JonBenet's Skull Fractures: The Weapon

[otg]

I noticed in one of my previous posts that the pictures I uploaded didn't show up. I don't know why, but they were important to illustrate what I was trying to show. So I'm going to repost the relevant portion with the photos included (hopefully):

I am not convinced that Dr Sptiz is wrong that the superior long side of the rectangular bone fragment was completely displaced and the inferior long side was still attached like a hinge – I think this is possible. The centerline of the force/energy follows the linear fracture line including the superior long side of the rectangular bone. In depressed displaced fracture, not all sides are necessarily depressed to the same extent, and the inferior side here could have even fractured upward (like a seesaw), but I don’t think so JMO. Suffice it to say that this fragment was relatively large, looked rectangular, and suffered less force/energy than the posterior comminuted bone.

If I’m following your line of thought correctly, what you suggest is certainly possible, but I don’t think that’s what Spitz is claiming. Here’s why I don’t think that’s what he meant and what my problem with his claims:

We’ve all seen the “hole” that was left in her skull at the moment it was photographed. Except for a minor chip, it is perfectly elliptical. Since we haven’t seen the bone fragments, it’s possible one (or more) of them was (were) rectangular. But this is what Spitz said in 2000 (http://thewebsafe.tripod.com/03172000spitzondiscovery.htm):

Dr. Werner Spitz: ...? it was perfectly rectangular. That piece of bone that was knocked out, remained attached on a hinge,and was bendable.

Narrator Lyn Cannon: The size and shape of the fracture was so distinctive, Spitz decided to conduct his own tests, reenacting the injury.

Spitz: You could do it on syrofoam, you could do it on cardboard, you could do it on bone. I did it on all three.

Cannon: Published reports this week, speculate a baseball bat, found outside the house, might be the murder weapon. Spitz's tests lead him to a weapon inside the house.

Spitz: I would certainly believe that the flashlight is the instrument of death.
Cannon: What makes you so sure that it's compatible. How do you know?

Spitz: Because it fits right into the ....?.. It doesn't fit into the defect where it leaves some area to play with. It fits perfectly.
​

I interpret that to mean he wasn’t talking about one portion of the bone fragments but the section that was knocked out. And then to verify this, on the CBS series, he had a sketch drawn that showed the “hole” as being rectangular in which coincidentally the Maglite did indeed fit. Here is a screencap of his sketch:

Here is the result of their demo of striking a flat object with the Maglite -- again, coincidentally matching his idea of a rectangular “hole”:

Yet in the same program, there was another sketch shown which appears to have been made from the autopsy photo. The problem is that they don’t match and nothing was said about it in the program. Here is the other sketch:

In this last photo it shows the elliptical shape and even the membrane still attached and covering the posterior third of the “hole.” Notice that it’s not shaped the same as what he’s trying to reproduce with the head of the Maglite.

 

[EtherealMoonRose]

I read this medium session online where some lady connected with JB and Patsy and she was told that Patsy hit her with an old-style wrought iron lamp. (Don't personally believe it myself)

I think it was the flashlight but just wanted to throw that in there.

 

[archieil]

I don’t know who the “JI Group” is, but I truly hope you aren’t referring to Roscoe’s “Team JBI.”

JonBenet Investigation Group
It seems notes in this matter have 2015 as a year of posting.

The movie posted here by otg is from 2013 so an idea appeared earlier.

Keep in mind what you have got depends on many factors.

That is why there is no single one 100% sure answer as long as someone was not watching exactly what has happened.

 

[Userid]

It’s very close to the depressed fracture, but I don’t think it’s the weapon for two reasons.

(1) In order to swing it, the heaviest part of the bat would be held in the assailant’s hands. That doesn’t allow there to be enough weight or force behind in (IMO) to cause the severe skull damage that was actually done in this case. The other possibility would be having the victim swung against the weapon, and I can’t see how she could have been swung (or fallen against it) with enough force to cause it.

