1091 users online (234 members and 857 guests)  


Websleuths News


Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 47
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    12

    Accident means no intruder

    If the DA can prove that JBīs head injury was a result of an accident then that alone would smash the intruder theory.

    This can be solved without geneticists. The DA would need to consult with a structural engineer who could tell her how the head fracture occurred. The autopsy report is enough to take to court and get a conviction. The ransom note will not help because handwriting analysis is not an exact science.

    The DA must also answer the questions asked by the grand jury about DNA found on JBīs panties. Tests taken by forensic scientists prove that new underwear does have DNA. The DNA found on JBīs panties was already there probably as a result of the manufacturing or packaging process.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,399
    They'd just argue that the intruder accidentally hit her on the head.
    Where is Trenton Duckett?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    1,810
    Not only that, but a structural engineer cannot tell how the skull fracture happened. They cannot tell what was used, who used it, and whether it was done purposely or accidentally.

    While structural engineers may have a certain amount of intelligence, they are not God, the perp, or a psychic.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    818
    Investigators have the ability to do, and test, many things during the course of investigation. Couple that with forensic pathology, and I just can't understand why more tests on the skull fracture weren't completed. Considering that the weapon used in the fracture would be key evidence, you'd think they would have conducted more tests. For instance:

    Many of the deceased have their bodies, or their children's bodies, donated to science. And while this may sound macabre, bear with me. Why not obtain a few skulls of deceased children around the same age and size as JB, and try different suspected objects/instruments on the skull to see if you can reproduce the result?

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    47
    My opinion: JonBenet's death was not a crime. It was an accident. The person responsible for the accident was a 9-year child. In Colorado, 9-year children cannot be charged with a crime -- and in fact -- are protected from even BEING NAMED as being responsible.

    I believe that every level of the justice system, including the last Grand Jury, came to understand this. Thus, the Grand Jury refused to charge anyone.

    The only loose end -- and it is considerable -- the TRUTH was never told to the public because the State of Colorado has laws which protect the identity of underage children.

    Can we accept on faith that our justice system worked? There is no "intruder/murderer" on the loose. Nobody got away with murder. The Ramsey's made an extreme sacrifice to take it on themselves to destroy evidence and cover-up that their son was responsible. But I truly believe that they realized he did not intend to harm his sister. They forgave him and did everything they could (legal or otherwise) to protect him. Because of that, they heaped much rage onto themselves. It is possible they did the best they knew to do at the time. Who knows what anyone would do in that situation?

    To their credit, if this is what happened, they were successful. Burke was never publicly accused or labeled as a murderer. They were able to continue within their family unit (what was left of it), without being separated from each other.

    It is difficult to imagine the pain they experienced in losing their daughter (as beloved and dotted on, as she was), coupled with the pain of knowing what could be facing their son, whom obviously they loved very much.

    There are lots of people who don't like the Ramseys, out of jealousy or intolerance. Maybe it is human nature for us to "want our pound of flesh."

    When you sort it out, maybe what the public is angry about is the simple fact that we, concerned citizens, didn't get the satisfaction of learning what happened. We think it is our right because a crime was committed. Isn't that the problem?

    Well, I am starting to accept the fact that there really wasn't a crime. It was an accident, and the family chose to take whatever drastic means they could to keep the details private. Was it their right to keep it private? I don't know, but it is my opinion that is why the public is still upset about it.

    This is my opinion of what happened, and I am nearing the point where I am willing to let this go. Are you?
    Everything I submit on this subject is my own personal opinion. I am basing my opinion on nothing other than the known facts in this case.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    1,810
    I understand what your saying, and they should've done more tests, although I don't know to what extent their testing ended.

    In attempting to re-create the skull injury, I would think that there would be so many different variables involved--not only the object, but the exertion of force, distance from weapon to skull, trajectory--speed and position....that it may be impossible to re-create it, no matter how much they tried.

    This case is baffling, to say the least!

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    12

    nuisance and juli

    The ransom note tells us that this crime was supposed to be a kidnapping. It was written by the killers so it canīt be dismissed, assuming the ransom note is the real thing. You can say the crime was about a pedo wanting sexual gratification but you canīt get around the fact that this was supposed to be a kidnapping.

