1232 users online (199 members and 1033 guests)  



Websleuths News


Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 77
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    713

    The headblow first and why

    I had forgotten this, and just reread the autopsy report - there was no damage to the tongue, no damage to the frenulum (that bit of tissue that connects the tongue to the bottom of the mouth) the hyoid bone was not damaged, no strap muscles damaged and no internal damage to the larynx, etc. In aphixiation and strangulation cases where the victim is conscious, there is damage to the tongue - the victim bites it, cuts it along the edge of the teeth as it presses down on them and very often the frenulum is cut or torn, cheeks are bitten. The hyoid bone is broken because it is a very delicate bone and as people struggle, arch their necks and pressure is put upon it, it fractures or breaks. There is always damage to other parts of the neck, such as bruising, tearing of muscles, etc. In this case, there was no damage to any of these body parts - no bruising, nothing. There was bruising, there were abrasions, but they were on the outside, not the inside of throat or mouth. Since there were no signs of a struggle then she was probably unconscious.

    IMO, this is more consistent with what Dave* suggested earlier and I had remembered from quite some time ago, that someone grabbed the neck of the shirt, twisted it, and at the same time began to shake the little girl. If the little girl had resisted, and arched her head and reared back, she might have hit her head on the edge of the sink counter and become immediately unconscious. In looking at the autopsy pictures, I noticed that there were also at least what appeared to be another furrow mark, wider and not as deep, with a v shaped bruise on the anterior of the neck which looks like knuckles pressed into the skin - there's another furrow closer to the top of the neck also. The ligature made by the white string, (which looks like a tie for sweatpants or a shoe string with the nibs missing) is horizontal, no pulling up or down or to any side that again would indicate a conscious struggle to breathe.

    Another odd anomoly is that the long underwear she had on was stained with urine anteriorly. That would mean that if she had had an accident while she had the longjohns on, she would have to have been on her stomach. However, I vaguely remember reading that the longjohns were on backwards, does anyone else remember that? That would of course mean that someone had redressed her, beside the fact that they had wrapped her in a blanket and layed the body on top of a throw in the basement room. I won't get into all the psychological implications of that, but it is very odd.

    If someone had come up from behind the kid and hit her little head with a flashlight, why would they need to use a stun gun, (not that they'd need to in any case) and if they strangled her first, why would a head blow be needed?

    In my opinion, the reason one person in that relationship kept quiet, is because he/she might have heard an altercation taking place and thought to him/herself "let the other person handle it, I'm too tired to get up" and then felt overcome with guilt that he/she didn't go see what was happening.

    *I should let Dave speak for himself, but by posting that, he did remind me, and I didn't want him to think I was ignoring his ideas or thoughts.

    I'm also thinking of starting a thread called "the guys I'd like to tro a beatin' to for screwin this up by openin ther traps and bein arrogant *ssh*les"

    Wecht, Eller, Arndt, The Denver FBI office, Smit, Darnay Hoffman (a real good beatin to him) Hunter... (just kidding...sort of)

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Ceti Alpha V
    Posts
    12,914
    Quote Originally Posted by Bev
    I had forgotten this, and just reread the autopsy report - there was no damage to the tongue, no damage to the frenulum (that bit of tissue that connects the tongue to the bottom of the mouth) the hyoid bone was not damaged, no strap muscles damaged and no internal damage to the larynx, etc. In aphixiation and strangulation cases where the victim is conscious, there is damage to the tongue - the victim bites it, cuts it along the edge of the teeth as it presses down on them and very often the frenulum is cut or torn, cheeks are bitten. The hyoid bone is broken because it is a very delicate bone and as people struggle, arch their necks and pressure is put upon it, it fractures or breaks. There is always damage to other parts of the neck, such as bruising, tearing of muscles, etc. In this case, there was no damage to any of these body parts - no bruising, nothing. There was bruising, there were abrasions, but they were on the outside, not the inside of throat or mouth. Since there were no signs of a struggle then she was probably unconscious.

    IMO, this is more consistent with what Dave* suggested earlier and I had remembered from quite some time ago, that someone grabbed the neck of the shirt, twisted it, and at the same time began to shake the little girl. If the little girl had resisted, and arched her head and reared back, she might have hit her head on the edge of the sink counter and become immediately unconscious. In looking at the autopsy pictures, I noticed that there were also at least what appeared to be another furrow mark, wider and not as deep, with a v shaped bruise on the anterior of the neck which looks like knuckles pressed into the skin - there's another furrow closer to the top of the neck also. The ligature made by the white string, (which looks like a tie for sweatpants or a shoe string with the nibs missing) is horizontal, no pulling up or down or to any side that again would indicate a conscious struggle to breathe.

    Another odd anomoly is that the long underwear she had on was stained with urine anteriorly. That would mean that if she had had an accident while she had the longjohns on, she would have to have been on her stomach. However, I vaguely remember reading that the longjohns were on backwards, does anyone else remember that? That would of course mean that someone had redressed her, beside the fact that they had wrapped her in a blanket and layed the body on top of a throw in the basement room. I won't get into all the psychological implications of that, but it is very odd.

    If someone had come up from behind the kid and hit her little head with a flashlight, why would they need to use a stun gun, (not that they'd need to in any case) and if they strangled her first, why would a head blow be needed?

    In my opinion, the reason one person in that relationship kept quiet, is because he/she might have heard an altercation taking place and thought to him/herself "let the other person handle it, I'm too tired to get up" and then felt overcome with guilt that he/she didn't go see what was happening.

    *I should let Dave speak for himself, but by posting that, he did remind me, and I didn't want him to think I was ignoring his ideas or thoughts.

    I'm also thinking of starting a thread called "the guys I'd like to tro a beatin' to for screwin this up by openin ther traps and bein arrogant *ssh*les"

    Wecht, Eller, Arndt, The Denver FBI office, Smit, Darnay Hoffman (a real good beatin to him) Hunter... (just kidding...sort of)
    I take it by "Dave" you mean me! Well, if that's the case:

    there would not have been any need for a head blow if she'd already been strangled to death, imo.

    Not only was the tongue not damaged, but the petechiae really don't add up to much. You can get those in the neck just by getting hit there.

    This is from "Cracking More Cases" by Henry Lee:

    "the head blow, in all probability, had come first...head wound was fully developed...victim had survived for a period of time."

    Just let me at Smit, Hunter and Hoffman! I'll take 'em all on at once! A no-holds-barred, broken-glass, barbed-wire death match!

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    713

    Yes, I did mean you

    after I wrote that, I thought it looked like we had some prior discussion and agreed on this, and it didn't seem very fair to you. Hope you didn't take offense, but I did think we were moving somewhat along the same lines - headblow first followed by staging. I don't think it was a deliberate act, I think it was an accident and what followed was a coverup motivated by shame.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    7,958
    I think it was an accident and what followed was a coverup motivated by shame.
    But an accident is not a homicide.

    Staging a homicide runs the risk of a life sentence if convicted on the staged evidence.

    Why take the risk, i.e. all three Ramseys were in this as a conspiracy, they tailored each others versions of events.

    So why would any of the other two take the risk of a sentence for faking a homicide, why not tell it like it is?

    There is more to JonBenet's death than an accident!


    .

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    713

    Imo

    trying to explain what happened would have been too shameful and embarrassing to Patsy Ramsey. There is no way she could have rushed that kid to the hospital without the doctors and nurses being aware that this was the result of tempers clashing between an adult and a child. I believe she thought she had killed her and then staged the coverup. How could she have possibly explained those injuries, because even if it was accidental (and I believe it was) it still was a criminal offense, probably involuntary manslaughter, negligent homicide or something along that order. The sad thing is, according to Boulderites, she would probably have gotten a deal, and would not have spent a day in prison, sparing her son and husband a lifetime of suspicion and accusation. I also think that she justified in her mind as an accident, since she didn't intend to do it.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Sep 2004
    Posts
    7,958
    Quote Originally Posted by Bev
    trying to explain what happened would have been too shameful and embarrassing to Patsy Ramsey. There is no way she could have rushed that kid to the hospital without the doctors and nurses being aware that this was the result of tempers clashing between an adult and a child. I believe she thought she had killed her and then staged the coverup. How could she have possibly explained those injuries, because even if it was accidental (and I believe it was) it still was a criminal offense, probably involuntary manslaughter, negligent homicide or something along that order. The sad thing is, according to Boulderites, she would probably have gotten a deal, and would not have spent a day in prison, sparing her son and husband a lifetime of suspicion and accusation. I also think that she justified in her mind as an accident, since she didn't intend to do it.
    Bev,

    It might just be as straight forward as you describe.

