What was John wearing the morning of Dec. 26?

[Solace]

Solace,

Microscopic fibers from family members are everywhere in a house. There were hundreds of other microscopic fibers on the sticky side of the tape besides the few from Patsy's jacket. The tape had been handled by the killer, and dropped onto the floor by John Ramsey and later again by Fleet White. Lord knows where the tape had been prior to it being placed on JonBenet's mouth. Uh, huh. And lets not forget that pesky garrotte with all the fibers from Patsy's sweater entangled in that with Jon Benet's hair. Must have blown in from the livingroom. Same for the paint box.

But IMO that is all mute because Patsy and John helped in the staging of this crime and the coverup, trying to make it appear to be a kidnapping gone wrong instead of what it really was -- an embarrassing accidental EA death involving children. The fiber transfers from her jacket likely occurred during the staging.

BlueCrab

I second that question "So what are you beefing about".

Also, I will present the analysis that Darnay Hoffman presented and it is chilling. As soon as I find it.

 

[Camper]

I seem to sense a consensus that the death was accidental, and that the choking part killed JonBenet. At least it must have appeared to the accidental choky person that she was nearly dead, why not continue the choking until she was really dead?

WHO would have stepped in to crush the skull for the weepy accidental choky person?

IF IF the person, young or otherwise that caused the choking debilitating problem for JonBenet, WHY THEN DIDN'T the person continue choking til they were sure that she was dead ----- since the note was written by a foreign faction, they obviously were not well skilled in killing their victims.

Welll, in my tiny mind, I donut think they would continue choking JonBenet BECAUSE she would have been totally dead IF IF the foreign faction knew their stuff.

I think the accidental choker person would have run to mom and dad and asked for help, particularly IF IF the accidental choker person was NOT the youngest Ramsey son. THIS alone would explain the lying about young Ramsey son, and suing of anyone who even intimidated that young Ramsey son had anything to do with IT. More convenient to blame a perp, than to involve two young boys in a sexual adventure for which they were not prepared.

I would then ask WHY bash her in the head, and WHO WHO in the Ramsey house would have the balls to bash her in the head to crush her skull IF IF IF the choking was an ACCIDENT?

Have I missed something or mistated something about the consensus?

The whole thing does not make any sense whatsoever.




.

 

[BlueCrab]

BlueCrab,
I don't think the term 'ligature' is limited to slip knots.
The forensic eveidence contradicts this, since no marks from the ligature were found on JB's wrists, and there would have been marks if she had been strung up.

Ok, so there was a 15.5 inch space from one wrist ligature to the other. Still plenty of room for the victim to move her hands.

And take a good hard look at those wrist ligatures, BlueCrab: they are a joke. One had already come off, being too big for the wrist, and the other was tied on top of the sleeve with a knot probably so loose that pulling at one end would immediately have caused the knot to come apart with no effort at all.

http://www.acandyrose.com/jonbenethandright.jpg

It is even more obvious in this photo:

http://www.acandyrose.com/garrote5.jpg

The "double loop ligature" looks exactly like a simple shoelace type knot. I think even laypersons can imagine what happens when you pull at one end of that "sophisticated" knot: it gets undone in no time.

If JB had died from asphyxiation first, no bleeding and swelling in her brain could have occurred. But since both were present, the forensic evidence indicates that the head injury came first. Even die-hard IDIs on other forums (CourtTV's Crimelibrary for example) have come to realize this.

rashomon,

There were no marks on the wrists because IMO she was strung up in a sitting position to something above her, so very little weight would be on the wrist ligatures -- but enough to keep the hands together and over her head. The wrists were crossed and secured to something over her head, so it would have been impossible to move them and reach downward. John Ramsey admits he untied one of the wrists, which would have helped the knot on the other wrist to loosen up.

There were petechial hemorrhages above and below the circumferential abrasion around the neck and there were petechial hemorrhages on the eyelids. It's impossible for petechial hemorrhages to form on the skin if the heart is not pumping. Therefore, the strangulation had to have been first and was the most likely cause of death.

BlueCrab

 

[Solace]

rashomon,

There were no marks on the wrists because IMO she was strung up in a sitting position to something above her, so very little weight would be on the wrist ligatures -- but enough to keep the hands together and over her head. The wrists were crossed and secured to something over her head, so it would have been impossible to move them and reach downward. John Ramsey admits he untied one of the wrists, which would have helped the knot on the other wrist to loosen up. Really, the fact that she is tied up in a cellar, where it is dark and she is afraid and you say she is not going to try to get loose and cause marks to her wrists in because she is "strung up" in a sitting positio. And if the wrists are so secured and she is unable to move them, THEN MARKS WOULD BE LEFT. John Ramsey says a lot of things, most of which are untrue. He says they were loose and he says they were tight. Which is it?

