Of course, I don't agree IDI, but there was a large bruise on JB's posterior right shoulder that seems like it would have been made by someone kneeling or pressing on her shoulder as they pulled the garrote. It can be seen in a rare photo that is not part of the usual "set" that is found online. I will try to find it if I can.
Cords, Knots, and Strangulation Devices
- Thread starter otg
- Start date
Of course, I don't agree IDI, but there was a large bruise on JB's posterior right shoulder that seems like it would have been made by someone kneeling or pressing on her shoulder as they pulled the garrote. It can be seen in a rare photo that is not part of the usual "set" that is found online. I will try to find it if I can.
MurriFlower
Inactive
- Joined
- Mar 25, 2010
- Messages
- 1,980
- Reaction score
- 15
Yes, everyone could have their own version of what happened, just as everyone here has their own theory(s), that doesn't make it a fact.
http://www.jameson245.com/garotte.htm
also, if the stick handle measures 12cm+ in length, and the diameter is 8-9mm,
I wonder what number of brush was used. If the handle would break if the victim was struggling.
also, if the stick handle measures 12cm+ in length, and the diameter is 8-9mm,
I wonder what number of brush was used. If the handle would break if the victim was struggling.
Thank you otg for clarifying on this.
ITA with your time line which has the final wrapping of the cord around the broken paintbrush stick (for staging purposes) after JonBenet was already dead.
For the neck knot been tied before, cutting off the last oxygen supply to JonBenet who was already in a deep coma from the head blow, nearing death.
So we would get the time line:
1) Head blow - resulting in an instant, near-death coma.
2) Tying of the neck knot - resulting in asphyxiation.
3) Wrapping of the cord arond the broken stick (as a mere stage prop).
I haven't seen the demonstration, but I bet he left out that step where the double knot was tied around the neck first.
(The autopsy report clearly mentions this double knot). So there was no loop pulled tight - a knot was tied instead.
But since a tied knot plus a handle for pulling contradict each other, it is actually the tied neck knot which gives the so-called "garrote" away as a stage prop.
For functional garrotes don't have knots. This would be downright counterpoductive.
In addition, the "handle" was not even fashioned as a twisting device - another element which contradicts the assertion about this being a "functional garrote".
This is a very difficult point, since the bladderr is constantly being filled with urine. So suppose the bedwetting occurred about a half hour before the TOD, there would again be at least some urine collected in in the bladder at the time of death.
If the attack followed immediately after the bedwetting episode, this would support your conclusion though.
The problem in this case is the many variables which allow us only to speculate on certain points.
But since every theory has to be consistent with the evidence, one can eliminate those theories which aren't.
For example, Smit speaking about a 'sophisticted' garrote and 'complicated' knots downright contradicts the evidence.
Now Smit based his intruder theory also on this clumsily fashioned thing he called a 'garrote', suggesting ony an criminally sophisticated expert could have made this.
Smit's theory is based on a false premise, so to speak, and a theory based on false premises can be eliminated.
That people, for a variety of reasons, still cling to such theories is another story. Lou Smit just could not believe the Ramseys were capable of doing this, so he "saw" what he wanted to see. So per Smit, it "had' to be an intruder because he had already psychologically ruled out the Ramseys as involved in this crime.
You forget the neck knot in all this. A handle in combination with a tied double neck knot makes no sense. It is as counterproductive as as if one would use a handle for tying a shoelace.
Imo the marks on JonBenet either indicate that she had been in a physical fight before it escalated, or that her body was callously and roughly handled after she was already unconscious
Since the autopsy report says nothing about the cord being looped twice around the neck, it looks like this part is just anoter myth that grew legs.
But what could lie at the origin of this? Maybe it was the second neck abrasion mark on JonBenet which the led to the conclusion a double rope had to have been around the neck?
*** autopsy photo *** http://www.acandyrose.com/jonbenetfaceright.jpg
But it looks like those double neck marks are not that unusual in strangulation cases. At least this is info I got from reading a crime fiction book by Donna Leon (today's crime fiction authors are often very reliable sources since they take forensic science into account). In Donna Leon's story, the strangulation victim too had double neck marks, which occurred as the perp stopped halfway in his attempt to strangle, and then, to 'get the job better done', resumed, with the cord now sliding somewhat away from its first area of contact with the neck.
