A question about JB's head wound

[ziggy]

I'm certain that is exactly what they were thinking as the cord dug deep into their daughter's throat. (tongue firmly in cheek). Don't want the coroner to come back with that!!! Can't smother her and leave a pillow nearby, nope, nope, we gotta go for some real overkill here. Nonsensical.

And sure, they probably thought she was already dead, so no coroner would ever figure out post mortem strangulation. Naw.

So even though you might be thinking about what the coroner might and might not find, you would NOT think about the coroner discovering post mortem staging because she was already dead? Wow.

 

[ziggy]

And just let me say before I must go and study some more, that NOTHING in the Ramsey's background or anything they have done since would indicate they are even capable of any of this morbid and salacious things you are speculating.

With cases of murdered children, something is found out after the fact, and something of substance, (not "acquaintences" stealing a few 15 minutes) that shows a mental health problem, rage, sexual deviancy. It all surfaces sooner or later. We are later here folks and nothing is still the same nothing there was long ago.

Let me leave you with an Ace Ventura version of - cuz I seem to have to say it again..

NUHH HHHUHHH HHUH THTHTHTHT IIIINNG GGGINGGGG.

Nada. So I can't figure out why anyone still goes there.

 

[Ames]

I'm certain that is exactly what they were thinking as the cord dug deep into their daughter's throat. (tongue firmly in cheek). Don't want the coroner to come back with that!!! Can't smother her and leave a pillow nearby, nope, nope, we gotta go for some real overkill here. Nonsensical.

And sure, they probably thought she was already dead, so no coroner would ever figure out post mortem strangulation. Naw.

So even though you might be thinking about what the coroner might and might not find, you would NOT think about the coroner discovering post mortem staging because she was already dead? Wow.

I said that the parents may have THOUGHT that she was already dead...when the garotte was used...not that she WAS already dead.

 

[Ames]

And just let me say before I must go and study some more, that NOTHING in the Ramsey's background or anything they have done since would indicate they are even capable of any of this morbid and salacious things you are speculating.

With cases of murdered children, something is found out after the fact, and something of substance, (not "acquaintences" stealing a few 15 minutes) that shows a mental health problem, rage, sexual deviancy. It all surfaces sooner or later. We are later here folks and nothing is still the same nothing there was long ago.

Let me leave you with an Ace Ventura version of - cuz I seem to have to say it again..

NUHH HHHUHHH HHUH THTHTHTHT IIIINNG GGGINGGGG.

Nada. So I can't figure out why anyone still goes there.

Apparently you have never watched the show "Snapped", it is about people that have no history of any of those things that you listed above...whatsoever...but, one day...they just snap. There is a first for everything. I do not believe that JB was killed purposely though.

 

[ziggy]

Apparently you have never watched the show "Snapped", it is about people that have no history of any of those things that you listed above...whatsoever...but, one day...they just snap. There is a first for everything. I do not believe that JB was killed purposely though.

I do watch it. What you are failing to do to convince me is pulling the pieces together. In "Snapped" there is a motive other than just snapping. Many of those shows are about money motives, affairs - people who may have not had a history of violence, but do have a motive that is revealed after the fact.

http://mylifeofcrime.wordpress.com/2008/04/18/snapped-real-women-real-stories-real-murder/

snipped: "Whether the motivation was revenge against a cheating husband, the promise of a hefty insurance payoff or putting an end to years of abuse, the reasons are as varied as the women themselves. From socialites to secretaries, female killers share one thing in common: at some point, they all “snapped.”

It's not like they had no reason and then suddenly they just decided to kill and the stories are not about accidental deaths.

An accidental death is a problem I have because how did they know she was dead? In addition, the cover up doesn't fit. Too much overkill.

 

[Ames]

I do watch it. What you are failing to do to convince me is pulling the pieces together. In "Snapped" there is a motive other than just snapping. Many of those shows are about money motives, affairs - people who may have not had a history of violence, but do have a motive that is revealed after the fact.

http://mylifeofcrime.wordpress.com/2008/04/18/snapped-real-women-real-stories-real-murder/

snipped: "Whether the motivation was revenge against a cheating husband, the promise of a hefty insurance payoff or putting an end to years of abuse, the reasons are as varied as the women themselves. From socialites to secretaries, female killers share one thing in common: at some point, they all “snapped.”

