What details would you like clarified?

[Jayelles]

There are little details about evidence in this case that I would like to have clarified becasue they would make ALL the difference to the interpretation of the evidence.

e.g.

Do the panty & fingernail DNA match?
There was foreign DNA nuder JBR's fingernails and in her panties. This DNA was degraded (yes - degraded, it was cracked and incomplete) and we know from screen captures on Tracey Doc I that there were only 2/3 markers from the fingernails. We also know from press releases that the panty DNA had 9 complete markers and a weaker tenth marker which enabled it to be run through CODIS. The full complement of markers for entry onto CODIS is 13.

RST claim the fingernail and panty DNA are a match. Lou Smit ONCE made that claim on TV but has never repeated it publicly. However, he also made other claims which turned out to be wrong - i.e. that a blue line between the marks on JBR were made by a blue arc of electricity.

The only official statement made by investigators about the panty DNA is that it may be the killer's but that it may NOT be the killer's. That it is very miniscule - like from a cough or a sneeze and may be from a worker at the factory which made the panties.

If the markers from the fingernail DNA match markers from the panty DNA, this would be ludicrous.

My query is - can they tell for sure whether markers match or is the fingernauil DNA too degraded to ever be conclusively labelled a match?

If the two DNAs match, it is strong IDI evidence - so why not shout it from the rooftops?

Is there a melted patch on the duct tape?
RST claim a stungun was used on JBR. Alas, only one "pair" of marks is on her body. The leading expert on stunguns says no stungun was used and unfortunately, one pair does not a pattern maketh!

The RST argue that on her face, the second stungun prod landed on the duct tape. I think the evidence contradicts this theory. For starters, the duct tape *may* act as insulation and stop the stungun from working. However, the evidence suggests that she was already dead or unconscious when the tape was applied because there is a perfect lip print on the tape. Why stungun a dead or unconscious child? Surely if she was taped and then stunned, her lips would move with the convulsion?

jameson argues that there is a teensy little white patch on her skin and that this patch is gum from the underside of the tape - caused by the stungun melting the tape. This would be compelling evidence if it were a fact. So why are Lou Smit and the Ramseys not screaming it from the rooftops as evidence of a stungun? Why is it only jameson posting it on her forum as alleged "insider" knowledge.

I cannot understand why jameson always hints at "insider" knowledge of evidence which clears the Ramseys. if it clears them - why not shout it from the rooftops?

[ellen13]

I, for one would like to know if Patsy and John ever read the McSanta's play

about the murder of a girl in her basement. Did Patsy and John know this about

her? Perhaps that's why they dumped her in the basement, instead of someplace else. Has this been discussed before?

[Rupert]

Indeed, why not shout it from the rooftops?

DNA - I don't trust it.

Tape - Could have been applied when she was immobilzed by death or the stun gun and garrote (can a person move their tongue when garroted so severely - I doubt it).

Stun Gun - should have been decided at autopsy (abrasion marks are simply not good enough description - after all this is a murder); but then again why not exhume to be decisive?

Like everything else in this case, the evidence is on the edge to be debated one way or another. I wish we could find one unarguable piece of evidence that that leads to IDI or RDI.
I guess we could say one thing for sure: this case was clouded.

[rashomon]

I, for one would like to know if Patsy and John ever read the McSanta's play

about the murder of a girl in her basement. Did Patsy and John know this about

her? Perhaps that's why they dumped her in the basement, instead of someplace else. Has this been discussed before?

I have never heard of this. Could you tell more about it? TIA.

[sandraladeda]

Sorry to be dense. Can someone tell me what "RST" means?
Thx

[Thorkim]

RST = Ramsey Spin Team.

[sandraladeda]

RST = Ramsey Spin Team.Merci beaucoup!!;)

[tipper]

My recollection is if she were dead the stun gun wouldn't leave marks.

Added:
Here it is -

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/
query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=1288262&dopt=Abstract

Homicidal manual strangulation and multiple stun-gun injuries.

Ikeda N, Harada A, Suzuki T.

Department of Forensic Medicine, Yamagata University School of Medicine, Japan.

Stun guns are electric shock devices that are used by a number of law enforcement agencies to subdue violent offenders, but sometimes are discharged into human bodies as offensive weapons. We autopsied a 22-year-old woman who was strangled and had many stun-gun injuries on her head, chest, abdomen, arms, and legs. The stun-gun injuries consisted of many pairs of round erythemas with or without central paleness, some of which were accompanied by circumferentialabrasions. To determine whether the electric shocks were administered before or after her death, we studied stun-gun injuries on pigs before and after death and found that the shocks after death did not mark the animal skin. Based on this experiment, all of the stun-gun injuries on the victim's body were concluded to have been inflicted before her death.

[narlacat]

I have never heard of this. Could you tell more about it? TIA.
Janet McReynolds wrote a play 'Hey Rube' which was based on a novel about the sexual assault, torture and murder of a girl whose body was found in a basement.

[ellen13]

Janet McReynolds wrote a play 'Hey Rube' which was based on a novel about the sexual assault, torture and murder of a girl whose body was found in a basement.
Narla, do you have the same question I do? Don't you think
the Rams would have to know about that play? I'd like that
to be a question on their lie detect. test.

[IrishMist]

Narla, do you have the same question I do? Don't you think
the Rams would have to know about that play? I'd like that
to be a question on their lie detect. test.
Ellen, I don't think they would have had to know about the play. I believe (and I'm going by memory, so this could be bad...) they did that play when they lived out east. It wasn't highly acclaimed, by any means... and I also remember it took some digging for reporters to find out much of anything about it.

I'm gonna guess that the Ramsey's didn't know about it until after JonBenét's death.

[narlacat]

Hi Ellen

I don't think the Ramsey's knew anything about the play that McSanta's wife wrote until after JonBenet's death.
You will have to take their word on that though, it's up to you.
The McChristmas's were strange, no doubt about it.
It would seem the Ramsey's were too trusting and naive.....but I'm sure in business John was not like that at all......you don't get to be a multi millionaire by being too trusting and naive.

[BlueCrab]

If the markers from the fingernail DNA match markers from the panty DNA, this would be ludicrous. If the two DNAs match, it is strong IDI evidence -



Jayelles,

Not necessarily. It could be the DNA of someone a Ramsey had invited into the house.

[BlueCrab]

The leading expert on stunguns says no stungun was used ...



Jayelles,

Leading expert? Stratbucker is well versed in stun guns, but he is not without peers of equal expertise. IMO Doberson is one of them, and Doberson is of the opinion that a stun gun could have been used on JonBenet, as are most of the experts who gave opinions on the subject.

The marks on JonBenet suggest a Taser brand stun gun had been used, and the Air Taser Corporation does not want her death associated with a Taser brand stun gun. Stratbucker has a vested financial interest in Air Taser, so his opinion that a stun gun was not used on JonBenet should be considered with caution.

BlueCrab

[ellen13]

Thank you both for your input on their knowledge of McReynold's
play. I have been thinking about that for a while now. The reason I
ask is that the Rams were so eager to make a list of suspects that were friends of theirs, that
I wouldn't put it past them to do a staging that could
incriminate Santa and his wife-anything to cause reasonable doubt and keep them (Rams) off the list of suspects. It was like how Patsy was so willing to turn over Linda Pugh.
Speaking of that, and I know McReynolds
health wasn't good, but did they have an alibi? I never believed he or his wife did
it for one minute.
Thanks again!

[IrishMist]

Ellen, I have a real hard time getting past McSanta. He was soooo weird the way he talked about JonBenét...
Plus, the play that the Mrs. wrote.

Just weird.

Apparently, he was cleared. Steve Thomas didn't take him real seriously, because he had had heart surgery, um... help me out guys- I wanna say 4 months prior to the crime?

But they also went on a ten day vacation to Spain- and travel, in my opinion, can be exhausting...

He's a suspect that I just can't get out of my mind. With the help of Mrs. McSanta- could it have been done??? Mixing two people's DNA would certainly cloud matters.

I just don't want to let go of that one, I guess. At the same time, I feel like it was a friend of JAR's.

ETA: They were each other's alibi.

