Page 11 of 43 FirstFirst ... 23456789101112131415161718192021 ... LastLast
Results 251 to 275 of 1069

Thread: Members' Theories

  1. #251
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,070
    Quote Originally Posted by DeeDee249 View Post
    What part of OPINION do you not understand, Whitefang? JR discusses Patsy's Klonipin use before JB's death in one of his interviews.
    IDI theories have no PROOF either.

    Well, let's see. Nope, that's true. No proof. Haven't named anyone as the perp, either.

    To say that the content of one of my previous posts was not funny, are you suggesting that my opinions were not funny? Perfectly acceptable though, right? After all, they were just opinions. But, why bother to mention that? Distasteful? Crude? Vulgar? Making light of a tragedy? Yet, they were just opinions, isn't that correct? No proof. Just opinions.

    I haven't found proof that John said Patsy was taking Klonopin before the murder. If you have, wonderful.

    Well, since I OBVIOUSLY DON'T know which PART OF THE WORD OPINION I don't understand, WHY WOULD YOU ASK ME, WHICH PART OF THE WORD OPINION DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND? IF I KNEW, i wouldn't make comments that prove i DON'T KNOW what part i don't know.
    BTW, what part of Klonopin can't you spell?
    Last edited by WHITEFANG; 05-12-2010 at 01:20 AM.

  2. #252
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Ceti Alpha V
    Posts
    11,203
    EASY, everybody. Let's all take a breath, here. Okay?
    All posts made by me are MY exclusive property, and are NOT to be used or reproduced without my permission. DAVE SMASH THIEVES!

  3. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to SuperDave For This Useful Post:


  4. #253
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,070

    could have stopped the sunrise hearing you weep

    Were the incessant insults of P and J merely your opinions? Licking his lips was directly related to evidence in this case? The leis they wore and the size of their shirt buttons were pertinent? DeeDee is guaranteed the right to express herself, so let her respond.
    Last edited by WHITEFANG; 05-12-2010 at 01:40 PM.

  5. #254
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    In the Federal Witness Protection Program
    Posts
    7,587
    Quote Originally Posted by WHITEFANG View Post
    Were the incessant insults of P and J merely your opinions? Licking his lips was directly related to evidence in this case? The leis they wore and the size of their shirt buttons were pertinent? DeeDee is guaranteed the right to express herself, so let her respond.
    I don't care about JR licking his lips at all. I have a lot of sympathy for Patsy, regardless of how she may or may not be a part of this crime. I have always felt she was a doting mother. I never commented about their leis or shirt buttons either, neither have anything to do with the crime. When I make a comment, it is usually relevant to the crime. I don't make any comment for the purpose of being insulting. If someone doesn't like my opinions or comments, they are free to place me on "ignore". I don't give a sweet rat's a$$ how anyone feels about this case, either. We all have our own council to keep. I don't begrudge anyone, RDI or IDI, their own theories about what happened that night. I have always felt that with all the different theories, ONE of them is bound to be right- and that has always been comforting. I don't care which one it is, either. I'd be THRILLED to have it proven that it was NOT a loved one's face that was the last thing JB saw. Bet many IDI's can't say the same about the other side.
    I could not care less about how much money the Rs had, how they lived their lives, how Patsy decorated her house and how they raised their kids. I could not care less about Patsy's past with the exception of how it may have played a part in her relationship with both her mother and her daughter.
    Last edited by DeeDee249; 05-12-2010 at 08:42 PM.
    THIS time, we get it RIGHT!

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

  6. The Following 5 Users Say Thank You to DeeDee249 For This Useful Post:


  7. #255
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    In the Federal Witness Protection Program
    Posts
    7,587
    Quote Originally Posted by WHITEFANG View Post
    Well, let's see. Nope, that's true. No proof. Haven't named anyone as the perp, either.

    To say that the content of one of my previous posts was not funny, are you suggesting that my opinions were not funny? Perfectly acceptable though, right? After all, they were just opinions. But, why bother to mention that? Distasteful? Crude? Vulgar? Making light of a tragedy? Yet, they were just opinions, isn't that correct? No proof. Just opinions.
    Right. I found them all of the above. So what? I also said that I got the point you were trying to make. The more dreadful the imagined scene, the more difficult it is to picture a loving mother doing it.

    And I can spell Klonopin just fine, thanks. I don't take the drug, so it's not like I can look at the label to see how it is spelled. And if it soothes you to criticize my spelling, go right ahead. Childish, though.
    Last edited by DeeDee249; 05-12-2010 at 08:50 PM.
    THIS time, we get it RIGHT!

