to operate it most comfortably, but 17" didn't require an overestension of my arm.

They said the presence of the garrotte was meant to give an impression and that no intruder would have a reason and so it had to be the Ramseys pointing the finger away from themselves and at a faceless intruder who was a sexual deviant.

I think what was said was that this was not a sex garrotte -e.g. one meant for errotic asphyxiation- because it didn't have a slip knot that would allow the noose to become larger -removing the chocking effect. If I'm not mistaken, it was LS who proposed this was the work of a sexual deviant.

It is difficult to see it as the work of a sexual perv who's into EA, because of the lack of slip knot.

IMO it was meant to strangle, and that's what it did, whether by pulling on the handle, or wrapping twice (which wouldn't actually have been necessary, but would have worked)

I suppose it fits with a revenge kiling, but then you have to expalin why a revenge killer mentions the completely phoney kidnapping (and he'd have to assume the body would be found in short order - it wasn't in this case, but had it been left by an intruder it would be logical for the intruder to assume it would be found in less than 7 hours) and you have to expalin the molestation with a paintbrush. I suppose the molestation could fit with a revenge killing, but just the killing would seem to be enough.

I won't bother with the foreign faction paramilitary intruder angle, as I regard it as too silly to bother with.

Because it doesn't fit with an EA addict, and the molestation doesn't fit -at least as a necessity- with a revenge killer, many of us think that leaves the Rs making it as staging.

There is also the problem of her hair entwined in the knots both at her neck, and at the handle. If someone really meant to kill her with a garrotte, why not make it first, then slip it over her head? Why try to make it "on the body" ?

I think the hair in the knots could be consistant with wrapping twice and using the handle to twist, and I've speculated on the garrotte thread that this might have occured. There don't seem to be many other RDIs who agree.


The staging legend grew to incorporate every piece of evidence that made no sense. If something was illogical when ascribed to the Ramseys, it became staging. There is just, for me, too much that goes against the grain to accept to believe the Ramseys did it. An accident had to have occurred. That is nothing but speculation. Both parents had to have mistakenly thought their breathing, pulsing daughter was dead. So, they decided to stage a deviant crime to point the finger elsewhere. They wrote a three page lunatic ransom note and had no trouble using words like "beheading" after just garrotting their daughter. They sexually violated her as she lay dying in order to fool police. They used Patsy's pen and paper. They used 1/3 of Patsy's paintbrush, replaced another 1/3 but took the trouble to hide (successfully) the remaining 1/3. One or two things never make sense. But, for me, all of this is too much. Too much staging imo. And using their own belongings to do it. Some of which they inexplicably (and successfully) disposed of while others remained openly displayed on the body and the counter.


I agree that the head wound being caused by an accident is speculation, and I don't regard it has the most probable explanation. It was a massive wound, and would have been fatal by itself. It strikes me as more deliberate, rather than the result of an accident. (Though it would still fit with the "rage" theory, as the intent may not have been to kill, but the force used was greater than merely falling)

If there were no prior sexual molestation by the parents, I don't think they'd have any reason at all to stage a murder scene - they'd have called 911 like any normal parent. If there were prior molestation by the parent(s)......

There is no reason for your speculation that JB showed signs of breathing or registered a pulse after the blow to the head.

The use of materials from the home is consistant with RDI because - what else were they going to use?

The use of materials from the home always strikes me as unlikely for an intruder. How could he be sure he'd have what was needed?

I also don't get the insistance from the IDI camp that the matterials were not "sourced" from the home. The missing 1/3 of the brush handle could well have been missing for ages. The killer may have selected one already broken on one end. The tape could have been on something else, as only a small piece was needed to cover the mouth. The remainder of the roll could have been discarded weeks prior. Rope isn't usually sold to individuals on large spools. It's sold in lengths cut at the hardware, or in packages. The claim that the rest of the cord couldn't be found is just nonsense.

If you think it's bizzare that the Rs would write such a note, consider how bizzare it would be for an intruder. He'd have had to have first the motive to stage it as the work of a small foreign faction, hostile to the US. Then he'd have to have as his motive a revenge kiling. Then he'd have to mention a phoney kidnapping, knowing that everyone in the house would no the case was no kidnapping as soon as the body was found. He not only mentions the non-existant kidnapping, but mentions a specific and unusual amount. Then he gives advice on bringing an adequate attache, and getting rested for the difficult delivery - all of which is bizzare for a small foreign faction, or a revenge killer. But it is consistant with docg's JDI theory, for reasons that have been gone over several times in the past couple weeks.

[rashomon]

Originally posted by Mimi428


Then what is your explanation for it showing up IN QUOTATION MARKS?

There is a difference between making up stories & making up DIRECT QUOTES. I don't disagree that the tabs have had problems creating stories - but this is not what we are discussing here. The Ramseys DID give an interview to the Enquirer. And that IS a DIRECT QUOTE from Patsy.
Thanks for finding the source Mimi. That comment by Patsy is downright chilling, for it shows she thought John was capable of molesting his daughter.

And Breezy: don't you think that the litigious Ramseys, if they felt they had been misquoted, would have sued the National Enquirer? You bet they would have done so, but obviously they didn't sue, which says it all.

[harz]

Originally posted by breezy1234


What? :shrug:

I thought you read my second previous post? About Patsy learned of John's abnormal sex desires even toward to JB. I didn't think Patsy would to broadcast everybody about what she had learned of her husband. Not many people with great shame of a relative or spouse would announce or make obvious of a such thing. IMO

[Da Wench]

Interesting. But just to play devil's advocate:

Let's assume that the quote is accurate. It could still have been taken out of context. If the question was, 'How do you KNOW that your husband wasn't molesting your daughter? Sometimes you weren't even in the house; you don't know what he was doing' - then Patsy's answer could have been intended to mean, 'It's not just that I don't believe he would do that - you don't have to take a wife's word for it. There's no way he COULD have done it.'

I don't know much about the National Enquirer (I'm not in the US) but aren't they the ones who keep finding Elvis living in a cave married to Bigfoot?

[MissOtisRegrets]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by WallyCleaver


There was a loop around her neck. There should have been a different type of knot, one which would allow the "noose" to slacken when force was lessened - perhaps that's what you meant by loop.

Yes. That's what I meant. The cord was not pulled through a loop. It was just pulled. This doesn't work, if the cord only goes once around the neck. It has to go around twice for it to work.

It's not that the piece the handle was tied to was too long to twist - twisting wouldn't have accomplished anything at half the lenght, or 1/4 the length, or any length. This was made to be used by pulliing on the handle, not twisting. It would be very effective for strangulation, but not for errotic asphyxiation, because for EA the idea isn't to actually strangle but to lessen air supply, or even cut it off, but only temporarily. The way this worked, every pull made it tighter, but the knot wouldn't allow it to loosen.

I am reacting here to the "experts" on tv whom I have seen for years sneering at the Ramseys for constructing such an obviously-bogus apparat and using the fact of that to accuse them of killing their daughter.

It certainly could have been wrapped twice, as you said. But it would be quite effective with only one trun around her neck.

It could be wrapped around once and pulled through a loop.

I suppose it fits with a revenge kiling, but then you have to expalin why a revenge killer mentions the completely phoney kidnapping (and he'd have to assume the body would be found in short order - it wasn't in this case, but had it been left by an intruder it would be logical for the intruder to assume it would be found in less than 7 hours) and you have to expalin the molestation with a paintbrush. I suppose the molestation could fit with a revenge killing, but just the killing would seem to be enough.

Wally, I've switched directions again on who I think might have done this. I think it might have been a kidnapping gone wrong. Spurred by the article in the Daily Camera about Access Graphics and "billions" only four days before. The opening reference to "we respect your business, but....." is what hit me.


There is also the problem of her hair entwined in the knots both at her neck, and at the handle. If someone really meant to kill her with a garrotte, why not make it first, then slip it over her head? Why try to make it "on the body" ?

I don't think she was intended to be killed in the house. Something went wrong somewhere and the garrotte was improvised. The note (written during the day) was still left on the offchance that the kidnapper would get the money before the body was found. The body was as well hidden as could be in the house, and John Ramsey's bankbook in the third drawer on the right in his desk suggested that he could get his hands on $118K in cash fairly quickly. If he had done it by 10am, the kidnapper could have had the money before the body was found.

There is no reason for your speculation that JB showed signs of breathing or registered a pulse after the blow to the head.


JonBenet was alive when the garrotte was put on.

[bullmoose]

For all you posters out there that read quotes from anybody in the National Enquirer: this is a trashy tabloid that is only to be taken seriously for bird cages, cat litter, and personal toilet needs if one runs out whilst communing with nature out in the woods; in other words, nobody with an IQ higher than their foot size believes anything whatsoever that is contained in that filthy little rag. IMO the interview with the Ramseys probably took place entirely within the diseased mind of whoever wrote the article. Any and all information in the article is probably horseplop. IMO bullmoose

[bullmoose]

TO harz: could it be that the reason the BPD had no comment on the NE article because even they knew it was an imaginary interview that never took place? bullmoose

[bullmoose]

I couldn't agree more totally.:beer: bullmoose

[WallyCleaver]

[i]Originally posted by MissOtisRegrets


Yes. That's what I meant. The cord was not pulled through a loop. It was just pulled. This doesn't work, if the cord only goes once around the neck. It has to go around twice for it to work.



I guess I continue to be confused by what you are trying to say. The cord was pulled through a knot - or rather, could be pulled through a knot. It could also have been wrapped twice but it definitely would work just the way we see it in the pictures on The Smoking Gun - except obviously it would be together where the coroner cut it and marked it. There no necessity at all for it to go around twice to work - as far as I can see.



I am reacting here to the "experts" on tv whom I have seen for years sneering at the Ramseys for constructing such an obviously-bogus apparat and using the fact of that to accuse them of killing their daughter.



Well it is bogus for EA purposes. But it was Lou Schmidt who proposed it was an EA garrotte. So you should be aware that you are disagreeing with the #1 proponent of IDI.


It could be wrapped around once and pulled through a loop.


Or through a knot. That is how it was built, as far as I can see. Placing one's hand over the knot and pulling the handle would cause it to tighten - but not loosen, due to the type of knot.



Wally, I've switched directions again on who I think might have done this. I think it might have been a kidnapping gone wrong. Spurred by the article in the Daily Camera about Access Graphics and "billions" only four days before. The opening reference to "we respect your business, but....." is what hit me.

I don't think she was intended to be killed in the house. Something went wrong somewhere and the garrotte was improvised. The note (written during the day) was still left on the offchance that the kidnapper would get the money before the body was found. The body was as well hidden as could be in the house, and John Ramsey's bankbook in the third drawer on the right in his desk suggested that he could get his hands on $118K in cash fairly quickly. If he had done it by 10am, the kidnapper could have had the money before the body was found.



The body wasn't all that well hidden - if we assume it lay the whole time, where JR found it, from when it was placed there by the killer to the time JR found it. JR found it within seconds of going down the basement around 1pm, in a corner, without turning on the light first. It's not really posible to say it was well hidden. Any decent search of the house -that is a competent search- where doors were opened and lights turned on, would have found the body in short order.

No kidnapper would have thought it likely he'd collect the ransom. And in fact, 10 am came and went, and no ransom phone call was ever placed. How'd the kidnapper know the body had already been found? He must have assumed it. A logical assumption, since it shouldn't take a houseful of friends, neighbors, and police very long to find it.

The note could have been left for other reasons, but whoever left it had no hope of ever collecting ransom, and he knew it.


JonBenet was alive when the garrotte was put on.

Yes, she was alive, but there is no reason for you to assume that was obvious to the killer. The head wound could have affected her so that the breathing and pulse were barely detectable.

[harz]

Originally posted by bullmoose
TO harz: could it be that the reason the BPD had no comment on the NE article because even they knew it was an imaginary interview that never took place? bullmoose

I don't blame BPD for no comment about NE article. I don't know for a fact that the interview between NE and Ramseys never took place. I am just questing for Ramsey's possible motivations of JB's murder, thats all. JMO

[bullmoose]

To Harz: We for the most part here are trying figure out the why's of who did it; there are anti-Ramseys', pro-Ramseys', Fencesetters' and everyone in between. None of us, {I hope} were there so what is posted is supposition and hopefully intelligent lines of thought. I don't know, Harz , where you are posting from; but I do not know of very many people in the USA that looks at the NE except for laughs, IMO after some of the blatantly false articles that the NE has printed on this, all with imaginary interviews with people that never happened, that the chance of the NE to get an actual Ramsey to speak to one of their supposed reporters is probably as unlikely as Bigfoot to be interviewed live on TV by none other than Elvis Presley come back to life. In other words, beyond unlikely. Quoting links to anything from the NE will only lower your own point of view. IMHO bullmoose

[MissOtisRegrets]

Originally posted by WallyCleaver


I guess I continue to be confused by what you are trying to say. The cord was pulled through a knot - or rather, could be pulled through a knot. It could also have been wrapped twice but it definitely would work just the way we see it in the pictures on The Smoking Gun - except obviously it would be together where the coroner cut it and marked it. There no necessity at all for it to go around twice to work - as far as I can see.





Wally, it WAS wrapped around twice. Linda Arndt was present at the autopsy.


1. http://www.webbsleuths.org/dcforum/DCForumID70/31.html

LINDA ARNDT I hadn’t seen savagery done to a child or even an adult until the doctor peeled back her scalp, and saw that horrific - God! - fracture to her head. It was the length of her head.
ELIZABETH VARGAS, ABCNEWS (VO) It was eight and a half inches long.
LINDA ARNDT The doctor hadn’t seen an injury like that. I just couldn’t believe what was done to her body. Her head, the depth of that ligature around her neck. It was so deep that twice that cord had been wrapped around her neck and the - it looked like it was only one loose time around. And she had trauma to her vagina.


2. The sixth photo down shows the BOTTOM layer of cord embedded in JonBenet's neck.

http://hellpainter.tripod.com/jbr/photos2.htm

[harz]

Originally posted by bullmoose
To Harz: We for the most part here are trying figure out the why's of who did it; there are anti-Ramseys', pro-Ramseys', Fencesetters' and everyone in between. None of us, {I hope} were there so what is posted is supposition and hopefully intelligent lines of thought. I don't know, Harz , where you are posting from; but I do not know of very many people in the USA that looks at the NE except for laughs, IMO after some of the blatantly false articles that the NE has printed on this, all with imaginary interviews with people that never happened, that the chance of the NE to get an actual Ramsey to speak to one of their supposed reporters is probably as unlikely as Bigfoot to be interviewed live on TV by none other than Elvis Presley come back to life. In other words, beyond unlikely. Quoting links to anything from the NE will only lower your own point of view. IMHO bullmoose

I have heard about tabloid news such as National Enquirer, never brought one, or read it for myself, except glanced at links that posters here posted. Frankly, I don’t care much about tabloid news, even if there are some truths. I came to a hint from this tabloid after being aware of histories myself. Magda Goebbels killed her children was an actual event; I was trying finding the parallels between the Goebbels and the Ramseys. As I said, I was searching the reasons behind JB’s murder by the Ramseys, even I thought the possible that John Ramsey saw JB as sexual object before that tabloid news was even posted. I didn’t quote anything from NE, so forget about that NE article to my posts. You have to talk with Mimi428 about that NE article, lol.

[Mimi428]

Originally posted by bullmoose
. I don't know, Harz , where you are posting from; but I do not know of very many people in the USA that looks at the NE except for laughs, IMO after some of the blatantly false articles that the NE has printed on this, all with imaginary interviews with people that never happened, that the chance of the NE to get an actual Ramsey to speak to one of their supposed reporters is probably as unlikely as Bigfoot to be interviewed live on TV by none other than Elvis Presley come back to life. In other words, beyond unlikely. Quoting links to anything from the NE will only lower your own point of view. IMHO bullmoose

<snipped>

I guess we will be looking forward to hearing what Elvis has to say to Bigfoot, won't we? Read it & weep. Unless you wish to claim that there own attorney didn't know what they were doing when he was making these statements about it & them...



http://www.acandyrose.com/12112001pr-depo.htm

VIDEOTAPED DEPOSITION OF
PATRICIA PAUGH RAMSEY
December 11, 2001 9:14 a.m.

24 Q. I am going to ask you if at any time
25 you ever gave an interview with The National

Page 106
1 Enquirer.
2 A. We spoke with a representative from
3 The National Enquirer as part of some litigation
4 we were involved with for Burke.
5 Q. Did you ever agree to be interviewed
6 by The National Enquirer for publication?
7 MR. WOOD: Hold on. Tell me how
8 this is relevant to the libel claims of Chris
9 Wolf, whether John and Patsy Ramsey were
10 interviewed by The National Enquirer.
11 MR. HOFFMAN: Because I am going to
12 ask her about statements that were made in The
13 National Enquirer which relate to the murder and
14 the case. That is why I am asking her.
15 MR. WOOD: Ask her about the
16 statements.
17 MR. HOFFMAN: I am going to first
18 lay the foundation that, in fact, she --
19 MR. WOOD: I let you say she gave
20 the interview. Why she gave the interview is not
21 relevant.

scroll on down past the Lin Wood doing his dog & pony show to page 109...

22 I happen to believe that, if the
23 question you are trying to get to is why did
24 John and Patsy Ramsey agree in the year 2000 or
25 2001 to an interview with The National Enquirer,

Page 110
1 that that is not relevant to the claims or
2 defenses in this libel lawsuit. That was the
3 question. I am going to instruct them not to
4 answer.

Then to page 111...

Q. (By Mr. Hoffman) Mrs. Ramsey, do you
4 know why you agreed to a National Enquirer
5 interview?
6 MR. WOOD: I instruct you not to
7 answer on the grounds that that issue is not
8 relevant to any claim or defense in this lawsuit.
9 Q. (By Mr. Hoffman) Mrs. Ramsey, will
10 you still answer the question?
11 MR. WOOD: I instruct you not to
12 respond to that question.
13 She will, in fact, follow her lawyer's
14 instructions just as any client should
15 appropriately follow her lawyer's instruction so
16 that she does not waive any right she has to
17 have Judge Carnes review this issue and rule
18 appropriately.
19 MR. HOFFMAN: Can I take that as a
20 no from your witness, that she will not --
21 MR. WOOD: You can take that exactly
22 for what it is, my statement on this record.
23 Next question, please.
24 Q. (By Mr. Hoffman) All right. Mrs.
25 Ramsey, I am looking at this interview; and,

Page 112
1 actually, since we have two interviews, what I
2 would like to do is give you an opportunity to
3 review this interview because I am going to ask
4 you questions about statements that you allegedly
5 made in the interview. And since we have only a
6 minute to go before we change, I think this would
7 be an appropriate time to break and give you an
8 opportunity to read the interview.

