Seriously - I have to ask

[Seeker]

This was dislocated skull , deforming the face. However, you don't have to believe it happened.

Sissi, please note that I did not say I didn't believe you saw this on the show. However, Linda Arndt said that JonBenet looked like she was sleeping...if this deformed face look came from the skull fracture (which wasn't even detected until the skull cap was pulled back) I don't doubt we would have heard all about it by now.

I honestly believe someone doctored that photo you saw via photoshop, or some other photo manipulation software, or it's very possible that the photo itself was damaged and made it look like that on the show.

 

[curious1]

I agree with you SuperDave we see it here every day, unfortunately, parents do kill kids. Please note...I have formed no concrete opinion on this case.

So what if her face was 'damaged'. That is suppose to change the mind of those who think Patsy did it? Think about this, if somone, say a parent, had so much self loathing for themselves that they had to live vicarously through a child and that child did not go along with everything they wanted them to do...do you think they would not strike the child in the face if they were talking back to them? Heck if they saw how much the child looked like them and hated themselves so much I would argue that they would be more likely to do something that might disfugure the face. Just my :twocents: worth. This photo will not change the minds of those who have already chosen sides IMHO.

 

[rashomon]

I absolutely would want to see that picture. Not for sensationalist reasons, and I know that looking at the picture will only make me pity that poor child even more. But autopsy pictures are part of a true crime forum discussion, even if they are hard to bear.
I would want to compare this picture to the autopsy report. For the first thought that struck me was: "if that picture was so absolutely horrible - then why did Dr. Meyer in his report not comment on the deformation of JB's face???"

Therefore just a thought: could his in any way be a forged picture - a picture which has been tampered with in some way, using modern computer technology? From what I know of Jameson, I would not put it past her if she felt this would achieve her goal ("no mother could have done this to her child").

 

[BBB167893]

I agree with you SuperDave we see it here every day, unfortunately, parents do kill kids. Please note...I have formed no concrete opinion on this case.

So what if her face was 'damaged'. That is suppose to change the mind of those who think Patsy did it?

Apparently. If I seem a little angry, it's because I feel like my intelligence is being insulted. I get a lot of that in this case.

Until we can isolate what is in the human heart that makes these things happen, we will never stop it.

 

[BBB167893]

Therefore just a thought: could his in any way be a forged picture - a picture which has been tampered with in some way, using modern computer technology? From what I know of Jameson, I would not put it past her if she felt this would achieve her goal ("no mother could have done this to her child").

Wouldn't be the first time, I hear.

 

[Jayelles]

I absolutely would want to see that picture. Not for sensationalist reasons, and I know that looking at the picture will only make me pity that poor child more. But autopsy pictures are part of a true crime forum discussion, even if they are hard to bear.
I would want to compare this picture to the autopsy report. For the first thought that struck me was: "if that picture was so absolutely horrible - then why did Dr. Meyer in his report not comment on the deformation of JB's face???"

Therefore just a thought: could his in any way be a forged picture - a picture which has been tampered with in some way, using modern computer technology? From what I know of Jameson, I would not put it past her if she felt this would achieve her goal ("no mother could have done this to her child").

In Tracey's documentary, they used transitions to go from one photo to another. Could be that the transition gave a false impression of the photo as one picture merged into another.

If there had been distortion to her face, it would certainly have been recorded on the autopsy report. This IMO is just a scam to justify circulating ghoulish images.

Respect and decency are the reasons why her face has always been cropped out of photos until now. IMO, nothing will be gained from seeing these images other than a voyeuristic pleasure for those who seek it.

 

[BBB167893]

The idea that brutality is an indication that a parent couldn't have done it is one of the great fallacies. Parents have decapitated children. Wonder how that one went over?

 

[Jayelles]

FWIW, I think the killer (if he/she is out there) would almost certainly want a photo of her face - as a trophy. To relive it all.

What draws people to want to look at these kinds of images?

It's like "Roll Up, Roll Up - see her little face in death here...."

Shame on Schiller for showing that image. Shame on anyone else who circulates it.

 

[Jayelles]

The idea that brutality is an indication that a parent couldn't have done it is one of the great fallacies. Parents have decapitated children. Wonder how that one went over?

Right. That's it for me. I need to go and lie down in a darkened room now.... I've lost faith in the human race...