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

  8. The Following User Says Thank You to DeeDee249 For This Useful Post:


  9. #256
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,070

    and the love that I feel is so far away

    Your sympathy for Patsy is overwhelming.
    If you don't know how to spell Klonopin, I suggest you look it up.
    If you don't like what I have to say in response to your comments, press the ignore button. If you understood what I was trying to say, say so. If you think my comments weren't funny, take a look at the accusations you have made against two innocent, loving parents who were cleared as suspects in the horrible murder of their child. If you state that Patsy could not have seen Joni's hands, back it up with something substantial. Your statement that since the average size Afghan would cover most of her body as the basis for your theory is precisely how some of the ridiculous, harmful, horrible, disgusting, not-funny rumors about people begin, perpetuate and do real harm to others.
    Last edited by WHITEFANG; 05-12-2010 at 10:32 PM.

  10. #257
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    In the Federal Witness Protection Program
    Posts
    7,587
    Quote Originally Posted by WHITEFANG View Post
    Your sympathy for Patsy is overwhelming.
    If you don't know how to spell Klonopin, I suggest you look it up.
    If you don't like what I have to say in response to your comments, press the ignore button. If you understood what I was trying to say, say so. If you think my comments weren't funny, take a look at the accusations you have made against two innocent, loving parents who were cleared as suspects in the horrible murder of their child. If you state that Patsy could not have seen Joni's hands, back it up with something substantial. Your statement that since the average size Afghan would cover most of her body as the basis for your theory is precisely how some of the ridiculous, harmful, horrible, disgusting, not-funny rumors about people begin, perpetuate and do real harm to others.
    Not a rumor. It WAS an afghan. That was a statement made by LE and the coroner. If her arms were covered, no one that was upstairs would have seen her hands. Both parents were under that "umbrella of suspicion" for a long time. That wasn't rumor either. I don't doubt the parents were loving. And this wasn't Murder One. But something happened that night that many people feel the parents are aware of, myself included.
    You weren't there (or were you?) so you don't know if her hands were visible for a fact either. We are BOTH forming an opinion.
    Check my post- I spelled Klonopin perfectly. Didn't need to look it up. You need to back off with the nasty attitude- you haven't been treated that way. I am not the only one here with that theory, so you are specifically targeting me. This is a forum where there are differing opinions on this case. I am sure every forum on this site is the same. So dialog of this nature is expected.
    The ignore button doesn't work all that well- you can still see "ignored" posts in other people's posts when quoted.
    Last edited by DeeDee249; 05-13-2010 at 09:52 PM.
    THIS time, we get it RIGHT!

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

  11. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to DeeDee249 For This Useful Post:


  12. #258
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,070

    i had waited for time to change her, the only change that came was over me

    Let's try to be perfectly clear. (Big Dick Nixon) I didn't question the size of the Afghan. I said Patsy may have seen her hands when she held her daughter when she found her body under the Christmas tree. The Afghan may have covered most of her body, but that does not mean her hands were covered. You said she did not see her hands. You said her hands were covered.

    You said I had been told repeatedly what the term "consistent with" meant. I asked you to show me the "repeated" occasions this occurred. I haven't seen your answer.

    Why don't you address these two issues, first?

    Yes, I was there and everything I say is beyond reproach and may be viewed as Gospel. It may be reproduced only with written permission from yours truly.
    Last edited by WHITEFANG; 05-14-2010 at 12:33 AM.

  13. #259
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    In the Federal Witness Protection Program
    Posts
    7,587
    Well I'll try one at a time.

    I haven't seen Nixon's Dick in person, so I can't comment on whether it is big or not.

