Many weapons.

Holdontoyourhat

Former Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2005
Messages
5,299
Reaction score
12
Whether you're RDI or IDI, there's no arguing that the perp selected weapons.

Although the weapons that were found by the police could have been mere staging, they are nonetheless weapons.

As a standalone item, the garrote has various potentials as a weapon is concerned. Regardless as to whether or not it was always just a prop, its potential is still remarkably high.

In the hands of an adult, the garrote could restrict air temporarily or permanently, and at maximum potential cause severe injury to the neck of a victim. It can also cause injury by poking, with its sharpened ends.

The second weapon is the second ligature. As a standalone, its potential has a wide range. It obviously included provision for limbs, possibly as many as three or even four. Its application is not understood by many, and is open to specultation even 10 years later. Maximizing the potential of this weapon has a person's limbs fully restrained.

The third weapon that was possibly at the crime scene is a combination garrote-second ligature weapon that fully restrains, where any limb movement translates to an air restriction.

The fourth weapon widely considered possible is whatever was used to cause the injury to JBR's skull. Perhaps a baseball bat, flashlight, or some other object.

The fifth weapon that is considered possible at the crime scene is a stun-gun or taser. This weapon has the potential of paralyzing the victim for a period of time.
 
"Although the weapons that were found by the police could have been mere staging, they are nonetheless weapons."

At least you're open to it.

"The fifth weapon that is considered possible at the crime scene is a stun-gun or taser. This weapon has the potential of paralyzing the victim for a period of time."

I've never known these things to paralyze a person. It doesn't knock them out, either, far as I know.
 
SuperDave said:
"Although the weapons that were found by the police could have been mere staging, they are nonetheless weapons."

At least you're open to it.

"The fifth weapon that is considered possible at the crime scene is a stun-gun or taser. This weapon has the potential of paralyzing the victim for a period of time."

I've never known these things to paralyze a person. It doesn't knock them out, either, far as I know.
I'm not really open to the idea that the weapons were mere staging. Its possible, but I certainly wouldn't bet my life on it.

Its obvious that most RDI considers the garrote and second ligature to be mere staging. RDI is quite dependent on this, as otherwise the parents would have to be quite vicious, and there's no evidence of this before, during, or after the murder.

The problem with this, is that the garrote and second ligature have this enormous weapon potential. I mean, this is really a lot of weapon for a mere prop.

This weapon doesn't just look like a weapon, it acts like one too. It was found in a deep furrow around JBR's neck. It could have fully restrained while strangling too. Isn't that a lot of weapon-like performance out of something intended to be just a staging prop? (The garrote/second ligature as prop idea is falling apart here).
 
Adults wouldn't be knocked out completely by a stun gun unless an unusually powerful one, but they probably haven't been tested on kids.

Which raises a new wild thought, could someone have been using JBR to test one on a kid, along with their other motives?
 
"Adults wouldn't be knocked out completely by a stun gun unless an unusually powerful one, but they probably haven't been tested on kids.

Which raises a new wild thought, could someone have been using JBR to test one on a kid, along with their other motives?"

It's the scientific principle of the stun gun that makes it so it doesn't knock a person out, Eagle1. Stun guns work by making the muscles burn themselves out.

Testing on JB? Must have put the fear in her to keep her quiet!

"I'm not really open to the idea that the weapons were mere staging. Its possible, but I certainly wouldn't bet my life on it."

Well, maybe not my life, but definitely the house!

"Its obvious that most RDI considers the garrote and second ligature to be mere staging. RDI is quite dependent on this, as otherwise the parents would have to be quite vicious, and there's no evidence of this before, during, or after the murder."

I've seen some samples of how "nice" they are! But I digress. The evidence says staging. Besides, you proceed from a faulty premise: that the staging was done to spare the parents feelings. It was done to keep them out of prison. How vicious can you be against someone you think is already dead?

"I mean, this is really a lot of weapon for a mere prop."

That's what makes it suspicious. A person who has come to kill will bring his own weapons, and he'll use what he needs, nothing too fancy. If he's in his own place, he'll feel more comfortable with experimenting and what-not. This has all the signs of someone who didn't know what a real crime scene would look like.

"This weapon doesn't just look like a weapon, it acts like one too. It was found in a deep furrow around JBR's neck."

Still staging. This is what Denver DA Norm Early said about it:

"When you're strangling somebody who has already been hit upside the head and there's no outward sign of the wound, you don't want a coroner to come back later and saythat this strangulation could not have killed this child. So you pull it deeper."

Besides, according to the autopsy, the internals of the neck were not that badly damaged. The tongue showed no signs of a struggle, the hyoid bone was undamaged, the larynx was almost untouched. The ONLY thing that even suggests that this strangulation was "vicious" is the photo, and that photo is misleading, like the ligature itself, because it shows what it LOOKS like, not what it really is. It shows what the stager wanted to show. In that regard, it embodies the ESSENCE of staging: what it looks like is all that matters, not what it really does.

"It could have fully restrained while strangling too."

I do not see how. Neither did the FBI.

"Isn't that a lot of weapon-like performance out of something intended to be just a staging prop?"

See Mr. Early's comment above.

"(The garrote/second ligature as prop idea is falling apart here)."

Not at all. To quote Greg McCrary:

"There's a false ransom note and a body and all the classic elements of a staged crime scene. Where else WOULD you look?"
 
SuperDave said:
I've seen some samples of how "nice" they are!
I said that there's no evidence of vicious behavior before or after. You said you've seen samples of how "nice" they are, as if you've got examples of their viciousness. Lets hear these samples of yours.

SuperDave said:
That's what makes it suspicious. A person who has come to kill will bring his own weapons..."
Unless, of course, he's just come from the airport and is returning to the airport afterwards, to go back to his 'foreign faction'. Then he's going to improvise, since he really cant 'bring his own weapons,' as you claim a person who has come to kill does.
 
A foreign faction that is right up on American movies.
A foreign faction who came all the way from os to little old Boulder to little old John Ramsey's house.
A foreign faction that is up on how things are said state to state.
A foreign faction that sits their victims down and feeds them pineapple.


Yeah right ;)
 
SuperDave said:
I do not see how. Neither did the FBI.
If JBR's limbs are fully restrained by the second ligature, and any resistance on her part causes the garrote to tighten around her neck, then she's not going to have any marks on her wrists whatsoever. Any logic flaws here?
 
narlacat said:
A foreign faction that is right up on American movies.
A foreign faction who came all the way from os to little old Boulder to little old John Ramsey's house.
A foreign faction that is up on how things are said state to state.
A foreign faction that sits their victims down and feeds them pineapple.


Yeah right ;)
Foreign factions love American movies.
Neither Boulder or JR are that benign.
What was said state to state that makes you think the perp's indigenous? I thought attache and Victory seemed pretty far cast.
I didn't know JBR was 'sat down', do you?
 
How is 'Victory' pretty far cast?
JR himself used the word, I forget the quote but something like 'we have to say to ourselves there will be no Victory'.
Isn't attaché a French word and didn't Patsy Ramsey just loovee anything French?
I'm thinking she did, 'hence' JonBenét.

I don't know if JBR was 'sat down' no, how do you suggest they fed it to her?

Even delousional Smit conceded it was more like a 'familiar faction'.
 
narlacat said:
How is 'Victory' pretty far cast?
JR himself used the word, I forget the quote but something like 'we have to say to ourselves there will be no Victory'.
Isn't attaché a French word and didn't Patsy Ramsey just loovee anything French?
I'm thinking she did, 'hence' JonBenét.

I don't know if JBR was 'sat down' no, how do you suggest they fed it to her?

Even delousional Smit conceded it was more like a 'familiar faction'.
IMO you may have just taken my examples of Victory and attache, and point-counterpointed them.

Again, the question was, what was it that was 'state to state' that you felt was indigenous?
 
