Accident means no intruder

Discussion in 'JonBenet Ramsey' started by gls, Sep 7, 2006.

  1. gls

    gls New Member

    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    If the DA can prove that JB´s head injury was a result of an accident then that alone would smash the intruder theory.

    This can be solved without geneticists. The DA would need to consult with a structural engineer who could tell her how the head fracture occurred. The autopsy report is enough to take to court and get a conviction. The ransom note will not help because handwriting analysis is not an exact science.

    The DA must also answer the questions asked by the grand jury about DNA found on JB´s panties. Tests taken by forensic scientists prove that new underwear does have DNA. The DNA found on JB´s panties was already there probably as a result of the manufacturing or packaging process.
     
  2. Loading...


  3. Nuisanceposter

    Nuisanceposter Remembering Little Miss Christmas

    Messages:
    1,399
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    They'd just argue that the intruder accidentally hit her on the head.
     
  4. julianne

    julianne Former Member

    Messages:
    1,810
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Not only that, but a structural engineer cannot tell how the skull fracture happened. They cannot tell what was used, who used it, and whether it was done purposely or accidentally.

    While structural engineers may have a certain amount of intelligence, they are not God, the perp, or a psychic.
     
  5. olive

    olive New Member

    Messages:
    818
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Investigators have the ability to do, and test, many things during the course of investigation. Couple that with forensic pathology, and I just can't understand why more tests on the skull fracture weren't completed. Considering that the weapon used in the fracture would be key evidence, you'd think they would have conducted more tests. For instance:

    Many of the deceased have their bodies, or their children's bodies, donated to science. And while this may sound macabre, bear with me. Why not obtain a few skulls of deceased children around the same age and size as JB, and try different suspected objects/instruments on the skull to see if you can reproduce the result?
     
  6. i_dont_chat

    i_dont_chat New Member

    Messages:
    47
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    My opinion: JonBenet's death was not a crime. It was an accident. The person responsible for the accident was a 9-year child. In Colorado, 9-year children cannot be charged with a crime -- and in fact -- are protected from even BEING NAMED as being responsible.

    I believe that every level of the justice system, including the last Grand Jury, came to understand this. Thus, the Grand Jury refused to charge anyone.

    The only loose end -- and it is considerable -- the TRUTH was never told to the public because the State of Colorado has laws which protect the identity of underage children.

    Can we accept on faith that our justice system worked? There is no "intruder/murderer" on the loose. Nobody got away with murder. The Ramsey's made an extreme sacrifice to take it on themselves to destroy evidence and cover-up that their son was responsible. But I truly believe that they realized he did not intend to harm his sister. They forgave him and did everything they could (legal or otherwise) to protect him. Because of that, they heaped much rage onto themselves. It is possible they did the best they knew to do at the time. Who knows what anyone would do in that situation?

    To their credit, if this is what happened, they were successful. Burke was never publicly accused or labeled as a murderer. They were able to continue within their family unit (what was left of it), without being separated from each other.

    It is difficult to imagine the pain they experienced in losing their daughter (as beloved and dotted on, as she was), coupled with the pain of knowing what could be facing their son, whom obviously they loved very much.

    There are lots of people who don't like the Ramseys, out of jealousy or intolerance. Maybe it is human nature for us to "want our pound of flesh."

    When you sort it out, maybe what the public is angry about is the simple fact that we, concerned citizens, didn't get the satisfaction of learning what happened. We think it is our right because a crime was committed. Isn't that the problem?

    Well, I am starting to accept the fact that there really wasn't a crime. It was an accident, and the family chose to take whatever drastic means they could to keep the details private. Was it their right to keep it private? I don't know, but it is my opinion that is why the public is still upset about it.

    This is my opinion of what happened, and I am nearing the point where I am willing to let this go. Are you?
     
  7. julianne

    julianne Former Member

    Messages:
    1,810
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I understand what your saying, and they should've done more tests, although I don't know to what extent their testing ended.

    In attempting to re-create the skull injury, I would think that there would be so many different variables involved--not only the object, but the exertion of force, distance from weapon to skull, trajectory--speed and position....that it may be impossible to re-create it, no matter how much they tried.

    This case is baffling, to say the least!
     
  8. gls

    gls New Member

    Messages:
    12
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The ransom note tells us that this crime was supposed to be a kidnapping. It was written by the killers so it can´t be dismissed, assuming the ransom note is the real thing. You can say the crime was about a pedo wanting sexual gratification but you can´t get around the fact that this was supposed to be a kidnapping.