    I had mentioned a few times that it was Dr. Lee, a forensic specialist who has been consulted on this case (he was the one who made the "rice already cooked" comment, referring to the mistakes made at the beginning of the investigation) who discussed the fiber evidence. He explained that when sourcing any fiber evidence, you can only say that a fiber is "consistent with" or "identical to" because the fiber in your evidence, even if it came from a suspected item, is one of many fibers that make up that item. By the very nature of having it in your possession to be tested means that it is no longer presently a part of the suspected item. There may also have been many, many items made from the same fibers, and this is true even in a one-of-a-kind item, because even then it is still one (or a few) of many. And because of that, it can't be said that it IS the same fiber. Only that it is identical to it, or consistent with the fibers that comprise it. But this type of classification has been used in other cases, for example when carpet fibers are found on a body that are consistent with carpet found in the trunk of a suspect's car or home.
    As far as the afghan goes, it is my belief that if JB was covered with an afghan and sweatshirt, as had been reported by Detective Arndt, her hands would have been covered because they were shown in a photo (described below) as being held up in front of JB, bent at the elbows, like a boxer almost- and no one would have seen her palms.
    In the autopsy photos available to us, her hands are partially seen in paper bags (standard procedure) on the living room rug, with the coroner's ruler over her, so this was after her coverings were removed. It's the position of her hands in that photo that leads me to believe her hands were not exposed.
    The other photos of her hands were taken at the autopsy. Rigor was subsiding at that point, or the coroner may have broken rigor himself, though he did not mention this. Her hands are palms down and appear to be at her sides, or at least they are not bent up in the position they were in on the rug the day before.
    There is a drawing out there, too, which I feel is misleading. It shows her arms straight over her head, and this is not the way they are shown in the photo of her on the rug. By that time, rigor mortis has reached its full effect, and no one there could (or would) have been able to pull her arms straight up like in the drawing. I have never seen it reported who made that drawing, so I can't say if it was someone who actually saw her or was drawing from a description.
    Last edited by DeeDee249; 05-14-2010 at 10:45 PM.
    THIS time, we get it RIGHT!

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

  14. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to DeeDee249 For This Useful Post:


  15. #260
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,070
    Quote Originally Posted by DeeDee249 View Post
    Well I'll try one at a time.

    I haven't seen Nixon's Dick in person, so I can't comment on whether it is big or not.

    You're a riot, Alice.

    I had mentioned a few times that it was Dr. Lee, a forensic specialist who has been consulted on this case

    I asked you to point out where I was told this? Not where you mentioned it. You did not tell me and that is what I asked you to show me. What kind of reasoning supports the idea that since you mentioned it, not to me, but somewhere, sometime and to who knows who, that you told me several times?

    he was the one who made the "rice already cooked" comment, referring to the mistakes made at the beginning of the investigation) who discussed the fiber evidence. He explained that when sourcing any fiber evidence, you can only say that a fiber is "consistent with" or "identical to" because the fiber in your evidence, even if it came from a suspected item, is one of many fibers that make up that item. By the very nature of having it in your possession to be tested means that it is no longer presently a part of the suspected item. There may also have been many, many items made from the same fibers, and this is true even in a one-of-a-kind item, because even then it is still one (or a few) of many. And because of that, it can't be said that it IS the same fiber. Only that it is identical to it, or consistent with the fibers that comprise it. But this type of classification has been used in other cases, for example when carpet fibers are found on a body that are consistent with carpet found in the trunk of a suspect's car or home.
    As far as the afghan goes, it is my belief that if JB was covered with an afghan and sweatshirt, as had been reported by Detective Arndt, her hands would have been covered because they were shown in a photo (described below) as being held up in front of JB, bent at the elbows, like a boxer almost- and no one would have seen her palms.
    In the autopsy photos available to us, her hands are partially seen in paper bags (standard procedure) on the living room rug, with the coroner's ruler over her, so this was after her coverings were removed. It's the position of her hands in that photo that leads me to believe her hands were not exposed.
    The other photos of her hands were taken at the autopsy. Rigor was subsiding at that point, or the coroner may have broken rigor himself, though he did not mention this. Her hands are palms down and appear to be at her sides, or at least they are not bent up in the position they were in on the rug the day before.
    There is a drawing out there, too, which I feel is misleading. It shows her arms straight over her head, and this is not the way they are shown in the photo of her on the rug. By that time, rigor mortis has reached its full effect, and no one there could (or would) have been able to pull her arms straight up like in the drawing. I have never seen it reported who made that drawing, so I can't say if it was someone who actually saw her or was drawing from a description.
    DeeDee249, you have added more ideas that you believe prove Patsy did not see Joni's hands when she dropped down on her body (as the police report says.) Nothing you offer proves that or comes anywhere close to being able to draw that conclusion. Don't you understand that?