Bring on Elvis...

and Bigfoot.

Whether y'all like it or not, the Ramsey parents DID grant an interview to the Nationial Enquirer.

[thewhitewitch1]

Originally posted by MissOtisRegrets


Wally, it WAS wrapped around twice. Linda Arndt was present at the autopsy.


1. http://www.webbsleuths.org/dcforum/DCForumID70/31.html

LINDA ARNDT I hadn’t seen savagery done to a child or even an adult until the doctor peeled back her scalp, and saw that horrific - God! - fracture to her head. It was the length of her head.
ELIZABETH VARGAS, ABCNEWS (VO) It was eight and a half inches long.
LINDA ARNDT The doctor hadn’t seen an injury like that. I just couldn’t believe what was done to her body. Her head, the depth of that ligature around her neck. It was so deep that twice that cord had been wrapped around her neck and the - it looked like it was only one loose time around. And she had trauma to her vagina.


2. The sixth photo down shows the BOTTOM layer of cord embedded in JonBenet's neck.

http://hellpainter.tripod.com/jbr/photos2.htm

Missotis....this quote really doesn't make much sense to me:

LINDA ARNDT The doctor hadn’t seen an injury like that. I just couldn’t believe what was done to her body. Her head, the depth of that ligature around her neck. It was so deep that twice that cord had been wrapped around her neck and the - it looked like it was only one loose time around.

I don't really see in that picture that that is the cord. If that is the second layer of the cord, why wasn't it taken off along with the first layer? All you'd have to do is cut it and unwrap it from around her neck. How could LA tell that it "looked like it had been lose only one time around?" What the heck does that mean anyway?? Is it possible that the cord was so deep in her neck because her body swelled around it making it look like more force was used than actually was?
Not sure what significance this has to anything but was just wondering about it all.

[MissOtisRegrets]

Originally posted by thewhitewitch1


Missotis....this quote really doesn't make much sense to me:

LINDA ARNDT The doctor hadn’t seen an injury like that. I just couldn’t believe what was done to her body. Her head, the depth of that ligature around her neck. It was so deep that twice that cord had been wrapped around her neck and the - it looked like it was only one loose time around.

I don't really see in that picture that that is the cord. If that is the second layer of the cord, why wasn't it taken off along with the first layer? All you'd have to do is cut it and unwrap it from around her neck. How could LA tell that it "looked like it had been lose only one time around?" What the heck does that mean anyway?? Is it possible that the cord was so deep in her neck because her body swelled around it making it look like more force was used than actually was?
Not sure what significance this has to anything but was just wondering about it all.

It means there appeared to be one layer of cord wrapped loosely around JB's neck. When they removed it, they found a second deeper layer of cord directly beneath it.

photo 5 - outer layer of cord

photo 6 - inner layer of cord

[thewhitewitch1]

I don't know exactly who Cyril Wecht is but I found this link tonight. It appears to me that though he analyzed the autopsy, he also created his own little version of what happened (the intruder/sex fiend theory) which I don't agree with. I did find what he had to say interesting, though, as far as the injuries are concerned and it would appear as though the cord was not wrapped that tight around her neck and he says nothing about it being wrapped twice.
Most interesting was the chronic sexual abuse. If this really was a sex offender, why not just rape her in the traditional sense?
Wecht says that the sexual abuse happened days or more before she was murdered....so how does this intruder wind up doing this to her days before he kills her without her parents noticing that something has happened? The more I read, the weirder this gets.

http://hellpainter.tripod.com/jbr/wecht.htm

[sunsplashed]

Originally posted by thewhitewitch1
I don't know exactly who Cyril Wecht is but I found this link tonight. It appears to me that though he analyzed the autopsy, he also created his own little version of what happened (the intruder/sex fiend theory) which I don't agree with. I did find what he had to say interesting, though, as far as the injuries are concerned and it would appear as though the cord was not wrapped that tight around her neck and he says nothing about it being wrapped twice.
Most interesting was the chronic sexual abuse. If this really was a sex offender, why not just rape her in the traditional sense?
Wecht says that the sexual abuse happened days or more before she was murdered....so how does this intruder wind up doing this to her days before he kills her without her parents noticing that something has happened? The more I read, the weirder this gets.

http://hellpainter.tripod.com/jbr/wecht.htm

Hi TWW,

I just skimmed it, but I don't see where Wecht says it had to be an intruder.

A lot of child molesters never actually rape their victims, however, I don't believe an intruder killed JB.

Cyril Wecht also did the second autopsy on the son on Anna Nicole Smith in the Bahamas. He's a forensic pathologist.

JMO

[thewhitewitch1]

Hi Sun. You are right...I don't believe he said intruder, however he did imply a sexual deviant...so if it wasn't an intruder he was suggesting, then who? I will never be able to see one of the Ramseys doing the things he suggested were done in the way he suggests they were done. You all know my feelings on whodunnit but no...not like that. That's too f'd up for even me to grasp.

[harz]

Originally posted by thewhitewitch1
I don't know exactly who Cyril Wecht is but I found this link tonight. It appears to me that though he analyzed the autopsy, he also created his own little version of what happened (the intruder/sex fiend theory) which I don't agree with. I did find what he had to say interesting, though, as far as the injuries are concerned and it would appear as though the cord was not wrapped that tight around her neck and he says nothing about it being wrapped twice.
Most interesting was the chronic sexual abuse. If this really was a sex offender, why not just rape her in the traditional sense?
Wecht says that the sexual abuse happened days or more before she was murdered....so how does this intruder wind up doing this to her days before he kills her without her parents noticing that something has happened? The more I read, the weirder this gets.

http://hellpainter.tripod.com/jbr/wecht.htm

Its logical if its was one of Ramseys molesting JB. Makes you wonder if JB's death was an accident that Ramseys had to put up a great job on staging, eh? Or a motive to murder JB as their staging was to bury that kind of truth, by using paintbrush stick for example. If it was an intruder, JB would have mention him if Ramseys had taught her about sex boundaries. Ramseys themselves did knew what was happening to JB, because of what their exploits had done to her. JMO

[MissOtisRegrets]

Originally posted by thewhitewitch1
I don't know exactly who Cyril Wecht is but I found this link tonight. It appears to me that though he analyzed the autopsy, he also created his own little version of what happened (the intruder/sex fiend theory) which I don't agree with. I did find what he had to say interesting, though, as far as the injuries are concerned and it would appear as though the cord was not wrapped that tight around her neck and he says nothing about it being wrapped twice.
Most interesting was the chronic sexual abuse. If this really was a sex offender, why not just rape her in the traditional sense?
Wecht says that the sexual abuse happened days or more before she was murdered....so how does this intruder wind up doing this to her days before he kills her without her parents noticing that something has happened? The more I read, the weirder this gets.

http://hellpainter.tripod.com/jbr/wecht.htm

TWW1, Wecht doesn't mention the cord being wrapped around twice because he is reading from the autopsy report, which doesn't mention it.

[MissOtisRegrets]

Originally posted by harz


Its logical if its was one of Ramseys molesting JB. Makes you wonder if JB's death was an accident that Ramseys had to put up a great job on staging, eh? Or a motive to murder JB as their staging was to bury that kind of truth, by using paintbrush stick for example. If it was an intruder, JB would have mention him if Ramseys had taught her about sex boundaries. Ramseys themselves did knew what was happening to JB, because of what their exploits had done to her. JMO

If she died during the garrotting "game", wouldn't the Ramseys have removed the stick, when they staged the cover-up?

Would they hit her on the head to cover-up the garrotting "game"?

[harz]

Originally posted by MissOtisRegrets


If she died during the garrotting "game", wouldn't the Ramseys have removed the stick, when they staged the cover-up?

Would they hit her on the head to cover-up the garrotting "game"?

Which stick? the one with cords tied on as garrotte? or one that poked into her?

The second question is kind of complicate for me because I am not sure which came first yet with some conflicting informations I gathered. Many sites haven't been updated about this case. Is your second question, or both, do they refer to your several previous posts about the garrotte & cords specifically? I would need to review them throughly again.

[MissOtisRegrets]

I can't believe that JR would suddenly decide, hours before the family was to rise to go to the airport, to break one of Patsy's paintbrushes and make a garrotte out of it. What are the chances Mom will see the marks around JB's neck, when she dresses her for the plane?

[MissOtisRegrets]

Originally posted by harz


Which stick? the one with cords tied on as garrotte? or one that poked into her?

The second question is kind of complicate for me because I am not sure which came first yet with some conflicting informations I gathered. Many sites haven't been updated about this case. Is your second question, or both, do they refer to your several previous posts about the garrotte & cords specifically? I would need to review them throughly again.

The stick attached to the cord. If they were covering up for the garrotting, and not an accidental head injury, why wouldn't they cover up the garrotting? According to Wecht's theory, the garrotting would have come first. The head injury would be the cover-up.

[MissOtisRegrets]

Why would a parent, when staging a crime scene to point AWAY from them, cover the body of their child with her blanket?

[harz]

Originally posted by MissOtisRegrets


The stick attached to the cord. If they were covering up for the garrotting, and not an accidental head injury, why wouldn't they cover up the garrotting? According to Wecht's theory, the garrotting would have come first. The head injury would be the cover-up.

I see what you meant. The cords that tied to JB's wrists were loose, not tight as the one around her neck. It could explain the “garrote game”. Also I looked at a photo of cords, one which tied to each other wrists with just one cord.
http://crimeshots.com/CrimeScene1.html
The question is, was that wrists cord already connected to garrote that also was tied to neck? I wish they would release the complete photo that would show all as they found her, so we can see which cord was connected to another part of cords on JB. If it was a garroting game, Ramsey's mistake probably was having the cord around her neck twice. JB could have fallen from bed or downstairs as the cords around her neck got tighter same time she struggled with cords tied on her wrists, made it more difficult to undo. Then if JB was left seriously injured around neck but still alive, her neck would show deep red line around her neck or the hemorrhage. It could made Ramseys panic about if JB was brought to hospital as doctor would be suspicion about it. So to Ramsey’s believe by making a right, they had to made the second mistake to kill her by a blow to her head & stage the scene. If Ramseys thought JB was already dead from garrote game, they went ahead with staging, JB woke up in middle of staging, then JB took a blow on her head by one of Ramsey. Or if JB was already dead, Ramseys might still want to be sure as mercy killing by a blow to her head. Is that why the coroner determined 20 to 60 minutes apart between head blow and garrote but cannot tell for sure which came first?

MOO

[harz]

Originally posted by MissOtisRegrets
Why would a parent, when staging a crime scene to point AWAY from them, cover the body of their child with her blanket?

The blanket was last thing on their mind for staging, because they didn't think logically when they were being sympathy. They might had different plans about to find JB or dump her. Remember John was one who went into wine cellar, picked JB up, he might had conflicting thoughts about the blanket, or he didn't realize it at all. IMO

[harz]

Originally posted by MissOtisRegrets
I can't believe that JR would suddenly decide, hours before the family was to rise to go to the airport, to break one of Patsy's paintbrushes and make a garrotte out of it. What are the chances Mom will see the marks around JB's neck, when she dresses her for the plane?

If it was an accident, then accident do happens. IIRC, they didn't have time to make it to the flight after they woke up, as they didn't packed the winter clothes. Probably because they had been busy at staging, I would like pictures of them on 26th so I can notice how tired they looked. I do not know for sure if it was just John or both. Many things does make sense if it was both of Ramseys, or John could had staged the scene to make it look like both them to diminish the chances from being prosecuted. Thats probably why both of Ramseys had seperate lawyers from seperate firms. IMO

[MyrDawn]

Originally posted by rashomon

Thanks for finding the source Mimi. That comment by Patsy is downright chilling, for it shows she thought John was capable of molesting his daughter.

And Breezy: don't you think that the litigious Ramseys, if they felt they had been misquoted, would have sued the National Enquirer? You bet they would have done so, but obviously they didn't sue, which says it all.

That comment doesn't show Patsy thought John was capable of molesting JonBenet. Read it again and look at the date on the article. That interview was done long after JonBenet was murdered. There had been allegations going around for years about John molesting JonBenet, and starting it when Patsy was undergoing treatment for her cancer. I've seen posters on this board claim that's why JonBenet started wetting her bed during that time.

Isn't it convenient that article doesn't show what questions led up to Patsy's response, and it was taken completely out of context?

Let's see now...it could have gone something like this, IMO...
NE: Mrs. Ramsey, do you have any way to prove John wasn't abusing Jonbenet every night in her bed when you were so ill undergoing cancer treatment?
Mrs. R: My mother..."came to take care of the kids. She slept in the other bed in JonBenet's room. I mean, if John was coming in to molest JonBenet, you know that's not going to happen 'cause Grandma was right there every night." If you don't believe me, ask my mother and she'll verify she was there.

It's only natural for parents to consider all possiblities when their child is murdered, including their spouse. If they don't, they are hiding their head in the sand. I'm sure John did the same.
Any person, when making a major decision, should consider all possiblities, but that does not mean we have to accept all possiblities.

But, considering the possiblities does not mean you believe them all!

I find it hard to believe that some of you, living in the US, would believe the National Enquirer is the book of truth and would NEVER twist things around, or take things out of context. But, all things are possible. :lol:

IMO, JMO and MOOOOOOOOOO

[MyrDawn]

Originally posted by Da Wench
Interesting. But just to play devil's advocate:

Let's assume that the quote is accurate. It could still have been taken out of context. If the question was, 'How do you KNOW that your husband wasn't molesting your daughter? Sometimes you weren't even in the house; you don't know what he was doing' - then Patsy's answer could have been intended to mean, 'It's not just that I don't believe he would do that - you don't have to take a wife's word for it. There's no way he COULD have done it.'

I don't know much about the National Enquirer (I'm not in the US) but aren't they the ones who keep finding Elvis living in a cave married to Bigfoot?

Dang, I should have read your reply before I made my post! It would have saved me a lot of typing. :D

I'll never forget the headline of a tabloid, (I think it was the NE), I saw once in the grocery store checkout. "The King Is Back! Elvis' Ghost Croons in Toilet Factory!"

Another of my favorite headlines from a tab: "Saddam Surrenders and Moves to New Jersey".

:lol: :lol:

[harz]

MissOtisRegrets;

If the marks on JB skin came from stun gun, do you think one of Ramseys treated the stun gun as defibrillator or shock paddles? To determine if JB was either dead or would come back breathing after the garrote thing? Ramseys might be intelligent but not nesscarry bright. What you think? :)
JMO

[rosebud]

The "intruder did it" people who insist a stun gun was used on JB seem to think this helps their theory that the Ramseys did not do it. I don't know how. Some medical experts think JB was chronically abused long before her death.

What the stun gun may indicate is that the Ramseys abuse of their daughter was escalating and came to a climax that night in which JB was killed in one of their sick sexual romps.

Why couldn't the stun gun indicate that?

JMO

[Da Wench]

LOLOL, MyrDawn! Gotta love the idea of Saddam retiring to New Jersey...

Even the most legit newspapers sometimes twist people's words. The National Enquirer...as far as I know, they don't even aim for journalistic accuracy.

There are things that make me wonder whether JonBenet was being abused by someone - but this isn't one of them.

[thewhitewitch1]

Originally posted by MissOtisRegrets
Why would a parent, when staging a crime scene to point AWAY from them, cover the body of their child with her blanket?

Why not? Almost everything (if not everything) used in the murder came from their home.

[MissOtisRegrets]

Originally posted by harz


I see what you meant. The cords that tied to JB's wrists were loose, not tight as the one around her neck. It could explain the “garrote game”. Also I looked at a photo of cords, one which tied to each other wrists with just one cord.
http://crimeshots.com/CrimeScene1.html
The question is, was that wrists cord already connected to garrote that also was tied to neck? I wish they would release the complete photo that would show all as they found her, so we can see which cord was connected to another part of cords on JB. If it was a garroting game, Ramsey's mistake probably was having the cord around her neck twice. JB could have fallen from bed or downstairs as the cords around her neck got tighter same time she struggled with cords tied on her wrists, made it more difficult to undo. Then if JB was left seriously injured around neck but still alive, her neck would show deep red line around her neck or the hemorrhage. It could made Ramseys panic about if JB was brought to hospital as doctor would be suspicion about it. So to Ramsey’s believe by making a right, they had to made the second mistake to kill her by a blow to her head & stage the scene. If Ramseys thought JB was already dead from garrote game, they went ahead with staging, JB woke up in middle of staging, then JB took a blow on her head by one of Ramsey. Or if JB was already dead, Ramseys might still want to be sure as mercy killing by a blow to her head. Is that why the coroner determined 20 to 60 minutes apart between head blow and garrote but cannot tell for sure which came first?

MOO

Harz, I am just completely at a loss with this. It's like we are trying to fit the puzzle pieces together, but the joke is the pieces are not all from the same puzzle. :mad:

Before I started following this case, I saw a man on TV (whom I now presume to have been Lou Smit) talking about the stun gun theory. He said that fibers consistent with the fibers in the nylon cord JonBenet was tied with were found in her bed. Maybe she was tied there. But what does that do to the pineapple?

P.S. I could do the Rubik's cube.

[MissOtisRegrets]

Originally posted by harz
MissOtisRegrets;

If the marks on JB skin came from stun gun, do you think one of Ramseys treated the stun gun as defibrillator or shock paddles? To determine if JB was either dead or would come back breathing after the garrote thing? Ramseys might be intelligent but not nesscarry bright. What you think? :)
JMO

:)

[Athena]

Originally posted by MissOtisRegrets
Why would a parent, when staging a crime scene to point AWAY from them, cover the body of their child with her blanket?

Honestly all of the CE is appears to be the Ramseys were trying to "frame" themselves. That is why much of this just does not make sense to me. jmo

[MissOtisRegrets]

Originally posted by thewhitewitch1


Why not? Almost everything (if not everything) used in the murder came from their home.

But, the blanket points to them not only because it came from their home, but because it suggests a protector of JonBenet covered her. I wouldn't think they would want to suggest that, if they were staging the scene.

[MissOtisRegrets]

Originally posted by Athena


Honestly all of the CE is appears to be the Ramseys were trying to "frame" themselves. That is why much of this just does not make sense to me. jmo

Yes. This is an extremely counterproductive cover-up for intelligent people to have staged. They seem interested mainly in adding things that implicate themselves.