    Kidnappers don´t leave the body of the victim in the house and then leave a ransom note. Even if the kidnapper caused the accident, he/she would still take JB and hope to get the ransom anyway. The parents don´t have to know JB is hurt. Kidnappers want one thing and that is money.

    Therefore I think we agree it was a kidnapping and that kidnappers take there victim with them especially after leaving a ransom note. If you don´t agree that it was a kidnapping and kidnappers take their victim then we have no basis for argument. But for the sake of rebuting your statements I´ll assume you agree with me.


    juli, a structural engineer can tell us what caused the fracture. We also know that the "kidnapping" of JB was not a real kidnapping because JB´s body was found in the house. So the ransom note was a red herring. It was a fake IOWs. Knowing that the ransom note was fake allows us to narrow the suspect list to two people, the parents. They have both been caught in lies so anything either one says can´t be believed. They are both involved. Therefore we know what caused the accident and we know who was present when the accident occurred.

    nuisance, if an intruder was present when the accident happened, tell me why the strangulation and the ransom note were needed. If this was the work of a pedo only wanting sex with JB then why the ransom note? Or why would a pedo leave a ransom note as a red herring? A pedo leaving a ransom note and strangling JB because she was hurt does not make sense. It defies logic. Therefore an intruder/ pedo was not involved in this crime.

    You can say that we are dealing with a crazed pedo who did things illogically but the evidence says otherwise.
     
  9. i_dont_chat

    i_dont_chat New Member

    Messages:
    47
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    You said: Knowing that the ransom note was fake allows us to narrow the suspect list to two people, the parents.

    Excuse me, but there was a 3rd person in the house. Burke. A 9-year old, strong, healthy male could have caused both the strangulation and the crushed skull.

    If you want to know my theory of the motive (or what Burke was doing when he accidentally killed his sister), you'll have to ask.

    Better yet, read my previous posts for my theory. It involves sexual experimentation by the children.
     
  10. Nuisanceposter

    Nuisanceposter Remembering Little Miss Christmas

    Messages:
    1,399
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I agree with you 100 percent, gls. I can see no evidence proving that anyone other than a Ramsey was in that house that night. I believe the head wound was an accident and the strangulation and ransom note was nothing but staging to take the focus off of the family.
     
  11. southcitymom

    southcitymom New Member

    Messages:
    16,021
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Your thoughts on what happened are probably very close to the truth in my opinion. Though I am not convinced of Burke's involvement, the theory of him accidentally harming his sister during experimentation is plausible to me. Other theories make sense to me also - and they all involve a Ramsey on some level.

    That said, I don't think I will ever be able to let this case go. It's not a pound of flesh thing. I believe there is/will be justice for JonBenet whether or not I ever see it. I leave those matters to powers greater than myself. I don't care if I ever see the killer put behind bars because I don't know that true justice ever plays out in this world.

    But I believe that the innocents in this world deserve our greatest loyalities and attention. A 6-year-old girl who dies in her home on Christmas with a split skull, a rope around her neck and a paintbrush in her vagina deserves to have the truth of her life and death shouted from the mountaintops - over and over again - even if it seems that no one is listening.

    I feel an obligation to keep searching for that truth, her truth, is this web of deceit.
     
  12. SuperDave

    SuperDave Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    13,263
    Likes Received:
    37
    Trophy Points:
    48
    "Why not obtain a few skulls of deceased children around the same age and size as JB, and try different suspected objects/instruments on the skull to see if you can reproduce the result?"

    They might have done that. I think Spitz did something along those lines.
     
  13. Amity

    Amity Attention Span of a Gnat

    Messages:
    1,170
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    For those of you who are forensically savvy, how much new information could be culled from exhuming JBR's body after ten years? Science has come a long way in just ten years. Imagine a fresh pair of eyes looking at the body. Maybe two sets of fresh eyes. But, without skin, can any new information be had?

    I personally know of two families who had to have the bodies of their loved ones exhumed...it was court ordered.
    What does it take, what kind of information needs to be proved to have the court order a body exhumed?
     
  14. SuperDave

    SuperDave Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    13,263
    Likes Received:
    37
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Well, Michael Baden found evidence THIRTY years after Medgar Evers' burial. I guess it would depend on what you're looking for.

    "What does it take, what kind of information needs to be proved to have the court order a body exhumed?"

    Information that shows it's vital to a case, I think.
     
