Garrote

[Chrishope]

Sure. Ever see the movie "Rising Sun?"

"I mean, people use these things (this type of garrotte - as oppossed to other types which are meant to kill quickly) for erotic asphyxiation - it stands to reason that it's suppossed to asphyxiate w/o doing permanent damage to the internals of the neck. Isn't it possible that a garrotte could kill someone w/o doing much damage?"

If it were applied long enough. But people who go in for that EA business USUALLY use something, like a scarf, to keep marks from appearing. And there, the idea is NOT to kill them.

So you are saying this particular type of garrotte isn't an EA type? If that's so, then it doesn't suggest a pervy sex killer. (though other elements of the case do) If it does suggest a pervy sex killer, then it must be that these types of garrottes are used in EA play. It doesn't seem to me we can have it both ways.

Exactly! If you were going to do it that way, why put a handle on it in the FIRST place?

Simply because they didn't know how to make one very well. It doesn't mean they couldn't have improvissed to make it work.

"Ok, that makes sesne. However, why not just wrap rope around her neck and pull? The garrotte just seems to suggest knowledge of really pervy sex acts, and thsat doesn't seem to fit with 'normal' parents."

That was the IDEA!

Of course. But it indicates more knowledge of pervy practices than I'd expect from a vanilla couple. If they are really vanilla, how'd they think up something that pervy? If they aren't really vanilla, the garrotte may have been more than staging. Or am I missing something?

 

[Chrishope]

The knowledge of the parents knowing about garrote use as a pervy sex device I don't see as something "vanilla" people wouldn't have heard of. That's something they could have read about or seen in a movie or in a story on the news. A garrote for the purpose of tightening a bandage would be known by someone who ever had any emergency medical training. I can see a vanilla person hearing about someone being strangled by a garrote as an AE device and knowing what one is and what it would look like because of some medical training or hearing about what it would like like. But the fact that the garrote didn't function as a garrote should for either an AE device or a killing device shows that the persons knowledge concerning a garrote or how one is used as an AE device is pretty much nil and limited to that of a vanilla person. I don't find anything "dark" about someone having limited knowledge of an AE device or the use of a garrote as an AE device.

I'm a vanilla person, but I've heard about AE, and I know what a garrote is as far as an emergency medical device goes, and in a pinch I may put two-and-two together to imagine a garrote being used as a pervy AE device. But I wouldn't know how to make one or how it would function as a pervy AE device or even a killing device. Vanilla people hear about pervy and violent stuff from the news or tv shows or movies all the time. The fact that the garrote was an attempt by someone at making a device not practically known them and didn't function as such a device for the purpose intended should just shows that it was made and used by a vanilla person with limited "heard about such a thing" knowledge obtained innocently.

Ok, that is certainly possible. It does explain why such a poorley constructed garrotte was used.

I'm fairly vanilla, but have seen weird stuff on the internet while researching AE and bondage in relation to this case. If I tried to stage some of the stuff I've seen I'd make a mess of it. Still, it just strikes me as a wierd choice for a couple not already involved in pervy stuff. I lean towards the theory that the garrotte was more than staging.

 

[BBB167893]

"If they are really vanilla, how'd they think up something that pervy?"

You can pick that stuff up anywhere! I've seen at least THREE "Law & Order" episodes like that.

 

[Chrishope]

"If they are really vanilla, how'd they think up something that pervy?"

You can pick that stuff up anywhere! I've seen at least THREE "Law & Order" episodes like that.

OK, possible. I still think it's pretty weird for a parent to do as staging. But who knows. The case is weird all the way around.

If they did it as staging, we'd have to assume they weren't smart enough to realize they didn't know how to make a garrotte.

 

[BBB167893]

"If they did it as staging, we'd have to assume they weren't smart enough to realize they didn't know how to make a garrotte."

Intelligence is not the same as knowing what you're doing. I should think a man with your mental abilities would have more respect for the difference between knowledge and...wisdom!

 

[Chrishope]

"If they did it as staging, we'd have to assume they weren't smart enough to realize they didn't know how to make a garrotte."

Intelligence is not the same as knowing what you're doing. I should think a man with your mental abilities would have more respect for the difference between knowledge and...wisdom!

I'm just trying to give them credit for being normally intelligent human beings. Why try to stage something you don't really know how to do when it will be more likely to backfire and point back at you? It would have taken the police 3 seconds to conclude the garrotte wasn't constructed by a knowledgeable perv.

Of course, they were in a state of semi-panic, probably straining to think clearly. Even intelligent people might screw up under such conditions.

Let me just ask you straight out - do you think it's at least possible this was JR's first foray into AE ? Do you think the garrotte could have been more than staging?

 

[BBB167893]

"Of course, they were in a state of semi-panic, probably straining to think clearly. Even intelligent people might screw up under such conditions."