[thewhitewitch1]

Originally posted by MissOtisRegrets


But, the blanket points to them not only because it came from their home, but because it suggests a protector of JonBenet covered her. I wouldn't think they would want to suggest that, if they were staging the scene.

Missotis...I am picturing two very frantic and panicked people. In that frame of mind, they are not going to be thinking of every little detail (such as the bowl of pineapples).
Quite possibly they didn't even stop to consider that it may implicate them. No more than they thought the note pad, sharpie pen or paintbrush would.
The fact that you think the blanket implies a protector should make you think a little more about the Ramseys possible involvement. And I do say that respectfully, Missotis.

[MissOtisRegrets]

Originally posted by thewhitewitch1


Missotis...I am picturing two very frantic and panicked people. In that frame of mind, they are not going to be thinking of every little detail (such as the bowl of pineapples).
Quite possibly they didn't even stop to consider that it may implicate them. No more than they thought the note pad, sharpie pen or paintbrush would.
The fact that you think the blanket implies a protector should make you think a little more about the Ramseys possible involvement. And I do say that respectfully, Missotis.

TWW1, what bothers me about JB being covered by her blanket is not so much that it implies that she was murdered by a protector, as the fact of the blanket being in the basement in the first place. Particularly, if it came from the dryer. An intruder/kidnapper would not have taken it from the dryer. JonBenet might have requested the blanket from an intruder, if she was going downstairs willingly and was cold. But, unless it had been taken out of the dryer to make room for something else and thrown onto the other bed in her room, he wouldn't have known where to find it, unless she told him.

TWW1, I haven't ruled out the Ramseys. I have a problem with a lot of things. But, overall, I just can't see it.

[harz]

Originally posted by MissOtisRegrets


Harz, I am just completely at a loss with this. It's like we are trying to fit the puzzle pieces together, but the joke is the pieces are not all from the same puzzle. :mad:

Before I started following this case, I saw a man on TV (whom I now presume to have been Lou Smit) talking about the stun gun theory. He said that fibers consistent with the fibers in the nylon cord JonBenet was tied with were found in her bed. Maybe she was tied there. But what does that do to the pineapple?

P.S. I could do the Rubik's cube.

Lol, I have Rubik's cube somewhere too. Sorry, there are some gaps in this case for me, even for us. BPD, DA, or investigators probably likely have more evidences than what we already learned from this case. I doubt they will release all of them to public nor telling us what they all are if this case still stays cold. Many websites haven’t been updated left me confused on some certain things. If a piece of a puzzle misdirect me away from Ramseys, I would be going no where or hit the dead end. All I can try is to figure out on how a piece of their misdirection to be fit into a puzzle after considering how they had it done.

You said maybe JB was tied with cord in her bedroom base on fibers match. The garrote game might have started in her room. Don’t you think that’s strange, Burke was on same floor; Ramseys room was on next floor upstairs? Remember you talked about cord tied around JB’s neck twice? Image how difficult it would to undo the cord if it got stuck as it got strangulate around her neck. It could be their mistake if the cord was around her neck twice instead of one time if in garrote game. Or John did it on purpose. I do not know for sure which it was accident or on purpose. I thought possible that John tampered with the cords or garrote while he was in wine cellar, before or after the second search, to make difficult for us to get more clues about it. If it was an accident, then image how can Ramseys explain to everybody about the bruises, red lines, or hemorrhages on JB’s neck if JB was either dead or alive? If JB was still alive, she would tell people how she got them from Ramsey’s fantasy sex games. Doctors would be suspicion once he gets to glance at JB’s neck, and report to police or children family service, and then there would be investigation which will lead to discover the Ramsey’s dark truth.

To your question about paintbrush stick used as garrote, why would they want to remove it afterward? They might have considered it since one of them brought Burke’s Swiss knife to basement. The cords were already tangled on the stick, JB’s hair, & around JB’s neck. What would it help to remove them? They still cannot remove the hemorrhage, red lines, or bruises on JB’s neck, so what’s the point?

MOO

[MissOtisRegrets]

Originally posted by harz


Lol, I have Rubik's cube somewhere too. Sorry, there are some gaps in this case for me, even for us. BPD, DA, or investigators probably likely have more evidences than what we already learned from this case. I doubt they will release all of them to public nor telling us what they all are if this case still stays cold. Many websites haven’t been updated left me confused on some certain things. If a piece of a puzzle misdirect me away from Ramseys, I would be going no where or hit the dead end. All I can try is to figure out on how a piece of their misdirection to be fit into a puzzle after considering how they had it done.

You said maybe JB was tied with cord in her bedroom base on fibers match. The garrote game might have started in her room. Don’t you think that’s strange, Burke was on same floor; Ramseys room was on next floor upstairs? Remember you talked about cord tied around JB’s neck twice? Image how difficult it would to undo the cord if it got stuck as it got strangulate around her neck. It could be their mistake if the cord was around her neck twice instead of one time if in garrote game. Or John did it on purpose. I do not know for sure which it was accident or on purpose. I thought possible that John tampered with the cords or garrote while he was in wine cellar, before or after the second search, to make difficult for us to get more clues about it. If it was an accident, then image how can Ramseys explain to everybody about the bruises, red lines, or hemorrhages on JB’s neck if JB was either dead or alive? If JB was still alive, she would tell people how she got them from Ramsey’s fantasy sex games. Doctors would be suspicion once he gets to glance at JB’s neck, and report to police or children family service, and then there would be investigation which will lead to discover the Ramsey’s dark truth.

MOO

Harz, I have been thinking all afternoon about your post that the cord might have been wrapped around twice by mistake. Yesterday someone posted a link to Cyril Wecht's conclusions from reading the autopsy report. He talked about JonBenet having the type of brain damage of someone with shaken baby syndrome and thought she might have collapsed lifeless during the garrotting and whoever was with her had tried to wake her up.

[harz]

Originally posted by MissOtisRegrets


Harz, I have been thinking all afternoon about your post that the cord might have been wrapped around twice by mistake. Yesterday someone posted a link to Cyril Wecht's conclusions from reading the autopsy report. He talked about JonBenet having the type of brain damage of someone with shaken baby syndrome and thought she might have collapsed lifeless during the garrotting and whoever was with her had tried to wake her up.

Now that's new to me and probably is an important piece to this puzzle. I remembered Mimi in her other thread talked about doll with strings. What do you think if JB was playing being a doll, putting the cords around her neck herself? Then she had accident by herself somehow, then Ramseys went overboard with the staging? It make sense if it was one of Ramsey who shaked JB (in shaken baby syndrome) trying bring her back alife. So why the staging? That would be the other obvious pieces to this puzzle on what they have to hide. So would you feel revive that Ramseys have nothing to do with JB's death, but accept the staging was done by Ramseys? IMO

[MissOtisRegrets]

Originally posted by harz


Now that's new to me and probably is an important piece to this puzzle. I remembered Mimi in her other thread talked about doll with strings. What do you think if JB was playing being a doll, putting the cords around her neck herself? Then she had accident by herself somehow, then Ramseys went overboard with the staging? It make sense if it was one of Ramsey who shaked JB (in shaken baby syndrome) trying bring her back alife. So why the staging? That would be the other obvious pieces to this puzzle on what they have to hide. So would you feel revive that Ramseys have nothing to do with JB's death, but accept the staging was done by Ramseys? IMO

I just don't know what to think, harz. If she had been shaken to stop her from screaming, the screams would have woken someone. If she had been shaken to "wake up" after losing consciousness, maybe she wasn't supposed to die. At least not at that point. Maybe she went to the basement with her blanket (Barbie attached by static electricity from dryer) to "play games". A quick snack in the kitchen. Or maybe in the basement. Maybe the killer had food down there for himself (he'd been there since the afternoon and must have eaten) and offerred her some to gain her confidence. The garrotting game goes terribly wrong. Wecht refers to the knot as a "slip knot", but the autopsy report calls it a "double knot", which would not be able to be undone or loosened quickly, would have to be cut off. Maybe it was knotted to free the hands of the perp for molesting JonBenet. When he can't revive her, but she is still breathing, he hits her with a flashlight, golf club, baseball bat, other to make sure she dies. Because she is still alive, he leaves the duct tape on and covers her with a blanket. And flees. To be honest, for me, this scenario would almost eliminate John or Patsy Ramsey. But, I wonder if she had to die, because she could identify the person.

I think if JonBenet accidentally hung herself, no one would hesitate to call 911. They would have no reason to stage a cover-up for something they had played no role in. Certainly not when it meant violating and abusing her body.

How the he** would a ransom note fit into this?

Wecht thought JB might have been penetrated (digitally) 48 to 72 hours before the murder in a separate incident. Maybe it was the same "friend".

[LadyFisher]

Originally posted by MissOtisRegrets


But, the blanket points to them not only because it came from their home, but because it suggests a protector of JonBenet covered her. I wouldn't think they would want to suggest that, if they were staging the scene. Douglas said in his book that just the torso was wrapped in the blanket...he says that the way a body is left often tells us a lot about the relationship of the victim and offender..He used this as one example...in the case of the man who killed his wife, the body was wrapped in the blanket from their bed...so that nothing but her head was exposed...It was a protective, "considerate" presentation...They say this shows "proprietary interest"...in the victim...sometimes it even demonstrated remores...But he didn't see that with JB since only the torso was covered...to him this seemed to be a case of covering the body for convenience rather than any kind of protection or nuturing instinct.... I found it interesting he said in his book that after John ran upstairs with the body and Arndt told him she was dead..he covered the body as if tucking her into bed before Patsy came into the room....what I'm saying is....if it had been Patsy and John the body would have been found probably completely covered in that basement,,,but it wasn't...only the torso!

[MissOtisRegrets]

Originally posted by LadyFisher
Douglas said in his book that just the torso was wrapped in the blanket...he says that the way a body is left often tells us a lot about the relationship of the victim and offender..He used this as one example...in the case of the man who killed his wife, the body was wrapped in the blanket from their bed...so that nothing but her head was exposed...It was a protective, "considerate" presentation...They say this shows "proprietary interest"...in the victim...sometimes it even demonstrated remores...But he didn't see that with JB since only the torso was covered...to him this seemed to be a case of covering the body for convenience rather than any kind of protection or nuturing instinct.... I found it interesting he said in his book that after John ran upstairs with the body and Arndt told him she was dead..he covered the body as if tucking her into bed before Patsy came into the room....what I'm saying is....if it had been Patsy and John the body would have been found probably completely covered in that basement,,,but it wasn't...only the torso!

Wow. That is really interesting. Thanks.

[harz]

Originally posted by LadyFisher
Douglas said in his book that just the torso was wrapped in the blanket...he says that the way a body is left often tells us a lot about the relationship of the victim and offender..He used this as one example...in the case of the man who killed his wife, the body was wrapped in the blanket from their bed...so that nothing but her head was exposed...It was a protective, "considerate" presentation...They say this shows "proprietary interest"...in the victim...sometimes it even demonstrated remores...But he didn't see that with JB since only the torso was covered...to him this seemed to be a case of covering the body for convenience rather than any kind of protection or nuturing instinct.... I found it interesting he said in his book that after John ran upstairs with the body and Arndt told him she was dead..he covered the body as if tucking her into bed before Patsy came into the room....what I'm saying is....if it had been Patsy and John the body would have been found probably completely covered in that basement,,,but it wasn't...only the torso!

Does torso mean upper body? Do you meant the blanket was covering just upper body, not below the stomach or hip? Remember the paintbrush stick? Ramsey might want to cover the torse and head with blanket to make it easier for one of them to poke the stick into her vagina. If I am correct the word torso means upper body. IMO

[LadyFisher]

Originally posted by harz


Does torso mean upper body? Do you meant the blanket was covering just upper body, not below the stomach or hip? Remember the paintbrush stick? Ramsey might want to cover the torse and head with blanket to make it easier for one of them to poke the stick into her vagina. If I am correct the word torso means upper body. IMO I believe he meant only the body,, not the arms and legs......Harz...I don't believe the Ramseys did this to their daughter...Parents kill, but I agree with Douglas on this one..they don't kill in this manner! And she was obviously strangled first...not the head injury first, which rules out for me that Patsy got angry and whacked her head with something....the petechial hemorrhages are indicative of this with the lack of substantial bleeding from the head wound! imho

[thewhitewitch1]

Originally posted by MissOtisRegrets


Harz, I have been thinking all afternoon about your post that the cord might have been wrapped around twice by mistake. Yesterday someone posted a link to Cyril Wecht's conclusions from reading the autopsy report. He talked about JonBenet having the type of brain damage of someone with shaken baby syndrome and thought she might have collapsed lifeless during the garrotting and whoever was with her had tried to wake her up.

Or...someone may have shaken her before the garrotting and she fell backwards and hit her head? I still don't think of the garrotting as a sexual thing so what did the killer expect to happen from it if not for her to die? I think we make too much out of the sexual assult which appeared to be little more than an afterthought to stage it to look like a sex crime. IMO
There was no need for the blow to the head to kill her. The garrotting would have been enough to kill her, which is why I still believe the blow to the head came first.

[thewhitewitch1]

Originally posted by LadyFisher
Douglas said in his book that just the torso was wrapped in the blanket...he says that the way a body is left often tells us a lot about the relationship of the victim and offender..He used this as one example...in the case of the man who killed his wife, the body was wrapped in the blanket from their bed...so that nothing but her head was exposed...It was a protective, "considerate" presentation...They say this shows "proprietary interest"...in the victim...sometimes it even demonstrated remores...But he didn't see that with JB since only the torso was covered...to him this seemed to be a case of covering the body for convenience rather than any kind of protection or nuturing instinct.... I found it interesting he said in his book that after John ran upstairs with the body and Arndt told him she was dead..he covered the body as if tucking her into bed before Patsy came into the room....what I'm saying is....if it had been Patsy and John the body would have been found probably completely covered in that basement,,,but it wasn't...only the torso!

Yes but how was it either convenient or necessary for an intruder to cover her body only from the torso down at all?
There is a video clip out there in cyberland that shows John demonstrating how JB's body was covered and it certainly appeared to be done in a loving way (folded around her).

[harz]

Originally posted by MissOtisRegrets


I just don't know what to think, harz. If she had been shaken to stop her from screaming, the screams would have woken someone. If she had been shaken to "wake up" after losing consciousness, maybe she wasn't supposed to die. At least not at that point. Maybe she went to the basement with her blanket (Barbie attached by static electricity from dryer) to "play games". A quick snack in the kitchen. Or maybe in the basement. Maybe the killer had food down there for himself (he'd been there since the afternoon and must have eaten) and offerred her some to gain her confidence. The garrotting game goes terribly wrong. Wecht refers to the knot as a "slip knot", but the autopsy report calls it a "double knot", which would not be able to be undone or loosened quickly, would have to be cut off. Maybe it was knotted to free the hands of the perp for molesting JonBenet. When he can't revive her, but she is still breathing, he hits her with a flashlight, golf club, baseball bat, other to make sure she dies. Because she is still alive, he leaves the duct tape on and covers her with a blanket. And flees. To be honest, for me, this scenario would almost eliminate John or Patsy Ramsey. But, I wonder if she had to die, because she could identify the person.

I think if JonBenet accidentally hung herself, no one would hesitate to call 911. They would have no reason to stage a cover-up for something they had played no role in. Certainly not when it meant violating and abusing her body.

How the he** would a ransom note fit into this?

Wecht thought JB might have been penetrated (digitally) 48 to 72 hours before the murder in a separate incident. Maybe it was the same "friend".

I had thought several possible scenarios on either accident or murder, or who did it, but they don’t satisfy me, as I felt like running out of oxygen. The only thing that makes a perfect sense to me is that Ramsey did the staging regardless over accident or murder to cover up for whom and the reasons. I have come to no problem in agreeing that John took responsible in the staging, since I believe he was really aware what happened that night to morning, and already knew where JB body was before he claimed to found her in the wine cellar. I don’t think Ramseys would cover up this secret “friend” over JB. So that leaves John, Patsy, & Burke. Like you said about Dr.Wecht thought JB might have been penetrated 48 to 72 hours before the murder. So which one of the Ramseys did it? That’s the problem if all 3 of Ramseys are covering up for each other to keep that information in secret. IMO

[LadyFisher]

Originally posted by thewhitewitch1


Yes but how was it either convenient or necessary for an intruder to cover her body only from the torso down at all?
There is a video clip out there in cyberland that shows John demonstrating how JB's body was covered and it certainly appeared to be done in a loving way (folded around her). I don't know, Whitewitch...I've never seen the video your speaking of...the only thing I would be able to guess is...that John really did block out of his mind what he actually saw in that basement...and showed how he as a nurturer would do it..:shrug: Have you seen this and may I ask where? I would think if I was a murderer...and tried to stage the murder as if an intruder did it...I certainly would not want to hire a man with the credentials of Douglas or Smit...these guys know their stuff...they would peg me as the murderer in a minute...and don't think if they believed for a second that the Ramseys were guilty they wouldn't disclose what they believed to the proper authorities because imho they both would....both would like to see this murder solved...so would I!!! :seeya: Have a great night, White!!!

[thewhitewitch1]

Originally posted by LadyFisher
I don't know, Whitewitch...I've never seen the video your speaking of...the only thing I would be able to guess is...that John really did block out of his mind what he actually saw in that basement...and showed how he as a nurturer would do it..:shrug: Have you seen this and may I ask where? I would think if I was a murderer...and tried to stage the murder as if an intruder did it...I certainly would not want to hire a man with the credentials of Douglas or Smit...these guys know their stuff...they would peg me as the murderer in a minute...and don't think if they believed for a second that the Ramseys were guilty they wouldn't disclose what they believed to the proper authorities because imho they both would....both would like to see this murder solved...so would I!!! :seeya: Have a great night, White!!!

Hi LH. I will try to find a link to the video for you. I think I got it from this forum in the first place. Talk about TMI. You have a great night too!

[harz]

Well that's interesting;
January 6, 1997
"The Colorado Daily reports that the police had searched the windowless room earlier than John Ramsey and that the body was not there at that time"

found at
http://zyberzoom.com/JBRTimeline.html

So, IMO thats when John placed JB body in wine cellar during his 90 minutes AWOL, interesting. Do you know there freezer in boiler room near wine cellar, maybe JB's body was stored in the freezer while the police search the house. Is that why someone said JB felt so cold when someone touched her? I forgot who, but I am sure someone did said she felt cold. (Imitating as Shakespeare) "So what say you?"