[narlacat]

Thank you both for your input on their knowledge of McReynold's
play. I have been thinking about that for a while now. The reason I
ask is that the Rams were so eager to make a list of suspects that were friends of theirs, that
I wouldn't put it past them to do a staging that could
incriminate Santa and his wife-anything to cause reasonable doubt and keep them (Rams) off the list of suspects. It was like how Patsy was so willing to turn over Linda Pugh.
Speaking of that, and I know McReynolds
health wasn't good, but did they have an alibi? I never believed he or his wife did
it for one minute.
Thanks again!
The McChristmas's only had each other as alibi's.
Indeed they were strange and it is hard to get past them like Irish says.
But you have to ask yourself, why would the Ramsey's cover for them?
I pretty much think they would only have covered for one of their own.

[IrishMist]

The McChristmas's only had each other as alibi's.
Indeed they were strange and it is hard to get past them like Irish says.
But you have to ask yourself, why would the Ramsey's cover for them?
I pretty much think they would only have covered for one of their own.
They did act like they were covering. And Camper keeps bringing up the "missing" video of that Christmas, which also seems odd. It makes me wonder who else was there that day? JAR? That doesn't seem likely, apparently his alibi checked out.

But I do wonder about Patsy's dad. I just don't know much about him as far as his whereabouts, DNA testing, etc. Seems like he's under the radar somehow.
He had an apartment in Boulder, did he not? Does anyone know what the scoop is with him?

[tipper]

They did act like they were covering. And Camper keeps bringing up the "missing" video of that Christmas, which also seems odd. It makes me wonder who else was there that day? JAR? That doesn't seem likely, apparently his alibi checked out.

But I do wonder about Patsy's dad. I just don't know much about him as far as his whereabouts, DNA testing, etc. Seems like he's under the radar somehow.
He had an apartment in Boulder, did he not? Does anyone know what the scoop is with him?What "missing" video?

I think Patsy's father still lives in Atlanta.

[narlacat]

Tipper
The video of the Ramsey's christmas.
They said there wasn't one as they hadn't charged the batteries on the video cam...or something like that, I can't quite remember.
Camper mentions it every now and again, thought you would have seen her posts about it?

[IrishMist]

What "missing" video?

I think Patsy's father still lives in Atlanta.
Sorry, it's getting late, and I realize I wasn't very clear...

I think Patsy's father had an apartment in Boulder at the time of the murder. I'm wondering if anyone knows where he was when JonBenét was murdered. I don't remember reading about an alibi.

The "missing video" that keeps getting brought up is something else that bugs me. If the family makes a Christmas video every year, why isn't there one for that year? Is it because someone else was there that year, so the tape had to disappear?

[tipper]

Sorry, it's getting late, and I realize I wasn't very clear...

I think Patsy's father had an apartment in Boulder at the time of the murder. I'm wondering if anyone knows where he was when JonBenét was murdered. I don't remember reading about an alibi.

The "missing video" that keeps getting brought up is something else that bugs me. If the family makes a Christmas video every year, why isn't there one for that year? Is it because someone else was there that year, so the tape had to disappear?Or is it that John is telling the truth? I've never seen a suggestion that Burke and/or JonBenet said anything about someone else being there. Plus there were neighbor kids in and out all day so the someone would have had to leave as soon as the gifts were done , in addition to Burke and JonBenet being mum about it.

[narlacat]

Jayelles,

Leading expert? Stratbucker is well versed in stun guns, but he is not without peers of equal expertise. IMO Doberson is one of them, and Doberson is of the opinion that a stun gun could have been used on JonBenet, as are most of the experts who gave opinions on the subject.

The marks on JonBenet suggest a Taser brand stun gun had been used, and the Air Taser Corporation does not want her death associated with a Taser brand stun gun. Stratbucker has a vested financial interest in Air Taser, so his opinion that a stun gun was not used on JonBenet should be considered with caution.

BlueCrab

From The Boulder Daily Camera - January 13, 1998.

"They came over and showed me some pictures from the (Ramsey) autopsy and asked for my opinion, whether they could be stun gun injuries," Dobersen recalled. "I told them that they could be; that was a possibility. But there were a lot of things they could do to narrow down the possibilities of what it could be."
Dobersen told Boulder investigators to do what The New Yorker reports they eventually did - measure the distance between the wounds and compare that to stun guns.
"Besides", he added, "the only definitive way to tell if electrocution was involved in JonBenet's death is to re-examine her body and look for very characteristic changes in skin tissue."
"You really can't tell from a photo," Dobersen said.

Doberson said 'could be', a 'possibilty'. That is not the same thing as saying 'definitely'. He has not gone on public record saying the marks definitely came from a stun gun, to do that JonBenet's body would have had to have been exhumed....and it wasn't.



From Boulder’s The Daily Camera, May 2, 2001 (Christopher Anderson)
“Air Taser representative Stephen Tuttle said he was contacted by an investigator early on in the case and provided Smit with the same model to conduct his experiments.
"I am bewildered. I don't know what to think about the theory," Tuttle said. "It defies the logic of what the weapon does."
Tuttle conceded that two marks are close to the width of the contacts of an Air Taser, but said that's where the similarities end.
"We have never seen those types of marks when you touch somebody with a stun gun," he said. "We are talking hundreds of people that have been touched with these devices. I can't replicate those marks."
Tuttle said it is uncommon for the stun gun to leave only two marks on the skin. The body moves away from the stun gun, causing multiple, erratic marks.
"How you can keep this thing perfectly still, not once, but twice on a squirming child? It doesn't make any sense," he said. "I hope that doesn't throw water on somebody's investigation."
He also said the Air Taser does not render people unconscious.

Why would a representative from Air Taser lie about what the weapon does and does not do?
What would Air Taser have to gain from that?
As if the next person who goes to buy an Air Taser is going to think....Hmmm maybe I shouldnt buy this, look what happened to that little girl.

Quotes from the Daily Camera courtesy of FFJ.

[ellen13]

A little off topic, but did Nedra Paugh die and McReynolds as well?
Has there been anyone who has died related to this story or the family?

[narlacat]

Hi Ellen

Nedra passed away in March 2001 and Bill McReynolds passed away in Sep. 2002.
I don't know of anyone else.

[Jayelles]

My thoughts on the missing video are that it would be unusual for a family who had experienced serious illness and death NOT to record family events like Christmas. Memories are IMO even more precious when you have lost loved ones or have someone with cancer.

We always record Christmas. Last year I forgot to charge the batteries for the camera, but I just recorded with the camera plugged into mains. This year I couldn't even find the battery for the camera - but again it ran fine from the mains electricity supply.

OTOH - the Ramseys were planning to celebrate Christmas with the big kids in Charlevoix. I have often wondered whether this was the "second santa visit" that JonBenet ALLEGEDLY spoke of to Ms Kostanick. If they were having another Christmas Day in Charlevoix with Santa and a tree and presents, maybe they intended to record that - especially since the extended family would be there (more of an event).

[BlueCrab]

DOBERSON: "Besides", he added, "the only definitive way to tell if electrocution was involved in JonBenet's death is to re-examine her body and look for very characteristic changes in skin tissue."


narlacat,

Not all experts agree that the skin tissue must be examined to determine if a person has been stungunned. Page 431 of PMPT paperback:

"After reviewing the photos and this new information, Meyer concluded that the injuries on JonBenet's face and back were, in fact, consistent with those produced by a stun gun.

"Soon afterward, Ainsworth learned of a 1988 Larimer County murder in which a stun gun had been used on a thirteen-month-old girl, Michaela Hughes, who had been sexually assaulted and killed. Ainsworth met with Dr. Robert Deters, the pathologist on the case, and showed him the autopsy photos of JonBenet. Deters agreed the marks were consistent with a stun-gun injury, but he didn't think the body had to be exhumed. Nothing more could be learned by examining the skin tissue."

BlueCrab

[BlueCrab]

I guess we could say one thing for sure: this case was clouded.


Rupert,

I don't agree the case was all that clouded. Much of the PHYSICAL EVIDENCE (the most powerful of all evidence) is staring us directly in the face and we refuse to see it. For instance, in my opinion:

o that was clearly an elaborate erotic asphyxiation device wrapped around JonBenet's neck;

o those are clearly stun gun injuries on JonBenet's body;

o it is clear JonBenet had been chronically sexually abused;

o it is clear the Ramseys have been lying their heads off, and innocent people don't lie in a murder investigation.

o etc., etc.

BlueCrab

[capps]

In my opinion the only unrefuted hard evidence in this case is: Jonbenet was murdered.

Everything else has been contradicted,argued,disagreed,and denied by experts and posters here.

I believe that is why there are still so many "fence sitters" until this day,and why this murder has not been solved.

