1340 users online (326 members and 1014 guests)  


The Killing Season - Websleuths

Websleuths News


Page 1 of 10 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 143
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,300

    Cyril Wecht's theory of the murder

    I have to admit I've only been a casual follower of the Ramsey case. Not because it wasn't interesting but because I was hooked by the Routier case just months before and stayed very immersed in that for many years. I tried to keep up with the death of that poor little girl, but time always limits me.

    When I finally did resurface I began to read and discuss the Ramsey case on the forums until I ran into a person who was, for lack of a better term, a bully on almost all of the Ramsey forums I read. I won't say the name because of the constant threats of lawsuits I saw from this person but I have to say they left a very bad taste in my mouth on forum discussions of this case.

    Still curious about the case but totally turned off to the forums, I read Wecht's book. I have to say I found his theory compelling, especially the lack of blood from the head wound.

    Has the book ever been discussed on this site?
    What is your opinion of his conclusions?
    I'm going to take my ball and go home

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    908
    I am interested to hear what you have to say. I have not read the book.

    It probably has been discussed somewhere on here everything else has; but, I don't know where.

    Someone threatened to sue you? Now that is just not right.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    1,878
    It's been discussed. There are of course various opinions.

    The thing is, imo, the garrotte doesn't function well for erotic asphyxiation games. It should tighten and loosen very easily. This one didn't loosen easily. Once it was pulled, it stayed in place until someone used both hands to loosen it.

    Of course the garrotte found on her neck at autopsy isn't necessarily what was used to strangle her. There are some who think there was a prior strangulation. You'll have to ask them for their reasons, I don't think there were two, just one. I don't think it was an EA game, as Dr. Wecht does. But I have to pay attention to Wecht's theory, he's no dummy.
    I'm just playing detective here. I have no idea who killed JonBenet. It's just an opinion.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,300

    In a nutshell...

    Quote Originally Posted by Charterhouse View Post
    I am interested to hear what you have to say. I have not read the book.

    It probably has been discussed somewhere on here everything else has; but, I don't know where.
    Wecht was asked to look at the case without knowing it was the Ramsey case. Although his book discusses the surrounding drama and other evidence in the case, Wecht's focus is on the autopsy evidence.

    He saw clear evidence of chronic sexual abuse, most likely digital or similar. So basically, he thinks the strangulation was a sex game and that the vagus nerve was accidentally pinched which immediately compromised her heart function. She went limp. The head wound came from the murderer panicking, striking her head either accidentally or purposefully.
    His evidence for that is the small amount of blood in the serious head wound. To him, if a head wound like that were sustained when her heart was still functioning normally there would be a lot of blood. As it was, there was very little...I think it was characterized as a tablespoon full of blood. It suggested to him that she was almost dead when her head wound occured.

    I've never heard a good dispute of that blood evidence.
    I have heard people saying the sex game didn't fit the "typical" freak of pedophiles. That's not really a compelling argument to me.

    One thing Wecht did note was how carefully the coroner examined and recorded the neck ligatures. He didn't see the point of it so he was intrigued.

    Despite his problems and a few cases I didn't agree with him on, I respect him more than Lee. I read Lee's book on the Simpson case and lost all respect for him.

    Someone threatened to sue you? Now that is just not right.
    Fortunately I was never personally threatened but this person often threatened people who spoke out against the Ramseys and their story with a communication from their lawyer Lin Wood. I was careful to keep to the facts if our paths crossed.

    To my knowledge, no one was sued regardless of the threats.
    I'm going to take my ball and go home

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,300

    Other stuff

    Quote Originally Posted by Chrishope View Post
    It's been discussed. There are of course various opinions.

    The thing is, imo, the garrotte doesn't function well for erotic asphyxiation games. It should tighten and loosen very easily. This one didn't loosen easily. Once it was pulled, it stayed in place until someone used both hands to loosen it.

    Of course the garrotte found on her neck at autopsy isn't necessarily what was used to strangle her. There are some who think there was a prior strangulation. You'll have to ask them for their reasons, I don't think there were two, just one. I don't think it was an EA game, as Dr. Wecht does. But I have to pay attention to Wecht's theory, he's no dummy.
    I think more than anything his book verified two points that were so obvious to me 1) this was a family murder and 2) there was a pattern of sexual abuse.
    I'm going to take my ball and go home

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Southern Utah
    Posts
    1,688
    _____________
    You may touch the dust but please don't write in it.
    _____________
    The way I see it is: if you are making a decision that will affect someone else's life, prepare for public scrutiny.
    ~ VICE journalist Tim Pool
    _____________
    Beware Of The Dog. The Cat Is Not Trustworthy Either.
    _____________
    Do not walk behind me, for I may not lead. Do not walk ahead of me, for I may not follow.
    Do not walk beside me either. Just pretty much leave me alone.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,300

    Thank you

    Quote Originally Posted by gramcracker View Post
    It would have taken me days to find those threads.