[thewhitewitch1]

Originally posted by harz
Well that's interesting;
January 6, 1997
"The Colorado Daily reports that the police had searched the windowless room earlier than John Ramsey and that the body was not there at that time"

found at
http://zyberzoom.com/JBRTimeline.html

So, IMO thats when John placed JB body in wine cellar during his 90 minutes AWOL, interesting. Do you know there freezer in boiler room near wine cellar, maybe JB's body was stored in the freezer while the police search the house. Is that why someone said JB felt so cold when someone touched her? I forgot who, but I am sure someone did said she felt cold. (Imitating as Shakespeare) "So what say you?"

You're usually cold when you are dead, harz but LA said that there was an odor about her too. There is speculation that she was either in the freezer or behind it but I am sure the police would have (you'd think) examined those areas for evidence.
I am sure she had an odor since she had urinated on herself and possibly vomited. I think I have read that the freezer was not a working freezer, also.

[harz]

Originally posted by thewhitewitch1


You're usually cold when you are dead, harz but LA said that there was an odor about her too. There is speculation that she was either in the freezer or behind it but I am sure the police would have (you'd think) examined those areas for evidence.
I am sure she had an odor since she had urinated on herself and possibly vomited. I think I have read that the freezer was not a working freezer, also.

Thats true, dead people get cold, it was in winter time and basement was cold too. I thought the person who said JB felt so cold, if she meant near frozen or something like that. I didn't know that the freezer wasn't working that time. It still seemed a good place to hide the body. IMO

I am seeing gaps in police reports. It makes me wonder how many cricital informations were censored by the judge in the power of Ramsey's lawyers?

[rashomon]

Originally posted by thewhitewitch1


You're usually cold when you are dead, harz but LA said that there was an odor about her too. There is speculation that she was either in the freezer or behind it but I am sure the police would have (you'd think) examined those areas for evidence.
I am sure she had an odor since she had urinated on herself and possibly vomited. I think I have read that the freezer was not a working freezer, also.
The odor about JonBenet was an odor of decay, for at the time JB was found, she had already been dead for at least twelve hours. Which is why the body was also in rigor mortis already.

[rashomon]

Originally posted by MissOtisRegrets


Occam's razor:

1. An accident of which there is no indication.

2. The assumption that two adults thought their daughter was dead, when she wasn't.

3. The staging of a cruel death by an intruder on the assumption that no one would think them capable.

4. The involvement of Patsy's paintbrush (a second part of which was boldly replaced in the paintbox for police to find) in the staging of the cruel death by an intruder.

5. The staging of the sexual violation of their daughter.

6. A fake ransom note composed almost exclusively from movie lines and themes the Ramseys would have to have committed to memory. (Computers would be expected to be seized and, so, couldn't be used.)

7. The use of Patsy's pad (boldly replaced and, subsequently volunteered) for the writing of the fake ransom note.

8. The use of Patsy's pen (boldly replaced) for the writing of the fake ransom note.

IMO one has to accept too much to believe the blow on the head was an accident, the garrotting staged, the sexual molestation staged, and the ransom note faked. I think they all were what they were.

MOO
Every single point listed can indeed explained by using Occam's razor, only that the result I get is that the Ramseys were involved in JB's death.
To address your points:

1. of course there was indication of an accident: an enraged parent probably struck out at JB in a rage, not meaning to kill her, but the tragic result was that the child got a deadly head injury from the blow. or at least a head injury which sent her into an irrecoverable coma.

2. JB could have been in a deep coma and her breathing so shallow that it couldn't be noticed anymore. Remember that the coroner said the head injury was so severe that it would finally have been fatal.

3. Imo, the way you put it explains the Ramseys' motive very well. They wanted to stage exactly that: a sexual predator scene, so that no one should think they could have done it. And remember, it worked: time and again we hear people say on fourms "But no parents would garrote their child, and therefore the Ramseys must be innocent". Yes, it worked for the Ramseys, at least with laypeople. But the FBI CASKU unit for example did not buy it and recognized it as staging.

4. the Ramseys had to use some item from their home, since this was not a premeditated crime. They wanted to make it appear as if the sexual predator had dragged JB into the far-away basement and grabbed some utensil there which should serve his purpose.

5. (see point three above) Same explanation: create a scenario as bizarre as possible so that no one should think it was the parents.

6. the Ramseys did not know what real ransom notes look like (they are usually very short), so they went by bits and pieces which they remembered from movies. They wildly threw everything in the mix, the more bizarre the better, in the frantic hope that at least something would be swallowed.
BTW, they even tried to implicate their housekeeper Linda Hoffmann-Pugh by putting in that ridiculously low sum (which they thought must be an awful lot of money for someone like LHP). To make it seem like LHP had seen John's pay slip with the $118,000 bonus lying around somewhere.

7. and 8.
The Ramseys had to use pen and paper from their own home. They couldn't very well use their PC. So what should they do? They knew the house was going to be searched from top to bottom including the garbage, so they didn't even try to throw pen and paper into the garbage.
Instead they boldly replaced both pen and paper because imo the thought entered their mind that a ransom note written with pen and paper from their own home would come in very handy for implicating their housekeeper Linda Hoffman-Pugh.
Didn't Patsy say in DOI that when she first saw the ransom note lying on the stairs, she thought her housekeeper had written her a note? Patsy also threw in that LHP had borrowed $2000 from her. It sticks out like a sore thumb what Patsy was up to here.
Linda Hoffman Pugh was among the first people of a long number of persons the Ramseys tried to throw under the bus.

Yes, Occam's razor is a very valuabale tool indeed. Imo applying it leads straight to the Ramseys.

[rashomon]

Originally posted by Mimi428

http://www.acandyrose.com/12112001pr-depo.htm
Whether y'all like it or not, the Ramsey parents DID grant an interview to the Nationial Enquirer.
And no Ramsey ever sued the NE because they felt they had been misquoted, right? The Ramseys are very litigious, so the inference one can draw from their not suing the paper is that the NE quoted them correctly and that this was what Patsy actually said. Simple as that.

[Athena]

Originally posted by thewhitewitch1


Or...someone may have shaken her before the garrotting and she fell backwards and hit her head? I still don't think of the garrotting as a sexual thing so what did the killer expect to happen from it if not for her to die? I think we make too much out of the sexual assult which appeared to be little more than an afterthought to stage it to look like a sex crime. IMO
There was no need for the blow to the head to kill her. The garrotting would have been enough to kill her, which is why I still believe the blow to the head came first.

Just maybe the killer was angry that she died before he was finished torturing and and hit her in the head out of anger. Too many possible explanations.

John Meyer however said there was an extensive bruise with minimal swelling -- which would indicate to me that that the blow was at or near death. If she had been struck 20 to 60 minutes earlier as some suggest seems like there would have been more swelling of such an extensive bruise. jmo

[rashomon]

Originally posted by Athena


Just maybe the killer was angry that she died before he was finished torturing and and hit her in the head out of anger. Too many possible explanations.

John Meyer however said there was an extensive bruise with minimal swelling -- which would indicate to me that that the blow was at or near death. If she had been struck 20 to 60 minutes earlier as some suggest seems like there would have been more swelling of such an extensive bruise. jmo
I don't rember coroner Meyer saying the swelling was minimal. Other experts (I think it was either Dr. Wecht or Dr. Spitz) stated that judging from the bruising and swelling of the brain, the blow was probably struck one to two hours before JB's death.

[LadyFisher]

Originally posted by rashomon

Every single point listed can indeed explained by using Occam's razor, only that the result I get is that the Ramseys were involved in JB's death.
To address your points:

1. of course there was indication of an accident: an enraged parent probably struck out at JB in a rage, not meaning to kill her, but the tragic result was that the child got a deadly head injury from the blow. or at least a head injury which sent her into an irrecoverable coma.

2. JB could have been in a deep coma and her breathing so shallow that it couldn't be noticed anymore. Remember that the coroner said the head injury was so severe that it would finally have been fatal.

3. Imo, the way you put it explains the Ramseys' motive very well. They wanted to stage exactly that: a sexual predator scene, so that no one should think they could have done it. And remember, it worked: time and again we hear people say on fourms "But no parents would garrote their child, and therefore the Ramseys must be innocent". Yes, it worked for the Ramseys, at least with laypeople. But the FBI CASKU unit for example did not buy it and recognized it as staging.

4. the Ramseys had to use some item from their home, since this was not a premeditated crime. They wanted to make it appear as if the sexual predator had dragged JB into the far-away basement and grabbed some utensil there which should serve his purpose.

5. (see point three above) Same explanation: create a scenario as bizarre as possible so that no one should think it was the parents.

6. the Ramseys did not know what real ransom notes look like (they are usually very short), so they went by bits and pieces which they remembered from movies. They wildly threw everything in the mix, the more bizarre the better, in the frantic hope that at least something would be swallowed.
BTW, they even tried to implicate their housekeeper Linda Hoffmann-Pugh by putting in that ridiculously low sum (which they thought must be an awful lot of money for someone like LHP). To make it seem like LHP had seen John's pay slip with the $118,000 bonus lying around somewhere.

7. and 8.
The Ramseys had to use pen and paper from their own home. They couldn't very well use their PC. So what should they do? They knew the house was going to be searched from top to bottom including the garbage, so they didn't even try to throw pen and paper into the garbage.
Instead they boldly replaced both pen and paper because imo the thought entered their mind that a ransom note written with pen and paper from their own home would come in very handy for implicating their housekeeper Linda Hoffman-Pugh.
Didn't Patsy say in DOI that when she first saw the ransom note lying on the stairs, she thought her housekeeper had written her a note? Patsy also threw in that LHP had borrowed $2000 from her. It sticks out like a sore thumb what Patsy was up to here.
Linda Hoffman Pugh was among the first people of a long number of persons the Ramseys tried to throw under the bus.

Yes, Occam's razor is a very valuabale tool indeed. Imo applying it leads straight to the Ramseys. The housekeeper had asked Patsy's mother....aren't you afraid someone will try to kidnap JonBenet..she is so beautiful? Her mother had related the conversation to Patsy...I would have suspected her, too....and someone with inside knowledge knew about the $118,000..imho...didn't the housekeeper ask for over $2,000 because she couldn't pay her rent? How much rent did this woman pay? I don't think the Ramseys were trying push anyone under a bus...they were horrified to realize the murderer was someone probably they were acquainted with....and please excuse my typonese today! :)

[Athena]

Originally posted by rashomon

I don't rember coroner Meyer saying the swelling was minimal. Other experts (I think it was either Dr. Wecht or Dr. Spitz) stated that judging from the bruising and swelling of the brain, the blow was probably struck one to two hours before JB's death.

It was from an interview that Schiller did with Meyer PMPT - Pgs 156-157

It further states that not all of the events Meyer noticed were included in the released autopsy report.

Dr Wecht interjected himself in this case. They also examined only PHOTOS of the injuries. I would believe Meyer knew more than he. Wecht also said there was semen found on JBR when he made his so-called analysis that JR had previously abused JBR and we all know that turned out not to be true. P265 PMPT His interest was to get onto as many talk shows as he possibly could. As soon as I saw him I would change channels. He became sickening. Sorry - but I do not respect this man at all. jmo

[LadyFisher]

I would like to add in my response to Rosh, that I do not see the Ramseys as folks who had the time to be that familiar with those movies...and some of the wording in the ransom note as beheaded at that time probably came from games such a Dungeons and Dragon...Hercules or Xena...or th tv series Highlander....I just can't picture the Ramseys knowing this stuff....a young person, yes..but not the Ramseys. jmho

[sunsplashed]

Originally posted by LadyFisher
Douglas said in his book that just the torso was wrapped in the blanket...he says that the way a body is left often tells us a lot about the relationship of the victim and offender..He used this as one example...in the case of the man who killed his wife, the body was wrapped in the blanket from their bed...so that nothing but her head was exposed...It was a protective, "considerate" presentation...They say this shows "proprietary interest"...in the victim...sometimes it even demonstrated remores...But he didn't see that with JB since only the torso was covered...to him this seemed to be a case of covering the body for convenience rather than any kind of protection or nuturing instinct.... I found it interesting he said in his book that after John ran upstairs with the body and Arndt told him she was dead..he covered the body as if tucking her into bed before Patsy came into the room....what I'm saying is....if it had been Patsy and John the body would have been found probably completely covered in that basement,,,but it wasn't...only the torso!

Hello LadyFisher! :)

I hope you're having a wonderful day. The fall weather here is perfect and the leaves are starting to turn beautiful colors.

I don't mean to be insulting to you in any way whatsoever, but I can't buy this whole thing about wrapping the body in a blanket denoting a special relationship.

I think if someone (anyone, Ramseys or intruder) is cold-blooded enough to kill a six-year-old child, he/she isn't going to give a darn whether the body is wrapped or not.

I'm probably missing something important, but to me, it's like apples and oranges. Caring and cold-blooded? I just can't see it.

JMO

Have a good day! :)

[sunsplashed]

Originally posted by LadyFisher
The housekeeper had asked Patsy's mother....aren't you afraid someone will try to kidnap JonBenet..she is so beautiful? Her mother had related the conversation to Patsy...I would have suspected her, too....and someone with inside knowledge knew about the $118,000..imho...didn't the housekeeper ask for over $2,000 because she couldn't pay her rent? How much rent did this woman pay? I don't think the Ramseys were trying push anyone under a bus...they were horrified to realize the murderer was someone probably they were acquainted with....and please excuse my typonese today! :)

LHP asked for $2000 and Patsy said yes, fine. Patsy was going to leave the check on the kitchen counter before the family went to Charlevoix and LHP was going to pick it up.

So, it wouldn't make any sense for LHP to have been the murderer. She would have shot herself in the financial foot. According to both Patsy and LHP, Patsy had already said, "No problem."

JMO

[LadyFisher]

Originally posted by sunsplashed


LHP asked for $2000 and Patsy said yes, fine. Patsy was going to leave the check on the kitchen counter before the family went to Charlevoix and LHP was going to pick it up.

So, it wouldn't make any sense for LHP to have been the murderer. She would have shot herself in the financial foot. According to both Patsy and LHP, Patsy had already said, "No problem."

JMO I am not accusing the housekeeper....I was just saying after the comment she made to Patsy's mother...I can understand why Patsy thought of her first....why would she make a comment about fearing JB would be kidnapped anyway to Patsy's mom? :confused: There wasn't much to fear in Boulder at that time from everything I've read.....in my world, Sun...$2,000 is a heck of a lot of money...the housekeeper must have had financial problems..did she mention the possibility of JB being kidnapped to anyone else? Maybe a family member of hers or someone else employed by the Ramseys? What was the housekeepers relationship like with John? Have a great day, Sun...gotta run and make a pot of homemade soup! :)

[Athena]

If one of my children were hurt I wouldn't trust ANYONE and EVERYONE would be suspect.

[rosebud]

Originally posted by LadyFisher
I am not accusing the housekeeper....I was just saying after the comment she made to Patsy's mother...I can understand why Patsy thought of her first....why would she make a comment about fearing JB would be kidnapped anyway to Patsy's mom? :confused: There wasn't much to fear in Boulder at that time from everything I've read.....in my world, Sun...$2,000 is a heck of a lot of money...the housekeeper must have had financial problems..did she mention the possibility of JB being kidnapped to anyone else? Maybe a family member of hers or someone else employed by the Ramseys? What was the housekeepers relationship like with John? Have a great day, Sun...gotta run and make a pot of homemade soup! :)

It never ceases to amaze me that people who are outraged at the "torture" the Ramseys have had to endure by being "falsely accused" have no problem accusing anybody else.

[Athena]

Originally posted by rosebud


It never ceases to amaze me that people who are outraged at the "torture" the Ramseys have had to endure by being "falsely accused" have no problem accusing anybody else.

How many threads are you going to post this same comment on?

[rashomon]

Originally posted by Athena


It was from an interview that Schiller did with Meyer PMPT - Pgs 156-157

It further states that not all of the events Meyer noticed were included in the released autopsy report.

Dr Wecht interjected himself in this case. They also examined only PHOTOS of the injuries. I would believe Meyer knew more than he. Wecht also said there was semen found on JBR when he made his so-called analysis that JR had previously abused JBR and we all know that turned out not to be true. P265 PMPT His interest was to get onto as many talk shows as he possibly could. As soon as I saw him I would change channels. He became sickening. Sorry - but I do not respect this man at all. jmo
I looked up the passage in my PMPT paperback, but all I found on page 157 was
"the tip of the left temporal lobe showed only very minimal bruising."
Hardly surprising, for JB was struck on the right side of her head.

PMPT, p 156/157:
"There was subdural hemorrhaging over the surface of the right cerebral hemisphere and a thin film of subarachnoid hemorrhaging over the over the whole right cerebral hemisphere.
in is report, he wrote about an extensive purple bruise, about 8by 11/4 inches in area, underlying the skull fracture as well as a bruise at the tip of the right temporal lobe measuring about 1/4 inch square."

I'm no fan of C. Wecht either, he's a compulsive attention seeker if there ever was one. And if memory serves (I'll do more checking on that and then post it here), it was not he who said that one to two hours had elapsed between the head bash and JB's death. I think it was Dr. Spitz who said that.
I also think it was actually Wecht who falsely claimed that there was only very little hemmorhaging in JB's brain, but per Meyer's report, this was not the case.

But although Wecht was wrong about semen stains being found on JB's body, this does not mean JR didn't abuse her chronically. Dr. McCann, a world-renowned expert on child abuse, who together with other experts, examined slides of tissue of JB's vaginal area, came to the conclusion that JB had been the victim of chronic sexual abuse.

[rosebud]

Originally posted by Athena


How many threads are you going to post this same comment on?

How many times are you going to speculate about an intruder that you admit there is no evidence of?

[Athena]

This person is on your Ignore List. To view this post click [here]

[Athena]

From PMPT pgs. 308-309 - John Fernie/footprints:

"John Fernie was angry when he read Charlie Brennan's story about footprints. Like many media stories this one came from an unnamed source and made the Ramseys look guilty. Fernie wondered if the source had provided the reporter with all of the facts. He knew that his own footprints were there in the snow that morning. He had driven up the back alley to the Ramseys' house just after 6AM in response to Patsy's frantic call that terrible morning. He remembered walking along the brick sidewalk to the patio door, looking through the glass panel, and reading a line or two of the ransom note which was lying on the floor just inside the door. Then he had run through the snow-covered grass around the south side of the house to the front door. If he cops had been looking they would have found his footprints. The police still have not checked the shoes he had on that day though a shoe print had been discovered next to JBR's body."