  16. #261
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    In the Federal Witness Protection Program
    Posts
    7,587
    Quote Originally Posted by WHITEFANG View Post
    DeeDee249, you have added more ideas that you believe prove Patsy did not see Joni's hands when she dropped down on her body (as the police report says.) Nothing you offer proves that or comes anywhere close to being able to draw that conclusion. Don't you understand that?
    Of course I do. But the way the scene in that living room has been described to me (in several books as well as reading Det. Arndt's testimony) and in viewing the autopsy photos, her hands would not have been visible.
    It is a conclusion that I am drawing based on what I have read and seen. I don't expect to be able to prove it to anyone- how could I? To prove it, there would have to be a photo of Patsy on the body and that doesn't exist as far as we know.
    To ME, it is the only conclusion I can draw. When I state my ideas, I TRY not to use the word "prove" because, really, I can't prove it.
    I certainly believe the police report that Patsy threw herself on her daughter's body. But as you said, I BELIEVE (not KNOW, not CAN PROVE) that if JB's body was covered the way it has been described, and her hands were the way they appear in the autopsy photo where she is still on the rug, then her hands would not have been visible to anyone, not just to Patsy.
    I am not the only one who feels this way and I can't change the way I feel.
    My apologies - though I have posted what I read about the fiber evidence and Dr. Lee's comments about it, I did not specifically post it to you, so you may have missed it. And I sometimes forget that newer posters may not have read all the threads on this forum and so are unaware of the extent that some things have been discussed previously.
    Let's be honest here- many of us posting here have probably more than one theory of how this night unfolded. We each draw our own conclusions (I can't in all honesty say I have just one conclusion). We have to agree to disagree.
    Last edited by DeeDee249; 05-15-2010 at 10:33 PM.
    THIS time, we get it RIGHT!

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

  17. The Following User Says Thank You to DeeDee249 For This Useful Post:


  18. #262
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    In the Federal Witness Protection Program
    Posts
    7,587
    OT- I loved Alice Kramden.
    THIS time, we get it RIGHT!

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

  19. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to DeeDee249 For This Useful Post:


  20. #263
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,070

    for the latest paperback edition of the boyscout manual

    From 20 feet away I raise my hand in front of your face with my palm facing you. I ask, what do you see and obviously you reply, your hand. Behind me 20 back is Super and I ask him the same question and he responds with the same answer, your hand. Darn sure that is my hand. All agree. No funny business or smoke and mirrors. Okay? Okay.

    I ask you to tell me if any of my fingernails have been smashed and are black and blue. You are absolutely positive I have no fingernails and obviously none is black and blue. Soright? Soright.

    I ask Super the same question and he says all look normal except the one on your ring finger. That baby is black, blue and green and about to fall off. Looks painful, how did you do that?

    Houston, we have a problem. Who is telling the truth? Both, neither, what is truth? Guilty?



    Off the subject. Never a Sharon Stone fan, but by golly she has gotten even prettier as time passes. Holy cow! She looks wonderful on Law and Order as an ex-cop become lawyer. Oh baby. Hubba Hubba
    Last edited by WHITEFANG; 05-15-2010 at 10:55 PM.

  21. #264
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    In the Federal Witness Protection Program
    Posts
    7,587
    My "I loved Alice Kramden" was a response to your "you're a riot, Alice" That was what Ralph Kramden said to her nearly every show. Younger posters won't know that- and I figured you did since you used that phrase. I agree about Sharon Stone. She looks great.

    About your fingernails- I believe your post has ME looking at your palms and SD looking at the back of your hand. So he would be able to see your fingernails and I would not. Therefore, you assume I would believe you did not have fingernails. Yet, had this been an actual event, I would think you probably did have fingernails, since most people do, and so would not make the statement that I was sure you did not have them. I'd answer your query about whether they were bruised by asking you to turn your hands around.
    Your post is based on me thinking you had no fingernails, yet that is illogical. What reason might I have to believe you did not have them when it is a fact that most people do? Just because I didn't see them is not enough to make me think you did not have them. But I have a feeling there is a point you are trying to make.
    Last edited by DeeDee249; 05-15-2010 at 11:01 PM.
    THIS time, we get it RIGHT!

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

  22. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to DeeDee249 For This Useful Post:


  23. #265
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,070

    Greasy fingers smearing shabby clothes

    You want to go places? To the moon, Alice!

    A simple illustration for the purpose of presenting two sides of the same picture or subject. Not meant to overdue it, but just to point out how we can see the same thing and yet observe different things. And, in this case, having knowledge of the object under examination, an assumption is made. An accurate assumption in this case. Fingernails are common on a human hand. Also, this knowledge by itself could not shed light on damaged fingernails. Yet, both participants saw a human hand, without a doubt.

    Just a little fun, folks.