    I can't say I was bowled over by the conclusions on the forums. Like most cases these days there are too many forensic expert voices and people pick the expert who best fits their pet theory. Not that I'm criticizing but I find common sense is often out the door. I remember one such case in the Darlie Routier discussions where a person said that the arm bruises were probably caused by someone kneeling on her arms because they had bruises similar in a similar situation. And suddenly that became the template for the people that thought she was wrongfully convicted. Problem was, they didn't really think through the evidence in the case versus personal, mostly unrelated, experience.

    For full disclosure purposes I will say right now I do not respect Dr. Henry Lee's opinions or conclusions in any case where he is being paid. His opinion, in my opinion, is too heavily influenced by who is paying for his expertise. I have disagreed with Wecht on many occasions but have found he is more sound and less influenced by money than Lee. Dr. Spitz is sound but I disagree with him more than I do with Wecht. He, too, does not appear to be influenced by money.

    I lean more toward Wecht in this case not because I like or agree with him more but because I think his conclusions more align with the overall feel (for lack of a better term) of the case.
    I pretty much know the Darlie Routier case inside and out. I used to love when people would come to the forums and challenge the majority consensus so we could dust off our facts and argue a compelling case. I hope you guys like that too because I am going to give you just that opportunity...but I'll start another thread
    I'm going to take my ball and go home

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    7,930
    Quote Originally Posted by 2 percent View Post
    It would have taken me days to find those threads.

    I can't say I was bowled over by the conclusions on the forums. Like most cases these days there are too many forensic expert voices and people pick the expert who best fits their pet theory. Not that I'm criticizing but I find common sense is often out the door. I remember one such case in the Darlie Routier discussions where a person said that the arm bruises were probably caused by someone kneeling on her arms because they had bruises similar in a similar situation. And suddenly that became the template for the people that thought she was wrongfully convicted. Problem was, they didn't really think through the evidence in the case versus personal, mostly unrelated, experience.

    For full disclosure purposes I will say right now I do not respect Dr. Henry Lee's opinions or conclusions in any case where he is being paid. His opinion, in my opinion, is too heavily influenced by who is paying for his expertise. I have disagreed with Wecht on many occasions but have found he is more sound and less influenced by money than Lee. Dr. Spitz is sound but I disagree with him more than I do with Wecht. He, too, does not appear to be influenced by money.

    I lean more toward Wecht in this case not because I like or agree with him more but because I think his conclusions more align with the overall feel (for lack of a better term) of the case.
    I pretty much know the Darlie Routier case inside and out. I used to love when people would come to the forums and challenge the majority consensus so we could dust off our facts and argue a compelling case. I hope you guys like that too because I am going to give you just that opportunity...but I'll start another thread
    2 percent,
    I agree with you here. Although I think Wecht arrived at the wrong conclusion, it was understandable given the times and constraints etc.

    Wecht realized something many had missed, but interpreted it in a manner which was inconsistent with the forensic evidence.

    He may have been playing to the crowd, who knows?


    .

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    12,667
    I may have to pick this book up. I have to tell you Cyril wechts opinion carries weight with me.

    I believe that she could have been abused. But I don't believe that means family. I think and have always thought it was someone close to the Ramsey's.
    Atticus Finch: “You never really understand a person . . . until you consider things from his point of view.” To Kill A Mockingbird

    All my posts are my opinion only.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,300

    Hard to say

    Quote Originally Posted by ScarlettScarpetta View Post
    I may have to pick this book up. I have to tell you Cyril wechts opinion carries weight with me.

    I believe that she could have been abused. But I don't believe that means family. I think and have always thought it was someone close to the Ramsey's.
    I'm sure you know that when a child that age is murdered LE look very closely at those closest to the child. This is mostly because a child's social circle is pretty small and those close enough to be able to successfully molest and kill the child in her own home is a very small circle indeed.

    I think your main stumbling block to the "someone close" theory will be that most if not all of the people that fit this definition have been scrutinized very closely. Whereas the people in that house that night have never been cleared in an unbiased way.

    I just have a hard time believing a person outside the house would be so desperate to be with JB that they would risk so much. Like I said in another post, this intruder would have had to break into a house on Christmas night not knowing if a neighbor would suddenly come home and catch them. The intruder would have to invade her comfort zone, invade her room without a peep from JB. After the sex game went awry that same intruder would have to hang around, write a note, etc when s/he could just run away. To me, it doesn't make sense. The only people who would be interested in sanitizing that house is the people in it...and they wouldn't do it for an intruder.

    The book is called "Who Killed JonBenet Ramsey?". It's a very interesting read.
    I'm going to take my ball and go home


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    12,667
    I think there are still way too many possibilities to just settle on immediate family.
    I don't believe it was a sex game I believe it was torture.

    I also believe that the timing makes it less likely to be a family member. Christmas night.

    The more I read without slant or influence I still feel firm it was not a primary Family member.

