961 users online (210 members and 751 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 72
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    4,970

    Why Patsy

    Will you please make a list of things/evidence that makes you 100% that it was Patsy who killed JB and not JR,BR or JAR.
    Thanks.
    The rice is already cooked...

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Georgia
    Posts
    1,897
    Hi Madeleine. I need to clarify before I can respond to your post. I believe Patsy is responsible for the head injury (but I don't believe the head injury is what killed JB). So, for me, that leaves one of the other three as being the killer.
    "This Time We Get it Right!"

    "For those who believe, no proof is necessary.
    For those who don't believe, no proof is possible." Stuart Chase

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Posts
    30,906
    Quote Originally Posted by joeskidbeck View Post
    Hi Madeleine. I need to clarify before I can respond to your post. I believe Patsy is responsible for the head injury (but I don't believe the head injury is what killed JB). So, for me, that leaves one of the other three as being the killer.

    I think Patsy struck her and that head injury would have killed her eventually. I also believe she fashioned the rope.

    I am wondering something legally...if that were true, that Pasty head bashed and and someone else came along and strangled her with the rope hastening death. Wouldn't they both be guilty of different degrees of murder? But, if they conspired to stage that would make both guilty of the first degree premeditated murder if the rope was used to end her life. What would it be if the rope was intended only as staging and unknowingly finished her off? Which came first? head blow or rope.


    I think all of these questions come into play when trying to understand why they were never charged. It's a tangled mess.


    Nosy by Nature and a Websleuther by choice

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    4,970
    Quote Originally Posted by Linda7NJ View Post
    I think Patsy struck her and that head injury would have killed her eventually. I also believe she fashioned the rope.

    I am wondering something legally...if that were true, that Pasty head bashed and and someone else came along and strangled her with the rope hastening death. Wouldn't they both be guilty of different degrees of murder? But, if they conspired to stage that would make both guilty of the first degree premeditated murder if the rope was used to end her life. What would it be if the rope was intended only as staging and unknowingly finished her off? Which came first? head blow or rope.


    I think all of these questions come into play when trying to understand why they were never charged. It's a tangled mess.
    I agree re the mess.
    Let's say that PR bashed her head but she didn't die.She died when JR strangled her in order to cover up,not knowing she is dead.I guess in this case,he is the one guilty of murder.Legally.Or?
    The rice is already cooked...

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    4,970
    Maybe it's different if the head blow would eventually have killed her anyway.Can you be charged of murder if you kill someone who is already dying?
    The rice is already cooked...

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Ceti Alpha V
    Posts
    13,221
    Quote Originally Posted by Linda7NJ View Post
    I am wondering something legally...if that were true, that Pasty head bashed and and someone else came along and strangled her with the rope hastening death. Wouldn't they both be guilty of different degrees of murder?
    I don't think so. One, the head bash, if it was during a fit of fury, would be manslaughter, Murder Two at the far outside. And regardless of who tied the cord, if they thought she was already dead, then it's not murder. Murder requires intent. You can't murder someone you think is already dead.

    But, if they conspired to stage that would make both guilty of the first degree premeditated murder if the rope was used to end her life.
    Only if they KNEW she was still alive.

    What would it be if the rope was intended only as staging and unknowingly finished her off?
    Like I said, you can't murder someone you think is dead. So it would probably be manslaughter when you take it all in.

    Which came first? head blow or rope.
    I'm forced to say head blow. But you'll get a lot of different answers.

    I think all of these questions come into play when trying to understand why they were never charged. It's a tangled mess.
    Right on both counts.
    I'm as mad as HELL and I'm NOT gonna take it anymore!.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Ceti Alpha V
    Posts
    13,221
    Quote Originally Posted by madeleine View Post
    Maybe it's different if the head blow would eventually have killed her anyway.Can you be charged of murder if you kill someone who is already dying?
    Yes, you can, IF you know that the person is still alive, even only barely.
    I'm as mad as HELL and I'm NOT gonna take it anymore!.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    In the Federal Witness Protection Program
    Posts
    8,022
    It would be very hard, if not impossible, to prove that someone didn't realize she was still alive. And just as hard to prove they weren't lying about it.
    The coroner was unable to determine which of the two causes of death came first or was the bigger contributor to her death. Without that, it would not be possible to charge one (of the two) perps with a more serious crime unless you could prove which one committed the more serious crime and also if that crime contributed more to her death.
    THIS time, we get it RIGHT!