It's not like they had no reason and then suddenly they just decided to kill and the stories are not about accidental deaths.

An accidental death is a problem I have because how did they know she was dead? In addition, the cover up doesn't fit. Too much overkill.

But...to me...an intruder, sitting and waiting for the Ramsey's return...not knowing when they would return or where the heck they were...and sitting down to pen a three page RN doesn't make any sense. The fact that a "practice note" was found....(what sort of kidnapper writes a practice note?)...doesn't make sense to me. The fact that JB had ate pineapple right before she died...and Patsy denied giving it to her, but her prints were on the bowl..doesn't make sense to me. And the fact that Patsy's clothing fibers were found on the sticky side of the tape over JB's mouth, inside of the paint tote, and entwined in the garotte...and NO intruder fiber's were found...doesn't make any sense to me. The fact that after the "intruder" wrote the three page RN, he replaced the cap back on the pen, and put the pen back inside of the pen holder (I believe that THIS was done by a Ramsey...out of habit)...doesn't make any sense to me. The fact that the flashlight AND the batteries were wipe down...doesn't make any sense to me. The fact that JB was "lovingly" wrapped (John's words)..."papoose style"...in a blanket that according to LHP had been in the dryer...doesn't make any sense to me. The fact that Burke's pocket knife was found near the body...possibly used to cut the cord....and LHP said that she had taken it away from him, and hid it...and only she and Patsy knew where it was...doesn't make any sense to me. The list goes on and on...and it's late...and I am tired. So I will spare you. But, I will say....there is just way, WAY too many things that do not make sense...IF an intruder truly committed this crime...and way, WAY too many things that DO make sense...if it were the parents that committed it.

 

[BBB167893]

I'm certain that is exactly what they were thinking as the cord dug deep into their daughter's throat. (tongue firmly in cheek). Don't want the coroner to come back with that!!! Can't smother her and leave a pillow nearby, nope, nope, we gotta go for some real overkill here. Nonsensical.

Who knows what they were thinking? My point is that you have a professional saying that I could be right.

And sure, they probably thought she was already dead, so no coroner would ever figure out post mortem strangulation. Naw.

It's not like that. If they thought she was already dead, then it wouldn't matter at the time.

So even though you might be thinking about what the coroner might and might not find, you would NOT think about the coroner discovering post mortem staging because she was already dead? Wow.

Wow is right.

With cases of murdered children, something is found out after the fact, and something of substance, (not "acquaintences" stealing a few 15 minutes) that shows a mental health problem, rage, sexual deviancy. It all surfaces sooner or later.

That's another myth that's been accepted as truth.

 

[DeeDee249]

The autopsy states there was tan mucus on her sleeve, cheek and in her nose. That would equate to it being blood-tinged. Normal nasal and oral secretions are clear.

 

[anne11]

The autopsy states there was tan mucus on her sleeve, cheek and in her nose. That would equate to it being blood-tinged. Normal nasal and oral secretions are clear.

Would the colour of the blood indicate that there was no oxygen in the blood?

 

[ziggy]

Who knows what they were thinking? My point is that you have a professional saying that I could be right.



It's not like that. If they thought she was already dead, then it wouldn't matter at the time.



Wow is right.



That's another myth that's been accepted as truth.

Well if that's a myth, I'm sure you won't mind backing it up for us.

 

[BBB167893]

Well if that's a myth, I'm sure you won't mind backing it up for us.

I don't mind at all. Darlie Routier had no history of violence, drugs or mental illness when she butchered her two boys (not to mention a lot less evidence against her.)

Diane Downs had no violent history when she killed her kids.

Jeffery MacDonald is the big one. In fact, I recommend all students of this case to study that one. Same basic scenario. The chief special prosecutor mentioned him by name.

But, since you brought it up, I have often wondered if there were problems like you suggest.

 

[DeeDee249]

Would the colour of the blood indicate that there was no oxygen in the blood?

When blood dries, it turns brownish/rust. Exposure to air will also change the appearance. The tan mucous indicates the presence of some (probably minor) oozing of blood which could have been the result of the head bash and/or the strangulation. It mixed with the normal clear mucus in the nose and mouth and the result is tan. Not red.
Blood can be tested to see if it has come from a live person (oxygenated) or a dead person.