  15. Trocaria

    Trocaria New Member

    Messages:
    66
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Depending on how well she was embalmed, AND provided that a quality vault was used in conjunction with the wood casket, the flesh should still be there.
    It will be more like leather now, mummified if you will. Had they used a metal casket with a sealing device, it may be a lost cause by now.

    The only concern I would have about the condition of her remains would be that she was fully "posted". Posted cases are difficult and take time to embalm if you are looking to do a good job. I am sure that my fellow embalmers at that furneral home in Boulder would have taken great care in raising as many vessels needed to make a through job. My guess is that the carotids would have been trashed for injection purposes, they usually get sliced in the course of the autopsy. The embalmer should have raised both femorals, both axials and brachials and if need be any of the smaller vessels in the wrists and calves. They might have hypoed the skin flaps prior to sucturing.
    They should have used autopsy powder in the cavities to prevent leakage. They would have flushed out and dried out the brain cavity then filled it with either hardening compound or kapok.
    The condition of the calvarium would have made it very difficult to re-attach. Infact, being it was homicide, I wonder if indeed the skull cap was even returned with the body? Would they have kept it? At least made a cast of it?
    Again, the embalming report would tell us a lot on what we wonder.

    This is a very long way of saying that if done well, the embalmed remains should still yield a plethra of clues and information.
     
  16. Amity

    Amity Attention Span of a Gnat

    Messages:
    1,170
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    "Well, Michael Baden found evidence THIRTY years after Medgar Evers' burial."
    SuperDave, I did not know that! I just went and did some look-see and sure 'nuff...you're spot-on, again!
    Thank the powers that be I've never had to go through the murder of my child so I have no idea how I would have acted/reacted/handled/or if I would have even been able to function in an upright position so I can't say for sure but seems to me if a specialist or several told me by exhuming the body they might be better able to see what might have been missed, especially now with so many more scientific advancements, I think (THINK, for now, as I have never had to make that decision) I would approve it.
    Anything, anything! to get as much information as I could possibly get to help solve this horrendous deed!
    But, then again, that's just me.


    Trocaria,
    That post was a wealth of information! Ok, honestly, I had to go look up some words but once I found them.... the post is a keeper in my hard files for sure...thank you so very much for taking the time to explain...much appreciated!
    And again, as I said above to SuperDave, why wouldn't someone give permission to exhume???, with all the latest DNA/scientific technology, I can pretty sure say as of right now (although in no way do I know for sure if faced with it) I would grant permission in a New York second if it meant garnering more information that could possibly lead to answers as to why my precious baby is no longer with me on this earth.
    But, that's just me.
     
  17. kazzbar

    kazzbar Inactive

    Messages:
    4,175
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    There is NO WAy John Ramsay will ever give permission to have JBR exhumed. It will not happen!

    The only way it will happen is if a court orders it to happen. There would have to be "neW' evidence presented to justify it.
     
  18. Amity

    Amity Attention Span of a Gnat

    Messages:
    1,170
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    36
    Hi Kazzbar,
    I've only seen one show a long time ago where JR answered in the negative about exhuming JBR's body (saying something about how she was resting in peace) but I've not read anything else about whether he'd be open for it now.

    But I keep running it around in my liddow grey matter and if it were me, if it would bring me some answers to exhume my child's body, at least a "How" or a "Who", I think I'd be more at peace with answers rather than living the rest of my life not knowing the How's or the Who.

    If it's a religious reason, I've read many times that most religions feel that the soul leaves the body. So, exhuming the body wouldn't be disturbing the soul...the person who is resting in peace is already in a higher/better place. No?
    I dunno....I've been reading lately about a lot of cases where the body was exhumed and in fact, something important had been missed during the original autopsy.
    Personally, I think it would be worth it if it brought even one missed/overlooked clue that could possibly bring some peace to me and hopefully justice to my murdered child.
     
  19. kazzbar

    kazzbar Inactive

    Messages:
    4,175
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Hi Amity, i would like to see JBR 's body exhumed if it would help find out anything that would get a prosecution in this case.But I just do not feel that John would let it happen. Maybe I am incorrect in saying this but I feel he has moved on and some people do not believe in doing these things. Perhaps he feel JBR should rest in peace.
     
  20. JMO8778

    JMO8778 ..at the beach!

    Messages:
    5,554
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Who,if anyone,has authority to do so once JR passes on?
     
  21. BirdieBoo

    BirdieBoo New Member

    Messages:
    4,414
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    If the Grand Jury had truly deemed it an accident, would Boulder still have arrested Karr, or would the case be considered closed?

    The garotte, etc. was no accident.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice