Garrote

[Chrishope]

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??

The handle is part of the paintbrush. One way it could work is by pulling the handle straight back, away from the neck. If it had a slip knot (which it didn't) this could be eased off, and the perpetrator could have "controled" her asphyxiation - to some extent. As it was, it had a knot that didn't let the noose loosen up. Every tug on the handle made it tighter.

Another way it could work is to put the handle in the loop and twist like a tourniquet. It would not have been necessary to tie the handle on to use it that way.

 

[Chrishope]

So how'd the hair become twisted up in the handle knot? The pics show the hair - was it cut from her head? Somehow hair got tangled up in that knot, and detached from her head.

 

[SieSie]

The handle is part of the paintbrush. One way it could work is by pulling the handle straight back, away from the neck. If it had a slip knot (which it didn't) this could be eased off, and the perpetrator could have "controled" her asphyxiation - to some extent. As it was, it had a knot that didn't let the noose loosen up. Every tug on the handle made it tighter.

Another way it could work is to put the handle in the loop and twist like a tourniquet. It would not have been necessary to tie the handle on to use it that way.

Thanks, Chrishope - I understand that the knot wasn't a slipknot now, so in essense it WAS more of a noose (meant to only tighten) rather than something used for AEA or whatever.

When you say "every tug on the handle made it tighter", is that what most people assume happened? That it was placed on her head, then someone "tugged" at it by holding onto the paintbrush handle? I guess I hadn't even thought of that and that's why I couldn't understand how it (the handle part) could be used to tighten the noose (because it WASN'T a slipknot). IOW, I thought the only way that circular noose part would be able to be tightened to strangle would be if it WAS a slipknot used. Since it wasn't a slipknot, I didn't know it could still tighten (it just can't loosen). I think I get it now. Thanks!!

I do understand how the handle part could be used "inside" the circular noose to tighten it, tourniquette style - and you're right, the handle wouldn't have needed to be attached to the rope to do it that way.

What about the cords around her wrist, though? Were they tied to anything else, or just her hands tied to each other??

I agree with others who think that she was strangled face down, and I think that's why there are some marks/abrasions on her face.

 

[Chrishope]

Thanks, Chrishope - I understand that the knot wasn't a slipknot now, so in essense it WAS more of a noose (meant to only tighten) rather than something used for AEA or whatever.

When you say "every tug on the handle made it tighter", is that what most people assume happened? That it was placed on her head, then someone "tugged" at it by holding onto the paintbrush handle? I guess I hadn't even thought of that and that's why I couldn't understand how it (the handle part) could be used to tighten the noose (because it WASN'T a slipknot). IOW, I thought the only way that circular noose part would be able to be tightened to strangle would be if it WAS a slipknot used. Since it wasn't a slipknot, I didn't know it could still tighten (it just can't loosen). I think I get it now. Thanks!!

I do understand how the handle part could be used "inside" the circular noose to tighten it, tourniquette style - and you're right, the handle wouldn't have needed to be attached to the rope to do it that way.

What about the cords around her wrist, though? Were they tied to anything else, or just her hands tied to each other??

I agree with others who think that she was strangled face down, and I think that's why there are some marks/abrasions on her face.

I think most people assume it was built on the body, meaning it wasn't slipped over her head first, but slipped around the neck and then knotted. I'm not sure about this, as it's a difficult way to construct it.

I don't know much about the cords around the wrist. SD or UKGuy would be more helpful here. From what I can see in the pictures, one wrist wasnt' even bound, and the other was just bound with a smaller loop, but not tied to anything else. I havn't heard anything of marks on her wrists which would indicate her wrists had been tied to anything.

 

[Nuisanceposter]

There were no marks on her wrists indicating either that she had struggled against restraints, nor were there any defensive wounds. The cord was tied very loosely, over her sleeves, with 15 inches of length between them. Coroner Meyer was able to slip one side off over her hand without untying it. Interesting since JR claims that he tried to untie the wrists but it was too tight.

The damage to JonBenet's neck does not support the idea that the paintbrush was inserted between the cord and the neck and twisted tourniquet-style. If that was the case, why tie the paintbrush to the cord to indicate a handle? Why didn't the killer leave the paintbrush tucked in the cord next to her neck?

