The Chair Blocking the Basement Door

[otg]

otg,
Which begs the question, why bother with ligature asphyxiation?

That question assumes it was intentional. I don't.

 

[icedtea4me]

otg,
Which begs the question, why bother with ligature asphyxiation?

.

Perhaps so Person B would have to get their hands dirty too.

 

[OliviaG1996]

otg,
Which begs the question, why bother with ligature asphyxiation?

.

My guess: To cover up or attempt to hide marks from a first attempted strangulation by whomever is being covered up for.

 

[UKGuy]

My guess: To cover up or attempt to hide marks from a first attempted strangulation by whomever is being covered up for.

OliviaG1996,
ITA. Yet somone could just say it was done to suggest irrational, perverse motives?

For me that contradicts the rationale injected into the staging, and allows the possibility of mistakes?

Its also similar to use of the paintbrush debate, i.e. was it an acute assault weapon or part of an attempt to mask an acute sexual assault?

My money is on most of the wine-cellar artifact being staged, and JonBenet being originally assaulted elsewhere in the house?

The wine-cellar was really used as an internal deposit site, there is no sign of struggle or violence having taken place there, objects seem to have been deliberately placed there to hide them, that appears to include BR's Christmas gifts, as per Kolar, and sadly JonBenet herself.

.

 

[UKGuy]

Perhaps so Person B would have to get their hands dirty too.

icedtea4me,
Which person, a parent?

Someone could have held JonBenet by the neck manually via her Gap Top, etc, and violently whacked her head against some other object, even the floor?

The rest might be staging. JonBenet might have interrupted BR as he played his game or constructed some lego object, and he just lost it?

BPD are in no hurry to solve the case, they have never followed up many family clues.

Even Fleet White has remained silent, as if he knows the case is BDI and there will never be a resolution, whereas initially he interpreted the R's behavour as suspicious, but realizes BR will never see the inside of a court room?

.

 

[UKGuy]

That question assumes it was intentional. I don't.

otg,
Nope, it most certainly does not. I'm neutral on that aspect, since it really does not impact on any theory, unless your BDI All, or IDI.

The intentionality regarding the use of the ligature plus the paintbrush lies in the concious, deliberate decision to:

1. Apply a Ligature.

2. Apply the Paintbrush.

Which, I assume were external items to the original primary crime-scene.

That is someone went to the trouble of constructing the ligature device, despite simpler methods of asphyxiation being readily available, possibly including a pillow from her bed?

If it was a parent who applied the ligature device, and Meyer took the stand to say, as per the AR, that this in conjunction with her blunt force injury killed her, then the court would likely conclude it was intentional since the said parent denied JonBenet the option of medical assistance?

How can you apply such a device to an already injured child and not consider it will further injure her?

I'm fairly confident either parent knew how to use a mirror or take a pulse to check if JonBenet was alive?

.

 

[icedtea4me]

icedtea4me,
Which person, a parent?*snip*

Yes, imo, John would have felt obligated to get his hands dirty.

 

[UKGuy]

Yes, imo, John would have felt obligated to get his hands dirty.

icedtea4me,
Like he did not want to be sidelined as Patsy added the ligature device, etc?

Apart from the ransom note, it could be BDI All which would include the ligature, even taking JonBenet down to the basement?

The parents really just improvise with what is in effect a faite accompli, adding the paintbrush, ransom note, and dumping stuff into the wine-cellar?

JR's role appears very opaque, potentially minimal, thus allowing for folks to think its definitely PDI.

When its really BDI All, and Patsy takes a few bullets for Burke Ramsey, i.e. size-12's, long johns, she opened the partially opened gifts.

.

 

[otg]

otg,
Nope, it most certainly does not. I'm neutral on that aspect, since it really does not impact on any theory, unless your BDI All, or IDI.

The intentionality regarding the use of the ligature plus the paintbrush lies in the concious, deliberate decision to:

1. Apply a Ligature.

2. Apply the Paintbrush.

Which, I assume were external items to the original primary crime-scene.

That is someone went to the trouble of constructing the ligature device, despite simpler methods of asphyxiation being readily available, possibly including a pillow from her bed?

If it was a parent who applied the ligature device, and Meyer took the stand to say, as per the AR, that this in conjunction with her blunt force injury killed her, then the court would likely conclude it was intentional since the said parent denied JonBenet the option of medical assistance?

How can you apply such a device to an already injured child and not consider it will further injure her?

I'm fairly confident either parent knew how to use a mirror or take a pulse to check if JonBenet was alive?

Mmmmmmmmm... I think everything you outline here (as well as your original question about why someone would "bother with ligature asphyxiation") is what would constitute "intent." Maybe it's all too subtle, and I really don't like parsing words, so I should just leave it at that. I'll simply state that it's my opinion that her ligature strangulation was accidental -- not intentional.

 

[UKGuy]

Mmmmmmmmm... I think everything you outline here (as well as your original question about why someone would "bother with ligature asphyxiation") is what would constitute "intent." Maybe it's all too subtle, and I really don't like parsing words, so I should just leave it at that. I'll simply state that it's my opinion that her ligature strangulation was accidental -- not intentional.

otg,
It cannot be accidental, there is intentionality displayed in selecting the paintbrush and ligature, then there is the construction, knotting etc. Nothing accidental there, then there is the physical application, it looks quite forceful to me?

that it's my opinion that her ligature strangulation was accidental -- not intentional.

Are you suggesting whomever asphyxiated JonBenet, thought she was already dead, so unknowingly asphyxiated her?

.

 

[otg]

otg,
It cannot be accidental, there is intentionality displayed in selecting the paintbrush and ligature, then there is the construction, knotting etc. Nothing accidental there, then there is the physical application, it looks quite forceful to me?

Kids have accidents every day with ropes, cords, wires, you-name-it. All it takes is a not-so-well-thoughtout setup and a slip. I don't think her strangulation was a deliberate act, no.

Are you suggesting whomever asphyxiated JonBenet, thought she was already dead, so unknowingly asphyxiated her?

Not at all.

 

[UKGuy]

Kids have accidents every day with ropes, cords, wires, you-name-it. All it takes is a not-so-well-thoughtout setup and a slip. I don't think her strangulation was a deliberate act, no.


Not at all.

otg,
Well it does not look remotely accidental to me. I reckon one of the R's asphyxiated JonBenet, possibly Patsy since her fibers are embedded in the knotting.

Yet the fibers could be a red herring and BR might have already applied the ligature, for whatever reason. Along comes Patsy who decides to stage an asphyxiation including the paintbrush for effect?

So BR might have done some staging, e.g. long johns, size-12's, added a ligature, moved the body, etc.

Patsy expands on the ligature device manufacture using the paintbrush, rationalizing it represents a visible cause of death, i.e. that's the staged part.

Whomever ligature asphyxiated JonBenet must be looking at Murder in 1st degree charges. Since they denied JonBenet medical assistance.

.

 

[icedtea4me]

icedtea4me,
Like he did not want to be sidelined as Patsy added the ligature device, etc?*snip*

No. I believe John believes it's what he did to JonBenet that caused Person A to strike JonBenet in the head.

 

[UKGuy]

No. I believe John believes it's what he did to JonBenet that caused Person A to strike JonBenet in the head.

icedtea4me,
Could be the case. There is no apparent smoking gun, just some major red flags.

If Fleet White maintains his silence then I reckon the case is BDI.

.

 

[otg]

otg,
Well it does not look remotely accidental to me. I reckon one of the R's asphyxiated JonBenet, possibly Patsy since her fibers are embedded in the knotting.

Yet the fibers could be a red herring and BR might have already applied the ligature, for whatever reason. Along comes Patsy who decides to stage an asphyxiation including the paintbrush for effect?

So BR might have done some staging, e.g. long johns, size-12's, added a ligature, moved the body, etc.

Patsy expands on the ligature device manufacture using the paintbrush, rationalizing it represents a visible cause of death, i.e. that's the staged part.

Whomever ligature asphyxiated JonBenet must be looking at Murder in 1st degree charges. Since they denied JonBenet medical assistance.

How it "looks" is very subjective and relies on many assumptions. Have you ever considered that JonBenet was already dead when the Ramsey parents discovered her body?

So take away what might have been staged, and look only at the physical evidence.

 

[SandyQLS]

3 MR. LEVIN: I think that is
4 probably fair. Based on the state of the
5 art scientific testing, we believe the fibers
6 from her jacket were found in the paint
7 tray, were found tied into the ligature found
8 on JonBenet's neck, were found on the blanket
9 that she is wrapped in, were found on the
10 duct tape that is found on the mouth, and
11 the question is, can she explain to us how
12 those fibers appeared in those places that
13 are associated with her daughter's death.
14 And I understand you are not going to answer
15 those.

What physical evidence ties BR to this scene?

 

[Ambitioned]

His tDNA on the nightie
Knife found in basement
Hi-Tec print in basement (may or may not be his)

 

[UKGuy]

3 MR. LEVIN: I think that is
4 probably fair. Based on the state of the
5 art scientific testing, we believe the fibers
6 from her jacket were found in the paint
7 tray, were found tied into the ligature found
8 on JonBenet's neck, were found on the blanket
9 that she is wrapped in, were found on the
10 duct tape that is found on the mouth, and
11 the question is, can she explain to us how
12 those fibers appeared in those places that
13 are associated with her daughter's death.
14 And I understand you are not going to answer
15 those.

What physical evidence ties BR to this scene?

SandyQLS,
Burke Ramsey's long johns which JonBenet was wearing when discovered. Thats the pair Patsy says she redressed JonBenet in when they arrived back from the White's.

Patsy is simply explaining away forensic evidence that could link Burke Ramsey to the crime-scene, e.g. size-12's, long johns, partially opened gifts.

Patsy says she opened the Partially Opened Gifts. Kolar says it was Burke Ramsey?

Then there is Burke Ramsey's opened gifts lying in the wine-cellar. Patsy says they were for Burke Ramsey's upcoming Birthday, Kolar describes them as Christmas Gifts.

Given Patsy's record in taking a bullet for Burke Ramsey, it seems more likely that the opened gifts were Christmas Gifts!

.

 

[DeDee]

Kids have accidents every day with ropes, cords, wires, you-name-it. All it takes is a not-so-well-thoughtout setup and a slip. I don't think her strangulation was a deliberate act, no.


Not at all.

otg,

I clearly remember your theory on the [accidental] hanging of JonBenet. However, I don't recall your explanation for the severe skull/brain injury. Do you have your theoratic report handy regarding the skull injury to share once again? It is your own opinion on the cause of the injury that I am seeking. I understand your precise explanation of the injury itself.

Thank you.
Happy Memorial Day weekend!

 

[icedtea4me]

*snip*
Patsy says she opened the Partially Opened Gifts. Kolar says it was Burke Ramsey?

Then there is Burke Ramsey's opened gifts lying in the wine-cellar. Patsy says they were for Burke Ramsey's upcoming Birthday, Kolar describes them as Christmas Gifts.

Given Patsy's record in taking a bullet for Burke Ramsey, it seems more likely that the opened gifts were Christmas Gifts!

.

Are you saying that it would have been absolutely, positively 100% impossible for Kolar to have been wrong about the gifts being Christmas gifts?