:banghead:

 

[Linda7NJ]

In Tracey's documentary, they used transitions to go from one photo to another. Could be that the transition gave a false impression of the photo as one picture merged into another.

If there had been distortion to her face, it would certainly have been recorded on the autopsy report. This IMO is just a scam to justify circulating ghoulish images.

Respect and decency are the reasons why her face has always been cropped out of photos until now. IMO, nothing will be gained from seeing these images other than a voyeuristic pleasure for those who seek it.

For the record, I would not take PLEASURE in viewing the photo, voyeuristic or otherwise!

 

[BBB167893]

Right. That's it for me. I need to go and lie down in a darkened room now.... I've lost faith in the human race...

:banghead:

Sick, isn't it? Or was it me you were disgusted by?

 

[Jayelles]

For the record, I would not take PLEASURE in viewing the photo, voyeuristic or otherwise!

With respect, that is easy to say and we only have your word for it.

 

[Jayelles]

Sick, isn't it? Or was it me you were disgusted by?

Not you SD. The other bit.

 

[sissi]

Good Lord, I am surprised by the content in many messages, and no I am not sending it , you will never see it,unless you secure it yourselves, you can take that nap now, because if you did you( a collective you) would accuse Jameson of going through tv film, cutting and editing. This isn't nuts!

I remember, years ago, in 1998 I received a copy of a note that was sent by a suspect. I after thinking on it for a long time sent it to Jameson, you know the rest. She was accused of fabricating "my note". She was called a liar bent on fabricating evidence, and more. No where have I seen the lies you all attribute to her, watch those glass houses.

 

[Karole28]

I have this personal theory. It goes like this.....most people are incredibly naive & stupid and actually prefer to remain that way. Most people have a mental image of what a murderer looks like, what a pedophile looks like, what a mother is...etc...

God forbid if the truth were to creep in their thick skulls and dirty up those rose colored glasses!

Not wanting to see a dead child's face for nothing more than morbid curiosity (there is nothing else to be gained) is not being naive or stupid. It's called having morals and being respectful.
But, that's just my personal theory.

 

[Jayelles]

Good Lord, I am surprised by the content in many messages, and no I am not sending it , you will never see it,unless you secure it yourselves, you can take that nap now, because if you did you( a collective you) would accuse Jameson of going through tv film, cutting and editing. This isn't nuts!

I remember, years ago, in 1998 I received a copy of a note that was sent by a suspect. I after thinking on it for a long time sent it to Jameson, you know the rest. She was accused of fabricating "my note". She was called a liar bent on fabricating evidence, and more. No where have I seen the lies you all attribute to her, watch those glass houses.

You are doing the right thing Sissi. Kudos.

 

[sissi]

Experts have clearly stated that no woman or child could have delivered this blow. Does anyone here believe that? Perhaps if you saw the damage you wouldn't think it was just a fractured skull. The force, explained by the experts, would have taken down a 300 lb linebacker. We all know women and children can kill, this is a fact, however, this is a "fact" that no woman delivered this blow. If you could believe this as truth, would you continue to believe that Patsy Ramsey murdered her child. I'm not talking about ghoulish curiosity, this is a part of the evidence that speaks to the kind of killer that murdered this child. She was garrotted, and finished off with a blow to the head. There is no evidence to convict a family member, however there is evidence to convict an intruder, he left behind saliva!

 

[Karole28]

Sissi, we don't know how the blow was delivered. If JonBenet herself was used as a cantilever (she was violently shaken and then thrown backwards onto something) it could appear to have taken more force than (we suppose) a woman could muster. However, we don't know how the blow was delivered, so ruling Patsy out based on this would be incorrect.

 

[Jayelles]

We've seen the head skull and the damage that was caused. It's here:-

http://www.jameson245.com/redskull.jpg

We all agree that it's an horrific injury. A child's skull cracks more easily than an adults.

Not sure what the original source of the 300lb man is though - whether that is a fact or whether it was someone's comment which perpetuated into a "fact".

 

[Jayelles]

There is also the matter of the weapon. We don't know what it was for sure (or if there even was a weapon). However, I do know that a hammer would cause a lot more injury than a rolling pin and with less force.


NOTE: I am not suggesting that either a hammer or a rolling pin were used in the Ramsey case - just trying to illustrate a point.