 

[lannie]

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?

the garrotte was used before, who ever was molesting JB did not want her to remember all of it so she was put in a simi conscious state with the sex devise, as it has been used so many times before, it has more than one use ,,John droping that scarf in her casket at the last monent was chilling, scarfs are used to keep markes from showing on the >>>neck<<<

 

[SieSie]

There were no marks on her wrists indicating either that she had struggled against restraints, nor were there any defensive wounds. The cord was tied very loosely, over her sleeves, with 15 inches of length between them. Coroner Meyer was able to slip one side off over her hand without untying it. Interesting since JR claims that he tried to untie the wrists but it was too tight.

The damage to JonBenet's neck does not support the idea that the paintbrush was inserted between the cord and the neck and twisted tourniquet-style. If that was the case, why tie the paintbrush to the cord to indicate a handle? Why didn't the killer leave the paintbrush tucked in the cord next to her neck?

So when she was brought upstairs by JR, both of her wrists had the cord wrapped lightly on top of her sweater - were they tied behind her back or in front of her - do we know??

I agree that the paintbrush wasn't used tourniquette-style, but I wanted to be sure to let Chrishope know that I understood the concept of how that could be done.

That's a weird looking paintbrush handle - it seems very long. It also appears to be broken on both ends (where the bristles would've been and the other end) - is this part of the same paintbrush that was used on her vaginally??

 

[i_dont_chat]

SuperDave,

You seem to know a lot about the case so maybe you can help me with something I'm confused about -

When you say the internals of the neck were hardly damaged, isn't that exactly what is supposed to happen with a garrotte? 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?

We know she really was strangled, either with the garrotte or manually, or with some other object, and we know the internals weren't damaged badly. Why couldn't it have been done with the garrotte?

To save time, I understand the garrotte wasn't "professional". I understand there are better ways to make them, and that typically they wouldn't be built on the body. But it seems to me this one could have worked -inefficiently- by wrapping the long tail around the hand a few times so as to shorten it up, and then pulling it tight.

I guess I'm just asking couldn't it possibly have been the garrotte, even if that's not the most probable scenario?

The reason I ask about this in particular is that I think the evidence points heavily towards the R's. But the business of staging a garrotting has always seemed bizzare (Yes I know people do bizzare things sometimes). Parents who weren't into the pervy world of EA probably wouldn't think of making a garrotte. People who would think of it are probably into pervy EA play. It's seems at least a possibility that the garrotte was made by someone making a first ameturish attempt and going too far with it.

Yes, I agree.



My opinion, what happened to JonBenet was a childish attempt to mimic the sexual act of Erotic Asphyxiation.



This is was might have happened. At the Christmas party at the Ramseys on the 23rd, during the time when the rented Mr. Santa was handing out presents to the children, some of the adults (at least 2 people) were secreted away, enjoying some EA, maybe privately, or maybe with an audience. (Voyeurism is used by some as an answer to a frustrated sex life.)



Let’s say that Burke witnessed it accidentally. Being curious, he may have “spied” on what the adults were doing. Maybe Burke got frightened because he thought that someone was being hurt/choked. And he dialed 9-1-1 for help. And maybe an adult, stopped him, and explained that no one was being hurt. It was okay. Just a game. Not to be afraid.



Fast forward to Dec 25; the Ramseys went to bed. JonBenet could have awaken, and gotten in bed with Burke (as she did sometimes, especially if she had wet her bed). Maybe both children went down stairs, had a snack (pineapple and iced tea) and Burke persuaded his sister to let him show her something.



This is not a stretch because it was said that Burke and JonBenet had been found out to have been experimenting sexually – we used to call it “playing doctor”. Burke could have tied the cord on the piece of the paintbrush handle. Maybe it was the same handle he had used to experiment with JonBenet before.



Burke of course was just acting out EA. He didn’t understand EA. He didn’t know that the cord was supposed to be released at the exact moment of orgasm. The whole orgasm thing probably was so new to him that he was ignorant about what he was doing. He simply choked her to death.

 

[Chrishope]

There were no marks on her wrists indicating either that she had struggled against restraints, nor were there any defensive wounds. The cord was tied very loosely, over her sleeves, with 15 inches of length between them. Coroner Meyer was able to slip one side off over her hand without untying it. Interesting since JR claims that he tried to untie the wrists but it was too tight.

The damage to JonBenet's neck does not support the idea that the paintbrush was inserted between the cord and the neck and twisted tourniquet-style. If that was the case, why tie the paintbrush to the cord to indicate a handle? Why didn't the killer leave the paintbrush tucked in the cord next to her neck?

You may be correct about the damage to the neck. I don't have eough medical knowledge to say one way or the other. I'm not really trying to make the case that the stick was used turniquet style, just saying it's possible. It would work that way, and it would account for the hair twisted up in the knot. If the handle were pulled, we then have to explain the twisted up hair. It's also possible the handle broke during the twisting motion, as a paint brush handle isn't the strongest thing one could use. It would be odd to break the brush into two or three pieces then use one piece for the handle. Much easier to use the whole brush.

Why tie the handle to the cord? I don't know. Why tie make so many windings at the handle? I think whoever made it didn't know what they were doing. Pulling on the handle might have proved too much of a strain, especially with the long tail. They might not have been getting the results they wanted doing it that way, then went to tourniquet mode.

Just theorizing. Trying to explain the twisted up hair in the handle.

 

[Chrishope]

Yes, I agree.



My opinion, what happened to JonBenet was a childish attempt to mimic the sexual act of Erotic Asphyxiation.



This is was might have happened. At the Christmas party at the Ramseys on the 23rd, during the time when the rented Mr. Santa was handing out presents to the children, some of the adults (at least 2 people) were secreted away, enjoying some EA, maybe privately, or maybe with an audience. (Voyeurism is used by some as an answer to a frustrated sex life.)



Let’s say that Burke witnessed it accidentally. Being curious, he may have “spied” on what the adults were doing. Maybe Burke got frightened because he thought that someone was being hurt/choked. And he dialed 9-1-1 for help. And maybe an adult, stopped him, and explained that no one was being hurt. It was okay. Just a game. Not to be afraid.



Fast forward to Dec 25; the Ramseys went to bed. JonBenet could have awaken, and gotten in bed with Burke (as she did sometimes, especially if she had wet her bed). Maybe both children went down stairs, had a snack (pineapple and iced tea) and Burke persuaded his sister to let him show her something.



This is not a stretch because it was said that Burke and JonBenet had been found out to have been experimenting sexually – we used to call it “playing doctor”. Burke could have tied the cord on the piece of the paintbrush handle. Maybe it was the same handle he had used to experiment with JonBenet before.



Burke of course was just acting out EA. He didn’t understand EA. He didn’t know that the cord was supposed to be released at the exact moment of orgasm. The whole orgasm thing probably was so new to him that he was ignorant about what he was doing. He simply choked her to death.

Possible. The problem I have with BDI theories is that he was 9. I recently discovered that anyone under 10 can't form the requisite intent for murder, (by statute) so basically Burke would have got some counciling and that's about it. No need to stage all this stuff - unless of course JR was diddling her and needed to cover that up, but then why would PR go along?

 

[BBB167893]

"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."

if that were the case, there would have been brush fragments on her neck from where it rubbed off

"I think most people assume it was built on the body, meaning it wasn't slipped over her head first, but slipped around the neck and then knotted. I'm not sure about this, as it's a difficult way to construct it."

Which is exactly what we mean: it was tied onto her after she was knocked out. he hair was tied into the knots, which proves it was tied onto her.

"There were no marks on her wrists indicating either that she had struggled against restraints, nor were there any defensive wounds. The cord was tied very loosely, over her sleeves, with 15 inches of length between them. Coroner Meyer was able to slip one side off over her hand without untying it. Interesting since JR claims that he tried to untie the wrists but it was too tight."

Yeah, they wouldn't restrain anyone.

Her hands were neither in front or back. They were over her head.

 

[Chrishope]

SD

Why wouldn't the perpetrator flip the hair out of the way? Much easier. The tail is so long the perp wouldn't need to make that knot with hair in the way.

The hair tangled in the handle knot had either to be pulled from her head, or cut off by the coroner.

 

[UKGuy]

My opinion, what happened to JonBenet was a childish attempt to mimic the sexual act of Erotic Asphyxiation.

i_dont_chat,

Your opinion does not correspond with any of the forensic evidence.

There are no fibers from Burkes clothing, or any of his dna to link him to the crime-scene.

Burke was prepubescent, so attributing adult motives to him is erroneous.

JonBenet was manually strangled and there are contusions and abrasions on her neck beneath the ligature which reflect this.

There are none on either side of the ligature!


IMO what happened to JonBenet was an Adult attempt to stage the crime-scene corresponding to that of a violent, sexually motivated homicide.



.

 

[i_dont_chat]

Possible. The problem I have with BDI theories is that he was 9. I recently discovered that anyone under 10 can't form the requisite intent for murder, (by statute) so basically Burke would have got some counciling and that's about it. No need to stage all this stuff - unless of course JR was diddling her and needed to cover that up, but then why would PR go along?

I want to submit (my theory) why the parents felt they had to prevent Burke from being questioned about his sister's death.

It is apparent to me that Burke had, at some time, witnessed adult sexual partners engaging in Erotic asphyxiation (EA).

Patsy and John Ramsey and some of their close friends and neighbors (my theory) knew this. I propose that they knew or guessed HOW Burke had been exposed to this sexual activity. They are not stupid. My theory is they realized that their lives would be greatly affected if the truth came out that Burke did it. Because it would follow -- the public/LE would want to know WHERE Burke learned of such things.

Child Protective Services would get involved and children could be removed from homes when the parents don't protect their children from being exposed or affected by such sexual behavior. The ramficiations were huge: child neglect charges, children placed in foster homes, divorce, public humilitation and shame.

So, my theory, they weren't protecting Burke as much as they were protecting themselves and the ramifications.

 

[Chrishope]

OK, possible. I'm not dismissing it out of hand. I just don't think it's the most plausible explanation. But the case isn't solved so none of us really has THE answer.

 

[i_dont_chat]

i_dont_chat,

Your opinion does not correspond with any of the forensic evidence.

There are no fibers from Burkes clothing, or any of his dna to link him to the crime-scene.

Burke was prepubescent, so attributing adult motives to him is erroneous.

JonBenet was manually strangled and there are contusions and abrasions on her neck beneath the ligature which reflect this.

There are none on either side of the ligature!


IMO what happened to JonBenet was an Adult attempt to stage the crime-scene corresponding to that of a violent, sexually motivated homicide.



.

The law MUST protect children. They cannot release anything which incriminates Burke. It is simply against the law.

Burke didn't know why or what he was doing. He was just acting out what he had seen.

JonBenet was strangled to death by the cord around her neck. Not by hands, if that is what you are saying.

 

[IrishMist]

The law MUST protect children. They cannot release anything which incriminates Burke. It is simply against the law.

Burke didn't know why or what he was doing. He was just acting out what he had seen.

JonBenet was strangled to death by the cord around her neck. Not by hands, if that is what you are saying.

Are you saying that LE knows it's Burke, and are protecting that information?

 

[Betsy]

But if LE knows it was Burke, then at what point did they find this out?

It must have been after Steve Thomas resigned, or maybe he didn't get the memo.

I guess each state is different with regard to children committing crimes. Here in Chicago, two young boys threw a 4 year old boy out of an apartment window--it was a heartbreaking story, and I don't remember if they named the boys in the media, but they sure did report on how old they were.

I suppose it would be different in this case, as reporting that a 9 year old committed the crime would be a little obvious.

Anyway, if LE knows it was Burke, then case closed, right? Only they can't possibly CLOSE the case without the media demanding the name of the perpetrator, so they must keep it open then. Faux open.

But then why would they bring in other people for questioning if they know Burke did it?

Maybe they DON'T know after all.

Or maybe he just didn't do it.

 

[UKGuy]

The law MUST protect children. They cannot release anything which incriminates Burke. It is simply against the law.

Burke didn't know why or what he was doing. He was just acting out what he had seen.

JonBenet was strangled to death by the cord around her neck. Not by hands, if that is what you are saying.

i_dont_chat,

If JonBenet's death was an accident then any information released will not incriminate Burke, since there is no crime involved!

So if the authorities know the circumstances surrounding JonBenet's death, why did they chase after Karr, spending money on dna testing and air flights?

BDI and EA does not standup to inspection its another conspiracy theory!


.

 

[BBB167893]

"The hair tangled in the handle knot had either to be pulled from her head, or cut off by the coroner."

Pretty sure the coroner cut it off.