 

[ziggy]

I don't mind at all. Darlie Routier had no history of violence, drugs or mental illness when she butchered her two boys (not to mention a lot less evidence against her.)

Diane Downs had no violent history when she killed her kids.

Jeffery MacDonald is the big one. In fact, I recommend all students of this case to study that one. Same basic scenario. The chief special prosecutor mentioned him by name.

But, since you brought it up, I have often wondered if there were problems like you suggest.

Darlie was convicted right? But there were many who questioned her guilt? I have not followed that case - there are only so many I can get to.

Diane Downs - definitely a bad comparison. She had the boyfriend motive and history of mental instability, single mother, other factors that raise the risk for the children.

Jeffrey McDonald - that is a pretty good one. I still am on the fence with that one - I think I lean toward his innocence, but I would have to go back and look at the recent findings and investigations. The initial one was compelling but probably lacked our modern technological assistance.

 

[BBB167893]

Darlie was convicted right? But there were many who questioned her guilt? I have not followed that case - there are only so many I can get to.

I understand. Yes, she was, and there are many people who think she was railroaded. Mostly for the reasons you've been giving.

Diane Downs - definitely a bad comparison. She had the boyfriend motive and history of mental instability, single mother, other factors that raise the risk for the children.

Within each skull is a little world all its own.

Jeffrey McDonald - that is a pretty good one. I still am on the fence with that one - I think I lean toward his innocence, but I would have to go back and look at the recent findings and investigations. The initial one was compelling but probably lacked our modern technological assistance.

I'll leave you to it.

 

[ziggy]

Well, I just finished hours of reading everything new in the Jeffrey MacDonald case.

The last thing I'd read that I paid much attention to was that Joe McGuinnes book and now I know what a joke that was!

I think if you read the entire case and how the army, judge, prosecution etc., withheld evidence from the defense you can see railroading in action.

New DNA testing, The Innocence Project and finally a guy coming forward to admit that Helen told the prosecutor she was one of the hippies there the night of the murders and was threatened to not say that to the jury by the prosecutor - these bring the hope of a new and more fair trial.

SuperDave - thanks for the suggestion. This case proves how poorly it can go for a bloke if the investigation sets out to prove he did it.

I see the parallel in the inexperienced investigator first on the scene and the need for the authorities to demonize their "suspect" in order to prove their case instead of following the evidence. The process was as corrupt as it gets for that poor guy.

I believe this supports my post. Jeffrey MacDonald is most likely innocent and he had no prior abuse or mental problems nor did he have a drug problem as suggested in the book. That was a lie and is supported by the testing they did for drugs the night of the murder.

http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/notorious_murders/family/jmacdonald/1.html

http://www.themacdonaldcase.org/

 

[Zak]

Well, I just finished hours of reading everything new in the Jeffrey MacDonald case.

The last thing I'd read that I paid much attention to was that Joe McGuinnes book and now I know what a joke that was!

I think if you read the entire case and how the army, judge, prosecution etc., withheld evidence from the defense you can see railroading in action.

New DNA testing, The Innocence Project and finally a guy coming forward to admit that Helen told the prosecutor she was one of the hippies there the night of the murders and was threatened to not say that to the jury by the prosecutor - these bring the hope of a new and more fair trial.

SuperDave - thanks for the suggestion. This case proves how poorly it can go for a bloke if the investigation sets out to prove he did it.

I see the parallel in the inexperienced investigator first on the scene and the need for the authorities to demonize their "suspect" in order to prove their case instead of following the evidence. The process was as corrupt as it gets for that poor guy.

I believe this supports my post. Jeffrey MacDonald is most likely innocent and he had no prior abuse or mental problems nor did he have a drug problem as suggested in the book. That was a lie and is supported by the testing they did for drugs the night of the murder.

http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/notorious_murders/family/jmacdonald/1.html

http://www.themacdonaldcase.org/

If I were you Ziggy, I would read a bit more about the McDonald case and not just from his website. Over the years I have read about the case from many sites, some including court transcripts. Helena, whom you refer to, was nothing but a druggie. At one point she said she was there, then she recanted and this went on and on until her death. How could she be a reliable witness or even believed? Follow the blood trail/types in the apt. that night. I remember reading something about the new DNA testing but thought that it didn't prove his innocence. For the life of me I can't explain the brutal murders/stabbings of a pregnant woman and her 2 small children and yet the husband was left alive with what, one stab wound ? Certainly, these drug crazed hippies would have killed the person who would provide the most opposition to their invasion, McDonald. He was the strongest person in the house. Yet, he is stabbed once and left alone. The others in the house were all stabbed and beaten? Yeah, McDonald is innocent and was railroaded all because Helena said she was there.