[rosebud]

Originally posted by Athena
From PMPT pgs. 308-309 - John Fernie/footprints:

"John Fernie was angry when he read Charlie Brennan's story about footprints. Like many media stories this one came from an unnamed source and made the Ramseys look guilty. Fernie wondered if the source had provided the reporter with all of the facts. He knew that his own footprints were there in the snow that morning. He had driven up the back alley to the Ramseys' house just after 6AM in response to Patsy's frantic call that terrible morning. He remembered walking along the brick sidewalk to the patio door, looking through the glass panel, and reading a line or two of the ransom note which was lying on the floor just inside the door. Then he had run through the snow-covered grass around the south side of the house to the front door. If he cops had been looking they would have found his footprints. The police still have not checked the shoes he had on that day though a shoe print had been discovered next to JBR's body."


If the police found no foot prints outside the house how could they check shoes for footprints that were not found? Kind of like assuming an intruder did it, when one admits that there is no evidence of an intruder, isnt' it? Unless Fermie was wearing Hi-Tec shoes he did not leave the footprint alongside the body.

[rashomon]

Originally posted by sunsplashed


LHP asked for $2000 and Patsy said yes, fine. Patsy was going to leave the check on the kitchen counter before the family went to Charlevoix and LHP was going to pick it up.

So, it wouldn't make any sense for LHP to have been the murderer. She would have shot herself in the financial foot. According to both Patsy and LHP, Patsy had already said, "No problem."

JMO
But it made sense for the writer of the ransom note to further implicate LHP. It would be found out that LHP was in dire straits financially, and since Pasty had to write the note on pen and paper from her own home, the housekeeper would make a perfect suspect from the ransom note writer's point of view. And wasn't the first thing Patsy mentioned about the note that she thought the housekeeper had left someting on the stairs for her to read? The housekeeper who knew Patsy was going to come down the stairs first thing in the morning?
My point was not about LHP being the perp, it was about Patsy consciously trying to throw LHP under the bus both when concocting the RN and later commenting on the note.
For seriously, which housekeeper would put a note at the bottom of a spiral staircase? Ridiculous.

[rosebud]

Originally posted by rashomon

But it made sense for the writer of the ransom note to further implicate LHP. It would be found out that LHP was in dire straits financially, and since Pasty had to write the note on pen and paper from her own home, the housekeeper would make a perfect suspect from the ransom note writer's point of view. And wasn't the first thing Patsy mentioned about the note that she thought the housekeeper had left someting on the stairs for her to read? The housekeeper who knew Patsy was going to come down the stairs first thing in the morning?
My point was not about LHP being the perp, it was about Patsy consciously trying to throw LHP under the bus both when concocting the RN and later commenting on the note.
For seriously, which housekeeper would put a note at the bottom of a spiral staircase? Ridiculous.


I believe that Linda Hoffman Pugh was the first person the ransom note written by a Ramsey was meant to implicate as the killer of JB. Another likely person was the angry ex-friend and ex-employee of John Ramsey who had had a falling out with him the previous April and had left Ramsey's company then. This guy wrote a fax to the company threatening to "get" John Ramsey. He also claimed they owed him $118,000 and later settled for about half of that.

I firmly believe those two people were who the rambling, apparently randomly written ransom note was intended to target.

[MissOtisRegrets]

Would the garrotte have necessarily been a sex game? The perp would not have been looking at JonBenet's face while strangling her from behind.

[MissOtisRegrets]

Would the digestive tract have slowed/shut down after JonBenet received her first severe injury?

TIA

[LadyFisher]

Originally posted by MissOtisRegrets
Would the garrotte have necessarily been a sex game? The perp would not have been looking at JonBenet's face while strangling her from behind. This was no sex game, MissO....I initally thought it could have been...but with everything I've been able to ascertain it wasn't....the lack of semen proves it to me....this perp had a grudge against John...he wanted to defile and rob him of the most valuable thing in the world...this was a brutal premeditated murder...imho

[Athena]

Originally posted by rashomon

I looked up the passage in my PMPT paperback, but all I found on page 157 was
"the tip of the left temporal lobe showed only very minimal bruising."
Hardly surprising, for JB was struck on the right side of her head.

PMPT, p 156/157:
"There was subdural hemorrhaging over the surface of the right cerebral hemisphere and a thin film of subarachnoid hemorrhaging over the over the whole right cerebral hemisphere.
in is report, he wrote about an extensive purple bruise, about 8by 11/4 inches in area, underlying the skull fracture as well as a bruise at the tip of the right temporal lobe measuring about 1/4 inch square."

I'm no fan of C. Wecht either, he's a compulsive attention seeker if there ever was one. And if memory serves (I'll do more checking on that and then post it here), it was not he who said that one to two hours had elapsed between the head bash and JB's death. I think it was Dr. Spitz who said that.
I also think it was actually Wecht who falsely claimed that there was only very little hemmorhaging in JB's brain, but per Meyer's report, this was not the case.

But although Wecht was wrong about semen stains being found on JB's body, this does not mean JR didn't abuse her chronically. Dr. McCann, a world-renowned expert on child abuse, who together with other experts, examined slides of tissue of JB's vaginal area, came to the conclusion that JB had been the victim of chronic sexual abuse.

Thanks. But there is nothing there that says there was any swelling? How can that be explained away with such an extensive injury? If I bump my head on a cabinet door or go to stand up and bang my head - the area swells up and gets worse as time progresses. However they are experts so ..... but the time I read in PMPT says 20 - 45 minutes

Dr. McCann is a clinical professor of medicine at the Dept of Pediatrics at the UofCA and "thought" the damage to JBR's hymen was dated from an old injury Drs Jones and Montelone agreed. Dr. Krugman of the CU Health Sciences Center who worked on the case since 4/97, suggested that the injury dated at her death and was part of the staging that took place and Dr. Spitz also dated the injury at the time of her death.

PMPT - 557, 560, 563

[LadyFisher]

Originally posted by rosebud


It never ceases to amaze me that people who are outraged at the "torture" the Ramseys have had to endure by being "falsely accused" have no problem accusing anybody else. This post is proof you aren't even reading the posts you quote...I stated very clearly..that I wasn't accusing the housekeeper....reread it....some of us are here to try and figure out why this horrible murder took place.....I do not believe it was done by the parents...and there in my humble opinion is more evidence of an IDI than RDI....the evidence is....LE did not find the remaining duct tape, the remaining rope...the latex gloves (imho was used to penetrate JB)....it's as MissO already commented a long time ago...if you would read others posts...it's the absence of a lot of things that point us to an intruder!

[Athena]

Originally posted by MissOtisRegrets
Would the digestive tract have slowed/shut down after JonBenet received her first severe injury?

TIA

MsOtis - There are also conflicting reports of when she could have eaten the pineapple -- if it was in fact pineapple. Experts have said she could have eaten it as early as dinner at the Whites and others say 1-2 hours???? Take your pick. :shrug:

[Athena]

Originally posted by LadyFisher
This post is proof you aren't even reading the posts you quote...I stated very clearly..that I wasn't accusing the housekeeper....reread it....some of us are here to try and figure out why this horrible murder took place.....I do not believe it was done by the parents...and there in my humble opinion is more evidence of an IDI than RDI....the evidence is....LE did not find the remaining duct tape, the remaining rope...the latex gloves (imho was used to penetrate JB)....it's as MissO already commented a long time ago...if you would read others posts...it's the absence of a lot of things that point us to an intruder!

Hats off to you Lady. You certainly have more patience than me. I gave up. :)

[LadyFisher]

Originally posted by Athena


Hats off to you Lady. You certainly have more patience than me. I gave up. :) Oh, I am beginning to lose my patience with her...that isn't the first post of mine she hasn't read but responded to....it does get old....doesn't it! :) Have a great afternoon, Athena! :)

[rashomon]

Originally posted by Athena


Thanks. But there is nothing there that says there was any swelling? How can that be explained away with such an extensive injury? If I bump my head on a cabinet door or go to stand up and bang my head - the area swells up and gets worse as time progresses. However they are experts so ..... but the time I read in PMPT says 20 - 45 minutes

Dr. McCann is a clinical professor of medicine at the Dept of Pediatrics at the UofCA and "thought" the damage to JBR's hymen was dated from an old injury Drs Jones and Montelone agreed. Dr. Krugman of the CU Health Sciences Center who worked on the case since 4/97, suggested that the injury dated at her death and was part of the staging that took place and Dr. Spitz also dated the injury at the time of her death.

PMPT - 557, 560, 563
But Dr. Spitz meant the vaginal injury, and not the head injury.
PMPT, p. 557:

"After viewing the slides, Spitz repeated his opinion: the injury to JonBenet's vagina had happened either at or immediately prior to her death - not earlier."

And in the very same pages of PMPT which you have quoted, it actually says that the head injury probably came first:

PMPT,p.558:

"According to the specialists, the head injury had likely come first. Since a six-year-old's skull is more resilient than an adult's, the blow must have been of trememdous force. The injury to her head was fully developed, which meant that her heart had beaten for some time after the blow. Also, the bruise to her brain did not immediately shut down all activity in JonBenet's body."

[MissOtisRegrets]

Originally posted by Athena


MsOtis - There are also conflicting reports of when she could have eaten the pineapple -- if it was in fact pineapple. Experts have said she could have eaten it as early as dinner at the Whites and others say 1-2 hours???? Take your pick. :shrug:

Thanks, Athena. My guess: it was actually red herring. :D

[Athena]

Originally posted by rashomon

But Dr. Spitz meant the vaginal injury, and not the head injury.
PMPT, p. 557:

"After viewing the slides, Spitz repeated his opinion: the injury to JonBenet's vagina had happened either at or immediately prior to her death - not earlier."

And in the very same pages of PMPT which you have quoted, it actually says that the head injury probably came first:

PMPT,p.558:

"According to the specialists, the head injury had likely come first. Since a six-year-old's skull is more resilient than an adult's, the blow must have been of trememdous force. The injury to her head was fully developed, which meant that her heart had beaten for some time after the blow. Also, the bruise to her brain did not immediately shut down all activity in JonBenet's body."

Sorry Rashomon if I confused you. The 1st paragraph referred to the head injury and I conceded to the experts based on that paragraph you just quoted.

The second one was referring to the vaginal injury in response to the last paragraph of your post beginning with Dr. McCann. :)

[MissOtisRegrets]

Originally posted by LadyFisher
This was no sex game, MissO....I initally thought it could have been...but with everything I've been able to ascertain it wasn't....the lack of semen proves it to me....this perp had a grudge against John...he wanted to defile and rob him of the most valuable thing in the world...this was a brutal premeditated murder...imho

I believe JonBenet was lying prone with the perp standing to the left of her neck and at right angles to her, when he pulled the cord tight. And then knotted it. I don't see much of a game there. Cyril Wecht refers to the knot as a "slip knot", which might give the impression of a game of some kind. But the autopsy report (from which Dr. Wecht gathered his information) refers to it as a "double knot", which does not.

[rashomon]

Originally posted by LadyFisher

"This was no sex game, MissO....I initally thought it could have been...but with everything I've been able to ascertain it wasn't....the lack of semen proves it to me....this perp had a grudge against John...he wanted to defile and rob him of the most valuable thing in the world...this was a brutal premeditated murder...imho"

I think it was neither a sex game nor a premeditated murder. It was more likely a staged scene done with some rope clumsily wrapped around a stick, with ligatures which didn't bind (they were loosely around the wrists), and with duct tape placed on the dead child's mouth).

Originally posted by MissOtisRegrets


Thanks, Athena. My guess: it was actually red herring. :D
I'm afraid it's not that simple with the pineapple being simply a red herring. JB ate cracked crab at the Whites', and the cracked crab was already further digested in her intestine than the pineapple, therefore JB had to have eaten the pineapple after she got home from the Whites' party.
Even Ramsey friend Lou Smit said that the pineapple was the 'big bugaboo' in the case. He realized that the pineapple evidence blew the Ramseys' offered time line of events apart by contradicting their story (that JB was already asleep when they got home from the Whites').

[Mimi428]

Originally posted by Athena


MsOtis - There are also conflicting reports of when she could have eaten the pineapple -- if it was in fact pineapple. Experts have said she could have eaten it as early as dinner at the Whites and others say 1-2 hours???? Take your pick. :shrug:

IIRC, it was Patsy who provided the information that JonBenet ate cracked crab and shrimp at the White's house earlier that evening. I hope we can all agree that crab & shrimp are not fruits or vegetables.

The autopsy report clearly states that the material in the upper part (closest to the stomach) of the small intestine contained fruit/vegetable material, which could be pineapple. Now if you want to say it was some other fruit or some kind of vegetable - fine.

But if you want to say she ate it at the home of Fleet White - then you need to explain why, in that same area of the small intestine, the crab & shrimp were NOT found along with what was found.

[Mimi428]

[i]Originally posted by rashomon



I'm afraid it's not that simple with the pineapple being simply a red herring. JB ate cracked crab at the Whites', and the cracked crab was already further digested in her intestine than the pineapple, therefore JB had to have eaten the pineapple after she got home from the Whites' party.

Even Ramsey friend Lou Smit said that the pineapple was the 'big bugaboo' in the case. He realized that the pineapple evidence blew the Ramseys' offered time line of events apart by contradicting their story (that JB was already asleep when they got home from the Whites').

Exactly! Sorry for the redundant post of my own, I had not seen your post before I wrote mine.

The crab & shrimp were so much further along, digestively speaking, that they were no longer recognizable from a forensic point of view. They had been digested to the point that what remained of them was fecal material. Check the autopsy report for verification, folks!

[Ames]

Does anyone have any idea how JonBenet's hair was styled at the White's Christmas party? Maybe it doesn't seem like a big deal to some, but...if her hair was NOT pulled back, in what I have read could have been "ties" from the potholder loom (the stretchy things used to make potholders with), at the party....and IF she fell asleep in the car, and was put directly to bed...then HOW did the "hair ties" (two of them) get into her hair? Who put them there? And why? I for some reason, could not imagine Patsy letting JB wear her hair like that to a Christmas party, it has been down in every picture that I have ever seen of her, and I could not especially imagine P letting JB wear the things used to make potholders, in her hair....for a fancy Christmas party. If anyone has any info on this....please answer. THANKS!

[MyrDawn]

Originally posted by rashomon

I looked up the passage in my PMPT paperback, but all I found on page 157 was
"the tip of the left temporal lobe showed only very minimal bruising."
Hardly surprising, for JB was struck on the right side of her head.

PMPT, p 156/157:
"There was subdural hemorrhaging over the surface of the right cerebral hemisphere and a thin film of subarachnoid hemorrhaging over the over the whole right cerebral hemisphere.
in is report, he wrote about an extensive purple bruise, about 8by 11/4 inches in area, underlying the skull fracture as well as a bruise at the tip of the right temporal lobe measuring about 1/4 inch square."

I'm no fan of C. Wecht either, he's a compulsive attention seeker if there ever was one. And if memory serves (I'll do more checking on that and then post it here), it was not he who said that one to two hours had elapsed between the head bash and JB's death. I think it was Dr. Spitz who said that.
I also think it was actually Wecht who falsely claimed that there was only very little hemmorhaging in JB's brain, but per Meyer's report, this was not the case.

But although Wecht was wrong about semen stains being found on JB's body, this does not mean JR didn't abuse her chronically. Dr. McCann, a world-renowned expert on child abuse, who together with other experts, examined slides of tissue of JB's vaginal area, came to the conclusion that JB had been the victim of chronic sexual abuse.

Naturally there's be hemorrhaging and bruising on the right side of her brain where the blow was struck (coup injury), but there should have been quite a bit of bruising on the left side of her brain if the head was struck hard enough on the right side to cause the massive fractures, if enough time had elapsed for the bruising to form before death. It's called contrecoup injury. And, it's often apparent in shaken baby syndrome.

Here's some links that explain coup / contrecoup injury.

http://www.braininjury.com/injured.html

http://www.biausa.org/Pages/types_of_brain_injury.html#coupe

http://www.villarilaw.com/brain_injury.htm

"Countrecoup injury: brain damage occurring on the side of the brain opposite the point of impact or trauma to the head. For example, if one is struck hard on the right side of the head, the brain will be thrown to the left in the skull and the left side of the brain will impact with the inside of the skull and become bruised or injured"

To me, the minimal bruising on the left side of her brain is an indication that she died very shortly after the blow to her head. Not hours, as some speculate.

IMO, JMO, and MOOOOOOO

[Athena]

Originally posted by rashomon
Originally posted by LadyFisher

"This was no sex game, MissO....I initally thought it could have been...but with everything I've been able to ascertain it wasn't....the lack of semen proves it to me....this perp had a grudge against John...he wanted to defile and rob him of the most valuable thing in the world...this was a brutal premeditated murder...imho"

I think it was neither a sex game nor a premeditated murder. It was more likely a staged scene done with some rope clumsily wrapped around a stick, with ligatures which didn't bind (they were loosely around the wrists), and with duct tape placed on the dead child's mouth).


I'm afraid it's not that simple with the pineapple being simply a red herring. JB ate cracked crab at the Whites', and the cracked crab was already further digested in her intestine than the pineapple, therefore JB had to have eaten the pineapple after she got home from the Whites' party.
Even Ramsey friend Lou Smit said that the pineapple was the 'big bugaboo' in the case. He realized that the pineapple evidence blew the Ramseys' offered time line of events apart by contradicting their story (that JB was already asleep when they got home from the Whites').

OK I'm confused then. How do you know the cracked crab was already further digested. According to the autopsy the other food was unidentified but was still in her stomach? Also where does Lou Smith say the pineapple was a "bugaboo"? I wish some of you would provide links. I know I certainly do even though it is a pain.

G.I. Tract: The esophagus is empty. It is lined by gray-white
mucosa. The stomach contains a small amount (8-11cc) of viscous to green to tan colored thick mucous material without particulate matter identified. The gastic mucosa is autolyzed but contains no areas of hemorrhage or ulceration. The yellow to
light green-tan apparent vegetable or fruit material which may represent fragments of pineapple. No hemorrhage is identified. The remainder of the small intestine is unremarkable. The large
intestine contains soft green fecal material. The appendix is present.

http://www.cnn.com/US/9703/ramsey.case/final.autopsy.html

[MyrDawn]

Originally posted by LadyFisher
This was no sex game, MissO....I initally thought it could have been...but with everything I've been able to ascertain it wasn't....the lack of semen proves it to me....this perp had a grudge against John...he wanted to defile and rob him of the most valuable thing in the world...this was a brutal premeditated murder...imho

I agree, I think the garrotte facillitated the strangling and the intruder wanted to stage the murder to add to the Ramseys shock and horror by knowing JonBenet had been slowly strangled to death.