[UKGuy]

Rupert,

I don't agree the case was all that clouded. Much of the PHYSICAL EVIDENCE (the most powerful of all evidence) is staring us directly in the face and we refuse to see it. For instance, in my opinion:

o that was clearly an elaborate erotic asphyxiation device wrapped around JonBenet's neck;

o those are clearly stun gun injuries on JonBenet's body;

o it is clear JonBenet had been chronically sexually abused;

o it is clear the Ramseys have been lying their heads off, and innocent people don't lie in a murder investigation.

o etc., etc.

BlueCrab

BlueCrab,

I wish things were all that clear.

1. that was clearly an elaborate erotic asphyxiation device wrapped around JonBenet's neck;
It may also simply be a standard garrotte, as per the scene from the Godfather where Luca Brasi is garrotted, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garrote

2. those are clearly stun gun injuries on JonBenet's body
Not for me, her injuries could be the result of multiple causes, but the most probable explanantion is that they are pressure point abrasions incurred during her garrotting.

3. it is clear JonBenet had been chronically sexually abused
Not so far, the word chronically is open ended, and capable of misinterpretation.

4. it is clear the Ramseys have been lying their heads off, and innocent people don't lie in a murder investigation.
Well innocent people do sometimes lie in murder investigations.


.

[BlueCrab]

BlueCrab,

I wish things were all that clear.

1. that was clearly an elaborate erotic asphyxiation device wrapped around JonBenet's neck;
It may also simply be a standard garrotte, as per the scene from the Godfather where Luca Brasi is garrotted, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garrote

2. those are clearly stun gun injuries on JonBenet's body
Not for me, her injuries could be the result of multiple causes, but the most probable explanantion is that they are pressure point abrasions incurred during her garrotting.

3. it is clear JonBenet had been chronically sexually abused
Not so far, the word chronically is open ended, and capable of misinterpretation.

4. it is clear the Ramseys have been lying their heads off, and innocent people don't lie in a murder investigation.
Well innocent people do sometimes lie in murder investigations.


.



1. The contraption around JonBenet's neck was not designed as a garrote. It was designed as an erotic asphyxiation device. Why would the perp need an elaborate device with a slip knot on one end and a stick carefully tied onto the other end of the cord just to strangle a little 45-pound six-year-old girl? If the original goal was to strangle JonBenet he could have easily done it with his bare hands.

2. Almost all of the experts who have examined the autopsy photos, and the coroner who studied and measured the tiny rectangular marks, agree they are consistent with stungun injuries.

3. All of the medical experts who have studied the autopsy photos and the microscopic slide specimens agree JonBenet had suffered chronic abuse to the vagina.

4. The Ramseys have been caught in numerous lies, including a conspiratorial lie among the three of them claiming Burke was upstairs in bed asleep during the 911 call when the enhanced 911 tape proved he was downstairs in the kitchen during the call. Why were they lying about Burke's whereabouts? The answer is obvious.

BlueCrab

[Holdontoyourhat]

1. The contraption around JonBenet's neck was not designed as a garrote. It was designed as an erotic asphyxiation device. Why would the perp need an elaborate device with a slip knot on one end and a stick carefully tied onto the other end of the cord just to strangle a little 45-pound six-year-old girl? If the original goal was to strangle JonBenet he could have easily done it with his bare hands.
It was designed as a garrote. It was a 'strangulation' device, not an 'asphyxiation' device. Why would the perp need an elaborate device? I don't know, you'd have to ask the perp. Your own question is a good sign you don't have all the answers.

[Linda7NJ]

It was designed as a garrote. It was a 'strangulation' device, not an 'asphyxiation' device. Why would the perp need an elaborate device? I don't know, you'd have to ask the perp. Your own question is a good sign you don't have all the answers.
Strangling someone isn't as easy as most people think. It's not quick nor is it easy. I think the perp hastily attached the broken handle to quicken the process, entangling her hair in the process.

[BlueCrab]

It was designed as a garrote. It was a 'strangulation' device, not an 'asphyxiation' device. Why would the perp need an elaborate device? I don't know, you'd have to ask the perp. Your own question is a good sign you don't have all the answers.


HOTYH,

It was a rhetorical question.

[Holdontoyourhat]

HOTYH,

It was a rhetorical question.
Does this mean you do have all the answers?

[IrishMist]

The only person that holds all the answers in this case is the murderer. The rest of us can guess, theorize, and/or speculate till we are blue in the face, and that's all it will be. Guesses, theories and speculation.

One of the many things I'd like to see clarified is the DNA X. Where was it found? Does it match the DNA on her body and/or panties?

[trixie]

DNA X is a curiosity. What I want to know is where was it found? Mark Beckner said at the crime scene. Where is that, her bedroom, the basement, the whole darn house?! Too vague for me. That's definatly one thing I'd like clarified. I also want to know what it consisted of. I mean in what form it was found. Need I elaborate? I didn't think so! lol!

[capps]

The DNAX is a mystery ....
I would also like to know whose finger prints were found on the big spoon from the bowl with the pineapple in it,the tea bag and glass.It makes it even more interesting since we know Patsy and Burke's finger prints were on the bowl,but no word about the spoon,tea bag and glass.

[trixie]

The DNAX is a mystery ....
I would also like to know whose finger prints were found on the big spoon from the bowl with the pineapple in it,the tea bag and glass.It makes it even more interesting since we know Patsy and Burke's finger prints were on the bowl,but no word about the spoon,tea bag and glass.


Yeah!!! I also want these things clarified. Especially the fingerprints on the tea glass. Good one, capps!

[BlueCrab]

The DNAX is a mystery ....
I would also like to know whose finger prints were found on the big spoon from the bowl with the pineapple in it,the tea bag and glass.It makes it even more interesting since we know Patsy and Burke's finger prints were on the bowl,but no word about the spoon,tea bag and glass.


capps,

DNA-X was mentioned by Chief Mark Beckner during a deposition in the Wolf v Ramsey defamation lawsuit. He said DNA-X was not on the body nor her clothing. That's all we know. My guess is it was on the wooden shards found on the basement floor, which in turn had been whittled off the end of the stick attached to the ligature device around the neck.

The fingerprint information on the spoon and waterglass containing the tea bag has never been made public. But due to the stickiness of pineapple, there were likely prints on the spoon and waterglass. My guess is they contained the prints of JonBenet and the perp.

BlueCrab

[trixie]

How do you know the wooden shards had been whittled off the end of the stick? Is it just your guess?

[BlueCrab]

How do you know the wooden shards had been whittled off the end of the stick? Is it just your guess?


trixie,

Yes, it's a guess. I feel that way because the tip of the stick is missing, so it must have looked like something or contained something the perp didn't want known, so he destroyed it. I also believe the EA device was made at least one day prior to the killing; there wasn't enough time to construct such an elaborate device the night of the crime.

The most obvious thing the perp probably didn't want known would be the sexual aspects of the crime. He cleaned up JonBenet and changed her underwear, made the killing look like the work of a foreign terrorist, and wrote a three-page ransom note to make it appear to be a kidnapping gone wrong, thus pointing away from Ramsey family members and the sexual aspects of the murder.

So yes, IMO the wooden shards were probably from the tip of the stick that was tied to the ligature. The shards could also be the source of DNA-X.

BlueCrab

[Linda7NJ]

trixie,

Yes, it's a guess. I feel that way because the tip of the stick is missing, so it must have looked like something or contained something the perp didn't want known, so he destroyed it. I also believe the EA device was made at least one day prior to the killing; there wasn't enough time to construct such an elaborate device the night of the crime.

The most obvious thing the perp probably didn't want known would be the sexual aspects of the crime. He cleaned up Jon Benet and changed her underwear, made the killing look like the work of a foreign terrorist, and wrote a three-page ransom note to make it appear to be a kidnapping gone wrong, thus pointing away from Ramsey family members and the sexual aspects of the murder.

So yes, IMO the wooden shards were probably from the tip of the stick that was tied to the ligature.

BlueCrab
Not enough time to make a garrote, but time to write a 3 page ransom note, clean her up, whittle off the end of the handle, and change her clothes?

How do you account for JonBenet's hair being entangled in it? How about the way it was loosely tied to her wrist?

[BlueCrab]

Not enough time to make a garrote, but time to write a 3 page ransom note, clean her up, whittle off the end of the handle, and change her clothes?

How do you account for JonBenet's hair being entangled in it? How about the way it was loosely tied to her wrist?