  24. The Following User Says Thank You to WHITEFANG For This Useful Post:


  25. #266
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,070

    eastern world it is exploding

    "What's more, the garrote used to strangle JonBenet, made of rope and the broken end of one of Patsy Ramsey's paintbrushes, was an elaborate instrument of death—an unlikely tool for the Ramseys to have fashioned in the panicked minutes after allegedly striking her. Smit discovered a wood splinter, apparently from the brush handle, on the carpet just outside the room where she was found. Police found fibers from the same carpet on a baseball bat in the bushes outside the house, leading Smit to believe the killer used it to bludgeon JonBenet. DNA found under JonBenet's fingernails and in her underpants was male, but did not match John Ramsey's."



    "The Boulder police were skeptical of Smit's stun-gun theory, and showed some of the autopsy pictures to Arapahoe County coroner Dr. Michael Doberson, who had researched stun-gun wounds. Doberson said he didn't think the marks were from a stun gun. But recently, NEWSWEEK asked Doberson to review Smit's stun-gun evidence.


    Doberson says the police never showed him Smit's pictures comparing the size and orientation of the marks with the electrical contacts on the Air Taser.


    He now calls Smit's stun-gun theory 'compelling.'"
    Last edited by WHITEFANG; 05-27-2010 at 05:41 PM.

  26. The Following User Says Thank You to WHITEFANG For This Useful Post:


  27. #267
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,070

    Violence flaring, bullets floating

    Dr. Cyril Wecht M.D. staunch advocate that the Ramsey's murdered their daughter said, "If you inflict a blow like that on someone whose heart is beating," he asserts, "the heart doesn't stop, because the cardiac and respiratory centers are at the base of the brain. You're not damaging that with a blow to the top of the head. It'll become compromised as the brain swells, but initially there's no compromise. They control your heart and lungs. The heart continues to beat. The blood continues to flow. But in the Ramsey case, they got less than a teaspoon and a half of blood. If you have a beating heart and the carotid arteries are carrying blood, this person doesn't die right away. That means that blow was inflicted when she was already dead or dying."

    The strangulation occurred before the head was smashed in according to prominent forensic pathologist Dr. Cyril Wecht.

  28. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to WHITEFANG For This Useful Post:


  29. #268
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,070

    you don't believe in war but what's that gun your toting?

    In an interview with KUSA-TV, JonBenet's pediatrician, Francesco Beuf, said he never saw any indication that the child had ever experienced sexual abuse.
    "I can tell you as far as her medical history is concerned there was never any hint whatsoever of sexual abuse," he said. "I didn't see any hint of emotional abuse or physical abuse. She was a very much loved child, just as her brother."
    Beuf said that as a pediatrician he sees all sorts of children and he can normally tell whether a child is happy.
    Beuf described JonBenet as "just a wonderful, happy kid who had the strength to deal with some very tough situations with regard to her mother's illness."

  30. #269
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Ceti Alpha V
    Posts
    11,203
    Quote Originally Posted by WHITEFANG View Post
    "What's more, the garrote used to strangle JonBenet, made of rope and the broken end of one of Patsy Ramsey's paintbrushes, was an elaborate instrument of death—an unlikely tool for the Ramseys to have fashioned in the panicked minutes after allegedly striking her. Smit discovered a wood splinter, apparently from the brush handle, on the carpet just outside the room where she was found. Police found fibers from the same carpet on a baseball bat in the bushes outside the house, leading Smit to believe the killer used it to bludgeon JonBenet. DNA found under JonBenet's fingernails and in her underpants was male, but did not match John Ramsey's."



    "The Boulder police were skeptical of Smit's stun-gun theory, and showed some of the autopsy pictures to Arapahoe County coroner Dr. Michael Doberson, who had researched stun-gun wounds. Doberson said he didn't think the marks were from a stun gun. But recently, NEWSWEEK asked Doberson to review Smit's stun-gun evidence.


    Doberson says the police never showed him Smit's pictures comparing the size and orientation of the marks with the electrical contacts on the Air Taser.


    He now calls Smit's stun-gun theory 'compelling.'"
    Too bad about the credibility issues.
    All posts made by me are MY exclusive property, and are NOT to be used or reproduced without my permission. DAVE SMASH THIEVES!

  31. #270
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Ceti Alpha V
    Posts
    11,203
    Quote Originally Posted by WHITEFANG View Post
    In an interview with KUSA-TV, JonBenet's pediatrician, Francesco Beuf, said he never saw any indication that the child had ever experienced sexual abuse. "I can tell you as far as her medical history is concerned there was never any hint whatsoever of sexual abuse," he said. "I didn't see any hint of emotional abuse or physical abuse. She was a very much loved child, just as her brother."
    I'd say DD and I addressed that one quite well already. (After all, Fang; you did ask.)