IMO, JMO and MOO

[Athena]

Originally posted by MyrDawn


Naturally there's be hemorrhaging and bruising on the right side of her brain where the blow was struck (coup injury), but there should have been quite a bit of bruising on the left side of her brain if the head was struck hard enough on the right side to cause the massive fractures, if enough time had elapsed for the bruising to form before death. It's called contrecoup injury. And, it's often apparent in shaken baby syndrome.

Here's some links that explain coup / contrecoup injury.

http://www.braininjury.com/injured.html

http://www.biausa.org/Pages/types_of_brain_injury.html#coupe

http://www.villarilaw.com/brain_injury.htm

"Countrecoup injury: brain damage occurring on the side of the brain opposite the point of impact or trauma to the head. For example, if one is struck hard on the right side of the head, the brain will be thrown to the left in the skull and the left side of the brain will impact with the inside of the skull and become bruised or injured"

To me, the minimal bruising on the left side of her brain is an indication that she died very shortly after the blow to her head. Not hours, as some speculate.

IMO, JMO, and MOOOOOOO

The minimal swelling is what confuses me is a well. :shrug:

[MyrDawn]

Originally posted by Ames
Does anyone have any idea how JonBenet's hair was styled at the White's Christmas party? Maybe it doesn't seem like a big deal to some, but...if her hair was NOT pulled back, in what I have read could have been "ties" from the potholder loom (the stretchy things used to make potholders with), at the party....and IF she fell asleep in the car, and was put directly to bed...then HOW did the "hair ties" (two of them) get into her hair? Who put them there? And why? I for some reason, could not imagine Patsy letting JB wear her hair like that to a Christmas party, it has been down in every picture that I have ever seen of her, and I could not especially imagine P letting JB wear the things used to make potholders, in her hair....for a fancy Christmas party. If anyone has any info on this....please answer. THANKS!

I don't know how JonBenet wore her hair at the White's, but according to the autopsy report, her ponytails were fastened with blue elastic bands, and one of them had a cloth hair tie. It doesn't say anything about a potholder loop on either of her ponytails:

http://denver.rockymountainnews.com/extra/ramsey/autopsy.html

"The scalp is covered by long blonde hair which is fixed in two ponytails, one on top of the head secured by a cloth hair tie and blue elastic band, and one in the lower back of the head secured by a blue elastic band."

[MyrDawn]

Originally posted by Athena


The minimal swelling is what confuses me is a well. :shrug:

Yep, me too. A blow hard enough to do that much damage to her skull and cause that much trauma under the wound, yet cause only minimal swelling. That only makes sense to me if it came very shortley before her death.

IMO, JMO and MOOOOOO

[lucky13]

Ladyfisher, you stated, that to you, the evidence of an IDI theory is the lack of evidence such as duct tape, rope(cord),gloves....you forgot about the rag used to wipe JB down & the practice ransom note too. Think about this...Ramseys had a fireplace... Aunt Pam removed many boxes of items from the active crime scene before the search of the house was completed...And I've surly never heard about the Ramseys getting patted down or body searched before they left the house. Have you? Just something to think about, that's all.

[rosebud]

Originally posted by MyrDawn


Yep, me too. A blow hard enough to do that much damage to her skull and cause that much trauma under the wound, yet cause only minimal swelling. That only makes sense to me if it came very shortley before her death.

IMO, JMO and MOOOOOO

I assume you have medical credentials as impressive as Athena does, right?

[Ames]

Originally posted by MyrDawn


I don't know how JonBenet wore her hair at the White's, but according to the autopsy report, her ponytails were fastened with blue elastic bands, and one of them had a cloth hair tie. It doesn't say anything about a potholder loop on either of her ponytails:

http://denver.rockymountainnews.com/extra/ramsey/autopsy.html

"The scalp is covered by long blonde hair which is fixed in two ponytails, one on top of the head secured by a cloth hair tie and blue elastic band, and one in the lower back of the head secured by a blue elastic band."

Yeah, I had just read somewhere that it MAY be the elastic bands to make potholders with. Doesn't matter, really. The main thing is, how her hair was styled at the Whites, compared to what it looked like when she was found in the basement. IMO

[MyrDawn]

Originally posted by Ames


Yeah, I had just read somewhere that it MAY be the elastic bands to make potholders with. Doesn't matter, really. The main thing is, how her hair was styled at the Whites, compared to what it looked like when she was found in the basement. IMO

Potholder loops aren't elastic bands. They're made out of stretchy knitted jersey type fabric.

[Ames]

Originally posted by MyrDawn


Potholder loops aren't elastic bands. They're made out of stretchy knitted jersey type fabric.

Elastic is what I meant for stretchy, even though they are not the same thing. I had some when I was little, and so did my daughter...they could be used for hair ties. Anyway, I had just read somewhere, that the hair ties in JB's hair "could have been" the bands used in the loom for making potholders. Like I said..it doesn't matter really, what matters is her hairstyle at the Whites. I wonder if they interviewed any of the other people at the party, to see if they remembered how she was wearing her hair. Just curious.....IMO

[MissOtisRegrets]

Wasn't she struck on the top of the head?

[MyrDawn]

Originally posted by MissOtisRegrets
Wasn't she struck on the top of the head?

According to the autopsy report, the blow was on the right side of her head:

http://denver.rockymountainnews.com/extra/ramsey/autopsy.html

"B. Linear, comminuted fracture of right side of skull"

"At the superior extension of the is area of hemorrhage is a linear to comminuted skull fracture which extends from the right occipital to posteroparietal area forward tot he right frontal area across the parietal skull."

[MissOtisRegrets]

Originally posted by MyrDawn


According to the autopsy report, the blow was on the right side of her head:

http://denver.rockymountainnews.com/extra/ramsey/autopsy.html

"B. Linear, comminuted fracture of right side of skull"

"At the superior extension of the is area of hemorrhage is a linear to comminuted skull fracture which extends from the right occipital to posteroparietal area forward tot he right frontal area across the parietal skull."

Thanks. I thought she was struck from above and behind.

Are we looking at the skull from above in these photos? What direction is the skull facing relative to us?

http://hellpainter.tripod.com/jbr/photos2.htm

[Athena]

I was actually going to pay for this interview if I could have from pulled it out of its archives NE however wasn't able to do that.

What bothers me about what was posted is that they are excerpts pulled out of the interview with commentary and like someone else mentioned could have been taken out of context and personally I do not believe something like this is credible information.

I would be willing to bet that a question was posed to PR about JR possibly molesting JBR when she wasn't there or asking her if JR was ever left alone with JBR and her answer would be appropriate within the context. jmo

[WallyCleaver]

Originally posted by LadyFisher
This was no sex game, MissO....I initally thought it could have been...but with everything I've been able to ascertain it wasn't....the lack of semen proves it to me....this perp had a grudge against John...he wanted to defile and rob him of the most valuable thing in the world...this was a brutal premeditated murder...imho

If there was no semen why was the body wiped down? Didn't the cops use fluroescent light to check for semen, and didn't they see the tell tale glow? (Even though there wasn't any left to take samples of for DNA purposes)

If it was a premeditated grudge murder, then why jab the vagina with a bit of broken paintbrush handle? What was that accomplishing? Just killing her would have sufficed.

And why do you assume JB was the most valuable thing in the world to JR? It does sort of relegate Burke to 2nd place in JR's heart, but if he were a normal parent, he'd love each child equally.

I do think it's possible it was premeditated murder. The blow to the head was quite forceful. I don't have the medical credentials to say it couldn't happen accidently, but it does strike one as a very deliberate blow.

[Athena]

Originally posted by WallyCleaver


If there was no semen why was the body wiped down? Didn't the cops use fluroescent light to check for semen, and didn't they see the tell tale glow? (Even though there wasn't any left to take samples of for DNA purposes)

If it was a premeditated grudge murder, then why jab the vagina with a bit of broken paintbrush handle? What was that accomplishing? Just killing her would have sufficed.

And why do you assume JB was the most valuable thing in the world to JR? It does sort of relegate Burke to 2nd place in JR's heart, but if he were a normal parent, he'd love each child equally.

I do think it's possible it was premeditated murder. The blow to the head was quite forceful. I don't have the medical credentials to say it couldn't happen accidently, but it does strike one as a very deliberate blow.

At first they did believe there was semen but after further testing it was determined it was not. Not sure they ever said what it was though.

I have two children who I love equally, but differently - hard to explain though I would put neither of them before the other. She was the baby also and in most families the baby is shown more attention in the earlier years.

I do agree with LadyFisher's post as well.

[MyrDawn]

Originally posted by MissOtisRegrets


Thanks. I thought she was struck from above and behind.

Are we looking at the skull from above in these photos? What direction is the skull facing relative to us?

http://hellpainter.tripod.com/jbr/photos2.htm

IMO, that looks like the top of the skull with the left side facing up. Whether it's a perfectly straight shot of the top or not, I can't tell.

[MyrDawn]

I've asked before, and I'm asking again, will one of you that claim JonBenet was jabbed in the vagina with a broken paintbrush please give me a link to a report that states that.

The autopsy mentions nothing about bits of wood or anything that resembles broken paintbrush bits found there. All it mentions is there is "birefringent foreign material". That would be something like calcite, crystal or quartz, IMO.

[rosebud]

Originally posted by LadyFisher
This post is proof you aren't even reading the posts you quote...I stated very clearly..that I wasn't accusing the housekeeper....reread it....some of us are here to try and figure out why this horrible murder took place.....I do not believe it was done by the parents...and there in my humble opinion is more evidence of an IDI than RDI....the evidence is....LE did not find the remaining duct tape, the remaining rope...the latex gloves (imho was used to penetrate JB)....it's as MissO already commented a long time ago...if you would read others posts...it's the absence of a lot of things that point us to an intruder!


Yeah, right. You say you are not accusing anyone then go ahead and speculate they did it. The Ramseys have no problem accusing anyone possible either.

[MissOtisRegrets]

Originally posted by MyrDawn


IMO, that looks like the top of the skull with the left side facing up. Whether it's a perfectly straight shot of the top or not, I can't tell.

So she was hit on the right half of the top of the skull with a blow that came straight down? Not the right side of the skull with a right to left blow? I'm asking because of that shaken baby syndrome thing of Wecht's. There was ONE trauma to the head that caused the brain to move around and a secondary injury occurred as a result?

Thanks.

[MissOtisRegrets]

Originally posted by MyrDawn
I've asked before, and I'm asking again, will one of you that claim JonBenet was jabbed in the vagina with a broken paintbrush please give me a link to a report that states that.

The autopsy mentions nothing about bits of wood or anything that resembles broken paintbrush bits found there. All it mentions is there is "birefringent foreign material". That would be something like calcite, crystal or quartz, IMO.

I don't know now where the link is that someone posted the other day with Cyril Wecht's thoughts on the autopsy report, but I believe it said he thought the material might be talc.

http://www.lousmit.com/intrudertheory.htm

Vaginal injuries: Something -- possibly one end of the broken paintbrush -- was forced into JonBenet's vagina because her hymen was partly torn. It was bleeding, so it happened before death. Smit said it was the only tear in her vagina, so he doesn't think somebody was sexually assaulting her over a long period of time. Plant materials similar to the paint brush's wood shards are found in her vagina.

[thewhitewitch1]

I am the one who posted the link and I will try to find it again but for now, here is a brief article on Cyril Wechts autopsy conclusions.

http://www.crimelibrary.com/criminal_mind/forensics/cyril_wecht/6.html

Nevermind...I got back in time to edit. Here's the link:

http://www.geocities.com/SiliconValley/Haven/9101/wecht.html

[MissOtisRegrets]

Thanks, TWW1!

:seeya:

MissO

[sunsplashed]

"According to the specialists, her head injury had likely come first. The injury to the head was fully developed, which meant that her heart had beaten for some time after the blow. Also, the bruise to her brain did not immediately shut down all activity in JB's body. The specialists estimated that ten to forty-five minutes might have elapsed between the blow to her head and the cessation of JB's vital function...."

(Page 558, PM/PT)

They theorized that more bleeding and swelling did not occur because the strangulation interruped the flow of blood to her brain.

Some pathologists, of course, believe the head injury came last, but the general consensus is that it came first.

[Mimi428]

Originally posted by Athena


OK I'm confused then. How do you know the cracked crab was already further digested. According to the autopsy the other food was unidentified but was still in her stomach?

G.I. Tract: The esophagus is empty. It is lined by gray-white
mucosa. The stomach contains a small amount (8-11cc) of viscous to green to tan colored thick mucous material without particulate matter identified. The gastic mucosa is autolyzed but contains no areas of hemorrhage or ulceration. The yellow to
light green-tan apparent vegetable or fruit material which may represent fragments of pineapple. No hemorrhage is identified. The remainder of the small intestine is unremarkable. The large
intestine contains soft green fecal material. The appendix is present.

http://www.cnn.com/US/9703/ramsey.case/final.autopsy.html

What "other food was unidentified but was still in her stomach"? I have no idea what you are referring to - help! TIA.

You highlighted this sentence... The stomach contains a small amount (8-11cc) of viscous to green to tan colored thick mucous material without particulate matter identified.

That is not food - that is two teaspoonfuls of snot. A teaspoon = 5cc. Mucous = snot.

(sorry to be gross, but that's what it is)

[sunsplashed]

The pineapple was indentified has almost in perfect condition and very poorly chewed. It was quite recognizable.

From page 558 of PM/PT:

"The pineapple in JB's small intestine was in near-perfect condition - it had sharp edges and looked as if it had been recently eaten and pooly chewed."

[thewhitewitch1]

Regarding the potholder bands....does anyone know why that picture of the loom is in the crime scene photos? What relevance does it have? There must be a reason why it was photographed and keeps appearing to the public. I have seen pictures of it in numerous places. Maybe there is is something about the potholder bands related to the murder...and Ames, the hairstyle could very well have everything to do with it.
I bet you can find something somewhere on the net where the Ramsesys are asked how JB wore her hair that day.

[sunsplashed]

Originally posted by thewhitewitch1
Regarding the potholder bands....does anyone know why that picture of the loom is in the crime scene photos? What relevance does it have? There must be a reason why it was photographed and keeps appearing to the public. I have seen pictures of it in numerous places. Maybe there is is something about the potholder bands related to the murder...and Ames, the hairstyle could very well have everything to do with it.
I bet you can find something somewhere on the net where the Ramsesys are asked how JB wore her hair that day.

Patsy was asked about the potholder loom in one of her police interviews, but I have no idea which one now.

[Athena]

Originally posted by Mimi428


What "other food was unidentified but was still in her stomach"? I have no idea what you are referring to - help! TIA.

You highlighted this sentence... The stomach contains a small amount (8-11cc) of viscous to green to tan colored thick mucous material without particulate matter identified.

That is not food - that is two teaspoonfuls of snot. A teaspoon = 5cc. Mucous = snot.

(sorry to be gross, but that's what it is)

Adjective: particulate paa(r)'tikyulut
Composed of distinct particles
(Particular matter not identified)

i. Secretions in the stomach
The mixture in the stomach is called chyme.
Stomach secretes mucus, hydrochloric acid, gastrin, intrinsic factor, and pepsinogen, a precursor to protease pepsin. Alkaline mucus secreted from the mucus cells protects the epithelial cells from the acidic chyme and pepsin.

http://lists.wayne.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind0004&L=aandp&D=0&P=505

When it enters the stomach, the mush from the mouth gets mixed. The stomach is your body's mechanical and chemical food processor. It's a pouch composed of sheets of muscle that encircle the stomach in different directions. When they contract, the stomach can mix the mush this way and that. The stomach muscles twist and churn the food like you would knead bread dough. The lining of the stomach secretes gastric juices, including hydrochloric acid, which dissolves the food, a protein-splitting enzyme called pepsin, and a fat-digesting enzyme called lipase. Like fruits or vegetables pureed in a blender, the food is churned and mixed with the digestive juices until it resembles thick soup. This glob is called chyme.
http://askdrsears.com/html/4/T042000.asp

Chyme
A thick liquid of partially digested food and stomach juices found in the stomach

http://www.worldcolleges.info/03_c.php

[Ames]

Originally posted by thewhitewitch1
Regarding the potholder bands....does anyone know why that picture of the loom is in the crime scene photos? What relevance does it have? There must be a reason why it was photographed and keeps appearing to the public. I have seen pictures of it in numerous places. Maybe there is is something about the potholder bands related to the murder...and Ames, the hairstyle could very well have everything to do with it.
I bet you can find something somewhere on the net where the Ramsesys are asked how JB wore her hair that day.

I have read that the marks on JB, thought to have been caused by a stun gun, are the exact width apart as the prongs on the loom. The site that I went to (I will see if I can find it again), actually had pictures of a guy that pressed a loom into his arm, and it looks just like the marks on JB. He has measurements (with the ruler in the picture) too....showing the exact space apart as the loom prongs. It was very interesting....IMO...that is why they photographed it. (Could JB have fallen on it when she was first attacked?) That is where I read that the "hair ties" that were in her hair, and scattered around on her bedroom floor, could have very well been potholder bands. I am one of the RDI people, and I think that even if J or P were asked about her hairstyle at the White's party, that they may have very well lied about it. BUT...what about the other people that were there at the party...I wonder if they were interviewed about her hairstyle. I have EVEN read somewhere, that Patsy MAY have sectioned JB's hair, to dye it (afterall...remember...they were leaving for a vacation....can't be caught with dark roots, you know). And that, JB was either too tired to sit for it, or wanted to play with her Christmas toys...and that didn't sit to well with P. Thats just another theory thats floating around out there, though. Of course...NOBODY but JOHN, now...and maybe Burke...knows the truth. IMO

[sunsplashed]

I always thought the marks were caused by the potholder loom, too. I've read that somewhere, I think in one of the police statements, but I can't remember for sure.

JMO

[sunsplashed]

But the pineapple in JB's intestine was in "near perfect" condition and barely chewed. The edges were sharply defined. It wasn't "mush" at all.

From PM/PT

[Ames]

Originally posted by sunsplashed
I always thought the marks were caused by the potholder loom, too. I've read that somewhere, I think in one of the police statements, but I can't remember for sure.

JMO

Hey, we may be onto something here...maybe we can solve this case afterall....(geez...wouldn't THAT be nice?) IMO Yeah, there had to be a reason for the police to photograph that loom. In my opinion also....the marks were caused by it.

[sunsplashed]

Originally posted by MyrDawn
I've asked before, and I'm asking again, will one of you that claim JonBenet was jabbed in the vagina with a broken paintbrush please give me a link to a report that states that.

The autopsy mentions nothing about bits of wood or anything that resembles broken paintbrush bits found there. All it mentions is there is "birefringent foreign material". That would be something like calcite, crystal or quartz, IMO.

