Known rope in the house

Discussion in 'JonBenet Ramsey' started by why_nutt, Dec 29, 2003.

  1. Toth

    Toth Inactive

    Messages:
    968
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    0
    LOL. Ofcourse the intruder did not shed tears, but dna has to come from somewhere and the earlier poster said it wasn't blood or skin, so I thought I'd suggest tears as a source.

    The assertion has been made that the half moons on the throat are not JonBenet's fingernail marks but are rope marks. Well, did the rope also leave the dna under her fingernails or did she scratch her attacker and get the dna under her fingernails? Which seems more likely to you as a source of foreign dna? A rope you claim was in the house or an intruder?
     
  2. Maxi

    Maxi Guest

    I think Masked Man first believed that the crescent shaped marks were fingernail marks, but, upon close examination of the various photos, concluded they could just as easily be petechial hemorrhages. (Sorry if I'm misrepresenting MM's pov on this).

    Even a newbie medical pathologist would know to look for fingernail marks on the neck of the strangulation victim. Meyer didn't present conclusions in his autopsy report, but I think he would at least have labeled the marks as "pattern abrasions" separate from the ligature abrasions if they were likely fingernail marks.
     
  3. Imon128

    Imon128 Former Member

    Messages:
    2,064
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I'm not narrowing it down to two choices, sorry to give that impression.
     
  4. why_nutt

    why_nutt New Member

    Messages:
    484
    Likes Received:
    8
    Trophy Points:
    0
    And yet, this "prolonged agony" was offset by the far more overwhelming offer of hope, and with many specific time parameters whose passage could be seized on to mitigate and ease the pain of waiting. The note offered a 100% chance of getting JonBenet back under the best circumstances, and even a 1% chance under the worst circumstances. The note also offered a specific time frame, between 8 and 10 in the morning. If you want to invoke Nicely Nicely, you have to admit that he would have bet every dime he had and borrowed more, given how much agony he would have been spared and how much hope he would have been given if the horse he bet on had those odds to win. Contrary to your assertion about "prolonged agony", the note tells John and Patsy that, while they are in some pain now, it will not last long and they will be guaranteed to win if they bet according to exact instructions. Patsy was not given such favorable odds when she had her cancer and doctors wanted to give her hope for life; if an intruder took pleasure in inflicting pain on the Ramsey family, why would this person treat John and Patsy better than doctors had?
     
  5. K777angel

    K777angel Member

    Messages:
    515
    Likes Received:
    10
    Trophy Points:
    18
    Toth - this notion that all the circumstances of the crime were purposely planned out by the perp to "prolong the parents' agony" is silly.
    Nothing in that crime indicates that.
    The perp left the body in the house! It is nothing short of fantastic (or dumb luck) that she was not discovered at 6:10 am! Where then would be the prolonged agony? It could have happened so very easily. The killer ignored the obvious methods of inducing prolonged OR even instant agony. He would have TAKEN the body out of the home and never called if he really wanted to prolong agony. Not left it in a room downstairs to be easily discovered - along with a "ransom" letter.
    And if his motivation were instant agony and shock - he would have displayed the dead body right in plain sight.

    According to you, this perp's goals were all over the map. He's a kidnapper, No - he's a revenge seeker; NO! He's a pedophile - no - that was just to add misery to the parents; He's a foreign faction - NO! - makes no sense; He's greedy and wants money - NO! - He never attempted to collect.....

    He/She was none of these things.

    He/She/They were distraught and shocked family members who never wanted JonBenet dead but found themselves in a horrific quandry after the "accident" gone bad, and were left no choice in their minds but to stage the scence and cover it all up to make it look like something it wasn't.
    Their was no "motivation" in this murder because it wasn't really a "murder."
    It was an accidental killing.
    The only motivation in the whole thing was to save their butts.
    So far it's worked.
     
  6. Islander

    Islander New Member

    Messages:
    35
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0

    Toth: This intruder may have liked the prolonged agony he was inflicitng on the parents waiting for a call that would never come, be he certainly could not have anticipated it unless he believed the Ramseys would not call the police upon finding the note, or he knew the police answering the 911 call were inexperienced. Let’s face it. The first thing experienced, competent cops would have done is to thoroughly search the house. Had they done so, JB’s body would have been found within a few minutes of the cops arriving at the house. Thus, no parents waiting around for a phone call that would never come. I don’t know who wrote the ransom note or why they wrote it, but I doubt very much it was written to prolong the agony of the parents.
     
  7. BlueCrab

    BlueCrab New Member

    Messages:
    3,053
    Likes Received:
    42
    Trophy Points:
    0

    Angel,

    There's a possibility the dead body had indeed been "posed" and displayed right in plain sight. In one of my BDI theories John Ramsey would have found JonBenet hours before the 911 call was made at 5:52 A.M., and cut down the body. And as you may recall, in one of my BDI theories I believe that Burke had an older friend over that night -- the "fifth" person in the house.

    That fifth person was a member of a small foreign faction (Asian Pacific American Coalition) at Colorado University that apparently hated privileged American females. APAC perceived that Asian-American females were discriminated against with respect to being protected from crime in the U.S., such as rape, and the members actively demonstrated to try to correct that perceived social injustice. I recall that the group invited extremist-type speakers to its meetings. One of APAC's members was a friend of the Ramseys and the Stines. APAC suspiciously disbanded just weeks after JonBenet was murdered.

    In my theory, if a loose-cannon member of APAC had anything to do with the killing of JonBenet then it wouldn't be unusual for her to be tortured, strangled, bludgeoned, and grotesquely posed in plain view for its shock value. It would have been a depraved message delivered by way of an innocent victim -- JonBenet. SBTC? Students Bettering The Community.

    Just my opinion.

    BlueCrab
     
  8. Imon128

    Imon128 Former Member

    Messages:
    2,064
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    If JB's body was moved, it would have had to been very early as livor mortis didn't indicate she'd been moved.
     
  9. BlueCrab

    BlueCrab New Member

    Messages:
    3,053
    Likes Received:
    42
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Livor mortis (settling of blood in the body by gravity after death) won't set until several hours, and up to 8 hours, after death. If the body is moved before the blood has set the blood will redistribute itself. IMO JonBenet died around 1:00 A.M. and was likely found and moved by John less than several hours after death (probably around 3:00 A.M.). Therefore, lividity would not have had time to set before she was moved.

    Just my opinion.

    BlueCrab
     
  10. Imon128

    Imon128 Former Member

    Messages:
    2,064
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0

    Wouldn't there be blanching?
     
  11. tipper

    tipper Former Member

    Messages:
    1,795
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    http://thrashinc.dynu.com/anarchy/essays/techniquestodeterminetimedeath.htm

    Livor mortis, which means literally "the color of death" is the discoloration of the skin caused by flow of blood into the venous spaces under the influence of gravity. Simply put, it is the blood pooling or settling into the lowest portions of the body. Livor is not considered to be a good indicator of postmortem interval, but there are some standards which can be seen. (Hendrix, 21). Anywhere from one-half to one hour after death livor can begin to be seen. Its appearance is similar to a bruise. In the early stages of lividity, (less than four hours) the skin, unlike a bruise, can be blanched when pressed. After four hours, the lividity has begun to set, and by six to ten hours, it has reached its maximum and is permanent. (Wilber, 39) Postmortem lividity is caused by the red blood cells settling into the veins and capillaries in the lowest portions of the body which causes a red color to appear in the skin beneath. Later, the red cells will break down and squeeze out of the capillaries into the body, thus making the lividity permanent. Therefore, livor is commonly used by investigators to determine whether or not a body has been moved after death. (Baden, 37) Because lividity, as stated earlier, is not a good indicator of postmortem interval, investigators may also look to another sign of death, rigor mortis.
     
  12. BlueCrab

    BlueCrab New Member

    Messages:
    3,053
    Likes Received:
    42
    Trophy Points:
    0

    No. There would not likely be any blanching of any areas showing livor mortis if the body was moved soon after death. The blood is still fluid and would re-distribute itself. However, there could be. Blanching is a temporary thing that occurs before lividity has set. If you push your finger into the purplish area of the skin where lividity is in the process of setting that area will blanch (turn white) but then return to its purplish color when you remove your finger. Visual lividity begins about one to two hours after death. Once lividity has set (about 10 hours later) the color remains purplish and will not blanch when you push your finger into the skin (or move the body).

    JonBenet's skin did not blanch, but John Meyer didn't say in his report when it was tested. Meyer didn't get into the house until 8:20 P.M., about 7 hours after John "found" the body, and an estimated 19 hours after death, so it didn't make much difference. The body was in full rigor mortis and livor mortis had set.

    Just my opinion.