(2) The other reason is because I don’t think the shape of the depressed fracture fits with the knob of a baseball bat. That “hole” is almost a perfect ellipse:

The shape I got in clay from the bat knob is too straight on the sides and too round on the ends:

Earlier in this thread I linked a video where I had tested different objects and shapes that have been suggested over the years (brick, fireplace poker, rolling pin, both heads of a ball peen hammer, head of a flashlight, crow bar, golf putter). The section on the baseball bat knob begins at this link:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pUwVZclrqkY&feature=youtu.be&t=7m42s


I don’t claim to be an expert. By all means I would encourage anyone to do some testing themselves. If you find something different, please post it.

With regard to number one, that's how I feel, except I feel that way with the Maglite. The Maglite is shorter in length compared to the bat, so the momentum of the force would be less, compared to the longer bat swing. Also, if the victim's head was already laying against something (i.e. the floor), that would also factor into it. Either way, I think it would be easier to make this particular with the bat and by swinging it by the barrell, because the killer would have more range in motion.

 

[archieil]

One of my ideas is the killer gripping the bat in the middle and is hitting to stop her instinctively.

The idea of JonBenet falling on sth fixed was used because of the time between fracture and strangulation.

It fits well with someone who has no idea it was not just a knockout.

 

[AlGx]

What is this JI/JBI group/team I've seen mentioned in this thread a few times??

 

[HRP]

There is nothing in the rules here that says a poster’s theories prevent them from discussing the evidence. If you have a thought that might convince others to your line of thought, post it. Discussing the evidence or the science behind it is good for all. Put it out there and let everyone else draw their own conclusions and develop their theories. Unless you theorize that the “killer” used a bat (or anything else) that had his name on it, I don’t see how your idea about the weapon would point to any single individual. If it does, post it and let the evidence convince us.

What you say (that I bolded) shouldn't be a requirement, if you know what I'm trying to say. Who are "us" who have to be convinced who are not already convinced it is not someone other than John, Patsy, or Burke? See how I cannot discuss anything without being thought a "troll" for having a different point of view? And I do understand the "no intruder" rule here, and it is frustrating for me, I must admit. I thank you for your kind gesture. It would be nice to have the experts here dissect my thoughts and tear them apart objectively without the devout loyalty to not looking outside the box this forum has become (and I mean no disrespect). Thanks again.

 

[AlGx]

Could the square base of a pageant trophy had been used to cause the head wound? I remember seeing one lying on the floor during the crime scene video.

Or would that have cut her head open completely?

 

[UKGuy]

I noticed in one of my previous posts that the pictures I uploaded didn't show up. I don't know why, but they were important to illustrate what I was trying to show. So I'm going to repost the relevant portion with the photos included (hopefully):

otg,
Thanks for the photographs. My takeaway is that it appears JonBenet was whacked from the side, not the back or front, assuming the angle of the flashlight is realistic?

From what I remember from my geometry lessons, don't ask, you have two semi-spherical bodies meeting, so some kind of elliptical indent should be left in one of them?

A rough rectangular indent is not what I would expect to see, so although I could not rule out the flashlight, its geometry does not seem to match the skull dpression, but what do I know?

.

 

[otg]

With regard to number one, that's how I feel, except I feel that way with the Maglite. The Maglite is shorter in length compared to the bat, so the momentum of the force would be less, compared to the longer bat swing. Also, if the victim's head was already laying against something (i.e. the floor), that would also factor into it. Either way, I think it would be easier to make this particular with the bat and by swinging it by the barrell, because the killer would have more range in motion.

I don't believe the Maglite was used either, my friend -- and certainly not the bulb end because of the geometry. But for the same reason I don't think it was the barrel, neither do I think it was the bat. All the experiments I did, and the math I was shown at the math site (http://www.mathisfunforum.com/viewtopic.php?pid=261595#p261595) indicates to me that the object that caused the skull fractures was between 1/2" to 1" diameter. Neither the Maglite barrel or the heavy portion of the bat would fall within that size.

 

[otg]

otg,
Thanks for the photographs. My takeaway is that it appears JonBenet was whacked from the side, not the back or front, assuming the angle of the flashlight is realistic?

Were it the bulb end of the Maglite (but it's not), that's correct. Not believing Spitz's idiocy, the position of the assailant would depend on what the actual weapon was.

From what I remember from my geometry lessons, don't ask, you have two semi-spherical bodies meeting, so some kind of elliptical indent should be left in one of them?

Depends on their diameters.

Imagine this... If you had a perfect sphere and it intersected with a perfectly flat object, what would the shape of the intersection be? (A: circle.)

Now imagine that you could bend the sides of that same flat object up until it was curled into a cylinder. What then would the intersection be? (A: ellipse.) The ratio of the width to length of the ellipse would depend on the diameter of the cylinder in relation to the sphere. (The depressed fracture in JB's skull was 1/2" x 1-3/4".)

A rough rectangular indent is not what I would expect to see, so although I could not rule out the flashlight, its geometry does not seem to match the skull dpression, but what do I know?

Well, you know enough to disagree with Spitz. Congratulations. Now if we could just convince Kolar that he's been led astray.

 

[Darlene733510]

It's been a long while since I posted, but I remember that in the wine cellar there was a bucket, or maybe an empty 5 gallon paint bucket. There were items in there that we were trying to identify.
Plumbers had been at the house and I thought that maybe the things in the bucket were wrenches that would be larger than a normal pipe wrench. There is a place on these wrenches which juts out, and is used to adjust the wrench. I think one of these maybe could cause that horrible head injury, with the adjustment place causing the area which made the hole in her skull.

 

[otg]

It's been a long while since I posted, but I remember that in the wine cellar there was a bucket, or maybe an empty 5 gallon paint bucket. There were items in there that we were trying to identify.
Plumbers had been at the house and I thought that maybe the things in the bucket were wrenches that would be larger than a normal pipe wrench. There is a place on these wrenches which juts out, and is used to adjust the wrench. I think one of these maybe could cause that horrible head injury, with the adjustment place causing the area which made the hole in her skull.

Hi, Darlene. I think you must be talking about when we were wondering what might have been in that workman's pail. (Boy, that was some time back. Time flies when we're having fun, eh?) It must have been after you disappeared for a while that I found and posted what I suspect was the weapon. I put the info in the following post:

http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...-Fractures-The-Weapon&p=10634184#post10634184

 

[DeDee]

06-17-2014, 03:33 PM Post # 450

I've read many posts, too numerous to count, on this forum for JonBenet. otg, many of your posts gave me pause to consider the data provided. This is one of those outstandingly informative posts. Thank you.

Some here may recall last year when I had tried to figure out the shape and size of the object that caused the fractures to JonBenet’s skull in this thread. If you do, you might remember that I had shown why I came to the conclusion that the object was a cylinder whose diameter was between 1/2” and 1”. If that conclusion is correct, it would eliminate the three items that are most commonly believed to be the weapon (a golf club, the Maglite, and one of the two bats found). Because of a picture taken in the basement showing that a new water heater had been installed recently and that there was new and old associated piping in the area, I think the weapon was a short section of leftover pipe -- something the investigators didn’t think to look for. If you don’t remember all this (or weren’t here at WS then), you might want to review some of the discussions on this thread, or my numbered posts showing how arrived at this conclusion. Essentially though it ended with my belief that the weapon used was probably overlooked by investigators because they didn’t know the shape of what was used, and we couldn’t see it in the photos that were available to us.

Last week someone posted a screen capture (which I saved to my files) from a TV program showing the same area of the boiler room taken from a slightly different angle. (Sorry I don’t remember who posted it -- I couldn’t find it when I went back looking for it.) I don’t know exactly when the photo was taken in relation to December 26, 1996, so maybe someone can help figure that out. Here is what I think (because of its number) was the one of the first photos of the area taken by BPD (notice the stacked window screens/frames in the bottom left corner of the photo):

​

The following photo was taken some time after the previous one, and the stacked window screens/frames have been removed from the area. In it, along the bottom you can also see the top of a 5-gallon pail that was probably used during the plumbing repair and installation of the new water heater.