You just hit it!

"Let me just ask you straight out - do you think it's at least possible this was JR's first foray into AE ? Do you think the garrotte could have been more than staging?"

No. JR was a sailor. He knew knots. According to Kane, the knot experts said this was the work of an amateur. Show me a sailor who doesn't know knots and I'll show you shark bait!

 

[Chrishope]

"Of course, they were in a state of semi-panic, probably straining to think clearly. Even intelligent people might screw up under such conditions."

You just hit it!

"Let me just ask you straight out - do you think it's at least possible this was JR's first foray into AE ? Do you think the garrotte could have been more than staging?"

No. JR was a sailor. He knew knots. According to Kane, the knot experts said this was the work of an amateur. Show me a sailor who doesn't know knots and I'll show you shark bait!

I appreciate your thoughts.

I disagree about sailors. I'm ex-Navy and I wouldn't know how to make an AE garrotte. I could probably figure it out, but not in the heat of the moment, trying to stage a sex murder. If JR did know enough about knots, he'd have made it correctly wouldn't he? - to make it look like the work of a knowledgeable perv.

 

[BBB167893]

Fair enough.

 

[UKGuy]

My problem with it is that the garrotte suggests a level of knowledge of the world of pervy sex that I wouldn't expect in a nice nomral Christian upstanding vanilla suburban parents.

Let me focus on the vanilla. How is it vanilla people know what a garrotte is? (I never knew before this case. I'm talking about the type of garrotte meant to asphyxiate for erotic purposes, as opposed to a type meant for quick killing) The people who made the garrotte didn't really know how to tie the right knots, but they sure had in mind a wierd kinky device they were trying to make - how do nice vanilla people know about errotic asphyxiation? IOW, this aspect of staging indicates knowledge of deviant sexual practices. If they did put the garrotte there as staging, they've told us something a bit dark about themselves.

Chrishope,

Your initial assumption may be incorrect. The person who suggested the garrote was linked to Erotic Asphyxiation was Lou Smit, he had an Intruder Theory to talk up, and a sexual assault to explain, so that was his angle!

The garrote may simply represent an amateur attempt to create one under restricted circumstances. JonBenet may have already been staged using the cord in some manner, this was possibly altered by the addition of the paintbrush handle, to form a garrote, that the paintbrush handle may have been employed to sexually assault JonBenet suggests this aspect was premeditated?

A garrote historically has been a killing method employed by assassins, murderers, and governments of state, the use of the term garrote in association with Erotic Asphyxiation is erroneous.


.

 

[BBB167893]

"So you are saying this particular type of garrotte isn't an EA type? If that's so, then it doesn't suggest a pervy sex killer."

RIGHT!

 

[Chrishope]

UKGuy/SD

Thanks for your insights. I don't like the word garrotte either, but we seem stuck with it.

I'd appreciate your thoughts on this idea -

The "garrotte" wasn't operated by pulling the handle, it was operated by inserting the stick and twisting like a turniquet. This accounts for why JBR's hair is twisted up in the handle knotting.

In turn, the "garrotte" could have been built on the body, or before, albeit with the wrong kind of knot. The usual reason for suggesting it was built on the body is the hair entangled in the handle knots, but turniquet action could account for this as well.

 

[UKGuy]

UKGuy/SD

Thanks for your insights. I don't like the word garrotte either, but we seem stuck with it.

I'd appreciate your thoughts on this idea -

The "garrotte" wasn't operated by pulling the handle, it was operated by inserting the stick and twisting like a turniquet. This accounts for why JBR's hair is twisted up in the handle knotting.

In turn, the "garrotte" could have been built on the body, or before, albeit with the wrong kind of knot. The usual reason for suggesting it was built on the body is the hair entangled in the handle knots, but turniquet action could account for this as well.

Chrishope,

There is no need for any ambiguity, a garrote is defined as a ligature and stick used together.

When referring to Lou Smit's Intruder Theory, he speculates that the ligature and stick was a Erotic Asphyxiation Device employed by a deranged pedophile.

Considered as an Erotic Asphyxiation Device the arrangement of the ligature and paintbrush handle around JonBenet's neck simply would not work as advertised!

Considered as a garrote its combination of fixed knotting and JonBenet's hair being embedded means it would also not operate as a standard garrote, although the ligature could still asphyxiate on its own.

This is why we know its really staging.

The "garrotte" wasn't operated by pulling the handle, it was operated by inserting the stick and twisting like a turniquet. This accounts for why JBR's hair is twisted up in the handle knotting.

If this had been the case then JonBenet's hair should have been torn from her scalp, and you would expect more severe internal injuries to her neck.

.

 

[Chrishope]

Do we know the hair wasn't pulled from the scalp?

I take your point about internal injuries.

 

[JMO8778]

UKGuy/SD

Thanks for your insights. I don't like the word garrotte either, but we seem stuck with it.

I'd appreciate your thoughts on this idea -

The "garrotte" wasn't operated by pulling the handle, it was operated by inserting the stick and twisting like a turniquet. This accounts for why JBR's hair is twisted up in the handle knotting.

In turn, the "garrotte" could have been built on the body, or before, albeit with the wrong kind of knot. The usual reason for suggesting it was built on the body is the hair entangled in the handle knots, but turniquet action could account for this as well.

I've always speculated that the reason the garrotte was built was so that the killer,(whom I believe was one of the parents),wouldn't have to be close to or in front of her body when the ligature was pulled tight,and they would be able to stage the strangling without having to touch her or view this.I say this because I think the strangling was done in a rage,and the rage ended and turned to shock and possibly regret and sorrow once JB died from it.Is this plausable?Is this what anyone else thinks?

 

[BBB167893]

"The 'garrotte' wasn't operated by pulling the handle, it was operated by inserting the stick and twisting like a turniquet. This accounts for why JBR's hair is twisted up in the handle knotting."

That's impossible. To do that would require that both ends of the cord be tied to the handle. One end was tied. If you don't believe me, try this:

Tie one end of a cord to a handle. Any old double-knot will do. Then tie the other end onto something else. Something that is fairly round and heavy enough not to move. Then take the handle and twist.

I just tried this a few minutes ago. No good.

"Do we know the hair wasn't pulled from the scalp?"

Yes, the autopsy says the hair was still in place.

"I've always speculated that the reason the garrotte was built was so that the killer,(whom I believe was one of the parents),wouldn't have to be close to or in front of her body when the ligature was pulled tight,and they would be able to stage the strangling without having to touch her or view this."

I agree. The fact that they couldn't even look her in the face when they killed her speaks volumes to me.

 

[IrishMist]

I've always speculated that the reason the garrotte was built was so that the killer,(whom I believe was one of the parents),wouldn't have to be close to or in front of her body when the ligature was pulled tight,and they would be able to stage the strangling without having to touch her or view this.I say this because I think the strangling was done in a rage,and the rage ended and turned to shock and possibly regret and sorrow once JB died from it.Is this plausable?Is this what anyone else thinks?

If RDI, then I think the strangulation was done manually, i.e. the twisting of the neckline of a shirt, and the head blow came at the same time. The garotte was then tied on her neck in order to explain the marks on her neck and in order for it to appear that a crazed pedophile murdered her.

I'm trying to think now if it was IDI, then what use was it. Shock value? To be visually pleasing for himself? That's all I can think of off the top of my head.

 

[BBB167893]

Dr. Spitz might agree, Irish.

IDI? It would have to be for visual pleasure, since it was so inefficient for practical use.

 

[Chrishope]

"The 'garrotte' wasn't operated by pulling the handle, it was operated by inserting the stick and twisting like a turniquet. This accounts for why JBR's hair is twisted up in the handle knotting."

That's impossible. To do that would require that both ends of the cord be tied to the handle. One end was tied. If you don't believe me, try this:

Tie one end of a cord to a handle. Any old double-knot will do. Then tie the other end onto something else. Something that is fairly round and heavy enough not to move. Then take the handle and twist.

I just tried this a few minutes ago. No good.

"Do we know the hair wasn't pulled from the scalp?"

Yes, the autopsy says the hair was still in place.

"I've always speculated that the reason the garrotte was built was so that the killer,(whom I believe was one of the parents),wouldn't have to be close to or in front of her body when the ligature was pulled tight,and they would be able to stage the strangling without having to touch her or view this."

I agree. The fact that they couldn't even look her in the face when they killed her speaks volumes to me.

I guess I wasn't clear in my description. The stick was -possibly- placed under the cord, which was already around her neck and knotted. By twisting the handle it would at the same time twist the cord, just like a turniquet. IOW, the handle didn't really have to be tied to the cord, it would have worked just as well if it were separate.

Thanks for the hair info. If it wasn't pulled from the head, it makes my theory unlikely. Still, there is hair in the knotting at the handle.

 

[SieSie]

You guys are amazing with your knowledge and sources, thanks for the links to YouTube, I found some more autopsy photos that I hadn't seen before and the marks and the garrotte confuse me even more, now!!

Are we allowed to post pictures? I have questions about some of the marks and would like to circle the areas or something in Paint program and then maybe you guys can help me understand what I'm seeing??

One thing that confuses me is the cord around her wrists - does that tie in to the garrotte somehow, or were her hands just tied to each other??

The pictures I've seen look like it's a noose (circle with knot) where her head was, and the end of the "noose" was tied to a wooden handle of some sort (is that the paintbrush??). I don't understand how the handle part could strangle - what's it supposed to tighten??