    This post is my constitutionally-protected opinion. Please do not copy or take it anywhere else.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    In the Federal Witness Protection Program
    Posts
    8,022
    It would be very hard, if not impossible, to prove that someone didn't realize she was still alive. And just as hard to prove they weren't lying about it.
    The coroner was unable to determine which of the two causes of death came first or was the bigger contributor to her death. Without that, it would not be possible to charge one (of the two) perps with a more serious crime unless you could prove which one committed the more serious crime and also if that crime contributed more to her death.
    THIS time, we get it RIGHT!

    This post is my constitutionally-protected opinion. Please do not copy or take it anywhere else.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    4,970
    I remember one article in the archives where Meyer was saying that he didn't put everything in the report because there are some things he will talk about only on the stand.Is this ok?Is this how it works?
    The rice is already cooked...


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    4,970
    http://web.dailycamera.com/extra/ram...7/08/14-2.html

    From a statement by Boulder County Coroner John E. Meyer, M.D.:

    "The time of an 'unwitnessed' death is very difficult to determine with any precision, and at best is an estimate based not only on autopsy findings but also on investigative information.
    "I consider estimation of time of death to be an interpretive finding rather than a factual statement, and it is not this Office's practice to include this estimate as part of any autopsy report. As has been stated in the past, it would also be inappropriate for me, as a potential expert and material witness, to make interpretive statements prior to testifying in court."
    The rice is already cooked...

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    4,970
    Wecht also questioned why there was no estimated time of death in the autopsy.

    But Meyer said it isn't unusual not to include an estimated time of death in an autopsy report.

    "The investigation is still ongoing," Meyer said. "There may be some point that comes up during the investigation that might have an influence on what that estimated time of death is. I don't like to put interpretive things in an autopsy report."


    Yeah right "I don't like",he just left the door open for a loooooooooooooot of interpretation by what he didn't do.
    The rice is already cooked...

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    4,970
    I don't like to put interpretive things in an autopsy report.



    Dunno why I feel like LAUGHING.Everything he wrote in it is interpretive,no exact COD,no TOD,nothing clear about the injuries down there.
    The rice is already cooked...

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    5,299
    Quote Originally Posted by madeleine View Post
    I don't like to put interpretive things in an autopsy report.



    Dunno why I feel like LAUGHING.Everything he wrote in it is interpretive,no exact COD,no TOD,nothing clear about the injuries down there.
    Might as well throw the autopsy report along with the ransom note in the trash. You're not going to solve this case with either one. There's nothing in the autopsy report or the ransom note that would allow you to draw any important conclusions.

    I mean, the ransom note was a big lie, right? It was so bogus. There was no kidnapping, JBR was left there!

    The autopsy report seems to be yet another example of how things can be easily misconstrued even by professionals.
    Last edited by Holdontoyourhat; 07-16-2010 at 02:11 PM.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    In the Federal Witness Protection Program
    Posts
    8,022
    Not so much misconstrued as stated in an evasive or unclear manner.

    It is not unusual for a coroner to state only what he SEES or observes when autopsying the body. But for example, when there is a stab wound, it should be described as a stab wound and not just a hole in the body. If the knife is present in the crime scene, the coroner should be able to tell if that knife made the specific stab would, as opposed to some other sharp object.
    It is clear in this case that Mayer did not KNOW what caused her vaginal injuries or caused her to bleed in a quantity sufficient to require wiping.
    THIS time, we get it RIGHT!

    This post is my constitutionally-protected opinion. Please do not copy or take it anywhere else.

Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Just Patsy, only Patsy
    By Linda7NJ in forum JonBenet Ramsey
    Replies: 196
    Last Post: 10-03-2016, 04:45 PM
  2. Patsy's IQ?
    By Foreign Faction in forum JonBenet Ramsey
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 05-06-2016, 11:15 AM
  3. Patsy's patsy...
    By redeemed in forum JonBenet Ramsey
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 12-02-2009, 10:02 PM
  4. !!!!!!!!!! Patsy did it!!!!!!!!
    By Vet4Bush in forum JonBenet Ramsey
    Replies: 190
    Last Post: 09-29-2006, 11:46 AM
  5. If Patsy killed JBR in a rage, what does Patsy deserve?
    By GuruJosh in forum JonBenet Ramsey
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 08-03-2005, 11:50 PM