Linda7NJ,

You got me in regard to the hair entangled in the knot on the stick. I just studied the crime scene photo of the knot again and you're right. JonBenet's hair is definitely imbedded in the knot.

I retract my statement about the ligature being constructed ahead of time. The knot on the stick had to have been made in place on JonBenet -- but why? Since she was probably already dead by that time, what use would the stick have? The stick appears to have been staging.

The wrist ligature is easier to explain. Ligatures are like slip knots. If JonBenet's body weight was pulling on the ligature it would have made the ligature tight. When the body weight was removed from the ligature it automatically loosened the ligature. John said the wrist ligature was tight and hard to remove -- which meant that JonBenet's body weight was likely keeping the ligature tight. It suggests JonBenet was strung up somehow and John cut her down.

Once the pressure from the wrist ligature was removed, the ligature loosened and fell off one wrist and almost fell off the other wrist. (The wrists had been bound together with one ligature.)

BlueCrab

[Linda7NJ]

Linda7NJ,

You got me in regard to the hair entangled in the knot on the stick. I just studied the crime scene photo of the knot again and you're right. JonBenet's hair is definitely imbedded in the knot.

I retract my statement about the ligature being constructed ahead of time. The knot on the stick had to have been made in place on JonBenet -- but why? Since she was probably already dead by that time, what use would the stick have? The stick appears to have been staging.

The wrist ligature is easier to explain. Ligatures are like slip knots. If JonBenet's body weight was pulling on the ligature it would have made the ligature tight. When the body weight was removed from the ligature it automatically loosened the ligature. John said the wrist ligature was tight and hard to remove -- which meant that JonBenet's body weight was likely keeping the ligature tight. It suggests JonBenet was strung up somehow and John cut her down.

Once the pressure from the wrist ligature was removed, the ligature loosened and fell off one wrist and almost fell off the other wrist. (The wrists had been bound together with one ligature.)

BlueCrabBut there was no evidence on her wrists that it had ever tightened. I think there would have been had she been suspended or even tight for any length of time. I do think she was alive when the stick was quickly tied to the rope while JonBenet was unconscious. I think the murderer needed the extra leverage to strangle her until she died. I think the wrist could have been staging like the duct tape.

I once did a lot of research on strangulation, it takes much longer and is far more difficult than most imagine. Remember Dennis Raders comments on the subject?

[UKGuy]

Linda7NJ,

You got me in regard to the hair entangled in the knot on the stick. I just studied the crime scene photo of the knot again and you're right. JonBenet's hair is definitely imbedded in the knot.

BlueCrab

This feature has already been remarked upon, here http://websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=938492&postcount=41 , and in other posts.


It would be an advance in JonBenet's case to conclude much of what is presented in the wine-cellar is that of a staged crime-scene, this aspect has, over the years, probably misled so many people?




.

[BlueCrab]

But there was no evidence on her wrists that it had ever tightened. I think there would have been had she been suspended or even tight for any length of time. I do think she was alive when the stick was quickly tied to the rope while JonBenet was unconscious. I think the murderer needed the extra leverage to strangle her until she died. I think the wrist could have been staging like the duct tape.

I once did a lot of research on strangulation, it takes much longer and is far more difficult than most imagine. Remember Dennis Raders comments on the subject?


Linda7NJ,

But the victim was a little 45-pound girl. A man wouldn't have needed additional leverage to strangle her. The average man could have wrung her neck like a chicken, using just his bare hands. Only an older adult with greatly diminished hand strength or another child would have needed the extra leverage. Hmmm.

BlueCrab

[Linda7NJ]

Linda7NJ,

But the victim was a little 45-pound girl. A man wouldn't have needed additional leverage to strangle her. The average man could have wrung her neck like a chicken, using just his bare hands. Only an older adult with greatly diminished hand strength or another child would have needed the extra leverage. Hmmm.

BlueCrab
Exactly!

[Jayelles]

Elsewhere, a poster has voiced the opinion that Patsy neglected Burke after Jonbenet's murder. This is denied by Ramsey supporters.

However, the fact is that in their book DOI, Patsy describes sending out to stores for various outfits for her try for the funeral. She describes choosing an outfit which was inspired by the one Jackie Onassis wwore at Kennedy's funeral and she described how John told her she was beautiful. Choosing her outfit and presenting herself as a Jackie-O like figure at the funeral are details which evidently stand out in her mind.

Yet Burke wore clothes which were way too small for him for the funeral! No-body took time to make sure that Burke was properly turned out. The Ramseys even commented on it later (although I cannot find that quote).

So there is evidence that Patsy was focusing upon herself and her appearance at a time when Burke needed her.

Now it could be that another person had told the Ramseys to get themselves ready and that THEY would see to Burke. This person may not have had a clue about dressing a child (my husband doesn't and will select clothes which don't match or fit!).

If the Ramseys were able to comment later about Burke's dishevelled appearance - why did his appearance not strike them as unsuitable at the time? Did they not look at their son?

[narlacat]

I don't remember Burke's clothes not fitting, I thought the shirt he had on looked a bit big if anything.
Given the circumstances, it's no small wonder the Ramsey's were not concerned with how Burke presented.
The Ramsey's were too busy with the funeral to care about Burke or what he looked like, their only concerns were about how THEY presented and how THEY were going to be perceived by the public.

[rashomon]

Linda7NJ,

But the victim was a little 45-pound girl. A man wouldn't have needed additional leverage to strangle her. The average man could have wrung her neck like a chicken, using just his bare hands. Only an older adult with greatly diminished hand strength or another child would have needed the extra leverage. Hmmm.

BlueCrab
Which is exactly why I think it was staged: to make it look like a bizarre sex crime.

[UKGuy]

Jayelles,

This is curious, since you would expect a wealthy family to suit and boot Burke for a public funeral at which they knew the media may be present. Particularly if they went to great lengths to appear well dressed.

Are you suggesting this is indirect evidence that Patsy habitually negelected Burke.

As a counterpoint, if Burke had been involved in the death of JonBenet, then you would think that John and Patsy's public focus would be on Burke, making sure nothing leaked into the public domain?

[Linda7NJ]

Which is exactly why I think it was staged: to make it look like a bizarre sex crime.
I don't think that part was staged as she was alive when she was strangled

[UKGuy]

I don't think that part was staged as she was alive when she was strangled

Linda7NJ,
BlueCrab already suggested this:
I retract my statement about the ligature being constructed ahead of time. The knot on the stick had to have been made in place on JonBenet -- but why? Since she was probably already dead by that time, what use would the stick have? The stick appears to have been staging.

and
JonBenet's hair was so tightly embedded in the knotting that the Coroner Dr. John Meyer, had to cut her hair to remove the cord. Also JonBenet's gold chain and cross were tangled in the ligature.

JonBenet can still be garrotted, Luca Brasi style, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garrote, and the paintbrush handle added post mortem, either to mask that it was used to sexually assault JonBenet, or simply ad-hoc staging, and the forensic evidence supports this view.

To employ the staged evidence for other theories is exactly what the person who staged the wine-cellar presentation hoped people would do!




.

[rashomon]

I don't think that part was staged as she was alive when she was strangled
But suppose she was in a coma from the blow struck to her head, and the person who delivered the blow realized that he had injured her so heavily that she was probably going to die, or stay at least permanently brain-damaged from the injury.
The garotte staging could have been inflicted then, while she was already unconscious and possibly nearing death.

[trixie]

Jayelles,

This is curious, since you would expect a wealthy family to suit and boot Burke for a public funeral at which they knew the media may be present. Particularly if they went to great lengths to appear well dressed.

Are you suggesting this is indirect evidence that Patsy habitually negelected Burke.

As a counterpoint, if Burke had been involved in the death of JonBenet, then you would think that John and Patsy's public focus would be on Burke, making sure nothing leaked into the public domain?

Yes, Patsy just had to look like Jackie Kennedy with the veil specially sewn on her hat and department stores sent over dresses for her to pick from. But look at Burke. Clothes don't fit and shirt is untucked. Patsy took care of Patsy, didn't she? And she always will, IMO.

[aussiesheila]

Linda7NJ,

You got me in regard to the hair entangled in the knot on the stick. I just studied the crime scene photo of the knot again and you're right. JonBenet's hair is definitely imbedded in the knot.

I retract my statement about the ligature being constructed ahead of time. The knot on the stick had to have been made in place on JonBenet -- but why? Since she was probably already dead by that time, what use would the stick have? The stick appears to have been staging.