    BlueCrab
     
  13. tipper

    tipper Former Member

    Messages:
    1,795
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I believe there would be blanching wherever the body came into contact with a hard surface since the blood cannot flow into those areas. If she was moved 1-3 hours later by John you would have a second set of margins from her new position but the old margins would still be visible.
     
  14. Toth

    Toth Inactive

    Messages:
    968
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I don't see this. I will admit that the nature and extent of his "added excitement" was highly variable and depended on how bright the cops were, but then again, if he lived in Boulder, he probably knew they need help with their donuts.
     
  15. BlueCrab

    BlueCrab New Member

    Messages:
    3,053
    Likes Received:
    42
    Trophy Points:
    0

    IMO JonBenet was found by John very soon after death -- perhaps within the first hour or two. If she was cleaned up, re-dressed, and moved within that one or two hour time span then blanching of the areas beginning to show livor mortis would not occur because the blood would still have time to re-distribute. Also, if JonBenet had been found on her back and repositioned approximately the same way on her back, then unusual blanching would not likely be noticeable.

    Just my opinion.
     
  16. BlueCrab

    BlueCrab New Member

    Messages:
    3,053
    Likes Received:
    42
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Getting back to my BDI theory that a "loose cannon" member of the Asian Pacific American Coalition, who had been let into the house by Burke, actually killed JonBenet -- please consider the broken stick used as a handle on the ligature device wrapped around JonBenet's neck. It was a paint brush handle broken in such a way as to allow the word "Korea" to be visible despite the multiple wraps of the white nylon cord around the stick.

    Was the killer providing a clue as to the ethnic motive behind this murder by making sure the word "Korea" was displayed?

    The paint brush handle had been strangely broken in two places, seemingly an unnecessary thing to do -- unless the purpose was to be able to display the word "Korea".

    Just my opinion.

    BlueCrab
     
  17. Maxi

    Maxi Guest

    Someone (maybe again MM?) said that the large triangular mark seemed to be a piece of skin pulled up by the cord as it moved on her neck. That confuses me because Meyer either said or implied that it was a pattern abrasion. If it was from the movement of the cord across the skin, it would be a movement (unpatterned) abrasion. If it is a movement abrasion, an m.e. can usually determine the direction of the momentum.
     
  18. Shylock

    Shylock Former Member

    Messages:
    1,058
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    BlueCrab, I find a lot of your BDI theory to indeed be plausable, including the involvement of Doug Stein. (Although I'm not sure how the kid would have gotten home at midnight that night seeing it doesn't appear the Rams drove him OR called his house to get him picked up.--No, I don't think they would have just let a kid that age walk out of there into the night...)

    But the "China" connection on the paintstick is just a bit too far out. It's like saying the brand of paper the note was written on was chosen for its message value.
    I think in staging the coverup, the Ramseys made due with anything they could find on the moment's notice. And the breaking of the paintstick could have happened days earlier while Burke (who loved playing with sticks and whittling them) was playing with it.
     
  19. Nehemiah

    Nehemiah Active Member

    Messages:
    1,622
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    38
    Why would the Rs even begin to coverup for an adult just because Burke let him in the house? I can't see them doing that; the fifth person in this scenario wasn't a member of the family and that's the only way I would think they would cover up for an adult. What reason would they have to do this?
     
  20. BlueCrab

    BlueCrab New Member

    Messages:
    3,053
    Likes Received:
    42
    Trophy Points:
    0

    Please remember that this APAC scenario is not my main BDI theory -- but it deserves looking into.

    IMO Burke was somehow involved because no intruder on his own would have behaved the way he did in the occupied house -- he had to have help from one of the Ramseys in the house that night. Since John and Patsy have exculpatory evidence tending to clear them and Burke doesn't, then that pretty much leaves Burke as the Ramsey who likely provided the help.

    And it's true the Ramseys wouldn't be covering up for a non-family member adult -- but they might cover up for Burke if he was directly involved in the killing along with someone else, and they weren't sure who that someone else was, and Burke wasn't talking.

    The way the "for sure" Gelb lie-detector tests were worded and answered by John and Patsy without deception lends itself to a scenario that shields Burke and an unknown fifth person in the house that night. Since Burke isn't talking about it even to his parents then that fifth person could have been an older teen from the Asian Pacific American Coalition.

    APAC members (there were 29 of them) seemed to be social malcontents and they had a direct relationship to the Stine and Ramsey families. The group disbanded shortly after JonBenet was murdered.

    Just my opinion.

    BlueCrab
     

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