 

[ziggy]

Now I'm all in a twitter about MacDonald.

SuperDave: dare you to read the actual court documents as I have and especially this most recent brief:

http://www.themacdonaldcase.org/Images/Amicus_brief_fnl2.pdf

and then I double dare you to explain to me how you think MacDonald got a fair trial and is guilty.

There was so much evidence that there were intruders in the MacDonald home that night. Even the prosecutor's medical report says the youngest, Kristin, had defensive wounds on her hands and low and behold, finally they were able to get the hair that was under her fingernails and DNA test it. It did not belong to anyone in the MacDonald family; more likely the man who confessed and who Helen Stoeckley said committed the murders because she was there.

Anyway, hate to get so OT, but your assertion that Jeffrey MacDonald would be a good example is hereby OVERTURNED!!! (makes me wonder if you actually read up on this stuff)

 

[ziggy]

If I were you Ziggy, I would read a bit more about the McDonald case and not just from his website. Over the years I have read about the case from many sites, some including court transcripts. Helena, whom you refer to, was nothing but a druggie. At one point she said she was there, then she recanted and this went on and on until her death. How could she be a reliable witness or even believed? Follow the blood trail/types in the apt. that night. I remember reading something about the new DNA testing but thought that it didn't prove his innocence. For the life of me I can't explain the brutal murders/stabbings of a pregnant woman and her 2 small children and yet the husband was left alive with what, one stab wound ? Certainly, these drug crazed hippies would have killed the person who would provide the most opposition to their invasion, McDonald. He was the strongest person in the house. Yet, he is stabbed once and left alone. The others in the house were all stabbed and beaten? Yeah, McDonald is innocent and was railroaded all because Helena said she was there.

Over the years I have read about the case from many sites, some including court transcripts. Helena, whom you refer to, was nothing but a druggie. At one point she said she was there, then she recanted and this went on and on until her death.
Ummm, that has been completely proven to be untrue because she confessed to the prosecutor Blackburn (who has since been convicted of all kinds of felonies) and he threatened that if she admitted that to the MacDonald jury the next day he would prosecute her for murder. It has been testified to and the court has held that Britt (on the proscution team and witness who signed sworn affidavit) is a reliable witness. You obviously are claiming to have read what you have not.
There has been proven prosecutorial misconduct so the transcripts are fraudulent documents you rely on.

Your reply makes it very apparent you have not done your homework.
Most of the evidence in the trial was found to be bogus including that smoking gun the folded pajama top.

And it is much, much more than Helen saying she was there. The synthetic hair clutched in Colette's hand was from a blonde wig Helen had. There were fraudulent reports that it was from a doll, but the truth finally came to light and no dolls were made with that saran type plastic, BUT WIGS WERE.
And, they found candle wax drippings in the apt. they could not link to any candle the MacDonald's had. In addition one of the first officers on the way to the scene saw a woman with a floppy hat standing in the rain at 3:00 a.m. near the M. home. He was disuaded from testifying and it goes on and on. I won't go on because me thinks your arse might get sore from my spanking

Edited: Sorry Zak - I posted this as if you were SuperDave.
Seriously, I tried reading any opposition to the new documents and briefs drafted by the IP, but there aren't many coming to the defense of that sorry prosecution.

 

[ziggy]

About the head wound: the autopsy states there was no external scalp trauma.
I find it hard to believe had that been done by accident (unlikely because of the force) it would be impossible for non medical persons to make the determination that it was near fatal, or could render someone brain dead or any of the other suggestions that are thrown around. Not a motive for strangulation staging imo.

 

[Ravyn]

Cause of death asphyxia by strangluation associatedwith craniocerebral trauma this is on the autopsy report since no evidence of JB struggling for being strangle I don't understand the staging you are talking about.. And about mental illness is there anything out there to tell me that mental illness didn't play apart in this...