The wrist ligature is easier to explain. Ligatures are like slip knots. If JonBenet's body weight was pulling on the ligature it would have made the ligature tight. When the body weight was removed from the ligature it automatically loosened the ligature. John said the wrist ligature was tight and hard to remove -- which meant that JonBenet's body weight was likely keeping the ligature tight. It suggests JonBenet was strung up somehow and John cut her down.

Once the pressure from the wrist ligature was removed, the ligature loosened and fell off one wrist and almost fell off the other wrist. (The wrists had been bound together with one ligature.)

BlueCrabMy understanding is that when the body was found there was a ligature around only the right wrist which I always wondered what the purpose of that would be. I have also always wondered what position JonBenet would have been held in for the sexual abuse. Now I am hearing you say there was a ligature around each wrist but that one had fallen off and that JonBenet had likely been strung up somehow. That all sounds very logical to me. Do you know if they found another wrist ligature anywhere? If there had been a ligature around each wrist and JonBenet had been strung up by the wrists to something, what do you imagine it would have been? Were there any beams or hooks on the ceiling in the basement? I don't expect you to know the answers BlueCrab but you must have some ideas. I was wondering if they (your perpetrators or mine) could have had a portable device that clipped onto overhead doorframes like the ones I have seen used for baby swing chairs.

[aussiesheila]

capps,

DNA-X was mentioned by Chief Mark Beckner during a deposition in the Wolf v Ramsey defamation lawsuit. He said DNA-X was not on the body nor her clothing. That's all we know. My guess is it was on the wooden shards found on the basement floor, which in turn had been whittled off the end of the stick attached to the ligature device around the neck.

The fingerprint information on the spoon and waterglass containing the tea bag has never been made public. But due to the stickiness of pineapple, there were likely prints on the spoon and waterglass. My guess is they contained the prints of JonBenet and the perp.

BlueCrabThat is so mean of them not to release the information on where the additional DNA was found.

But if they have some additional DNA then the case still has a chance of being solved. Can LA in the US ask anyone for their DNA? I don't suppose they can. So LA can only test the DNA against people who have been detained for law offences.

While the investigation was in it's early stages BPD did collect some DNA samples which presumably they checked against the DNA under JonBenet's fingernails and from her panties. I think the DNA under her fingernails must have been skin from the person she scratched before she had her hands tied. The DNA on the panties was from blood wasn't it? So how would perpetrator blood get on her pants? Perhaps JonBenet bit someone's finger as he tried to put the ligature around her neck? Then perhaps the blood from his finger came off on her panties as he tried to pull them off.

Whose DNA did BPD collect in those early stages?

These are the only people I know for sure had their DNA taken -
John Ramsey, Burke Ramsey, John Andrew Ramsey

I think these people also but I am not sure -
FW, PW, BMcR, JMcR

What about these people, did they ever have DNA samples taken? I have a feeling that they did not -
DP, CG, CW, JB, FB, GM

[Jayelles]

Jayelles,

This is curious, since you would expect a wealthy family to suit and boot Burke for a public funeral at which they knew the media may be present. Particularly if they went to great lengths to appear well dressed.

Are you suggesting this is indirect evidence that Patsy habitually negelected Burke.

As a counterpoint, if Burke had been involved in the death of JonBenet, then you would think that John and Patsy's public focus would be on Burke, making sure nothing leaked into the public domain?
No, I don't think there is any evidence that Patsy neglected Burke generally or habitually. However it is clear that he wasn't on their minds prior to the funeral (which may be understandable - I don't know). This refutes RST claims to the contrary.

(I don't think the Ramseys killed jonbenet and I think they brought a lot of their own post-murder troubles upon themselves. I also think the RST are a group of people who have helped to demonise the Ramsey by supporting them in such an obviously biased and blinkered way).

[UKGuy]

No, I don't think there is any evidence that Patsy neglected Burke generally or habitually. However it is clear that he wasn't on their minds prior to the funeral (which may be understandable - I don't know). This refutes RST claims to the contrary.

(I don't think the Ramseys killed jonbenet and I think they brought a lot of their own post-murder troubles upon themselves. I also think the RST are a group of people who have helped to demonise the Ramsey by supporting them in such an obviously biased and blinkered way).


Jayelles,

I tend to agree with you regarding the Ramseys's incuring their own own post-murder troubles upon themselves, obviously if a Ramsey did not murder JonBenet, then someone who was very familiar with the house and its layout did.

Do you think an intruder did it?



.

[Jayelles]

I think her killer came into the house that night but was not a stranger. I think her killer is a very disturbed individual who harboured resentment towards Jonbenet beyond all reason. I'd like to know where Patsy took off her jacket that night. Was it in her bedroom or did she leave it downstairs?

[Jayelles]

I think the killer didn't like children much and possibly little girls even less.

[BlueCrab]

aussiesheila,

When the body was found by John he says the arms were tied tightly over her head. From the 1998 interviews:

JOHN RAMSEY: "And I tried to untie her arms; they were tied up behind her head."

LOU SMIT: "Were they tied tight?"

JOHN RAMSEY: "Yeah, very tight."


There is evidence that JonBenet had been strung up and posed, thereby causing the wrist ligature to be very tight. John Ramsey's own testimony suggests this without him actually admitting it.

If you study the crimescene photo of the ligature it becomes apparent that BOTH wrists had likely been clasped together using just ONE ligature. The ligature was on the right wrist, and the tail of the cord from the ligature was probably wrapped twice around the left wrist -- pulling the two wrists tightly together. JonBenet's body weight, if she was strung up with both arms over her head but in a sitting position, would have kept the ligature tight, thus keeping the wrists together until John "cut her down". This would have released the pressure on the ligature, allowing the ligature to loosen and the cord on the left wrist to unravel and eventually fall off. Therefore, when John carried JonBenet upstairs the ligature was seen as being loosely tied to the right wrist and there was no cord on the left wrist.

The autopsy report, of course, detailed the wrist ligature as the coroner saw it, not as it had likely been originally tied prior to JonBenet being cut down.

BlueCrab

[aussiesheila]

aussiesheila,

When the body was found by John he says the arms were tied tightly over her head. From the 1998 interviews:

JOHN RAMSEY: "And I tried to untie her arms; they were tied up behind her head."

LOU SMIT: "Were they tied tight?"

JOHN RAMSEY: "Yeah, very tight."


There is evidence that JonBenet had been strung up and posed, thereby causing the wrist ligature to be very tight. John Ramsey's own testimony suggests this without him actually admitting it.

If you study the crimescene photo of the ligature it becomes apparent that BOTH wrists had likely been clasped together using just ONE ligature. The ligature was on the right wrist, and the tail of the cord from the ligature was probably wrapped twice around the left wrist -- pulling the two wrists tightly together. JonBenet's body weight, if she was strung up with both arms over her head but in a sitting position, would have kept the ligature tight, thus keeping the wrists together until John "cut her down". This would have released the pressure on the ligature, allowing the ligature to loosen and the cord on the left wrist to unravel and eventually fall off. Therefore, when John carried JonBenet upstairs the ligature was seen as being loosely tied to the right wrist and there was no cord on the left wrist.

The autopsy report, of course, detailed the wrist ligature as the coroner saw it, not as it had likely been originally tied prior to JonBenet being cut down.

BlueCrabThanks for that quote from the interview. I had read that interview but obviously missed that point. I guess I didn't see it as significant at the time. Someone Linda? asked you about marks around the wrists if she had been bound tightly. What do you have to say about this?

And was the bit of the wrist ligature found on the floor of the cellar? Or was it not found at all? Maybe it is in the crimescene photo - I'll have to go and look.

You obviously do a lot of research, alot of time spent? Thanks for providing the info to the lazy ones like me.

Now your theory and mine differ markedly as to who applied the ligatures and what they were used for, who used the stun gun, and who wielded the baseball bat. I assume you think a baseball bat was used to hit her over the head? Which one do you think it was? The one inside the house? I think you must, but I think it was the one found outside in the yard.

It seems you think she would have been in the sitting position with her arms strung up above her head. Now the rope has to be attached to something overhead to be effective - right? Maybe you think there was someplace on the ceiling?