    Beuf said that as a pediatrician he sees all sorts of children and he can normally tell whether a child is happy. Beuf described JonBenet as "just a wonderful, happy kid who had the strength to deal with some very tough situations with regard to her mother's illness."
    Wonderful. Nice to know he's a freakin' mind-reader. Maybe he's never heard of Child Abuse Accomodation Syndrome. Something like 90% of abused kids show no outward signs at all.

    As I wrote on another thread, people think it's so easy. But literally every single thing has to go 100% right in order for an abuser to be caught.
    All posts made by me are MY exclusive property, and are NOT to be used or reproduced without my permission. DAVE SMASH THIEVES!

  32. The Following User Says Thank You to SuperDave For This Useful Post:


  33. #271
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,070

    do you believe in the day

    Quote Originally Posted by SuperDave View Post
    I'd say DD and I addressed that one quite well already. (After all, Fang; you did ask.)



    Wonderful. Nice to know he's a freakin' mind-reader. Maybe he's never heard of Child Abuse Accomodation Syndrome. Something like 90% of abused kids show no outward signs at all.

    As I wrote on another thread, people think it's so easy. But literally every single thing has to go 100% right in order for an abuser to be caught.

    Their credibility and opinions are as good as most.

  34. #272
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,070

    the horses' breath clouding

    Quote Originally Posted by WHITEFANG View Post
    Dr. Cyril Wecht M.D. staunch advocate that the Ramsey's murdered their daughter said, "If you inflict a blow like that on someone whose heart is beating," he asserts, "the heart doesn't stop, because the cardiac and respiratory centers are at the base of the brain. You're not damaging that with a blow to the top of the head. It'll become compromised as the brain swells, but initially there's no compromise. They control your heart and lungs. The heart continues to beat. The blood continues to flow. But in the Ramsey case, they got less than a teaspoon and a half of blood. If you have a beating heart and the carotid arteries are carrying blood, this person doesn't die right away. That means that blow was inflicted when she was already dead or dying."

    The strangulation occurred before the head was smashed in according to prominent forensic pathologist Dr. Cyril Wecht.

    JonBenet was strangled to death and then struck with a violent blow to her head which fractured her skull about 8 inches in length and created a large commuted fracture, as well, according to Dr. Wecht. Theories that she was the victim of an accidental blow to her head first, rest moot before the expertise and experience of this forensic pathologist. Whoever the perpetrator of this vicious act, he spared the massive blow until she was already gone. Neither the Ramsey's nor anyone else would have reason to be concerned with camouflaging the true cause of death.

    Built upon this foundation, new, pertinent theories may one day help investigators to identity the killer of JonBenet

  35. #273
    Quote Originally Posted by WHITEFANG View Post
    JonBenet was strangled to death and then struck with a violent blow to her head which fractured her skull about 8 inches in length and created a large commuted fracture, as well, according to Dr. Wecht. Theories that she was the victim of an accidental blow to her head first, rest moot before the expertise and experience of this forensic pathologist. Whoever the perpetrator of this vicious act, he spared the massive blow until she was already gone. Neither the Ramsey's nor anyone else would have reason to be concerned with camouflaging the true cause of death.

    Built upon this foundation, new, pertinent theories may one day help investigators to identity the killer of JonBenet
    I think WF that this is the only reason that sits well with me so far as to why no external bruising, bleeding or swelling. The strangle and bash happened at or about the same time. Yep, happy with that theory.

  36. #274
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Posts
    1,070

    the kettle almost boiling

    Quote Originally Posted by MurriFlower View Post
    I think WF that this is the only reason that sits well with me so far as to why no external bruising, bleeding or swelling. The strangle and bash happened at or about the same time. Yep, happy with that theory.
    Cool.

    Like trying to fit a round peg into a square hole, isn't it? Then, when we're given the piece that fits, there's that sense that, "this is what I've needed." Don't have to strain and twist and jam it. Poof, like that, it makes sense.
    Last edited by WHITEFANG; 05-27-2010 at 11:06 PM.

  37. #275
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    In the Federal Witness Protection Program
    Posts
    7,587
    Quote Originally Posted by MurriFlower View Post
    I think WF that this is the only reason that sits well with me so far as to why no external bruising, bleeding or swelling. The strangle and bash happened at or about the same time. Yep, happy with that theory.
    Me, too.
    THIS time, we get it RIGHT!

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

Page 11 of 43 FirstFirst ... 23456789101112131415161718192021 ... LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •