740 users online (74 members and 666 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 1 of 7 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 98
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Oriental, North Carolina
    Posts
    939

    "IT WAS AN ACCIDENT"

    Experts disagree on whether or not the blow to the head came before the garrotte essentially "killed" JonBenet. I guess I've always leaned toward the theory the garrotte was a sexual stimulation toy and also used to control her. I thought the blow to the head came first, but by only a fraction. Perhaps it happened because she was struggling while being denied air and fighting for her life, so the perp got nervous and hit her with something.

    So many think it's ludicrous for Karr to say "it was an accident" if he loved JonBenet and all that crap. I say it isn't at all. I believe people who do these things REWRITE HISTORY when it comes to what they do in the passion of the moment. I think he didn't mean to kill her, but it happened, so now he says it was accidental. Also, to him, it makes him look and feel better about the outcome plus he probably thinks it might help to decide a slightly easier punishment.

    I'm still of the belief if this guy was soooo obsessed with JonBenet, he'd have found a way to keep her quiet, but keep her alive, and take her with him...not leave her there.

    Was it an accident, as Karr says?
    Simplicity...patience...compassion

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    NSW Australia
    Posts
    9,182
    Karr is full of *hit, I wouldn't believe anything he says at this point.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    579
    the garrotte was a sexual stimulation toy

    Sexual asphyxiation is NOT done because the stangling is stimulating but because being out of oxygen can to some be a stimulant, so if not the perp was imagining JBR would like to be out of oxygen this idea does not make sense.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    NSW Australia
    Posts
    9,182
    I agree.
    The garotte was not an EA device.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    6,341
    Quote Originally Posted by gaia
    Experts disagree on whether or not the blow to the head came before the garrotte essentially "killed" JonBenet. I guess I've always leaned toward the theory the garrotte was a sexual stimulation toy and also used to control her. I thought the blow to the head came first, but by only a fraction. Perhaps it happened because she was struggling while being denied air and fighting for her life, so the perp got nervous and hit her with something.

    So many think it's ludicrous for Karr to say "it was an accident" if he loved JonBenet and all that crap. I say it isn't at all. I believe people who do these things REWRITE HISTORY when it comes to what they do in the passion of the moment. I think he didn't mean to kill her, but it happened, so now he says it was accidental. Also, to him, it makes him look and feel better about the outcome plus he probably thinks it might help to decide a slightly easier punishment.

    I'm still of the belief if this guy was soooo obsessed with JonBenet, he'd have found a way to keep her quiet, but keep her alive, and take her with him...not leave her there.

    Was it an accident, as Karr says?
    I really do not think experts disagree. The blow to her head was delivered after JonBenet was dead.

    If Karr is the murderer, her death may have been an accident in his mind. However, given the garrote and the blow to her head, I suspect a jury would not find it to have been an accident.
    It's not what a man knows that makes him a fool, it's what he does know that ain't so. .... Josh Billings

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Oriental, North Carolina
    Posts
    939
    Hey, tumble, I know what you mean, but it has been explained to me just watching the child being denied the air is sexually stimulating plus he could be actually stimulating her at the time as well...eeeekkk, ewwwww! Plus, the garrotte might just be a stimulus in and of itself to the perp - just making it and placing it around her neck...and it was a great control mechanism.
    Simplicity...patience...compassion

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    579
    Quote Originally Posted by gaia
    Hey, tumble, I know what you mean, but it has been explained to me just watching the child being denied the air is sexually stimulating plus he could be actually stimulating her at the time as well...eeeekkk, ewwwww! Plus, the garrotte might just be a stimulus in and of itself to the perp - just making it and placing it around her neck...and it was a great control mechanism.
    OK, I see where my imagination reaches its limits

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    579
    Quote Originally Posted by Wudge
    I really do not think experts disagree. The blow to her head was delivered after JonBenet was dead.

    If Karr is the murderer, her death may have been an accident in his mind. However, given the garrote and the blow to her head, I suspect a jury would not find it to have been an accident.
    There are experts that believe the blow was struck first. And it makes more sense, if you study the lack of function in how the garrote was constructed, being tied with her hair entagled in the knot, not something you do on a concious victim. The garrote smells staging.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Oriental, North Carolina
    Posts
    939
    Quote Originally Posted by tumble
    There are experts that believe the blow was struck first. And it makes more sense, if you study the lack of function in how the garrote was constructed, being tied with her hair entagled in the knot, not something you do on a concious victim. The garrote smells staging.
    Oh, like I said before, I just really think that blow was struck first also. Deal is, old Cyril Wecht said there was only a teaspoon or two of blood in the hemorraging from the blow, so he thinks the child was choked to death and while she was dying, the blow was struck. To me, it's kinda like apples and oranges if these things happened that close together!
    Simplicity...patience...compassion

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    579
    Quote Originally Posted by gaia
    Oh, like I said before, I just really think that blow was struck first also. Deal is, old Cyril Wecht said there was only a teaspoon or two of blood in the hemorraging from the blow, so he thinks the child was choked to death and while she was dying, the blow was struck. To me, it's kinda like apples and oranges if these things happened that close together!
    Yes, they happend close together, not more than an hour between.
    It is important though which happened first. A blow could have been delivered without the purpose of killing in a rage, strangling someone seems more premediated.


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    6,341
    Quote Originally Posted by tumble
    There are experts that believe the blow was struck first. And it makes more sense, if you study the lack of function in how the garrote was constructed, being tied with her hair entagled in the knot, not something you do on a concious victim. The garrote smells staging.

    I do not recall an "expert" who thought as you said. Do you have particulars?
    It's not what a man knows that makes him a fool, it's what he does know that ain't so. .... Josh Billings

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    California
    Posts
    292
    Last night druing CNN Anderson Cooper there were blurbs shown from various early CNN shows (blurbs from when the case was new and up until now) There was one very short blurb from a previous Larry King show where a person (It appeared to be Clint Van Zandt (Sp?) ) was saying "I think her death was an accident...")

    Back when statements such as this were coming out I believe the context was that sexual play and kidnapping had been the intent of the killer.

    Whether or not JMK is the guy, it is possible that he heard and remembers statements like this within the media and now repeats them to suit his needs.
    dragonfly >!<

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    579
    Quote Originally Posted by Wudge
    I do not recall an "expert" who thought as you said. Do you have particulars?
    Henry Lee for example.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Posts
    6,341
    Quote Originally Posted by tumble
    Henry Lee for example.

    Link? (thank you)

    I have no recollection whatsover of Dr. Lee saying that.
    It's not what a man knows that makes him a fool, it's what he does know that ain't so. .... Josh Billings

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    579
    Quote Originally Posted by Wudge
    Link? (thank you)

    I have no recollection whatsover of Dr. Lee saying that.
    Links does not tell you everything do they.

    On May 22, 2001 Adrienne Mand reported that forensic scientist Henry Lee told Connecticut TV station WFSB-TV that he wonders if JBR was even murdered.

    Lee said it's possible JonBenetís death was an accident, which was covered-up to make it look like a homicide, in which case there really isnít a killer.

Page 1 of 7 1 2 3 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. the "accident" victim
    By Backwoods in forum Israel Keyes
    Replies: 31
    Last Post: 10-20-2015, 08:59 PM
  2. GUILTY TX - Dr. Calvin Day for sexual assault of patient, San Antonio, 2013
    By wfgodot in forum Recently Sentenced and Beyond
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 06-27-2013, 10:02 AM
  3. Replies: 66
    Last Post: 11-06-2011, 02:11 AM
  4. Actress breaks arm singing "ACCIDENT WAITING TO HAPPEN"
    By blueclouds in forum Bizarre and Off-Beat News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-07-2005, 07:01 PM