    But there was always going to be shame, the Ramseys were always going to have to face the world with the fact that their daughters dead body was discovered inside their house, accident or not!

    Why should John choose to involve himself in such a flaky deal, how was he to know how it would all end up, Patsy was unstable at best?

    If it was John, Patsy could just divorce him and inherit all his wealth while he went to jail.

    If events unfolded as you suggest, Patsy must have confided to John at some point: I just killed JonBenet or JonBenet is dead.

    The motive to engage all three resident Ramseys in a conspiracy to stage the accidental death of JonBenet as an Intruder Homicide, is that of avoiding shame and embarrassment.

    Not only does that not sound right, but it is patently a rationalisation of Patsy's behaviour e.g. accidental.

    Do you reckon it was Patsy who authored the ransom notes?

    Do you reckon it was Patsy who wiped her down and changed her underwear?

    Do you reckon it was Patsy who wrapped JonBenet in those blankets and deposited her corpse behind a latched door in the basement wine-cellar?

    Do you reckon it was Patsy who sexually assaulted JonBenet?

    Do you reckon it was Patsy who tied the ligature around JonBenet's neck and pulled it tight?

    Was this the behaviour of a woman driven by the desire to avoid shame and public ridicule, so driven it overides any maternal instinct?

    Actually it would seem much easier to fake an accident, along the lines JonBenet fell in the bathtub and hit her head on the side.

    This was probably not undertaken because there is more to JonBenet's death than that of an accident and coverup that went wrong!

    Its quite likely that what JonBenet wanted to tell people would shame Patsy and John socially, so she was silenced, and not accidently!


    .

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Ceti Alpha V
    Posts
    12,914
    Not a problem, Bev.

    "Staging a homicide runs the risk of a life sentence if convicted on the staged evidence."

    Not if you think the person is already dead, UKGuy. Alan Dershowitz was talking about this case. He said that if you think someone is already dead, you can't intend to kill them. (It's a curious idea, but that's the law!)

    "Why should John choose to involve himself in such a flaky deal, how was he to know how it would all end up, Patsy was unstable at best?"

    Well, think about it this way: for him to admit she was involved, he'd have to admit that he screwed up his first marriage only to marry a monster. That's hard to take.

    "If it was John, Patsy could just divorce him and inherit all his wealth while he went to jail."

    And she might die from a cancer relapse. Then her son would be alone.

    "Do you reckon it was Patsy who authored the ransom notes?

    Do you reckon it was Patsy who wiped her down and changed her underwear?

    Do you reckon it was Patsy who wrapped JonBenet in those blankets and deposited her corpse behind a latched door in the basement wine-cellar?

    Do you reckon it was Patsy who sexually assaulted JonBenet?

    Do you reckon it was Patsy who tied the ligature around JonBenet's neck and pulled it tight?

    Was this the behaviour of a woman driven by the desire to avoid shame and public ridicule, so driven it overides any maternal instinct?"

    Given the state of it as we know it, I have to say yes.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    713

    I have to agree with Dave

    this woman's whole life was wrapped up in her presentation of herself to the world. Her house, her husband, her money, her looks, her kids - it was all how it looked. I believe that this accident of rage was so out of character for her, that at first she didn't know what to do. She thought the little girl was dead - if she called 911, any medic, doctor or nurse would have taken one look at that kid and those bruises on her neck and along with the head fracture know that this was the result of rage. Everything she had worked for would be gone, and by that I don't mean the money and the stuff, I mean her reputation as the glamourous saint of a wife and mother.

    Here's something that every parent, if he/she is honest will tell you - sometimes you feel like knocking the kid into next week. The vast majority of parents are able to control themselves, but sometimes, something just snaps. I think PR had a really tiring day, now add to that a trip right before a big cruise, that she admitted she did not want to do, she said she still had packing for all four of them (for the cruise) to do, she had to get clothes ready for the next day so that they could leave @ 6:30 am, and she also said that every night she had to go into the little girl's bedroom, wake her up, and make her go to the bathroom. I think PR had been futzing around trying to get it together for the next day, she remembered around midnight to go wake the child, and the child probably was whiney and crabby and possibly refused to get up or just acted defiantly. I would imagine by that time of night, PR had had it up to her chin and just plain lost her temper. She didn't morph into a "monster", she didn't become "evil" in fact, she was all too human. One of the tragedies of this accident, was that I think she weighed what she thought she might lose, against a future with people knowing she did this, and decided that the best thing for her was to make it look like a kidnapping. I think she had every intention of taking the little girl's body somewhere, but couldn't make herself do it in the end. That's why you have the little girl with the supposed sexual abuse, a knock on the head, clothes on backward and an instrument of strangulation that was made so that she didn't have to touch the child or look into her face. That's why we have acts of maternal remorse - the wrapping her in a blanket, the placing her on a blanket, placing a favorite little thing with the child - those aren't acts of a psychopath - those are acts of remorse and true sorrow for what she had done - those are things that mothers do. The comforter, the children's book in the suitcase - I think she thought she could go through with it - put that little girl in a suitcase and put her somewhere. The fact that she was so hidden away, is I think, indicative of her feelings - she wanted to hide away her act, but she couldn't bear to part with her.

    The only way this whole tragedy makes sense, is if you look at Patsy Ramsey with empathy and compassion and ask yourself, "if you were Patsy Ramsey, what would you do?" I believe her when she said she loved that child with her whole heart and soul, she truly meant it, but I also think that for one moment in her life she lost control and accidently killed that little girl. The one act of Patsy Ramsey that made me sure she did it, was at that press conference when she was asked if the person who did this should get the death penalty, she completely broke down, put her head down and could barely say the word yes. I think she thought that she was serving her sentence - she would never see her little girl again. And who knows, maybe that was punishment enough. I always think, "there but for the grace of God, go I."

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Ceti Alpha V
    Posts
    12,914
    Quote Originally Posted by Bev
    this woman's whole life was wrapped up in her presentation of herself to the world. Her house, her husband, her money, her looks, her kids - it was all how it looked. I believe that this accident of rage was so out of character for her, that at first she didn't know what to do. She thought the little girl was dead - if she called 911, any medic, doctor or nurse would have taken one look at that kid and those bruises on her neck and along with the head fracture know that this was the result of rage. Everything she had worked for would be gone, and by that I don't mean the money and the stuff, I mean her reputation as the glamourous saint of a wife and mother.

    Here's something that every parent, if he/she is honest will tell you - sometimes you feel like knocking the kid into next week. The vast majority of parents are able to control themselves, but sometimes, something just snaps. I think PR had a really tiring day, now add to that a trip right before a big cruise, that she admitted she did not want to do, she said she still had packing for all four of them (for the cruise) to do, she had to get clothes ready for the next day so that they could leave @ 6:30 am, and she also said that every night she had to go into the little girl's bedroom, wake her up, and make her go to the bathroom. I think PR had been futzing around trying to get it together for the next day, she remembered around midnight to go wake the child, and the child probably was whiney and crabby and possibly refused to get up or just acted defiantly. I would imagine by that time of night, PR had had it up to her chin and just plain lost her temper. She didn't morph into a "monster", she didn't become "evil" in fact, she was all too human. One of the tragedies of this accident, was that I think she weighed what she thought she might lose, against a future with people knowing she did this, and decided that the best thing for her was to make it look like a kidnapping. I think she had every intention of taking the little girl's body somewhere, but couldn't make herself do it in the end. That's why you have the little girl with the supposed sexual abuse, a knock on the head, clothes on backward and an instrument of strangulation that was made so that she didn't have to touch the child or look into her face. That's why we have acts of maternal remorse - the wrapping her in a blanket, the placing her on a blanket, placing a favorite little thing with the child - those aren't acts of a psychopath - those are acts of remorse and true sorrow for what she had done - those are things that mothers do. The comforter, the children's book in the suitcase - I think she thought she could go through with it - put that little girl in a suitcase and put her somewhere. The fact that she was so hidden away, is I think, indicative of her feelings - she wanted to hide away her act, but she couldn't bear to part with her.

    The only way this whole tragedy makes sense, is if you look at Patsy Ramsey with empathy and compassion and ask yourself, "if you were Patsy Ramsey, what would you do?" I believe her when she said she loved that child with her whole heart and soul, she truly meant it, but I also think that for one moment in her life she lost control and accidently killed that little girl. The one act of Patsy Ramsey that made me sure she did it, was at that press conference when she was asked if the person who did this should get the death penalty, she completely broke down, put her head down and could barely say the word yes. I think she thought that she was serving her sentence - she would never see her little girl again. And who knows, maybe that was punishment enough. I always think, "there but for the grace of God, go I."
    And that's what keeps me down to earth. I'm trying very hard to be forgiving.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    713

    That's my new life philosophy

    it isn't those who forget history who are condemned to repeat it, it is those who can't forgive history who are condemmed to repeat it.

    You know, I'm starting to get a tad irritated with the "it was God's will" or "it must have been a monster" excuse for actions, that are the result of poor choices, lack of control, lost temper, jealously, greed or anything else that's part of being human. Human beings are capable of committing some of the most hideous, filthy acts and at the same time exhibiting overwhelming kindness and compassion for each other. I truly believe that if we stopped making excuses, maybe we could take responsiblity for what we do, and try to figure out a way to help each other. And I'm not advocating a revocation of law and order - society has to have law and order or we wouldn't be able to live together in relative harmony, and society has the right to seek retribution and protect itself from humans more broken than ourselves - but if we don't acknowledge that we are human and our acts are human, then we will always have excuses to behave badly and we will never have the opportunity to be better humans.

    Does that make any d*mned sense a'tall?


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    202
    The accident/cover-up theory doesn't account for the content of the ransom note and all the correlations to books and movies. This crime was no accident.

    Head blow first, strangulation first, it was no accident either way.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    116
    Quote Originally Posted by Paradox
    The accident/cover-up theory doesn't account for the content of the ransom note and all the correlations to books and movies. This crime was no accident.

    Head blow first, strangulation first, it was no accident either way.
    I agree. That was a very massive head blow.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Posts
    202
    When she bent to look, he brought the plaster cast down on the back of her head.

    He rolled her onto her face and checked her scalp, parting her thick hair with his fingers. The padded cast hadn't cut her.

    From The Silence of the Lambs.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Posts
    342
    Well done Bev. A good part of heaven is what you leave behind. No excuses. That's what I was taught.

    I was always grappling with the head bash first or strangulation. The lack of evidence of internal related injuries related to strangulation makes me think that the headbash might have come first and I have never heard or considered this before. Thankyou for pointing this out. Some doctors have stated that head injuries do not always cause alot of blood.
    If indeed there was no intruder, then the R's owe the world the truth.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Posts
    713

    The note is silly.

    It's not a political treatise or a blow for freedom, it's a silly, nonsensical, piece of work, which sounds like something written in the middle of the night. Even John Ramsey didn't take it seriously.

    Here we have terrorists kidnapping the man's daughter, for 118,000. which wouldn't even buy you a false passport, much less fund a revolution, and what does JR do? Nothing. He doesn't call Lockheed Martin, which actually is an international company, alert their executives, (or even the executives of his own company) enlist the help of their security department (which by the way is huge and considering the fact that Lockheed Martin makes weapons systems for the U.S., you would think he'd want their expertise and their knowledge of active, terrorist groups who pose a threat to their company) call the FBI and any other government office I could think of that might help and hunker down for the ordeal. Instead, this man has his wife call 911, the very thing the letter said not to do if he wanted his child back. That doesn't sound like a man who took that letter seriously - he didn't even bother to run outside and look around.

    As to that forceful head blow, of course it was forceful - when you're shaking someone back and forth, and the person is resisting, you're building up a great force, and when that great force meets an immovable object, you're going to have some serious damage.

Page 1 of 6 1 2 3 ... LastLast