Cords, Knots, and Strangulation Devices

[madeleine]

The only way it could have been used would be to hold the stick and pull; but then her body would have to at the same time be pushed away to overcome the force of the knot holding the cord. Could that have been the case? Possibly, but not very likely, and certainly not very effectively.

ITA.

This was the loop around her neck.I didn't pay attention before BUT NO WAY does that kind of knot tighten when you pull that stick.

 

[madeleine]

Maybe it would tighten if you pulled both tails of cord trailing from the knot.But what was the purpose of the stick then.

 

[madeleine]

The "garrote" was always the creepiest evidence to me,still is.But looking at the loops and the knots more carefully.....this is not what a normal adult would do IMO,looks more like a child done it?Very creepy anyway.........

 

[madeleine]

I was thinking about what JR said re her hands being above her head....and I was looking for some pics and found the site of this.....nutcase

http://www.aliceodilon.com/index.php?/category/85

graphic warning

anyway,the photos are sick but look at the position of the hands of the doll in the first photo.....
now I am wondering about what JR said re her hands being above her head....above her head but how exactly positioned....like a cross in this photo or how?

 

[Linda7NJ]

I think that probably the coroner said that what he found was “consistent” with digital penetration, meaning he didn’t really know at that time what caused the damage, but that it was not what would be typically be expected from a rape or penile insertion.



I have very little medical knowledge, but I do know that in strangulations, there are several kinds of petechiae and ecchymoses that occur in the surrounding area and even in the eylids (conjuctival). They can be pin-sized to irregularly shaped blotches. I don’t feel confident enough to try and guess from the photos what each of them are, but I can offer solace to anyone in that there are no scratch mark around the ligature. It should be comforting to know that there was no lengthy struggle from the strangulation. My guess is (and this is only my belief) that she was already unconscious from the head blow.

I don't remember now who the poster was, but someone on here posted that they had personal experience there (having been strangled), and that there was a great deal of grasping at the rope(?).

About the ligature furrow, remember this: It was formed around the cord after having been left in place for over 24-hours. It is caused by the swelling of the tissue around where it was left in place for that long period of time. During the mere moments that it caused the strangulation, it may have been in a different position. Therefore (or should I say, “and hence”), you have to look at the other marks left behind from the cord for how it may have been positioned then.

Just wanted to comment on "rape" a person can be raped with a pencil, rape doesn't require a penis.

 

[LadyLu]

Hi there. This is my first post, I usually just lurk.

I am in the UK and I would just like to point out, with regard to this:

Just wanted to comment on "rape" a person can be raped with a pencil, rape doesn't require a penis.

I have been advised by a police officer that technically rape can only be commited by someone with a penis. Anything else would be classed as sexual assault.

 

[madeleine]

This is an enlarged photo of her neck&cheek injuries.

http://connect.in.com/jonbenet-ramsey/photos-48n29sp-3c887beae3d2bb0e.html

I just don't think that the cord would have left so many marks....especially if it was applied as staging.
Could it be that she was strangled with her necklace?The one with the cross on it?

 

[madeleine]

And look at that abrasion,no way is that a stun gun mark.I always thought it looks like a burn (cigarette boxes found in the basement) but I guess the coroner would have noticed it if so,or?
So what on earth caused all those abrasions on her body?

 

[Linda7NJ]

Hi there. This is my first post, I usually just lurk.

I am in the UK and I would just like to point out, with regard to this:



I have been advised by a police officer that technically rape can only be commited by someone with a penis. Anything else would be classed as sexual assault.

Not on this side of the pond

Hey, let's not make this your last post! No more lurking for you! Welcome

 

[LadyLu]

Thank you. I have often gone to post so many times but, the confusion and sheer volume of questions in my head about this case, have made me think twice as in "how can I post my opinion when my opinions on this case vary at every little thing i read". Although i guess if everyone thought like that there would be no opinions here at all

Enough of my rambling. As soon as I posted I realised that the definition of rape will vary in other places.

 

[CathyR]

I thought the similarities to a horse mans twitch was established. We call it a garrote but it actually the same knot used in sexual asphyxia games. The same knot used is also used for climbing. Someone had posted about serial killer AA shore and that he used the same knot. He also used to work for SBTC as a lineman.

He claimed he used this knot as he had injured his finger during one murder using a garrote where the two ends are pulled tight to cause the strangulation.

 

[otg]

I was asked in an email about the “cellulose”, so I’ll answer here so I’m sharing the same information with everyone, and you all can have it for consideration. I’d still like to get to the rest of the knots, and the cord itself (and what it all might mean), but understand that this is not my full-time job, so it has to be done when I have the time. I will get to it though.