​

This photo was taken from a slightly different angle showing all the way back to the corner of the boiler room:

​

The following screen capture was made from a program on NBC. It looks like it might have been from a video, but I don’t know anything about it. Take a look at it and see if you don’t see the same thing I see leaning up against the wall to the side of the freezer shown in the bottom left of the photo:

​

Here it is with a red circle around it:

​

My questions would be:

1. Is that a section of iron pipe left over from the water heater installation/repair?
2. When was it placed there?
3. If it was moved there by the CSIs, where was it before?
4. Was it in that location when the other photos were taken and it simply wasn’t seen?
5. Did the police completely overlook it when they were searching for a weapon?
6. If it was taken into evidence, did they check it for fingerprints, fiber evidence, DNA?

I don’t think they even considered this. If they had, it should have been listed as collected evidence on the search warrants. Here is a list of what they did take into evidence when they went back (after the autopsy revealed the head wound) looking for what might have been possibly used as a bludgeon:

• Black sheet metal from wine cellar (39KKY)
• baseball bat (3GLI)
• golf clubs (4GLI)
• red clay brick (48BAB)
• baseball bat (74BAB)
• hammer (6BAH)
• flashlight (20JRB)
• golf club (79BAH)
• (BLACKED OUT ITEMs)

I think they should have been looking for a short section of pipe with an outside diameter of 1/2” to 1”. I also think that may be shown it in that last photo.

Edited to add: Hello, Darlene!

 

[UKGuy]

Were it the bulb end of the Maglite (but it's not), that's correct. Not believing Spitz's idiocy, the position of the assailant would depend on what the actual weapon was.


Depends on their diameters.

Imagine this... If you had a perfect sphere and it intersected with a perfectly flat object, what would the shape of the intersection be? (A: circle.)

Now imagine that you could bend the sides of that same flat object up until it was curled into a cylinder. What then would the intersection be? (A: ellipse.) The ratio of the width to length of the ellipse would depend on the diameter of the cylinder in relation to the sphere. (The depressed fracture in JB's skull was 1/2" x 1-3/4".)


Well, you know enough to disagree with Spitz. Congratulations. Now if we could just convince Kolar that he's been led astray.

otg,
There is not much we disagree upon, those points we do can be technical or subjective so are open to revision.

Personally I do not reckon Kolar has been led astray. I think his interpretation of the forensic evidence lies within the legal boundaries set by his prior employment contract.

This is why both Spitz and Kolar cite similar scenarios both in the CBS documentary and his book that are off the wall, e.g. Burke whacked JonBenet for stealing pineapple chunks, but note the location, i.e. breakfast bar.

In other words, not JonBenet's bedroom from where she was transported to the basement. Bloodstain on the pillow anyone?

So it could be argued that there has been an institutional coverup that uses Burke's age at the time of the homicide as an overarching rationale, thus spawning a JonBenet Who Did it industry.

Consider Steve Thomas' book which was not his original theory, the R's threatened legal action so his theory was amended. He more or less told Kolar it's your turn for the limelight and royalties, whilst declining to talk over the finer points of Kolar's theory in public.

So none of the investigators who have published books can really be trusted to be telling the truth or revealing new forensic evidence as their employment contracts say otherwise. Note they do not publish their prior contracts for public scrutiny.

So it appears there is a commercial and legal conspiracy to prevent what actually happened the night JonBenet was killed from becoming public knowledge.

So unless Burke Ramsey is an accident of history, an individual wih an Autism Spectral Disorder, thereby an easy target for conspiracy theorists, such as Kolar who wish to paint him into a corner, where he killed JonBenet in pursuit of child like erotic desires, he is the killer of JonBenet and both John and Patsy Ramsey effected staging to edit him out of her death?

That's my take on the case, and why PDI is for birds, as it's Steve Thomas' revised theory one he did not defend against Kolar's in interview.

I give JR full marks for heroically defending his son in the manner he has. At his age other matters than your son's wellfare will be at the front of your mind. Note how JR takes a bullet for the flashlight just as Patsy did on Burke's long johns, or as they are known in the crime authoring community long underwear.



So the case is BDI all the way down, with an institutional coverup, complete with a fake news agenda.

.

 

[otg]

otg,
There is not much we disagree upon, those points we do can be technical or subjective so are open to revision.

Personally I do not reckon Kolar has been led astray. I think his interpretation of the forensic evidence lies within the legal boundaries set by his prior employment contract.

This is why both Spitz and Kolar cite similar scenarios both in the CBS documentary and his book that are off the wall, e.g. Burke whacked JonBenet for stealing pineapple chunks, but note the location, i.e. breakfast bar.

In other words, not JonBenet's bedroom from where she was transported to the basement. Bloodstain on the pillow anyone?

So it could be argued that there has been an institutional coverup that uses Burke's age at the time of the homicide as an overarching rationale, thus spawning a JonBenet Who Did it industry.

Consider Steve Thomas' book which was not his original theory, the R's threatened legal action so his theory was amended. He more or less told Kolar it's your turn for the limelight and royalties, whilst declining to talk over the finer points of Kolar's theory in public.

So none of the investigators who have published books can really be trusted to be telling the truth or revealing new forensic evidence as their employment contracts say otherwise. Note they do not publish their prior contracts for public scrutiny.

So it appears there is a commercial and legal conspiracy to prevent what actually happened the night JonBenet was killed from becoming public knowledge.

So unless Burke Ramsey is an accident of history, an individual wih an Autism Spectral Disorder, thereby an easy target for conspiracy theorists, such as Kolar who wish to paint him into a corner, where he killed JonBenet in pursuit of child like erotic desires, he is the killer of JonBenet and both John and Patsy Ramsey effected staging to edit him out of her death?

That's my take on the case, and why PDI is for birds, as it's Steve Thomas' revised theory one he did not defend against Kolar's in interview.

I give JR full marks for heroically defending his son in the manner he has. At his age other matters than your son's wellfare will be at the front of your mind. Note how JR takes a bullet for the flashlight just as Patsy did on Burke's long johns, or as they are known in the crime authoring community long underwear.



So the case is BDI all the way down, with an institutional coverup, complete with a fake news agenda.

UKG, no one has all the answers. Even those who know more than the general public had to depend on others to fill in the spaces where their knowledge was limited.

I don’t know why Steve Thomas chose to believe the “toilet rage” theory that was put out by Dr. Krugman, other than my guess that to him (Thomas) it filled in the gaps on motive for why someone in the home would kill JonBenet. Krugman stated, “The JonBenet case is a text book example of toileting abuse rage," and he convinced Thomas that this was the cause. So Thomas developed his entire theory around that.

Kolar, not understanding the medical aspects, bought into Spitz’s pronouncements. Once convinced that Spitz had it right about why an unexplained Maglite was shown in a CS photo, Kolar believed it to be the source of the skull fractures. Then he thought since it was there in the kitchen area along with a bowl of pineapple that the Ramseys denied having given to JonBenet, he made the connection with the two, thinking the purloined pineapple was the start of a sibling conflict that escalated to the point of violence. That’s why he hints that the “fight” started there and her body was somehow transported to the basement. The problem with this theory is that it leaves out accounting for the sexual molestation, so Spitz just dismisses it as, “There was no molestation.” Instead he has to account for the microscopic wood fibers as secondary transfer.

Another “expert” whose opinion Kolar bought was Dr. Lucy. Before his account of her opinion, most were still debating whether the head blow or the strangulation came first. Once her supposed extended timeframe between the two was reported, it seems it has been accepted by most as fact. (I don’t -- Kolar was too vague about how that timeframe was determined when asked about it, and it conflicts with what the medical examiner described in the AR.)

UKGuy has made the connection of two statements in the interviews about blood in JonBenet’s room and unconfirmed statements about “playing doctor” with where it all started -- although I’m not quite sure how his theory plays out from there other than BDI All, even an attempt at staging the CS.

There is no “commercial and legal conspiracy to prevent what actually happened the night JonBenet was killed from becoming public knowledge.” It’s just that no one knows with certainty and we all have opinions. It’s what we chose to accept and weave into our theories that influences the outcome.

 

[Userid]

I don't believe the Maglite was used either, my friend -- and certainly not the bulb end because of the geometry. But for the same reason I don't think it was the barrel, neither do I think it was the bat. All the experiments I did, and the math I was shown at the math site (http://www.mathisfunforum.com/viewtopic.php?pid=261595#p261595) indicates to me that the object that caused the skull fractures was between 1/2" to 1" diameter. Neither the Maglite barrel or the heavy portion of the bat would fall within that size.

Interesting, thanks OTG. The diameter of a baseball knob is 2" in diameter (for adults), according to the graphic below. Notice how the handle of the bat measures 1" around. Depending on the curvature of her skull and the angle the bat was sung, perhaps the impact could have occurred with the handle (assuming the bat was held and swung by the barrell, of course)? Just brainstorming.

http://pad1.whstatic.com/images/thu...28px-Make-a-Baseball-Bat-Step-6-Version-3.jpg

 

[otg]

Interesting, thanks OTG. The diameter of a baseball knob is 2" in diameter (for adults), according to the graphic below. Notice how the handle of the bat measures 1" around. Depending on the curvature of her skull and the angle the bat was sung, perhaps the impact could have occurred with the handle (assuming the bat was held and swung by the barrell, of course)? Just brainstorming.

http://pad1.whstatic.com/images/thu...28px-Make-a-Baseball-Bat-Step-6-Version-3.jpg

Nothing wrong with brainstorming, my friend -- only way we can arrive at more informed opinions. I wouldn't dismiss your thought about the diameter of a bat's handle. It's on the upper end of what I think might be the correct diameter, but I left a large + or - range to allow for my not knowing the exact curvature of the skull (which varies) at the exact location of the depressed fracture. What makes me doubt the bat handle more is the physics (?) of it being capable of causing the amount of damage that was done to JonBenet's skull. If a bat is held by the barrel and swung, all the potential force is dampened by the weight of the bat being held in the assailant's hands.That's one of the same reasons (of two) that I don't think it was the knob of a bat either.

I know I mentioned at one time I should write something about "sweet spots," but I never did get around to it. Any object used to strike something (bat, tennis racquet, night stick, hammer, section of pipe) has (depending on where it is gripped) an area that produces the most force. It is related to (but not exactly the same as) the "center of percussion." A baseball player would tell you it's where the ball hits the bat resulting in their feeling the least amount of vibration in their hands. Actually, it is where there is equal force on either side of the striking point so there is equal distribution of the vibration.

Imagine hitting the ball with a bat so that the ball hits near the end of the bat. The vibration in your hands would be in a forward motion because there is more force on that side of the ball. If OTOH you hit the ball closer to the handle, the vibration would be toward the back of your hands because the larger amount of force would be on the opposite end of the bat (opposite end from the knob). A batter tries to hit the ball right there in that "sweet spot" between the ends so he has the most amount of force behind it with the least amount of force wasted in vibration.

Can you imagine a baseball player going up to the plate and holding the bat by the barrel and swinging the handle at the ball. Wouldn't see many home runs that way even if it was Babe Ruth swinging the bat.

If you play tennis, imagine hitting the ball either too high or to low on the racquet. You'd have the same effect there (although not as noticeable as in baseball).

A hammer is designed so that if you hold it in the center of the handle, all the weight (force) is concentrated right in the center of the head delivering enough force to drive a nail into wood.

The only point in all this is to understand the physics behind swinging something with enough force with whatever it was that was used to have caused the amount of damage that was done to JonBenet's skull.


(Disclaimer: I am not a professional baseball player, tennis player, carpenter, or murderer. :biggrin

 

[Userid]

^ Haha, thanks OTG. Yeah that wound is very perplexing to me -- the fact that it created such damage to the skull, but didn't bleed. I'm always trying to determine what could have created that mysterious wound and how, and I always come to sources that would provide either too much force or too little force, for such a peculiar injury. I think you're right in that the handle wouldn't have provided sufficient force.

 

[otg]

(rsbm)

^ Haha, thanks OTG. Yeah that wound is very perplexing to me -- the fact that it created such damage to the skull, but didn't bleed.

From Forensic Pathology: Principles and Practice, by David Dolinak, Evan Matshes, Emma O. Lew:

Although one would expect that the application of significant force to a child’s head would have definitive external markers of injury, this is simply not always the case. Perhaps as a result of increased water-binding polysaccharides and glycoproteins in young skin, the skin and subcutaneous tissues are more resilient to impact, making it entirely possible that a significant blow imparted on the infant or child’s head may leave no external soft tissue evidence of injury.
​