I don't think anyone knows for sure what was inserted into her vagina, but on page 559 of PM/PT, it says that what was found ws a microspcopic splinter of cellulose that look like that wood from the paintbrush. I think it's just conjecture, not a positive match. And, some of the forensic pathologists say the cellulose dated from the injuries she suffered the night of her death, while others say the cellulose dated from an older vaginal injury.

Once again, even experts do not agree.

JMO

[sunsplashed]

Originally posted by Ames


Hey, we may be onto something here...maybe we can solve this case afterall....(geez...wouldn't THAT be nice?) IMO Yeah, there had to be a reason for the police to photograph that loom. In my opinion also....the marks were caused by it.

Tomorrow, I'll see if I can find the place in the police interview where the BPD asks Patsy about the loom. I know I read it in one interview, but I can't remember which one now.

[Mimi428]

Originally posted by Athena


Adjective: particulate paa(r)'tikyulut
Composed of distinct particles
(Particular matter not identified)



Okay, I think I see the source of the confusion. I believe you are interpreting this to be essentially saying that particulate matter was PRESENT, but not identified.

My interpretation is that there was no particulate matter TO identify in this 8-11 cc mixture of mucous.

Refer to what was already processed through the stomach & into the upper part of the small intestine - the material which was believed to be pineapple. If you comprehend that all of that got to the small intestine in a still identifiable form, you will understand that when the coroner says "not identified" - it is because there was no particulate matter in the stomach TO identify - it was simply the 2 teaspoonfuls of sticky (viscous) mucous.

[Ames]

Originally posted by sunsplashed


Tomorrow, I'll see if I can find the place in the police interview where the BPD asks Patsy about the loom. I know I read it in one interview, but I can't remember which one now.

That would be great if you could find that interview. I don't think that I have ever read it before. It would be interesting to see what she has to say about it, though. Let me know if you would like for me to dig up those pictures of the guy with the loom marks on his arm...showing the exact distance between the loom prongs, and the marks on JB and him.

[sunsplashed]

Originally posted by Ames


That would be great if you could find that interview. I don't think that I have ever read it before. It would be interesting to see what she has to say about it, though. Let me know if you would like for me to dig up those pictures of the guy with the loom marks on his arm...showing the exact distance between the loom prongs, and the marks on JB and him.

Here is something interesting about the potholder loom and the injuries it can cause:

http://ruthees_library.tripod.com/stungun.html

[Ames]

Originally posted by sunsplashed


Here is something interesting about the potholder loom and the injuries it can cause:

http://ruthees_library.tripod.com/stungun.html

THANK YOU ....THANK YOU...thats the one that I was talking about....I couldn't find it!! Hey, I have put this on a thread...but you need to check it out...JB's Acual swingset is for sale at EBAY , starting bid...$15,000.00....don't you think this is strange!!!

http://cgi.ebay.com/Actual-Jon-Benet-Ramsey-Swing-Set-Play-Deck_W0QQitemZ170029395335QQihZ007QQcategoryZ16515 QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem?hash=item170 029395335

[rashomon]

Originally posted by WallyCleaver


If there was no semen why was the body wiped down? Didn't the cops use fluroescent light to check for semen, and didn't they see the tell tale glow? (Even though there wasn't any left to take samples of for DNA purposes)

If it was a premeditated grudge murder, then why jab the vagina with a bit of broken paintbrush handle? What was that accomplishing? Just killing her would have sufficed.

And why do you assume JB was the most valuable thing in the world to JR? It does sort of relegate Burke to 2nd place in JR's heart, but if he were a normal parent, he'd love each child equally.

I do think it's possible it was premeditated murder. The blow to the head was quite forceful. I don't have the medical credentials to say it couldn't happen accidently, but it does strike one as a very deliberate blow.
And such a deliberate blow could have been struck by an enraged parent. Not that the parent meant to kill JB, but the parent snapped and lost it and then realized to her horror that irreparable damage had been done. Most killings of children by parents are rage killings.
Good question as to why JB was wiped down. No semen was found on JB, which points to this being no sex crime. It seems that what was wiped off the child was blood.
But why wipe her down if you want to stage a sexual predator scenario?
Some say this was some act of 'undoing' by the parents, for despite their staged scene, this still was their child.

But I personally believe that JB was wiped down because the parent who had staged the scene wanted to see if the paintbrush wound she had inflicted for staging purposes looked convincing enough, and for that to see, the blood from this wound had to be wiped away.

[rashomon]

Originally posted by Ames
Does anyone have any idea how JonBenet's hair was styled at the White's Christmas party?
...
HOW did the "hair ties" (two of them) get into her hair? Who put them there? And why? I for some reason, could not imagine Patsy letting JB wear her hair like that to a Christmas party, it has been down in every picture that I have ever seen of her, and I could not especially imagine P letting JB wear the things used to make potholders, in her hair....for a fancy Christmas party. If anyone has any info on this....please answer. THANKS!
I agree: no way would Patsy have let JB attend a Christmas party with her hair pulled back like that.
It has been speculated that maybe Patsy was going to dye JB's hair and a fight ensued. JB's hair was indeed freshly dyed (one can see it in the autopsy picture from the back of her neck), but I think Patsy did this before going to the White's Christmas party and not after. And no one dyeing someone's hair would put a velvet cloth tie in the hair to hold it back, for it would get dirty.

The only explanation that makes sense to me: JB's hair was done in that strange way to hide the head wound. I know the head wound was not visible from the outside, but still this could have been an attempt by the parents to direct the attention away from the part of JB's head where the blow was struck.

[MyrDawn]

Originally posted by MissOtisRegrets


So she was hit on the right half of the top of the skull with a blow that came straight down? Not the right side of the skull with a right to left blow? I'm asking because of that shaken baby syndrome thing of Wecht's. There was ONE trauma to the head that caused the brain to move around and a secondary injury occurred as a result?

Thanks.

From the picture, it looks like it was hit near the top on the right side, but I can't tell if the blow came straight down or not. From the bruising on the left side, I'd imagine the blow would have come more from the right than straight down, though.

Since our brain floats within the skull, surrounded by a watery fluid known as cerebrospinal fluid, it moves at a different pace from the skull. That fluid acts as a shock absorber to cushion the brain under normal circumstances...falls, small bumps, etc., but under extraordinary force, such as a violent shake (shaken baby syndrome), or in a motor vehicle accident, the brain can slam against the opposite side of the skull, causing bruising in that location.

MOO

[MyrDawn]

Originally posted by MissOtisRegrets


I don't know now where the link is that someone posted the other day with Cyril Wecht's thoughts on the autopsy report, but I believe it said he thought the material might be talc.

http://www.lousmit.com/intrudertheory.htm

Vaginal injuries: Something -- possibly one end of the broken paintbrush -- was forced into JonBenet's vagina because her hymen was partly torn. It was bleeding, so it happened before death. Smit said it was the only tear in her vagina, so he doesn't think somebody was sexually assaulting her over a long period of time. Plant materials similar to the paint brush's wood shards are found in her vagina.

Thanks, MissO!
I wonder where the "plant materials" came from. Meyer did the autopsy and he doens't mention anything about plant materials in her vagina in the autopsy report. Wouldn't he be the one that would have found them?

[MyrDawn]

Originally posted by sunsplashed
"According to the specialists, her head injury had likely come first. The injury to the head was fully developed, which meant that her heart had beaten for some time after the blow. Also, the bruise to her brain did not immediately shut down all activity in JB's body. The specialists estimated that ten to forty-five minutes might have elapsed between the blow to her head and the cessation of JB's vital function...."

(Page 558, PM/PT)

They theorized that more bleeding and swelling did not occur because the strangulation interruped the flow of blood to her brain.

Some pathologists, of course, believe the head injury came last, but the general consensus is that it came first.

The coroner that did the autopsy, and saw the injuries in person, believes the strangulation came first. Did those specialists view it in person, or from photographs?

[MyrDawn]

Originally posted by Mimi428


What "other food was unidentified but was still in her stomach"? I have no idea what you are referring to - help! TIA.

You highlighted this sentence... The stomach contains a small amount (8-11cc) of viscous to green to tan colored thick mucous material without particulate matter identified.

That is not food - that is two teaspoonfuls of snot. A teaspoon = 5cc. Mucous = snot.

(sorry to be gross, but that's what it is)

Snot? :D

Sounds more like bile mucous to me.

MOO

[MyrDawn]

Originally posted by rosebud



Yeah, right. You say you are not accusing anyone then go ahead and speculate they did it. The Ramseys have no problem accusing anyone possible either.

Very sarcastic, IMO.

[rosebud]

Originally posted by MyrDawn


Very sarcastic, IMO.

Yes, it was.

[LadyFisher]

Originally posted by WallyCleaver


If there was no semen why was the body wiped down? Didn't the cops use fluroescent light to check for semen, and didn't they see the tell tale glow? (Even though there wasn't any left to take samples of for DNA purposes)

If it was a premeditated grudge murder, then why jab the vagina with a bit of broken paintbrush handle? What was that accomplishing? Just killing her would have sufficed.

And why do you assume JB was the most valuable thing in the world to JR? It does sort of relegate Burke to 2nd place in JR's heart, but if he were a normal parent, he'd love each child equally.

I do think it's possible it was premeditated murder. The blow to the head was quite forceful. I don't have the medical credentials to say it couldn't happen accidently, but it does strike one as a very deliberate blow. I don't have a clue to what this guy was thinking really...so why he wiped down the body, I don't know...that is really a sign of a pedophile..but some of the other things that he did points me to a perp that despised the Ramseys especially John......of course John loved his son..but I think in the perps mind, JB would have been the one to harm...she was the one making headlines in the paper...she was at one time, I believe, Little Miss Colorado....etc...he wanted to hurt John so badly and what better way of doing it than brutally murdering and violating his little girl...he obviously had inside information...and the ransom note idea imo was formed while he was in the home awaiting their arrival...he either entered through the window well or with a key...this person imo was a young adult..I think so many references to movies and games in the ransom note proves it......don't have time to go further...but I don't understand a mind like this, I don't think any of us do....but this was a horrible, brutal killing from someone filled with hate! imho Have a great day! :)

[MyrDawn]

Originally posted by LadyFisher
I don't have a clue to what this guy was thinking really...so why he wiped down the body, I don't know...that is really a sign of a pedophile..but some of the other things that he did points me to a perp that despised the Ramseys especially John......of course John loved his son..but I think in the perps mind, JB would have been the one to harm...she was the one making headlines in the paper...she was at one time, I believe, Little Miss Colorado....etc...he wanted to hurt John so badly and what better way of doing it than brutally murdering and violating his little girl...he obviously had inside information...and the ransom note idea imo was formed while he was in the home awaiting their arrival...he either entered through the window well or with a key...this person imo was a young adult..I think so many references to movies and games in the ransom note proves it......don't have time to go further...but I don't understand a mind like this, I don't think any of us do....but this was a horrible, brutal killing from someone filled with hate! imho Have a great day! :)

It may not have mattered which one he killed. He'd know killing either of the children would hurt the Ramsey's terribly. He may have chosen JonBenet because she was younger and smaller, therefore easier to handle.

MOO

[Ames]

Originally posted by rashomon

I agree: no way would Patsy have let JB attend a Christmas party with her hair pulled back like that.
It has been speculated that maybe Patsy was going to dye JB's hair and a fight ensued. JB's hair was indeed freshly dyed (one can see it in the autopsy picture from the back of her neck), but I think Patsy did this before going to the White's Christmas party and not after. And no one dyeing someone's hair would put a velvet cloth tie in the hair to hold it back, for it would get dirty.

The only explanation that makes sense to me: JB's hair was done in that strange way to hide the head wound. I know the head wound was not visible from the outside, but still this could have been an attempt by the parents to direct the attention away from the part of JB's head where the blow was struck.

Whats weird is, the fact that in one of the autopsy photos, you can clearly see her dark roots (on the top of her head)...and underneath in the back, it had already been dyed, as clearly shown in autopsy photos. Other posters have commented on her dark roots too ....so, (as a person that does hair), I think that P had maybe STARTED the hair dye in the back...and for some reason, did not make it to the top of her scalp (head). Normally, it would be done working front to back....BUT...its not necessary to go in any specific order. Patsy, may have been going from back to front. She got the back portion done, there was an argument, and the rest is history. The velvet cloth tie, could have been added after the fact. Just another theory....IMO.

[thewhitewitch1]

Hey guys. I was up very late last night reading the 1997 and 1998 interregations of Patsy. I uncovered a few very interesting things. She was asked how JB would wear her hair to bed and P said in a single ponytail. How true...don't know.
She also slipped up twice about what JB was wearing at the Whites party and said she was wearing a velvet dress. You can find the entire transcript on acandyrose.com.
I had never seen evidence that JB was redressed that night until now. This came out while she was looking at pictures of the scene and asked to identify items.
Very long read but interesting. I found the comment about the dress in the '98 interregation.

[MyrDawn]

Originally posted by thewhitewitch1
Regarding the potholder bands....does anyone know why that picture of the loom is in the crime scene photos? What relevance does it have? There must be a reason why it was photographed and keeps appearing to the public. I have seen pictures of it in numerous places. Maybe there is is something about the potholder bands related to the murder...and Ames, the hairstyle could very well have everything to do with it.
I bet you can find something somewhere on the net where the Ramsesys are asked how JB wore her hair that day.

I've seen several sites with closeup pictures of the potholder loom on the internet. The title under the one on ACandyRose is "Tabloid Photograph JonBenet Nightstand".

Some people speculate that it was the potholder loom that made the marks on JonBenet that some think came from a stun gun. Others speculate it was loops from the loom that were in JonBenet's hair and near her body.

[sunsplashed]

Originally posted by MyrDawn


The coroner that did the autopsy, and saw the injuries in person, believes the strangulation came first. Did those specialists view it in person, or from photographs?

The coroner that did the autopsy is John Meyer.

I posted links in the past to HIS OWN WORDS stating that even he wasn't sure which injury came first. He said he first would think one, then the other.

The consensus among top forensic pathologists is that the head injury came first.

Links to John Meyer's statements already given in previous posts.

[sunsplashed]

Originally posted by MyrDawn


It may not have mattered which one he killed. He'd know killing either of the children would hurt the Ramsey's terribly. He may have chosen JonBenet because she was younger and smaller, therefore easier to handle.

MOO

But Burke was more shy and quiet. According to Nedra, he would have been far less likely to fight back.

JMO

[Ames]

Originally posted by thewhitewitch1
Hey guys. I was up very late last night reading the 1997 and 1998 interregations of Patsy. I uncovered a few very interesting things. She was asked how JB would wear her hair to bed and P said in a single ponytail. How true...don't know.
She also slipped up twice about what JB was wearing at the Whites party and said she was wearing a velvet dress. You can find the entire transcript on acandyrose.com.
I had never seen evidence that JB was redressed that night until now. This came out while she was looking at pictures of the scene and asked to identify items.
Very long read but interesting. I found the comment about the dress in the '98 interregation.

WELLLL....that would mean that JB was awake at some point, for her hair to be put into a ponytail for bed (she had two ponytails when she was "found"). Her parents said that she was sleeping..she fell asleep in the car, they brought her in and put her to bed. SOMEBODY'S LYING!!! (Sorry...I wasn't yelling at you...just trying to emphasize). SOOO..IF she was asleep when they brought her in and put her to bed....did elves come in and put her hair in two ponytails, while she was sleeping? Thats VERY interesting about Patsy saying that she was wearing a velvet dress to the party. GEEZ....we need to find some pictures of the White's Christmas party. Fleet took some of JB and P...and showed them to police, to show that P was wearing a red sweater...when red fibers were found on and around JB's body.

IMO

[sunsplashed]

Originally posted by Ames


THANK YOU ....THANK YOU...thats the one that I was talking about....I couldn't find it!! Hey, I have put this on a thread...but you need to check it out...JB's Acual swingset is for sale at EBAY , starting bid...$15,000.00....don't you think this is strange!!!

http://cgi.ebay.com/Actual-Jon-Benet-Ramsey-Swing-Set-Play-Deck_W0QQitemZ170029395335QQihZ007QQcategoryZ16515 QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem?hash=item170 029395335

You're welcome. Glad I could find it.

I think some nutjob got ahold of JB's swing set and is trying to sell it on eBay. Sensationalism. Sad, but it happens a lot.

JMO

[Ames]

Originally posted by sunsplashed


You're welcome. Glad I could find it.

I think some nutjob got ahold of JB's swing set and is trying to sell it on eBay. Sensationalism. Sad, but it happens a lot.

JMO

Yeah, he would HAVE to be a nutjob...and the person that buys it has to be a nutjob, too.
IMO

[sunsplashed]

Originally posted by Ames


Whats weird is, the fact that in one of the autopsy photos, you can clearly see her dark roots (on the top of her head)...and underneath in the back, it had already been dyed, as clearly shown in autopsy photos. Other posters have commented on her dark roots too ....so, (as a person that does hair), I think that P had maybe STARTED the hair dye in the back...and for some reason, did not make it to the top of her scalp (head). Normally, it would be done working front to back....BUT...its not necessary to go in any specific order. Patsy, may have been going from back to front. She got the back portion done, there was an argument, and the rest is history. The velvet cloth tie, could have been added after the fact. Just another theory....IMO.

Strange about her hair having already been colored in the back.

Of course, the skin "shrinks" (not really the correct word) after death, so it could have pulled tighter in the front, exposing the natural light brown hair, but not as tight in the back.

I don't know. I only know it looks more and more and more like an accident happened in the house and then there was an elaborate (but clumsy and very obvious) attempt at staging done.

Personally, I am SURE the Ramseys are the guilty parties. Both of them. Until I see clear and convincing evidence otherwise, I'll always believe the Ramseys did it.

Really sad, because if the BPD had let the FBI take charge of the case, it probably would have been solved within a week.

JMO

[MyrDawn]

Originally posted by sunsplashed


The coroner that did the autopsy is John Meyer.

I posted links in the past to HIS OWN WORDS stating that even he wasn't sure which injury came first. He said he first would think one, then the other.

The consensus among top forensic pathologists is that the head injury came first.

Links to John Meyer's statements already given in previous posts.

He did say he wasn't sure which came first, but he put the strangulation first in the autopsy report, because that seemed most likely to him, based on the minimal bleeding and swelling.

Nobody is postive, but I think Meyer would be the best to judge which would be most likely.

[Ames]

Originally posted by sunsplashed


Strange about her hair having already been colored in the back.

Of course, the skin "shrinks" (not really the correct word) after death, so it could have pulled tighter in the front, exposing the natural light brown hair, but not as tight in the back.

I don't know. I only know it looks more and more and more like an accident happened in the house and then there was an elaborate (but clumsy and very obvious) attempt at staging done.

Personally, I am SURE the Ramseys are the guilty parties. Both of them. Until I see clear and convincing evidence otherwise, I'll always believe the Ramseys did it.

Really sad, because if the BPD had let the FBI take charge of the case, it probably would have been solved within a week.

JMO

The skin doesn't start shrinking immediately, though (from what I have heard). That doesn't start until after a person is already buried. I also learned this in Cosmetology School...a long time ago, it was thought that after death, nails and hair continued to grow (HOW? I have NO idea...LOL)....BUT...it was later determined, (by someone with common sense) that the skin actually shrunk, making the nails and hair appear longer. BUT..that does not happen right after death...it takes awhile. So, there is no way that her scalp would have shrunk (shrinked?) in that short amount of time. SO...there goes THAT theory out the window. I agree...I think that the Ramsey's are involved...I don't think that it was intentional....I just don't buy that. But, I am with you on this one, the FBI should have had this case from day one.
IMO

[MyrDawn]

Originally posted by sunsplashed


But Burke was more shy and quiet. According to Nedra, he would have been far less likely to fight back.

JMO

Less likely if he was being kidnapped or injured? And, how would the intruder know? Nedra was his grandmother, she'd know the kids personalities much better than someone that didn't know them so well, IMO.

[sunsplashed]

Originally posted by MyrDawn


Less likely if he was being kidnapped or injured? And, how would the intruder know? Nedra was his grandmother, she'd know the kids personalities much better than someone that didn't know them so well, IMO.

If he knew that house well enough to get around in the dark, if he knew the basement window had been (allegedly) broken, if he knew the amount of John's bonus (whatever it was properly called) was $118,000, if he knew JB's dog, Jacques, was already at the Barnhills' and wouldn't be barking, if he knew JB loved pineapple, if he knew that the Ramseys always used the BACK circular staircase, and on and on and on with all the intimate details an "intruder" would have had to know, he certainly would have known which child would have been least likely to fight back and which child was John's favorite...Burke.

JMO

[MyrDawn]

Originally posted by sunsplashed


If he knew that house well enough to get around in the dark, if he knew the basement window had been (allegedly) broken, if he knew the amount of John's bonus (whatever it was properly called) was $118,000, if he knew JB's dog, Jacques, was already at the Barnhills' and wouldn't be barking, if he knew JB loved pineapple, if he knew that the Ramseys always used the BACK circular staircase, and on and on and on with all the intimate details an "intruder" would have had to know, he certainly would have known which child would have been least likely to fight back and which child was John's favorite...Burke.

JMO

Why would he have had to know ALL those things???

[Mimi428]

Originally posted by MyrDawn


He did say he wasn't sure which came first, but he put the strangulation first in the autopsy report, because that seemed most likely to him, based on the minimal bleeding and swelling.



Link, please to that statement from Meyer on why he put strangulation first.

TIA

Don't tell me why YOU think he put it first - tell me where HE says why he put it first.

Listing it first as the cause of death could be simply because he knows, as a coroner, that the time factor for causing death is much less for ligature strangulation than it is for the head injury. IOW, once the ligature was applied with force, death would result in less than 15 minutes.

It is entirely possible to inflict a severe head injury first which will eventually be fatal - but before enough time has elapsed to cause death a ligature strangulation can be carried out which kills the person more quickly than the head injury. Doesn't mean the ligature was applied first - it simply means it creates a faster death than the blow to the skull.

So....if it is your claim that the reason Dr. Meyer put strangulation first is because he think it HAPPENED first - I definitely want to see evidence that he SAID so.

[rashomon]

Originally posted by MissOtisRegrets
http://www.lousmit.com/intrudertheory.htm

Vaginal injuries: Something -- possibly one end of the broken paintbrush -- was forced into JonBenet's vagina because her hymen was partly torn. It was bleeding, so it happened before death. Smit said it was the only tear in her vagina, so he doesn't think somebody was sexually assaulting her over a long period of time. Plant materials similar to the paint brush's wood shards are found in her vagina.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Smit is wrong re JB's hymen being 'partly torn': JB's hymen consisted of a rim of tissue going from the two to ten o'clock position, i. e. a large part part of the hymen was already gone, and this was not due to the fresh injury inflicted to her vagina.
There was no 'tear' in her vagina either, but an instrument had been jabbed in the vaginal vestibule which caused some bleeding.

Dr. McCann, who unlike Lou Smit, is one of the leading pediatric experts on sexual abuse, noted that the vaginal orifice measured twice the size normal for a child of JB's age, he mentioned the reddening of the vaginal walls, irregularities of the edge of the hymen, thickening of the hymeneal rim at the 7 o' clock position, and exposure of vaginal structures (the rugae) which are normally covered. All this combined led him to conclude that JB had been the victim of chronic abuse. and virtually all the other experts on the panel agred with Dr. McCann on that.

And when Det. Jane Harmer showed to members of the BPD slides of JB's damaged vaginal tissue compared to slides of vaginal tissue of a healthy six-year-old child, the difference was glaringly obvious even to non-medical experts.

[WallyCleaver]

Originally posted by LadyFisher
I don't have a clue to what this guy was thinking really...so why he wiped down the body, I don't know...that is really a sign of a pedophile..but some of the other things that he did points me to a perp that despised the Ramseys especially John......of course John loved his son..but I think in the perps mind, JB would have been the one to harm...she was the one making headlines in the paper...she was at one time, I believe, Little Miss Colorado....etc...he wanted to hurt John so badly and what better way of doing it than brutally murdering and violating his little girl...he obviously had inside information...and the ransom note idea imo was formed while he was in the home awaiting their arrival...he either entered through the window well or with a key...this person imo was a young adult..I think so many references to movies and games in the ransom note proves it......don't have time to go further...but I don't understand a mind like this, I don't think any of us do....but this was a horrible, brutal killing from someone filled with hate! imho Have a great day! :)

It's possible that we can't understand a mind like that because there is no mind like that.

You say it yourself in your post -he looks in one instance like a paedophile, but other things suggest -to you- a revenge killer. No wonder we have trouble telling what he's thinking - he has a split personality :-) He's a revenge paedophile.

Of course we have to remember that he's also a kidnapper, albeit not a very good one. Bad form leaving the body in the house like that.

So yes, it's difficult to understand the mind of a kidnapper/paedophile/revenge killer. Possibly because no such mind exists.

[sunsplashed]

Originally posted by sunsplashed


If he knew that house well enough to get around in the dark, if he knew the basement window had been (allegedly) broken, if he knew the amount of John's bonus (whatever it was properly called) was $118,000, if he knew JB's dog, Jacques, was already at the Barnhills' and wouldn't be barking, if he knew JB loved pineapple, if he knew that the Ramseys always used the BACK circular staircase, and on and on and on with all the intimate details an "intruder" would have had to know, he certainly would have known which child would have been least likely to fight back and which child was John's favorite...Burke.

JMO

It's self-evident. Because IF there was an intruder, he:

1. Was able to get around in the house in the dark and knew the layout very well;

2. Knew the basement window was broken "last summer" (after all, it was hidden by a grate and not visible from the outside);

3. Used the amount of John's bonus in the ransom note;

4. Knew the dog was at the Barnhills' and wouldn't be barking to alert others;

5. Gave JB pineapple instead of something else;

6. Left the "note" on the back stairs and not on the kitchen counter or on JB's bed, which would have been more logical for an intruder;

7. Got Burke's Swiss Army knife out of its hiding place;

And knew SO much more ONLY a Ramsey would know.

JMO

[sunsplashed]

Originally posted by WallyCleaver


It's possible that we can't understand a mind like that because there is no mind like that.

You say it yourself in your post -he looks in one instance like a paedophile, but other things suggest -to you- a revenge killer. No wonder we have trouble telling what he's thinking - he has a split personality :-) He's a revenge paedophile.

Of course we have to remember that he's also a kidnapper, albeit not a very good one. Bad form leaving the body in the house like that.

So yes, it's difficult to understand the mind of a kidnapper/paedophile/revenge killer. Possibly because no such mind exists.

You're right, Wally.

He was a killer so consumed with jealousy of John (!) that he was capable of the brutal murder of a six-year-old, who was also a pedophile, who was also a kidnapper, who was also intimately familiar with the details of the Ramseys' house and their life, who was also inept.

(!!!!!!)

No, no such mind exists.

JMO

[WallyCleaver]

Re: revenge killing.

Isn't revenge killing pretty rare? Can anyone cite some cases where someone killed another person's child out of revenge?

[LadyFisher]

Originally posted by WallyCleaver
Re: revenge killing.

Isn't revenge killing pretty rare? Can anyone cite some cases where someone killed another person's child out of revenge? Has there ever been another case like this where the parents killed their child in this manner....or staged an accident in this exact manner? NO! imho

[WallyCleaver]

Originally posted by LadyFisher
Has there ever been another case like this where the parents killed their child in this manner....or staged an accident in this exact manner? NO! imho

I don't know about the manner, but certainly there are many cases of parents killing children.

Killing someone's child as revenge ? For what? A bad business deal? It just strikes me as very unlikely.

[LadyFisher]

Originally posted by WallyCleaver


It's possible that we can't understand a mind like that because there is no mind like that.

You say it yourself in your post -he looks in one instance like a paedophile, but other things suggest -to you- a revenge killer. No wonder we have trouble telling what he's thinking - he has a split personality :-) He's a revenge paedophile.

Of course we have to remember that he's also a kidnapper, albeit not a very good one. Bad form leaving the body in the house like that.

So yes, it's difficult to understand the mind of a kidnapper/paedophile/revenge killer. Possibly because no such mind exists. I know it sounds wild, Wally....but there truly are crazies out there in our world....we do know that pedophiles do kidnap children.....we do know pedophiles are truly messed up mentally..the best example is JMK...don't tell me that you think he is normal....I wouldn't find it odd that a kidnapper with pedophile tendencies could hate a man of John's stature....the hate or shall we say strong resentment against John is notible in the ransom note! imho.....I'm not saying that's exactly what happened...I have a bunch of theories...only two people know exactly...JB who is now deceased and the true killer. Please excuse my typonese today...! :)

[sunsplashed]

Originally posted by LadyFisher
I know it sounds wild, Wally....but there truly are crazies out there in our world....we do know that pedophiles do kidnap children.....we do know pedophiles are truly messed up mentally..the best example is JMK...don't tell me that you think he is normal....I wouldn't find it odd that a kidnapper with pedophile tendencies could hate a man of John's stature....the hate or shall we say strong resentment against John is notible in the ransom note! imho.....I'm not saying that's exactly what happened...I have a bunch of theories...only two people know exactly...JB who is now deceased and the true killer. Please excuse my typonese today...! :)

LadyFisher, where do you see any hate for John in the ransom note? I'm not being disrespectful to you, and you are as entitled to you opinion as any one of us, but I just don't see that.

All I see is: Don't call the police.

JMO

[LadyFisher]

Originally posted by WallyCleaver


I don't know about the manner, but certainly there are many cases of parents killing children.

Killing someone's child as revenge ? For what? A bad business deal? It just strikes me as very unlikely. John Douglas, the former FBI profiler seemed to think it could have been a revenge murder.....but he had another theory, too....I think he suspected this because of the hatred expressed in the ransom note...and the manner in which JB died....he has much better credentials than I do........but, I cannot begin to understand the mind of a killer....I'm just guessing here..as those who speculate on how the Ramseys did it and why! :seeya:

[rosebud]

Originally posted by LadyFisher
John Douglas, the former FBI profiler seemed to think it could have been a revenge murder.....but he had another theory, too....I think he suspected this because of the hatred expressed in the ransom note...and the manner in which JB died....he has much better credentials than I do........but, I cannot begin to understand the mind of a killer....I'm just guessing here..as those who speculate on how the Ramseys did it and why! :seeya:

John Douglas was also on the Ramsey's payroll while "investigating the case."

[sunsplashed]

Originally posted by LadyFisher
John Douglas, the former FBI profiler seemed to think it could have been a revenge murder.....but he had another theory, too....I think he suspected this because of the hatred expressed in the ransom note...and the manner in which JB died....he has much better credentials than I do........but, I cannot begin to understand the mind of a killer....I'm just guessing here..as those who speculate on how the Ramseys did it and why! :seeya:

LadyFisher, I have to discount what John Douglas says just as I have to discount much of what Steve Thomas and Lou Smit say. All three had/have an "agenda." None are objective about the facts.

JMO

[sunsplashed]

Originally posted by rosebud


John Douglas was also on the Ramsey's payroll while "investigating the case."

Right, that's why I just discount what he says. He had an agenda and didn't want to lose his paycheck.

JMO

[LadyFisher]

Originally posted by sunsplashed


Right, that's why I just discount what he says. He had an agenda and didn't want to lose his paycheck.

JMO I knew you folks would say that...but the man imho does have integrity...he himself said he's been called a hired gun or a media hound....he was payed a fee by the Ramseys...but, before he gave his analysis...he warned them..that if he came to the conclusion they were guilty he wouldn't fail to reveal it!!! Have a great evening folks,,,gotta run, again! :seeya:

[thewhitewitch1]

Originally posted by MyrDawn


The coroner that did the autopsy, and saw the injuries in person, believes the strangulation came first. Did those specialists view it in person, or from photographs?

Myrdawn....Cyril Wecht analyzed the original autopsy and gave it to the general public in "layman" terms and then gave his opinions on what had happened based on the autopsy.

[Eagle1]

Originally posted by Ames


......... Let me know if you would like for me to dig up those pictures of the guy with the loom marks on his arm...showing the exact distance between the loom prongs, and the marks on JB and him.

That would be most interesting, Ames. Sure hope you can find them.

[Ames]

Originally posted by rashomon

<snipped>
But I personally believe that JB was wiped down because the parent who had staged the scene wanted to see if the paintbrush wound she had inflicted for staging purposes looked convincing enough, and for that to see, the blood from this wound had to be wiped away.

WOW...never thought of that, I bet you are right. IMO

[Athena]

Originally posted by MyrDawn


I've seen several sites with closeup pictures of the potholder loom on the internet. The title under the one on ACandyRose is "Tabloid Photograph JonBenet Nightstand".

Some people speculate that it was the potholder loom that made the marks on JonBenet that some think came from a stun gun. Others speculate it was loops from the loom that were in JonBenet's hair and near her body.

I had read someone surmise the marks coming from that loom a long time ago. The problem with that is those would have caused an indentation in the skin not an abrasion. jmo

[MyrDawn]

Originally posted by sunsplashed


I don't think anyone knows for sure what was inserted into her vagina, but on page 559 of PM/PT, it says that what was found ws a microspcopic splinter of cellulose that look like that wood from the paintbrush. I think it's just conjecture, not a positive match. And, some of the forensic pathologists say the cellulose dated from the injuries she suffered the night of her death, while others say the cellulose dated from an older vaginal injury.

Once again, even experts do not agree.

JMO

I agree. That's why I was confused by seeing so many posts saying JonBenet was jabbed with a paintbrush that night and wanted a link. The truth is, nobody knows if she was or not. Whether or not she was jabbed that night, and what she was jabbed with if she was jabbed, was never determined.

[MyrDawn]

Originally posted by Mimi428


Link, please to that statement from Meyer on why he put strangulation first.

TIA

Don't tell me why YOU think he put it first - tell me where HE says why he put it first.

Listing it first as the cause of death could be simply because he knows, as a coroner, that the time factor for causing death is much less for ligature strangulation than it is for the head injury. IOW, once the ligature was applied with force, death would result in less than 15 minutes.

It is entirely possible to inflict a severe head injury first which will eventually be fatal - but before enough time has elapsed to cause death a ligature strangulation can be carried out which kills the person more quickly than the head injury. Doesn't mean the ligature was applied first - it simply means it creates a faster death than the blow to the skull.

So....if it is your claim that the reason Dr. Meyer put strangulation first is because he think it HAPPENED first - I definitely want to see evidence that he SAID so.

Why don't you tell me why you think he'd lie in the autopsy report?

[MyrDawn]

Originally posted by sunsplashed


It's self-evident. Because IF there was an intruder, he:

1. Was able to get around in the house in the dark and knew the layout very well;

2. Knew the basement window was broken "last summer" (after all, it was hidden by a grate and not visible from the outside);

3. Used the amount of John's bonus in the ransom note;

4. Knew the dog was at the Barnhills' and wouldn't be barking to alert others;

5. Gave JB pineapple instead of something else;

6. Left the "note" on the back stairs and not on the kitchen counter or on JB's bed, which would have been more logical for an intruder;

7. Got Burke's Swiss Army knife out of its hiding place;

And knew SO much more ONLY a Ramsey would know.

JMO

1. He didn't have to have the house memorized. A flashlight works quite nicely in the dark.

2. He didn't have to know about the basement window. A key to the door would have worked quite nicely to enter the house. He could easily have seen the basement window once he was in the basement after taking JonBenet there.

3. As I've said, every one of John's pay stubs for most of the year had the amount on them. He could have seen it several months before the murder and remembered it when writing the ransom note.

4. He might have been watching the house earlier and seen them take the dog there.

5. I don't know of any kid that doesn't like pineapple. Maybe he'd have offered her something else if she didn't want pineapple. He might have had a pocketfull of candy.

6. It doesn't seem logical for him to go back up to the 2nd floor and leave the note on her bed. The 3rd step from the bottom of the stairs is quite visible from a distance. And, it's a logical way for Patsy to come downstairs in the morning. It reasonable to think the note would have been found pretty fast even if she hadn't come down those stairs. The minute they realized JonBenet wasn't in bed they'd have looked all over and come across it.

7. Burke might found that knife himself, or JonBenet, and put it in the basement.

IMO, JMO and MOO

[MyrDawn]

Originally posted by WallyCleaver


I don't know about the manner, but certainly there are many cases of parents killing children.

Killing someone's child as revenge ? For what? A bad business deal? It just strikes me as very unlikely.

There are many cases of people killing children for no apparant reason at all. There are many cases of a parent killing their own child to hurt the other parent. That to me seems more unlikely than a non-relative killing a child to hurt a parent. But, it happens.

[MyrDawn]

Originally posted by Eagle1


That would be most interesting, Ames. Sure hope you can find them.

Sunsplashed posted the link to the site with the pictures of the guy with the loom marks on his arm several posts back. Here it is again:

http://ruthees_library.tripod.com/stungun.html