Holdontoyourhat said:
IMO you may have just taken my examples of Victory and attache, and point-counterpointed them.

Again, the question was, what was it that was 'state to state' that you felt was indigenous?
Use that good southern common sense of yours.
 
Holdontoyourhat said:
As a closing salutation, its way far cast.
Yeah well, it was at the end of the note and I don't understand your reasoning for thinking it was 'way far cast'.

Because it was at the end of the note?
Is that what you mean?
 
narlacat said:
Yeah well, it was at the end of the note and I don't understand your reasoning for thinking it was 'way far cast'.

Because it was at the end of the note?
Is that what you mean?
The closing salutation "Victory!" "...harks back to foreign powers," according to a famous FBI profiler.

Nobody uses "Victory!" as a closing salutation.
 
Nobody uses "Victory!" as a closing salutation.

In your own reasoning, someone who want to make it look like a foreign faction does.
 
narlacat said:
Use that good southern common sense of yours.
This IMO was a feeble attempt on the part of the perp to sound familiar or close by. It actually exposes the lack of knowledge the perp had about JR, since JR is in fact not a 'southerner' and anybody close to them knows it. JR couldn't 'use that good southern common sense' even if he wanted to.
 
"I said that there's no evidence of vicious behavior before or after. You said you've seen samples of how "nice" they are, as if you've got examples of their viciousness. Lets hear these samples of yours."

Not that it will do me any good. Well, for starters, read concernedperson's account of Patsy in the office. John chased a guy off the property screaming obscenities. Then there's the famous ST face-off on LKL, where John sits there giggling like the Emperor from "Star Wars" as Patsy uses her (she thinks) irresistable sexual charms to try and turn ST, then threatening a lawsuit when he refuses to join them. Not to mention the housekeeper saying that JB feared the bathroom because Patsy would literally beat the you-know-what out of her in there. Take what you want.

"Unless, of course, he's just come from the airport and is returning to the airport afterwards, to go back to his 'foreign faction'. Then he's going to improvise, since he really cant 'bring his own weapons,' as you claim a person who has come to kill does."

That doesn't wash. The 9/11 hijackers brought weapons, didn't they?

"If JBR's limbs are fully restrained by the second ligature, and any resistance on her part causes the garrote to tighten around her neck, then she's not going to have any marks on her wrists whatsoever. Any logic flaws here?"

Just one: we can't say for sure that they were ever used like that.

"Foreign factions love American movies."

He's right about that.

"Neither Boulder or JR are that benign."

He's right about that, too!

"I didn't know JBR was 'sat down', do you?"

Well, she ate pineapple after arriving home and neither parent said that they gave it to her.

"Isn't attaché a French word and didn't Patsy Ramsey just loovee anything French?
I'm thinking she did, 'hence' JonBenét."

Yeah, she really dug that fancy-schmancy stuff.

"Nobody uses "Victory!" as a closing salutation."

Stan Lee uses "excelsior!" That's pretty close.

"This IMO was a feeble attempt on the part of the perp to sound familiar or close by. It actually exposes the lack of knowledge the perp had about JR, since JR is in fact not a 'southerner' and anybody close to them knows it. JR couldn't 'use that good southern common sense' even if he wanted to."

That was exactly the point narlacat was trying to make! It was one of the family's little jokes.
 
SuperDave said:
That doesn't wash. The 9/11 hijackers brought weapons, didn't they?
Of course it washes.

The 9/11 hijackers brought box cutters. Those aren't weapons. They were used as weapons, but they're not intrinsically weapons, as you claimed. There's no comparison.

The garrote is a weapon. When combined with the second ligature it can form a restraining device, that the perp may have felt was necessary to commit the intended crime. The perp would be unlikely to attempt to transport this weapon, required to commit the intended crime, thru an airport.
 
I don't see how a bundle of cord would set off alarms at an airport.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
181
Guests online
2,146
Total visitors
2,327

Forum statistics

Threads
589,984
Messages
17,928,670
Members
228,033
Latest member
okaydandy
Back
Top