    I have many scenarios that work for me. But alas no proof. But in the absence of positive proof of a parent or sibling I will not point fingers at them.
    Atticus Finch: “You never really understand a person . . . until you consider things from his point of view.” To Kill A Mockingbird

    All my posts are my opinion only.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    where the big sharks come to play
    Posts
    4,529
    I asked a few questions at a conference years back (I have a medical background) re: JBR's repetitive urinary tract infections and correlation or significance towards molestation as the causative factor (digital or otherwise) and liked W*cht's answer much better than L*e's.

    My question then lead into a heated debate between the two of them.

    moo
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    "Look, if any of us wanted to mind our own business, we wouldn't be here" (carbuff 8/11/13)

    This post reflects my constitutionally-protected opinion. Please do not copy it anywhere else outside of the WebSleuth forum

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    where the big sharks come to play
    Posts
    4,529
    Quote Originally Posted by ScarlettScarpetta View Post
    I think there are still way too many possibilities to just settle on immediate family.
    I don't believe it was a sex game I believe it was torture.

    I also believe that the timing makes it less likely to be a family member. Christmas night.

    The more I read without slant or influence I still feel firm it was not a primary Family member.

    I have many scenarios that work for me. But alas no proof. But in the absence of positive proof of a parent or sibling I will not point fingers at them.
    Scarlett----in the case of molestation, proof positive is ever so elusive. Many times the damage is done long before rumors even start to arise, if they ever do. Some take the molestation to their grave. I'm just saying that like all "bedroom crimes"....looking for "proof positive" will leave many guilty people walking---(like CA and the murder of her tot).

    moo
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    "Look, if any of us wanted to mind our own business, we wouldn't be here" (carbuff 8/11/13)

    This post reflects my constitutionally-protected opinion. Please do not copy it anywhere else outside of the WebSleuth forum

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    12,667
    Quote Originally Posted by ATasteOfHoney View Post
    Scarlett----in the case of molestation, proof positive is ever so elusive. Many times the damage is done long before rumors even start to arise, if they ever do. Some take the molestation to their grave. I'm just saying that like all "bedroom crimes"....looking for "proof positive" will leave many guilty people walking---(like CA and the murder of her tot).

    moo
    To me, If you are going to accuse a family member of abusing a child you better have proof. Lots of it and solid proof. It is just too serious a crime to guess at or speculate about.
    I have seen many people accused wrongly in the last 20 years and I just won't go there.

    I firmly still believe the Ramseys had nothing to do with Jon Benet's death. I am in the minority but until I see proof, I won't believe it. I do plan to get Cyril Wechts book soon and read it.

    But I don't apply speculation to cases.. I think about the source and then I look to see where they are coming from, But it has to be evidence that leads the case for me.
    Atticus Finch: “You never really understand a person . . . until you consider things from his point of view.” To Kill A Mockingbird

    All my posts are my opinion only.

  15. #15
    otg's Avatar
    otg is offline Reports of my death are greatly exagerated.
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Posts
    2,164
    Quote Originally Posted by ScarlettScarpetta View Post
    To me, If you are going to accuse a family member of abusing a child you better have proof. Lots of it and solid proof. It is just too serious a crime to guess at or speculate about.
    I have seen many people accused wrongly in the last 20 years and I just won't go there.

    I firmly still believe the Ramseys had nothing to do with Jon Benet's death. I am in the minority but until I see proof, I won't believe it. I do plan to get Cyril Wechts book soon and read it.

    But I don't apply speculation to cases.. I think about the source and then I look to see where they are coming from, But it has to be evidence that leads the case for me.
    No one here has “accused” anyone of abusing a child. This is a discussion forum. We discuss theories, and express our opinions. We agree and disagree with one another from time to time. We try to connect the dots and fill in the blanks because we don’t have access to all the evidence that the authorities do simply because even with that evidence -- they apparently haven’t. If you want to call that guessing and speculating and not participate, that’s fine, but don’t condemn others for doing what the forum is here for. Your opinion that “the R’s had nothing to do with Jon Benet's death”, while the minority opinion here, is just as valid as any other. But if you expect that there will ever be any “solid proof” of someone, you will only be disappointed. The DNA won’t do it, and there will never be a confession (unless you want to put your hopes on another fruitcake like Karr).

    All views expressed in my posts are my opinion and are protected under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution as “freedom of speech.”

Page 1 of 10 1 2 3 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Dr. Cyril Wecht Indicted On Federal Charges
    By AeroFanRW in forum Crimes in the News
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 03-15-2016, 05:47 PM
  2. Thursday July 24th 8 PM ET Dr. Cyril Wecht
    By Tricia in forum Websleuths Radio
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-23-2014, 12:05 PM
  3. Mortal Evidence - Cyril Wecht
    By Jayelles in forum JonBenet Ramsey
    Replies: 67
    Last Post: 12-08-2003, 06:06 PM