Maybe this was also what happened in the JR case? Or another possbility: the Ramseys tried to use another cord first, found it to be 'unsuitable' for some reason, and then switched to the nylon cord?
joeskidbeck
Rest in Peace
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2005
- Messages
- 1,897
- Reaction score
- 52
otg
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2010
- Messages
- 2,410
- Reaction score
- 184
Exactly, Tad, exactly.
Nope, nope, nope. Sorry, Tad, but it's back to [ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showpost.php?p=5721057&postcount=1"]Post #1[/ame] for you, unless what you meant to say was, "The LS character demonstrates his idiotic, delusional idea of a functional garotte."
That is not a "functional" garrote! Back to square-1 for anyone who thinks that.
.
otg
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2010
- Messages
- 2,410
- Reaction score
- 184
Gee whiz, rashomon, I just checked in and you've really run up the score. Excellent posts. I don't think there was a thing you said in these previous posts that I could disagree with. I think you and I are on the same wavelength.
However... (Uh-oh, here it comes) I think where the "double-wrapped" ligature thing started was from Linda Arndt saying that exact phrase on a TV show called "Good Morning America"(GMA). I saw it. It was an interview she did that was broken into a series over several days (September, 1999). When she said it, it created a big stir because it was the first mention of it. And after that, like you said, it grew legs. There has never been any other mention of it (to my knowledge).
I was half-way being facetious earlier when I asked if we should consider the PMPT reference as a second source on the "double-wrapped" rumor. I really don't take movies as a serious source of information, but I do think it strange that that slight of a tiny detail in the movie would be put in. After finding out though that Schiller wrote, produced, and directed the movie, I'm not as surprised.
Personally, I don't believe it was double-wrapped, but that may be one of those many things that Kane said the public was wrong about or didn't know.
Now, about the abrasions and other marks you noted in the referenced photo... You are on to something on that subject. You are getting very close to what I think actually happened. I hope to get to all of it this weekend. (I'm sneaking in a little time on this from work right not. Shhhhhhh...)
.
rashomon,
It is difficult. But it is similar to the small amount of blood in her head, supposedly due to her being asphyxiated prior to her sustaining her head injury. I'm not claimimg this as fact, only that its one explanation.
That JonBenet's bladder was refilled to some extent, after the bedwetting is an additional assumption, I'm not sure how correct this is?
That is the bedwetting theory has to posit two bedwetting episodes to make the theory consistent, e.g. one upstairs and one downstairs?
Occam's Razor suggests its one episode and with urine staines present in the basement and on her clothing, which I assume was placed on her after death, then it was at this point she voided her bladder?
.
There was creatinine on JB's sheets, evidence of dried urine. If JB never went to bed that night, the urine could have been from the night before. She wet the bed nearly every night. The housekeeper said the sheets on JB's bed were not the ones she put on when she was there last on the 23rd.
If JB did wet the bed after coming home from the White's, a bed-wetting incident may have started the fatal events of the night.
If she ate pineapple and drank anything (there wouldn't be specific evidence of anything she drank, as liquids do not go through the same digestive process as food) and at least a small amount of time passed till she died (my estimate is 2-3 hours, plenty of time) there would be sufficient urine in her bladder to stain the front of her longjohns and panties and stain the basement carpet.
If JB did wet the bed after coming home from the White's, a bed-wetting incident may have started the fatal events of the night.
If she ate pineapple and drank anything (there wouldn't be specific evidence of anything she drank, as liquids do not go through the same digestive process as food) and at least a small amount of time passed till she died (my estimate is 2-3 hours, plenty of time) there would be sufficient urine in her bladder to stain the front of her longjohns and panties and stain the basement carpet.
Linda7NJ
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 7, 2005
- Messages
- 31,866
- Reaction score
- 7,458
Yes. If there was more than 30 minutes or so, there would be sufficient urine to be voided at death. We really don't know how MUCH urine was voided at death, and it can take surprisingly little urine to wet through fairly thin fabrics like the cotton panties and thin thermal logjohns and drip onto the basement carpet. Even a TINY amount of urine can soak through clothes. Take it from us moms who potty train our kids.