Now what about that chair in the doorway - do you think she could have been sitting on that when the abuse occurred? I actually think she would have been in the standing position, maybe standing on that chair in the doorway with her arms above her head and the rope attached to a device the abusers brought with them, that that could clip onto the top of the doorway. (I am assuming that the doorway was constructed the way most doorways are here, with 2 cm wide solid wood edging - if there was no doorway surrround then this can't be right obviously. Know of any relevant photos?).

[BlueCrab]

Someone Linda? asked you about marks around the wrists if she had been bound tightly. What do you have to say about this?



aussiesheila,

The cord ligature around the right wrist was on top of the sleeve of JonBenet's white sweater. This would have helped cushion the cord as it tightened on the wrist. Actually, there appears to be a very slight reddened area on JonBenet's wrist, but I guess I'm the only one who sees it.

John admits the ligature was tight when he was trying to untie it, yet it's obvious not tight in the autopsy photos. This lends credence to the theory that JonBenet had been strung up and the weight of her body was keeping the ligature tight. My guess is she was in a sitting position on the floor, propped up against the back of a chair, with her hands tied together over her head and tethered to the back of the chair.

In this position the weight of her upper torso would have kept the ligature tight, but it wasn't enough to cause circumferential abrasions on her wrists.

It's also interesting to note that John Ramsey said in the interviews that he was trying to keep her head from flopping to the side as he was trying to untie the ligature on her wrists. This to me means her torso was in an upright position and not lying prone on the floor.

Furthermore, what's the head doing flopping around when she was supposed to be in full rigor? Therefore, I'm certain John found JonBenet early on the morning of the 26th, before rigor set in, and about 3 or 4 hours before the 911 call was placed at 5:52 AM. When John carried JonBenet up from the basement at 1:05 PM on the 26th she was stiff as a board and her head was not flopping.

John is apparently caught in another lie.

BlueCrab

[capps]

"It's also interesting to note that John Ramsey said in the interviews that he was trying to keep her head from flopping to the side as he was trying to untie the ligature on her wrists. This to me means her torso was in an upright position and not lying prone on the floor.
Furthermore, what's the head doing flopping around when she was supposed to be in full rigor? Therefore, I'm certain John found JonBenet early on the morning of the 26th, before rigor set in, and about 3 or 4 hours before the 911 call was placed at 5:52 AM. When John carried JonBenet up from the basement at 1:05 PM on the 26th she was stiff as a board and her head was not flopping."

BlueCrab.

Now that would be a pretty good clue!
Please tell me that came from an interview with investigators .... and not a source from one of the tabloids.

[aussiesheila]

aussiesheila,

The cord ligature around the right wrist was on top of the sleeve of JonBenet's white sweater. This would have helped cushion the cord as it tightened on the wrist. Actually, there appears to be a very slight reddened area on JonBenet's wrist, but I guess I'm the only one who sees it.

John admits the ligature was tight when he was trying to untie it, yet it's obvious not tight in the autopsy photos. This lends credence to the theory that JonBenet had been strung up and the weight of her body was keeping the ligature tight. My guess is she was in a sitting position on the floor, propped up against the back of a chair, with her hands tied together over her head and tethered to the back of the chair.

In this position the weight of her upper torso would have kept the ligature tight, but it wasn't enough to cause circumferential abrasions on her wrists.

It's also interesting to note that John Ramsey said in the interviews that he was trying to keep her head from flopping to the side as he was trying to untie the ligature on her wrists. This to me means her torso was in an upright position and not lying prone on the floor.

Furthermore, what's the head doing flopping around when she was supposed to be in full rigor? Therefore, I'm certain John found JonBenet early on the morning of the 26th, before rigor set in, and about 3 or 4 hours before the 911 call was placed at 5:52 AM. When John carried JonBenet up from the basement at 1:05 PM on the 26th she was stiff as a board and her head was not flopping.

John is apparently caught in another lie.

BlueCrabThanks for the reply BlueCrab,

I'm not happy with your idea of JonBenet's hands being tethered to the back of the chair. I don't think the weight of the chair would be adequate for the purpose, one minor wriggle from JonBenet and I think the chair would topple over.

I just don't know enough about rigor to be able to make any other comments.

[BlueCrab]

"It's also interesting to note that John Ramsey said in the interviews that he was trying to keep her head from flopping to the side as he was trying to untie the ligature on her wrists. This to me means her torso was in an upright position and not lying prone on the floor.
Furthermore, what's the head doing flopping around when she was supposed to be in full rigor? Therefore, I'm certain John found JonBenet early on the morning of the 26th, before rigor set in, and about 3 or 4 hours before the 911 call was placed at 5:52 AM. When John carried JonBenet up from the basement at 1:05 PM on the 26th she was stiff as a board and her head was not flopping."

BlueCrab.

Now that would be a pretty good clue!
Please tell me that came from an interview with investigators .... and not a source from one of the tabloids.


capps,

Okay, here it is and it's not from the tabs. There are two sources -- one for the head ('98 interviews) and one for the rigor (Steve Thomas' book):

From the 1998 interviews here's John's comment to Mike Kane. John was trying to explain how he was attempting to untie the ligature on JonBenet's hands when he found her in the wine cellar:

JOHN RAMSEY: "Her head was tilted to one side. I was trying to hold her head."

So why is John attempting to hold her head while trying to untie her hands? JonBenet was supposed to be lying flat on her back with hands crossed well above her head when John found her. There would be no reason for him to hold the head since her head was lying flat on the floor and her hands were straight up and not near her head. The head would have had nothing to do with the ligature on the wrists.

And from Steve Thomas' book, pg 28:

"John Ramsey emerged from the basement carrying the body of JonBenet, not cradled close but held away from him, his hands gripping her waist. The child's head was above his, facing him, her arms were raised high, stiffened by rigor mortis, and her lips were blue. The child was obviously dead."

It appears John slipped again. He unconsciously mixed his fake story with what truthfully happened -- a standard behavior problem when someone is fibbing a story. I know beyond a reasonable doubt that John found JonBenet hours before the 911 call was made. The chair blocking the trainroom door revealed he was lying and had been in the basement long before the cops and Fleet White made their searches.

JonBenet was in full rigor when found at 1:05 PM. The head would not need support if she was picked up. It takes about 12 hours after death to reach full rigor. This means JonBenet may have died around 1:00 AM. If John found her one or two hours after she died she would barely be in rigor and the head would need support if she was picked up.

BlueCrab

[aussiesheila]

capps,

Okay, here it is and it's not from the tabs. There are two sources -- one for the head ('98 interviews) and one for the rigor (Steve Thomas' book):

From the 1998 interviews here's John's comment to Mike Kane. John was trying to explain how he was attempting to untie the ligature on JonBenet's hands when he found her in the wine cellar:

JOHN RAMSEY: "Her head was tilted to one side. I was trying to hold her head."

So why is John attempting to hold her head while trying to untie her hands? JonBenet was supposed to be lying flat on her back with hands crossed well above her head when John found her. There would be no reason for him to hold the head since her head was lying flat on the floor and her hands were straight up and not near her head. The head would have had nothing to do with the ligature on the wrists.

And from Steve Thomas' book, pg 28:

"John Ramsey emerged from the basement carrying the body of JonBenet, not cradled close but held away from him, his hands gripping her waist. The child's head was above his, facing him, her arms were raised high, stiffened by rigor mortis, and her lips were blue. The child was obviously dead."

It appears John slipped again. He unconsciously mixed his fake story with what truthfully happened -- a standard behavior problem when someone is fibbing a story. I know beyond a reasonable doubt that John found JonBenet hours before the 911 call was made. The chair blocking the trainroom door revealed he was lying and had been in the basement long before the cops and Fleet White made their searches.

JonBenet was in full rigor when found at 1:05 PM. The head would not need support if she was picked up. It takes about 12 hours after death to reach full rigor. This means JonBenet may have died around 1:00 AM. If John found her one or two hours after she died she would barely be in rigor and the head would need support if she was picked up.

BlueCrabBut BlueCrab, John just said "I was trying to hold her head"

He didn't say WHY he was holding her head.

You have ASSUMED he was holding her head to stop it from flopping sideways, but really, I don't think you can justifiably conclude this.

John might have been holding her head because, having just found his beloved daughter's body, that was the part of her that he so desperately needed to hold and keep on holding and not let go of, even as he untied her hands.

[capps]

capps,

Okay, here it is and it's not from the tabs. There are two sources -- one for the head ('98 interviews) and one for the rigor (Steve Thomas' book):

From the 1998 interviews here's John's comment to Mike Kane. John was trying to explain how he was attempting to untie the ligature on JonBenet's hands when he found her in the wine cellar:

JOHN RAMSEY: "Her head was tilted to one side. I was trying to hold her head."

So why is John attempting to hold her head while trying to untie her hands? JonBenet was supposed to be lying flat on her back with hands crossed well above her head when John found her. There would be no reason for him to hold the head since her head was lying flat on the floor and her hands were straight up and not near her head. The head would have had nothing to do with the ligature on the wrists.

And from Steve Thomas' book, pg 28:

"John Ramsey emerged from the basement carrying the body of JonBenet, not cradled close but held away from him, his hands gripping her waist. The child's head was above his, facing him, her arms were raised high, stiffened by rigor mortis, and her lips were blue. The child was obviously dead."

It appears John slipped again. He unconsciously mixed his fake story with what truthfully happened -- a standard behavior problem when someone is fibbing a story. I know beyond a reasonable doubt that John found JonBenet hours before the 911 call was made. The chair blocking the trainroom door revealed he was lying and had been in the basement long before the cops and Fleet White made their searches.

JonBenet was in full rigor when found at 1:05 PM. The head would not need support if she was picked up. It takes about 12 hours after death to reach full rigor. This means JonBenet may have died around 1:00 AM. If John found her one or two hours after she died she would barely be in rigor and the head would need support if she was picked up.

BlueCrab

BlueCrab,

I appreciate you looking up that information for me.

John's statement was a bit different than I was mentally visualizing in my head,thinking that JB's head was flopping all over the place while JB was trying to untie the knot.

But you are correct,if she was in full rigor,and her hands were extended over her head,at no time would there be a need for John to "try to hold her head". Interesting.

This would have been a perfect time for Kane to push JB a bit further,ask John to show him exactly what he was doing,and catch him in his inconsistency,and retort back with a "that's impossible John,she was in full rigor mortis!" Make John sweat a little.

But that never happened in any of the interviews,and that was the investigators downfall ...I think they could have had JB and PR tripping so bad over their statements if they pushed further,that they would have gotten the Ramsey's so rattled,and more of the truth would have come forth.

Another opportunity missed.

[capps]

BlueCrab,

Did you catch this?
Here is a part of one of your previous posts in this thread:

"When the body was found by John he says the arms were tied tightly over her head. From the 1998 interviews:
JOHN RAMSEY: "And I tried to untie her arms; they were tied up behind her head."
LOU SMIT: "Were they tied tight?"
JOHN RAMSEY: "Yeah, very tight."

John states "they (her arms) were tied up BEHIND her head.That would make sense,if before she was in full rigor,and her hands were tied behind her head,not above her head,he was TRYING TO HOLD HER HEAD,to untie the arm. Autopsy states her hands were above her head. Was her body rearranged at some point?

[UKGuy]

JOHN RAMSEY: "Her head was tilted to one side. I was trying to hold her head."

BlueCrab

BlueCrab,

Do we have any crime-scene or pathology photograph to illustrate the alignment of JonBenet's head with respect to her body?

I always assumed the above quote referred to parental concern, or filial love towards JonBenet, in that he did not want to disturb her neck/head region due to the ligature and paintbrush construction?

So was her head at 90 degrees to her shoulders ?


Why do think she was posed, what would be the motive?

[BlueCrab]

BlueCrab,

Do we have any crime-scene or pathology photograph to illustrate the alignment of JonBenet's head with respect to her body?

I always assumed the above quote referred to parental concern, or filial love towards JonBenet, in that he did not want to disturb her neck/head region due to the ligature and paintbrush construction?

So was her head at 90 degrees to her shoulders ?


Why do think she was posed, what would be the motive?


UKGuy,

When found at 1:05 PM her head was turned to the right and she was in full rigor. I don't know about the alignment.

John says he didn't see the ligature around the neck with the stick tied to it until after he had brought her upstairs.

I consider the thought of JonBenet being grotesquely posed because there's some evidence that this murder was the work of a sexual sadist. The injuries that appear to be stun gun burns on the face, back and leg suggests torture had accompanied the bondage, the penetration, and the possible use of feces. Sexual sadists obtain pleasure from inflicting pain and humiliation on their victims.

In the sexual sadist theory John would have found JonBenet shortly after she had been killed. She would have been strung up in an indecent sitting position, legs apart, with her back leaning against something such as a chair and with crossed hands bound together and tied to an overhead object to keep her torso from falling over. Her unsupported head would have been tilted to the right because the neck ligature was positioned at the front left of her neck, causing the large red triangular abrasion at that spot.

John would have found JonBenet around one or two AM after being awakened by her scream and just minutes after she died. The extreme tightening of the neck ligature and the bash on the head both likely took place just seconds after the scream.

The Ramseys cleaned up JonBenet and repositioned the body to give her a measure of dignity in death.

BlueCrab

[UKGuy]

UKGuy,

When found at 1:05 PM her head was turned to the right and she was in full rigor. I don't know about the alignment.

John says he didn't see the ligature around the neck with the stick tied to it until after he had brought her upstairs.

I consider the thought of JonBenet being grotesquely posed because there's some evidence that this murder was the work of a sexual sadist. The injuries that appear to be stun gun burns on the face, back and leg suggests torture had accompanied the bondage, the penetration, and the possible use of feces. Sexual sadists obtain pleasure from inflicting pain and humiliation on their victims.

In the sexual sadist theory John would have found JonBenet shortly after she had been killed. She would have been strung up in an indecent sitting position, legs apart, with her back leaning against something such as a chair and with crossed hands bound together and tied to an overhead object to keep her torso from falling over. Her unsupported head would have been tilted to the right because the neck ligature was positioned at the front left of her neck, causing the large red triangular abrasion at that spot.

John would have found JonBenet around one or two AM after being awakened by her scream and just minutes after she died. The extreme tightening of the neck ligature and the bash on the head both likely took place just seconds after the scream.

The Ramseys cleaned up JonBenet and repositioned the body to give her a measure of dignity in death.

BlueCrab

BlueCrab,
Thanks for your reply, you may be correct, and JonBenet's death was at the hands of a sexual sadist.


Considering these remarks:
JOHN RAMSEY: "Her head was tilted to one side. I was trying to hold her head."

One sentence here seems to be consistent with JonBenets discovered position, in that "tilted to one side" is not much different from "When found at 1:05 PM her head was turned to the right". The second sentence may just mean what it suggests. Although it does seem odd, yet given the circumstances, he has just found his daughters corpse, would he not want to hold her head?


I actually find it remarkable that "John says he didn't see the ligature around the neck with the stick tied to it until after he had brought her upstairs".

Yet by all accounts she was lying face up, he removed the tape, so he could see that, although it was dark in color, he also untied or loosened the cord around her wrists, which might be impossible in unsighted conditions, yet he failed to notice the ligature and paintbrush handle? I dont find that credible!

This feature deserves a comment:
"The Ramseys cleaned up JonBenet and repositioned the body to give her a measure of dignity in death."

The posing of a corpse by a sexual sadist can mean what you suggest i.e. "Sexual sadists obtain pleasure from inflicting pain and humiliation on their victims."

Generally they tend to indecently pose the corpse, and is intended as a public signal.


The interesting question is why would the Ramsey's cleanup her body and reposition it, given this is a horrific homicide? Why not leave it as it is, and as per the ransom note response, dial 911 immediately?

Why are the Ramsey's staging a crime-scene for a sexual sadist where is the percentage in that?

Also when you suggest the Ramsey's did reposition her body, do you mean moved it and aligned it horizontally on the floor, or something else?

Personally I think its an open question if she was ever posed, if she was, then for me, it would change the nature of her homicide.

I think there was at least two separate staging instances, one in the wine-cellar, and one upstairs, with the possibilty of an intermediate one elsewhere in the basement. So it could be in one of those JonBenet was posed.



.

[sandraladeda]

I guess my problem with using the term "sexual Sadist" is that I would expect the violation of JBR to be more violent.

When NP stated JBR was sexually assaulted "only a little bit" or whatever the exact phrasing, I think it was an unfortunate choice of words, and I do not wish to make light of any sexual violation of a 6 year old girl. I would expect a sexual sadist to very violently assault the victim, and thus I would have expected JBR's injuries to be very graphic, very obvious at first glance, and far more injurious to her than my reading up on the subject has indicated. This is why I, so far, lean towards the possibility (note I am not yet committed to this idea!) that the sexual assault aspects of the crime were staged to make it look as though it was a sex crime. This red herring, so to speak, along with the red herring of the ransom note, perhaps indicates a perp or perps desperately creating scenarios to point attention away from themselves.

Comments?

[UKGuy]

I guess my problem with using the term "sexual Sadist" is that I would expect the violation of JBR to be more violent.

When NP stated JBR was sexually assaulted "only a little bit" or whatever the exact phrasing, I think it was an unfortunate choice of words, and I do not wish to make light of any sexual violation of a 6 year old girl. I would expect a sexual sadist to very violently assault the victim, and thus I would have expected JBR's injuries to be very graphic, very obvious at first glance, and far more injurious to her than my reading up on the subject has indicated. This is why I, so far, lean towards the possibility (note I am not yet committed to this idea!) that the sexual assault aspects of the crime were staged to make it look as though it was a sex crime. This red herring, so to speak, along with the red herring of the ransom note, perhaps indicates a perp or perps desperately creating scenarios to point attention away from themselves.

Comments?

sandraladeda,

You have to wonder if "only a little bit" referred to prior to her death? The phrase sexual sadist has specific connotations within the law enforcement community, its not exactly the same a violent sexual predator. I think it was Lou Smit who first used the phrase wrt JonBenet's death, since it chimes perfectly with his theory that JonBenet was subjected to some form of Erotic Asphyxiation, thus torturing JonBenet as he also assaulted her.

Lou Smit has been characterised as a visionary type of detective, using a mixture of deduction and intuitive insight to close cases.

He is on record as engaging in prayer sessions with the Ramseys, who he describes as Christian , like himself, so his stun-gun theory along with the garrote mutating into an Erotic Asphyxiation Device, and the use of these imaginative elements by a sexual sadist, appears to originate from him?

So some people would suggest to you, is being sexually assaulted, stun-gunned, and erotically asphyxiated not enough evidence, what more do you need to demonstrate that this was the work of a sexual sadist?

Lou Smit states that the ligature was constructed precisely and expertly by someone who knew what he was doing, he says that the killer was a "sexual sadist." That there is evidence to indicate the garrote was made in the basement, strongly suggesting the killing happened there?

Since JonBenet's hair is tied into the knotting on the paintbrush, and her cross and chain are entwined in the ligature, so tightly incidentally, the Coroner Dr. John Meyer, had to cut her hair to remove the cord. This is clear forensic evidence that the purpose of the ligature was not to act an EA Device, as claimed by Lou Smit, but simply that of a classical garrote, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garrote , particularly when you consider Lou Smit stated it had been "constructed precisely and expertly by someone who knew what he was doing" patently not so, the paintbrush handle was attached to the ligature, after she was dead, and the forensic evidence is not lying!

So this along with a small degree of concurrent sexual assault, although there may be a history of prior sexual abuse, leads me to rejecting the concept of a sexual sadist as characterised by Lou Smit, being responsible for the death of JonBenet. It may look good on the front page of the tabloids, and feel just right on crime forums, but for me it just panders to the "Silence of The Lambs" style of investigation!


.

[aussiesheila]

BlueCrab,

Do we have any crime-scene or pathology photograph to illustrate the alignment of JonBenet's head with respect to her body?

I always assumed the above quote referred to parental concern, or filial love towards JonBenet, in that he did not want to disturb her neck/head region due to the ligature and paintbrush construction?

So was her head at 90 degrees to her shoulders ?


Why do think she was posed, what would be the motive?There are no crime scene photos of the body, but there are autopsy photos. One of them shows JonBenet's neck with the cord around it and the head is tilted to one side.

I envisage a totally different scenario from BlueCrab's.

IMO if she was held in the standing position with her arms tied at the wrists and held outstretched above her head during an abuse session, and was killed in this position, then her body could well have been left in this position when it was laid horizontally on the floor of the cellar maybe an hour or so after the killing. (doesn't a body go through an initial but temporary stiffening shortly (about an hour?) after death and remain so for a short period of time (several hours?).

If she had been left in this position on the cellar floor, the weight and shape of the head might have been enough to cause it to tilt sideways some time later, so that it came to rest on one of her outstretched arms and as it appears in the autopsy photo.

IMO this is what happened and this is how John found her when he first saw her at 1 pm the next day. John said he didn't see the rope around her neck. I think he was trying to untie her wrists and cradle her head in his arms at the same time, as a distressed father might very well do.

[aussiesheila]

UKGuy,

and the possible use of feces.
BlueCrabThanks BlueCrab, you've just given me an idea (but which you probably won't agree with, sorry)

I think very likely JonBenet might have actually soiled herself at some time during the abuse and the abusers were turned off by it so wiped her up with a black cloth before they continued to abuse her.

[BlueCrab]

BlueCrab,

Thanks for your reply, you may be correct, and JonBenet's death was at the hands of a sexual sadist.

Why are the Ramsey's staging a crime-scene for a sexual sadist where is the percentage in that?



UKGuy,

IMO the Ramseys know who he is, but a family member is also involved. Thus, the staging and the coverup.

BlueCrab

[UKGuy]

UKGuy,

IMO the Ramseys know who he is, but a family member is also involved. Thus, the staging and the coverup.

BlueCrab

Well sexual sadist or not it does appear that a family member is involved, otherwise there is no rationale in staging the crime scene.

A violent sexually motivated sadistic intruder is not going to hang around, re-arranging the crime scene , wiping JonBenet down, re-locating her body, then having a seat while he/she authors a stereotypical ransom note!

[UKGuy]

There are no crime scene photos of the body, but there are autopsy photos. One of them shows JonBenet's neck with the cord around it and the head is tilted to one side.

I envisage a totally different scenario from BlueCrab's.

IMO if she was held in the standing position with her arms tied at the wrists and held outstretched above her head during an abuse session, and was killed in this position, then her body could well have been left in this position when it was laid horizontally on the floor of the cellar maybe an hour or so after the killing. (doesn't a body go through an initial but temporary stiffening shortly (about an hour?) after death and remain so for a short period of time (several hours?).

If she had been left in this position on the cellar floor, the weight and shape of the head might have been enough to cause it to tilt sideways some time later, so that it came to rest on one of her outstretched arms and as it appears in the autopsy photo.

IMO this is what happened and this is how John found her when he first saw her at 1 pm the next day. John said he didn't see the rope around her neck. I think he was trying to untie her wrists and cradle her head in his arms at the same time, as a distressed father might very well do.

aussiesheila,

If she had been killed in an upright position, and left for any length of time then there should be abrasions on her wrists, arms etc where she was tethered standing up, due to gravity. But the Coroner Dr. John Meyer did not record any abrasions like this in his autopsy report!

I suspect her arms are extended above her head due to her being re-dressed, probably from some item of clothing then to the the red turtleneck and back into her white gap top?

It is very curious that Patsy wants us all to know that she and JonBenet argued over her wearing that red top, as if that is a pseudo explanation for something none of us has questioned yet?

Adding a tabloid twist to this theme, since JonBenet was encouraged to dress up and perform for her pageants, she may have been dressed up and going through some routine prior to her death?


.

[aussiesheila]

aussiesheila,

If she had been killed in an upright position, and left for any length of time then there should be abrasions on her wrists, arms etc where she was tethered standing up, due to gravity. But the Coroner Dr. John Meyer did not record any abrasions like this in his autopsy report!

I suspect her arms are extended above her head due to her being re-dressed, probably from some item of clothing then to the the red turtleneck and back into her white gap top?

It is very curious that Patsy wants us all to know that she and JonBenet argued over her wearing that red top, as if that is a pseudo explanation for something none of us has questioned yet?

Adding a tabloid twist to this theme, since JonBenet was encouraged to dress up and perform for her pageants, she may have been dressed up and going through some routine prior to her death?


.
re abrasions on her wrists:
Yes you have a point there UKGuy and if what you say is definitely true then I would have to reconsider my idea. But if she was not hanging, but rather standing on a chair with her arms stretched tight to ropes attached overhead, ie her body held taught but not hanging, it might be possible for only very minor abrasions to result, particularly if the Gap top sleeve ends were between the rope and her skin. But I don't know for sure.

re clothing:
I don't think she was re-dressed in the Gap top, I think that was on her the whole evening, even during the abuse.

re Patsy:
well she is so full of guilt all her answers are designed to deceive, IMO

re pageants:
I don't think pageants had anything to do with the case