The “cellulose” that has so much been discussed is not mentioned in the autopsy report that was released. If I’m not mistaken, that use of the word came from two sources: Steve Thomas’s IRMI, and Lawrence Schiller’s PMPT. Since it was first used, it has grown (by speculation) in people’s conjecture from a single small splinter to “shards of wood”. But we really don’t know. If we assume it was actually found but not shown in the released autopsy, it can be assumed it was something the coroner might have wanted kept quiet. If you read on Wikipedia ([ame="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cellulose"]Wikipedia[/ame]), it says that it is “the structural component of the primary cell wall of green plants, many forms of algae and the oomycetes.” It also says it is “obtained from wood pulp and cotton” and “used to produce paperboard and paper,” and “to a smaller extent it is converted into a wide variety of derivative products such as cellophane and rayon.”

So we really don’t know what it means as far as how the coroner meant it (assuming the reports of it having been found to be correct) or in what form he found it. If I were to speculate (and I will, but realize that that’s what it is), I’d say he found a small fragment of wood that was transferred during the cleanup and staging after the fact. Not knowing for certain what it was, he probably had it analyzed and found that on a microscopic level it was “cellulose” which (combined with its visual appearance) would have told him it was wood. But the words “wood” and “cellulose” are not mentioned in the released autopsy. At the time of the autopsy, that information would not have been known by him, and therefore not written. What should have been there though is a notation of something unknown that was removed for analysis. It may have been withheld from public release of the autopsy, or it may have been represented in the notations at the end of “items turned over to BPD as evidence” (“fibers and hair from clothing and body surfaces,” and “vaginal swabs and smears”). We just don’t know.

 

[Tadpole12]

Heyya otg.

I’d still like to get to the rest of the knots, and the cord itself (and what it all might mean), but understand that this is not my full-time job, so it has to be done when I have the time. I will get to it though. - otg



oh, yes!
Please do, return to the topic of the knots.
If 'we' could develop a more descriptive model? on how to reconstruct the knots within the length of rope. Some illustration?

A friend gave us the 'The Really Useful Knots Set',
includes 'The Really Useful Knots Book' & 2 practice ropes ....
so I'm raring to go.

 

[otg]

Just wanted to comment on "rape" a person can be raped with a pencil, rape doesn't require a penis.

Yes, Linda7NJ, that wasn't worded in the most skillful of ways. Absolutely, rape can (and is) committed with other objects (at least "on this side of the pond" ). I was trying to be not too explicit, but still communicate that the coroner's observation was his way of saying that the vaginal opening wasn't damaged as much as would be expected from a "typical" (What's the word I want here? typical? normal? ordinary? common? Nothing seems to fit well.) rape. Sorry if I didn't say that very well. I hope you understand what I meant.

 

[madeleine]

As he paid attention to the case and read the portion of the autopsy report that was released, he noted items that supported the likelihood of chronic sexual abuse—that is, her vaginal injury had not occurred at the time of the crime. It may have been done by a finger or some object, not via outright rape, but he believed it was clear that before the murder someone had behaved inappropriately with the child.

People both inside and outside of the investigation reacted to that statement.

Yet as more of the autopsy report was released, he felt more certain of his analysis, and recent events appear to bear him out.

"I have learned that the police called in three separate child sexual abuse experts," he reports. "They separately and independently came to the same conclusion that there was evidence of prior sexual abuse. Not that I needed anybody to hold my hand, but for saying that same thing I took abuse on national television from self-appointed Ramsey defenders and sycophants. But it's the most ridiculous thing in the world, a little girl with half of the hymen gone and she's dead, and you've got a tiny abrasion, a tiny contusion and a chronic inflammation of vaginal mucosa. That means it happened more than 72 hours earlier; we don't know how long, or how often it was repeated, but chronic means it wasn't from that night. This was a tragic, tragic accident. This was a game that had been played before."


http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/criminal_mind/forensics/cyril_wecht/6.html

 

[madeleine]

a little girl with half of the hymen gone and she's dead


and we still can't figure out the motive?
seeing it put like this it makes all the sense in the world...

 

[UKGuy]

As he paid attention to the case and read the portion of the autopsy report that was released, he noted items that supported the likelihood of chronic sexual abuse—that is, her vaginal injury had not occurred at the time of the crime. It may have been done by a finger or some object, not via outright rape, but he believed it was clear that before the murder someone had behaved inappropriately with the child.

People both inside and outside of the investigation reacted to that statement.

Yet as more of the autopsy report was released, he felt more certain of his analysis, and recent events appear to bear him out.

"I have learned that the police called in three separate child sexual abuse experts," he reports. "They separately and independently came to the same conclusion that there was evidence of prior sexual abuse. Not that I needed anybody to hold my hand, but for saying that same thing I took abuse on national television from self-appointed Ramsey defenders and sycophants. But it's the most ridiculous thing in the world, a little girl with half of the hymen gone and she's dead, and you've got a tiny abrasion, a tiny contusion and a chronic inflammation of vaginal mucosa. That means it happened more than 72 hours earlier; we don't know how long, or how often it was repeated, but chronic means it wasn't from that night. This was a tragic, tragic accident. This was a game that had been played before."


http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/criminal_mind/forensics/cyril_wecht/6.html

madeleine,
Here is what the investigators asked Patsy abour prior molestation.

Patsy's June 1998 Interview , excerpt

0580
25 TOM HANEY: Okay. Ms. Ramsey, are

0581
1 you aware that there had been prior vaginal
2 intrusion on JonBenet?
3 PATSY RAMSEY: No, I am not.
4 Prior to the night she was killed?
5 TOM HANEY: Correct.
6 PATSY RAMSEY: No, I am not.
7 TOM HANEY: Didn't know that?
8 PATSY RAMSEY: No, I didn't.
9 TOM HANEY: Does that surprise you?
10 PATSY RAMSEY: Extremely.
11 TOM HANEY: Does that shock you?
12 PATSY RAMSEY: It shocks me.
13 TOM HANEY: Does it bother you?
14 PATSY RAMSEY: Yes, it does.
15 TOM HANEY: Who, how could she have
16 been violated like that?
17 PATSY RAMSEY: I don't know. This
18 is the absolute first time I ever heard that.
19 TOM HANEY: Take a minute, if you
20 would, I mean this seems -- you know, you didn't
21 know that before right now, the 25th, at 2:32?
22 PATSY RAMSEY: No, I absolutely
23 did not.

0582
14 ELLIS ARMISTEAD: To be fair, Tom,
15 that's been a subject of debate in the newspaper
16 whether or not she represented what is true as a
17 fact. I don't want you to alarm my client too
18 much here about whether or not it's absolutely a
19 fact. I just think that should be mentioned to
20 be fair to my client.
21 TOM HANEY: And based on the
22 reliable medical information that we have at
23 this point, that is a fact.
24 PATSY RAMSEY: Now when you say
25 violated, what are you -- what are you telling

0583
1 me here?
2 TOM HANEY: That there was some
3 prior vaginal intrusion that something --
4 something was inserted?
5 PATSY RAMSEY: Prior to this night
6 that she was assaulted?
7 TOM HANEY: That's the--
8 PATSY RAMSEY: What report as -- I
9 want to see, I want to see what you're talking
10 about here. I am -- I am -- I don't -- I am
11 shocked.
12 TOM HANEY: Well, that's one of the
13 things that's been bothering us about the case.
14 PATSY RAMSEY: No damn kidding.
15 TOM HANEY: What does that tell
16 you?
17 PATSY RAMSEY: It doesn't tell me
18 anything. I mean, I knew -- I -- I --
19 TOM HANEY: Okay, for a second --
20 PATSY RAMSEY: Did you know about
21 this?
22 ELLIS ARMISTEAD: I tried to stay
23 out of the making of the record and inserting
24 myself into the tape-recording of this
25 interview. The newspapers have talked about

0584
1 this. Whether or not--
2 PATSY RAMSEY: Well, they talk
3 about a lot of things that are not true.
4 ELLIS ARMISTEAD: And there has
5 been a debate among the people who talked about
6 the findings in the autopsy report as to whether
7 there was a prior vaginal intrusion or not. So
8 when you ask, either Tom or me or Trip or
9 Jennifer, did we know that, there has been a
10 debate about that. Even in the newspaper.
11 PATSY RAMSEY: Well, I do not know
12 of anything and I am very distressed about this.
13 TOM HANEY: Who could have done
14 such a thing?
15 PATSY RAMSEY: I do not know. I
16 don't have any idea.
17 TOM HANEY: What is your best
18 guess?
19 PATSY RAMSEY: I couldn't begin to
20 guess. I am shocked. I don't have any idea. I
21 am just -- I can't believe, I just can't believe
22 this.
23 TOM HANEY: Would that knowledge
24 change your answer to any question that you have
25 been asked?

0585
1 PATSY RAMSEY: No, sir. I have
2 answered every question you or anyone else has
3 asked me to the best of my ability.
4 TOM HANEY: Would that answer or
5 would that statement, that information, would
6 that lead you in any particular direction?
7 Would you think about a particular person being
8 involved or doing something, with JonBenet?
9 PATSY RAMSEY: I don't -- I
10 don't -- I just am shocked is all I can say. I
11 don't -- I don't know what I think. You know, I
12 just want to see where it says that.
13 TOM HANEY: And prior to today, had
14 you heard or read or seen anything about--
15 PATSY RAMSEY: I had heard that
16 the night she was killed that she may have
17 had -- have been sexually assaulted. But not
18 prior to that. Absolutely.
19 TOM HANEY: Have you ever suffered
20 any physical abuse?
21 PATSY RAMSEY: Absolutely not.
22 TOM HANEY: In childhood, you know,
23 dating, your adult life?
24 PATSY RAMSEY: (NO AUDIBLE
25 RESPONSE).

0586
1 TOM HANEY: How about sexual abuse?
2 PATSY RAMSEY: (NO AUDIBLE
3 RESPONSE).
4 TOM HANEY: How about anybody in
5 your family ever suffered any physical abuse?
6 PATSY RAMSEY: Not to my
7 knowledge.
8 TOM HANEY: Your sisters?
9 PATSY RAMSEY: Not to my
10 knowledge.

.

 

[otg]

It may have been done by a finger or some object, not via outright rape, but he believed it was clear that before the murder someone had behaved inappropriately with the child.

Hmmm. An "outright" rape. Maybe that's the word I was looking for. (Although anything with the word "right" in it before the word "rape" doesn't doesn't seem... right?)

 

[UKGuy]

I was asked in an email about the “cellulose”, so I’ll answer here so I’m sharing the same information with everyone, and you all can have it for consideration. I’d still like to get to the rest of the knots, and the cord itself (and what it all might mean), but understand that this is not my full-time job, so it has to be done when I have the time. I will get to it though.

The “cellulose” that has so much been discussed is not mentioned in the autopsy report that was released. If I’m not mistaken, that use of the word came from two sources: Steve Thomas’s IRMI, and Lawrence Schiller’s PMPT. Since it was first used, it has grown (by speculation) in people’s conjecture from a single small splinter to “shards of wood”. But we really don’t know. If we assume it was actually found but not shown in the released autopsy, it can be assumed it was something the coroner might have wanted kept quiet. If you read on Wikipedia (Wikipedia), it says that it is “the structural component of the primary cell wall of green plants, many forms of algae and the oomycetes.” It also says it is “obtained from wood pulp and cotton” and “used to produce paperboard and paper,” and “to a smaller extent it is converted into a wide variety of derivative products such as cellophane and rayon.”

So we really don’t know what it means as far as how the coroner meant it (assuming the reports of it having been found to be correct) or in what form he found it. If I were to speculate (and I will, but realize that that’s what it is), I’d say he found a small fragment of wood that was transferred during the cleanup and staging after the fact. Not knowing for certain what it was, he probably had it analyzed and found that on a microscopic level it was “cellulose” which (combined with its visual appearance) would have told him it was wood. But the words “wood” and “cellulose” are not mentioned in the released autopsy. At the time of the autopsy, that information would not have been known by him, and therefore not written. What should have been there though is a notation of something unknown that was removed for analysis. It may have been withheld from public release of the autopsy, or it may have been represented in the notations at the end of “items turned over to BPD as evidence” (“fibers and hair from clothing and body surfaces,” and “vaginal swabs and smears&#8221. We just don’t know.

otg,

Steve Thomas explicitly described the material as a splinter. The words used in the autopsy are birefringent foreign material. Cellulose and wooden splinter are an example of material that has the birefringent property. As an investigator, there will be no need to speculate as to what the precise material is, since being birefringent this means forensic testing will have allowed for an exact match, but like other items e.g. the colour of the duct tape, it will have been sealed or redacted.

JonBenet Ramsey Autopsy Report

Vaginal Mucosa: All of the sections contain vascular
congestion and focal interstitial chronic inflammation. The
smallest piece of tissue, from the 7:00 position of the
vaginal wall/hymen, contains epithelial erosion with
underlying capillary congestion. A small number of red
blood cells is present on the eroded surface, as is
birefringent foreign material. Acute inflammatory infiltrate
is not seen.

.

 

[otg]

otg,

Steve Thomas explicitly described the material as a splinter. The words used in the autopsy are birefringent foreign material. Cellulose and wooden splinter are an example of material that has the birefringent property. As an investigator, there will be no need to speculate as to what the precise material is, since being birefringent this means forensic testing will have allowed for an exact match, but like other items e.g. the colour of the duct tape, it will have been sealed or redacted.

JonBenet Ramsey Autopsy Report


.

Thomas described it as a "splinter" after he knew the results of the analysis. The phrase "birefringent foreign material" was an observation made during the autopsy of the visual appearance of something that didn't belong where it was found. But again, I say pay close attention to the exact wording. Maybe I am over-interpreting, and this is only my opinion, but I think it is in the same sentence with another observation for a reason. Also, he doesn't state or estimate the amount, so my interpretation of that leaves open the possibility that there may have been more than just a couple of pieces.

All this = MHO