    Kidnappers donīt leave the body of the victim in the house and then leave a ransom note. Even if the kidnapper caused the accident, he/she would still take JB and hope to get the ransom anyway. The parents donīt have to know JB is hurt. Kidnappers want one thing and that is money.

    Therefore I think we agree it was a kidnapping and that kidnappers take there victim with them especially after leaving a ransom note. If you donīt agree that it was a kidnapping and kidnappers take their victim then we have no basis for argument. But for the sake of rebuting your statements Iīll assume you agree with me.


    juli, a structural engineer can tell us what caused the fracture. We also know that the "kidnapping" of JB was not a real kidnapping because JBīs body was found in the house. So the ransom note was a red herring. It was a fake IOWs. Knowing that the ransom note was fake allows us to narrow the suspect list to two people, the parents. They have both been caught in lies so anything either one says canīt be believed. They are both involved. Therefore we know what caused the accident and we know who was present when the accident occurred.

    nuisance, if an intruder was present when the accident happened, tell me why the strangulation and the ransom note were needed. If this was the work of a pedo only wanting sex with JB then why the ransom note? Or why would a pedo leave a ransom note as a red herring? A pedo leaving a ransom note and strangling JB because she was hurt does not make sense. It defies logic. Therefore an intruder/ pedo was not involved in this crime.

    You can say that we are dealing with a crazed pedo who did things illogically but the evidence says otherwise.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    47
    You said: Knowing that the ransom note was fake allows us to narrow the suspect list to two people, the parents.

    Excuse me, but there was a 3rd person in the house. Burke. A 9-year old, strong, healthy male could have caused both the strangulation and the crushed skull.

    If you want to know my theory of the motive (or what Burke was doing when he accidentally killed his sister), you'll have to ask.

    Better yet, read my previous posts for my theory. It involves sexual experimentation by the children.
    Everything I submit on this subject is my own personal opinion. I am basing my opinion on nothing other than the known facts in this case.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    1,399
    I agree with you 100 percent, gls. I can see no evidence proving that anyone other than a Ramsey was in that house that night. I believe the head wound was an accident and the strangulation and ransom note was nothing but staging to take the focus off of the family.
    Where is Trenton Duckett?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Location
    Atlanta, GA
    Posts
    16,021
    Quote Originally Posted by i_dont_chat
    ...
    This is my opinion of what happened, and I am nearing the point where I am willing to let this go. Are you?
    Your thoughts on what happened are probably very close to the truth in my opinion. Though I am not convinced of Burke's involvement, the theory of him accidentally harming his sister during experimentation is plausible to me. Other theories make sense to me also - and they all involve a Ramsey on some level.

    That said, I don't think I will ever be able to let this case go. It's not a pound of flesh thing. I believe there is/will be justice for JonBenet whether or not I ever see it. I leave those matters to powers greater than myself. I don't care if I ever see the killer put behind bars because I don't know that true justice ever plays out in this world.

    But I believe that the innocents in this world deserve our greatest loyalities and attention. A 6-year-old girl who dies in her home on Christmas with a split skull, a rope around her neck and a paintbrush in her vagina deserves to have the truth of her life and death shouted from the mountaintops - over and over again - even if it seems that no one is listening.

    I feel an obligation to keep searching for that truth, her truth, is this web of deceit.


  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Ceti Alpha V
    Posts
    13,223
    "Why not obtain a few skulls of deceased children around the same age and size as JB, and try different suspected objects/instruments on the skull to see if you can reproduce the result?"

    They might have done that. I think Spitz did something along those lines.
    I'm as mad as HELL and I'm NOT gonna take it anymore!.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Southern California Near Disneyland
    Posts
    1,170
    For those of you who are forensically savvy, how much new information could be culled from exhuming JBR's body after ten years? Science has come a long way in just ten years. Imagine a fresh pair of eyes looking at the body. Maybe two sets of fresh eyes. But, without skin, can any new information be had?

    I personally know of two families who had to have the bodies of their loved ones exhumed...it was court ordered.
    What does it take, what kind of information needs to be proved to have the court order a body exhumed?
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    GenaBena, my only sibling,
    In the time line of life, it wasn't supposed to happen this way.
    We were supposed to grow old together.
    Sleep Peacefully, Li'l Sis
    October 16, 2011


    ~~~~~~~~~~

    Amity

    Consciousness:
    That annoying time between naps.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Ceti Alpha V
    Posts
    13,223
    Well, Michael Baden found evidence THIRTY years after Medgar Evers' burial. I guess it would depend on what you're looking for.

    "What does it take, what kind of information needs to be proved to have the court order a body exhumed?"

    Information that shows it's vital to a case, I think.
    I'm as mad as HELL and I'm NOT gonna take it anymore!.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Posts
    66
    Quote Originally Posted by Amity
    For those of you who are forensically savvy, how much new information could be culled from exhuming JBR's body after ten years? Science has come a long way in just ten years. Imagine a fresh pair of eyes looking at the body. Maybe two sets of fresh eyes. But, without skin, can any new information be had?

    I personally know of two families who had to have the bodies of their loved ones exhumed...it was court ordered.
    What does it take, what kind of information needs to be proved to have the court order a body exhumed?
    Depending on how well she was embalmed, AND provided that a quality vault was used in conjunction with the wood casket, the flesh should still be there.
    It will be more like leather now, mummified if you will. Had they used a metal casket with a sealing device, it may be a lost cause by now.

    The only concern I would have about the condition of her remains would be that she was fully "posted". Posted cases are difficult and take time to embalm if you are looking to do a good job. I am sure that my fellow embalmers at that furneral home in Boulder would have taken great care in raising as many vessels needed to make a through job. My guess is that the carotids would have been trashed for injection purposes, they usually get sliced in the course of the autopsy. The embalmer should have raised both femorals, both axials and brachials and if need be any of the smaller vessels in the wrists and calves. They might have hypoed the skin flaps prior to sucturing.
    They should have used autopsy powder in the cavities to prevent leakage. They would have flushed out and dried out the brain cavity then filled it with either hardening compound or kapok.
    The condition of the calvarium would have made it very difficult to re-attach. Infact, being it was homicide, I wonder if indeed the skull cap was even returned with the body? Would they have kept it? At least made a cast of it?
    Again, the embalming report would tell us a lot on what we wonder.

    This is a very long way of saying that if done well, the embalmed remains should still yield a plethra of clues and information.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    Southern California Near Disneyland
    Posts
    1,170
    "Well, Michael Baden found evidence THIRTY years after Medgar Evers' burial."
    SuperDave, I did not know that! I just went and did some look-see and sure 'nuff...you're spot-on, again!
    Thank the powers that be I've never had to go through the murder of my child so I have no idea how I would have acted/reacted/handled/or if I would have even been able to function in an upright position so I can't say for sure but seems to me if a specialist or several told me by exhuming the body they might be better able to see what might have been missed, especially now with so many more scientific advancements, I think (THINK, for now, as I have never had to make that decision) I would approve it.
    Anything, anything! to get as much information as I could possibly get to help solve this horrendous deed!
    But, then again, that's just me.


    Trocaria,
    That post was a wealth of information! Ok, honestly, I had to go look up some words but once I found them.... the post is a keeper in my hard files for sure...thank you so very much for taking the time to explain...much appreciated!
    And again, as I said above to SuperDave, why wouldn't someone give permission to exhume???, with all the latest DNA/scientific technology, I can pretty sure say as of right now (although in no way do I know for sure if faced with it) I would grant permission in a New York second if it meant garnering more information that could possibly lead to answers as to why my precious baby is no longer with me on this earth.
    But, that's just me.
    ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    GenaBena, my only sibling,
    In the time line of life, it wasn't supposed to happen this way.
    We were supposed to grow old together.
    Sleep Peacefully, Li'l Sis
    October 16, 2011


    ~~~~~~~~~~

    Amity

    Consciousness:
    That annoying time between naps.

Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 ... LastLast


Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 138
    Last Post: 11-01-2013, 09:41 PM