There were petechial hemorrhages above and below the circumferential abrasion around the neck and there were petechial hemorrhages on the eyelids. It's impossible for petechial hemorrhages to form on the skin if the heart is not pumping. Therefore, the strangulation had to have been first and was the most likely cause of death.

BlueCrab

I know you just love my responses so here goes. First of all, the blow to the head could have put her in a coma and she was still alive and therefore the petechial hemorrhages on the eyelids and around the neck. She was thrown in the bathroom and hysteria follows.

 

[kaykay]

kaykay,

It appears JonBenet may have been strung up in a slumped sitting position, with arms over her head and lashed to something stationary such as a piece of furniture or a doorknob. The settling of the livor mortis seems to support this scenario. With the weight of the upper torso keeping the ligatures tight, IMO when John found her he had to cut her down. This created two separate lengths of cord, each with frayed ends as described in the autopsy.

When and if John found JonBenet as I just described, rigor mortis had not yet fully set in. IMO John found her around 2 to 3 AM. It takes about 12 hours for rigor to fully set (JonBenet was in full rigor when "found" by John shortly ater 1 PM).

IMO the children were experimenting with erotic asphyxiation, a dangerous breath contol sex game. JonBenet died accidentally because the children didn't know what they were doing. The elaborate device wrapped around JonBenet's neck was NOT designed as a garrote. It was designed to do exactly what it was being used for, erotic asphyxiation.

Garrotes are killing tools. Real garrotes are not elaborate. They are nothing but a straight length of cord or wire that is wrapped around a victim's neck from behind, pulled tight, and held until the victim gives up struggling and dies.

BlueCrab

BlueCrab,
I'm a BDI person....with other children being involved. I think that's why freinds were called. I think the R's called and told them to "come quick". I can't see any other reason for the R's to call friends over especially if kidnappers were going to kill their child if they did.

They had to know there was no kidnapping to take that chance.

I think this is the reason no one has talked. I think they agreed on a story to
protect the kids.

Can BR be questioned again? Was DNA taken from friends children? If not, can it be done now?

I can't say I agree with the EA theory.

kaykay

this is my opinion only..I have no proof..

 

[Toltec]

I seem to sense a consensus that the death was accidental, and that the choking part killed JonBenet. At least it must have appeared to the accidental choky person that she was nearly dead, why not continue the choking until she was really dead?

WHO would have stepped in to crush the skull for the weepy accidental choky person?

IF IF the person, young or otherwise that caused the choking debilitating problem for JonBenet, WHY THEN DIDN'T the person continue choking til they were sure that she was dead ----- since the note was written by a foreign faction, they obviously were not well skilled in killing their victims.

Welll, in my tiny mind, I donut think they would continue choking JonBenet BECAUSE she would have been totally dead IF IF the foreign faction knew their stuff.

I think the accidental choker person would have run to mom and dad and asked for help, particularly IF IF the accidental choker person was NOT the youngest Ramsey son. THIS alone would explain the lying about young Ramsey son, and suing of anyone who even intimidated that young Ramsey son had anything to do with IT. More convenient to blame a perp, than to involve two young boys in a sexual adventure for which they were not prepared.

I would then ask WHY bash her in the head, and WHO WHO in the Ramsey house would have the balls to bash her in the head to crush her skull IF IF IF the choking was an ACCIDENT?

Have I missed something or mistated something about the consensus?

The whole thing does not make any sense whatsoever.




.

You're right Camper...this whole thing does not make any sense whatsoever.

My belief is that she was hit over the head first...and that rendered her unconcious. After that, the cord was placed around her neck and the remaining cord placed around her wrists.

JONBENET WAS UNCONCIOUS...BUT NOT YET DEAD.

Her heart was still pumping when the cord was placed around her neck, hence the petichial hemorrhaging. No skin under JonBenet's nails which would prove she fought to get the cord off.

The cord around her neck was placed almost in a perfect circumference, hence no evidence of a struggle.

The duct tape was placed over an already dead JonBenet as evidenced by a perfect lip impression on the tape.

How does one "gently" strangle a feisty six-year-old like JonBenet?

How does one feed pineapple to a feisty six-year-old who would scream bloody murder?

No sireee...the blow to the head came first.

 

[UKGuy]

I seem to sense a consensus that the death was accidental, and that the choking part killed JonBenet. At least it must have appeared to the accidental choky person that she was nearly dead, why not continue the choking until she was really dead?

WHO would have stepped in to crush the skull for the weepy accidental choky person?

IF IF the person, young or otherwise that caused the choking debilitating problem for JonBenet, WHY THEN DIDN'T the person continue choking til they were sure that she was dead ----- since the note was written by a foreign faction, they obviously were not well skilled in killing their victims.

Welll, in my tiny mind, I donut think they would continue choking JonBenet BECAUSE she would have been totally dead IF IF the foreign faction knew their stuff.

I think the accidental choker person would have run to mom and dad and asked for help, particularly IF IF the accidental choker person was NOT the youngest Ramsey son. THIS alone would explain the lying about young Ramsey son, and suing of anyone who even intimidated that young Ramsey son had anything to do with IT. More convenient to blame a perp, than to involve two young boys in a sexual adventure for which they were not prepared.

I would then ask WHY bash her in the head, and WHO WHO in the Ramsey house would have the balls to bash her in the head to crush her skull IF IF IF the choking was an ACCIDENT?

Have I missed something or mistated something about the consensus?

The whole thing does not make any sense whatsoever.




.

Camper,

I think your analysis is correct.

My current take on this aspect is that JonBenet was seeking to escape from a painful sexual assault, and her assailant grapped her by the neck-collar to prevent her from running away, thus causing the compressed abrasion marking on the side of her neck, while she was constrained and likely choking her assailant further whacked her on the head to make her more compliant, probably killing her!



.

 

[rashomon]

Camper,

I think your analysis is correct.

My current take on this aspect is that JonBenet was seeking to escape from a painful sexual assault, and her assailant grapped her by the neck-collar to prevent her from running away, thus causing the compressed abrasion marking on the side of her neck, while she was constrained and likely choking her assailant further whacked her on the head to make her more compliant, probably killing her!

And then this sexual assault killer took the time to put a piece of cord around her neck, (perfectly circumferential btw), and constructed that silly garrote to make it look like a sex crime???

I seem to sense a consensus that the death was accidental, and that the choking part killed JonBenet

It is interesting to note that even die-hard IDIs on other forums have come to admit that the head blow came first.

 

[Ames]

I know you just love my responses so here goes. First of all, the blow to the head could have put her in a coma and she was still alive and therefore the petechial hemorrhages on the eyelids and around the neck. She was thrown in the bathroom and hysteria follows.

I agree...this is my scenario of what happened that night, too.

 

[UKGuy]

And then this sexual assault killer took the time to put a piece of cord around her neck, (perfectly circumferential btw), and constructed that silly garrote to make it look like a sex crime???
It is interesting to note that even die-hard IDIs on other forums have come to admit that the head blow came first.

rashomon,

Well someone did.

I think that too much emphasis is made of the head blow/strangulation sequencing.

One thing I am certain about is that if JonBenet's death had just been an accident, then it should have been staged as an accident e.g. JonBenet was taking a bath, I heard a scream, when I ran through, she was lying over the side of the bath, she must have slipped and cracked her head.

Also unless the missing piece of the paintbrush was left inside JonBenet, then an attempt was made to hide her sexual assault by wiping her down and removing blood etc. This is not accidental.

The garrote does not make it look like a sex-crime that is the media and in particular Lou Smit's take on it, the purpose of the garrotte is to mask, obsfucate, and explain away the compressed abrasion on the side of her neck!

I think camper's analysis is correct, that is if the head blow came first why did JonBenet's killer not continue with another head blow until it was certain JonBenet was dead, similarly with her being strangled!

Aplying kiss and occam here, it all happened at once, her injuries were part of an assault!


.

 

[Camper]

The confusion of the foreign factions actual 'reasoning' in their handwritten note, leads us all astray in solving all matters connected with the MURDER.

1. WHY ask for a ransom IF the victim is already dead in her own home?


2. WHY not kill her in her room and leave, and not ask for ransom money?

a. IF they did it that way, why not leave a short note on the stairs to the master bedroom. WE the foreign f. dislike your business practices. KEEP them up and the rest of your family meets the same end as your daughter.


3. WHY the pineapple, bowl and spoon, that no other Ramsey admits having eaten any?


4. WHO was the person that Barnhill saw WALK up to the front door of the Ramsey home on Christmas afternoon?

a. Were the neighbors polled by the Police about this person and IF they saw him too, or IF they did could they identify him?


5. WHAT John was wearing is important, but the WHEN did he put it on would be more important.

a. Did he really pull on a pair of skivees when PR called to him and he was in the shower?

b. It was stated that he was on his knees reading the note on the floor at some point, yet no fingerprints on the note of any kind, HOW did the note get on the floor?


6. WHEN exactly was the NOTE found, versus what we were told?


7. WHY would a foreign faction even bother with carrying her down stairs?


8. WHY would the Ramseys NOT publicly make a statement about someone who was impersonating Johns older son in Michigan with a cash offer to kill JonBenet. All their attorneys said publicly that I am aware of ?? was that the older son was not in Michigan at the time of the 'offer'.


The half truths, the unanswered questions, the stone walling by the DA, the dumbest ransom note in history, all equal one unsolved murder, and WE don't even know the REAL MOTIVE of the murder.

WE all just guess and ponder.


Tomorrow is the Super Bowl.
We are at war in Iraq.
National elections for America in 2008.
Miss America has been crowned.
Oscars are coming up.


Point being, life just keeps going on. Little JonBenet is just dead, I will never, never forget her as long as I live.

For a head blow like she had, imop, it had to be delivered by someone who was STRONG, DRUNK/?/DRUGS, OLDER, or MAD about something, and it was NOT about business practices.


I would ask if you quote me that you use my post number, when you are quoting me out of context, thank you.

.

 

[UKGuy]

The confusion of the foreign factions actual 'reasoning' in their handwritten note, leads us all astray in solving all matters connected with the MURDER.

1. WHY ask for a ransom IF the victim is already dead in her own home?


2. WHY not kill her in her room and leave, and not ask for ransom money?

a. IF they did it that way, why not leave a short note on the stairs to the master bedroom. WE the foreign f. dislike your business practices. KEEP them up and the rest of your family meets the same end as your daughter.


3. WHY the pineapple, bowl and spoon, that no other Ramsey admits having eaten any?


4. WHO was the person that Barnhill saw WALK up to the front door of the Ramsey home on Christmas afternoon?

a. Were the neighbors polled by the Police about this person and IF they saw him too, or IF they did could they identify him?


5. WHAT John was wearing is important, but the WHEN did he put it on would be more important.

a. Did he really pull on a pair of skivees when PR called to him and he was in the shower?

b. It was stated that he was on his knees reading the note on the floor at some point, yet no fingerprints on the note of any kind, HOW did the note get on the floor?


6. WHEN exactly was the NOTE found, versus what we were told?


7. WHY would a foreign faction even bother with carrying her down stairs?


8. WHY would the Ramseys NOT publicly make a statement about someone who was impersonating Johns older son in Michigan with a cash offer to kill JonBenet. All their attorneys said publicly that I am aware of ?? was that the older son was not in Michigan at the time of the 'offer'.


The half truths, the unanswered questions, the stone walling by the DA, the dumbest ransom note in history, all equal one unsolved murder, and WE don't even know the REAL MOTIVE of the murder.

WE all just guess and ponder.


Tomorrow is the Super Bowl.
We are at war in Iraq.
National elections for America in 2008.
Miss America has been crowned.
Oscars are coming up.


Point being, life just keeps going on. Little JonBenet is just dead, I will never, never forget her as long as I live.

For a head blow like she had, imop, it had to be delivered by someone who was STRONG, DRUNK/?/DRUGS, OLDER, or MAD about something, and it was NOT about business practices.


I would ask if you quote me that you use my post number, when you are quoting me out of context, thank you.

.

Camper,

IMO the ransom note was part of an abandonded staging scenario, other than a red-flag to investigators it has little forensic value, no fingerprints matches the flashlight found in the same vicinity! The RN may have been left on the spiral staircase, to suggest JonBenet was killed downstairs, certainly she had her last pineapple snack in the breakfast bar, which patently has nothing to do with her death since there were fingerprints left on the bowl!

The person who killed JonBenet was resident in the house that night, there is absolutely no forensic evidence to indicate an intruder ever gained access to the Ramsey house.


.

 

[rashomon]

rashomon,
One thing I am certain about is that if JonBenet's death had just been an accident, then it should have been staged as an accident e.g. JonBenet was taking a bath, I heard a scream, when I ran through, she was lying over the side of the bath, she must have slipped and cracked her head.

What exactly do you mean by "accident" here?

I think camper's analysis is correct, that is if the head blow came first why did JonBenet's killer not continue with another head blow until it was certain JonBenet was dead, similarly with her being strangled!

If the killer was an intruder, yes.
But what if the killer was a shocked parent who realized that irreparable damage had been done by her rage attack on JB?

Aplying kiss and occam here, it all happened at once, her injuries were part of an assault!

Applying KISS and Occam here, the injury e. g. to JB's genital area was done calculatedly. I can't remember which doctor pointed this out, but he said that in order to inflict the so-called paintbrush injury, the person doing this would have had to manually separate the labia first.

 

[UKGuy]

What exactly do you mean by "accident" here?
[/i]
If the killer was an intruder, yes.
But what if the killer was a shocked parent who realized that irreparable damage had been done by her rage attack on JB?

Applying KISS and Occam here, the injury e. g. to JB's genital area was done calculatedly. I can't remember which doctor pointed this out, but he said that in order to inflict the so-called paintbrush injury, the person doing this would have had to manually separate the labia first.

rashomon,

By accident I mean just that, a non-intentional death, accidental death is a category of death, as is homicide.

But what if the killer was a shocked parent who realized that irreparable damage had been done by her rage attack on JB?

Maybe that was the intention, I still maintain if it had been accidental then its more likely to be staged as an accident than a homicide.

Applying KISS and Occam here, the injury e. g. to JB's genital area was done calculatedly. I can't remember which doctor pointed this out, but he said that in order to inflict the so-called paintbrush injury, the person doing this would have had to manually separate the labia first.

Thats only if the injury was inflicted by the paintbrush, anyway thats irrelevant since any invasive sexual assault would separate her labia, and as part of my theory I'm assuming JonBenet was the victim of a sexual assault which was later hidden by wiping her down , and redressing her in size-12's!


.

 

[rashomon]

rashomon,
By accident I mean just that, a non-intentional death, accidental death is a category of death, as is homicide.

But there exist accidental deaths where no outside party is involved (e. g. a child falls down the stairs, getting fatally injured), and accidental deaths where an outside party is involved. I suppose you mean by 'accidental death' a scenario where JB was attacked in a rage?

 

[UKGuy]

But there exist accidental deaths where no outside party is involved (e. g. a child falls down the stairs, getting fatally injured), and accidental deaths where an outside party is involved. I suppose you mean by 'accidental death' a scenario where JB was attacked in a rage?

rashomon,

I agree e.g.

But there exist accidental deaths where no outside party is involved (e. g. a child falls down the stairs, getting fatally injured)

I suppose you mean by 'accidental death' a scenario where JB was attacked in a rage?

Only if it was non-intentional, but given JonBenet's injuries that case is extremely difficult to susbstantiate!

I'll state it again, if JonBenet's death had been accidental then the most obvious staging strategy would be that of an accident.

Given that a homicide was selected as the chosen staging strategy then that is what was being covered up?


.

 

[BBB167893]

Maybe that was the intention, I still maintain if it had been accidental then its more likely to be staged as an accident than a homicide.

Per my MbP post, that would not do.

 

[Camper]

This case goes around and around just like a merry-go-round.

DA Hunter did not spill any beans, or help Thomas in his detective work by getting information that he requested of the DA. Present DA is doing the daisy dance, getting nowhere going in a circular motion, leaves a person in the same location.

Even Owens before he left office was not pushy to get things done, I suspect someone got to him with real information.

The FBI said, LOOK at the family.

IF IF it was a friend of the younger Ramsey.
QUESTION: WHY would the friend crack JonBenets skull?
ANSWER: He wouldn't.

WHY would ONE PERSON crack JonBenets skull AND choke her?
ANSWER: The one person would not do both imop.

Just like boiling some great ingredients to make a sauce, you keep simmering and reducing it until it is ready to eat.

WE have worked it and worked it and keep coming to the same conclusion, someone who LIVED in the house OR a family member that came often BUT had an alibi for that night.

Nutty ransom note.
Severe cases of Ramnesia (my coined word).
A do nothing DA in 1997.
Detective Thomas left, because his digging was met with 'go away guy you are tilting my boat.'
Grand Jury left hanging.
A stage play that was made up as they went along.
Get outta Dodge, color everyone gone.

.

 

[philamena]

Nutty ransom note.
Severe cases of Ramnesia (my coined word).
A do nothing DA in 1997.
Detective Thomas left, because his digging was met with 'go away guy you are tilting my boat.'
Grand Jury left hanging.
A stage play that was made up as they went along.
Get outta Dodge, color everyone gone.

.

Camper,
Excellent post. Your coined word Ramnesia is classic.

 

[UKGuy]

Per my MbP post, that would not do.

SuperDave,

Please expand upon this.


As per your MpB post:

But then, I started wondering if maybe it was a premeditated killing for that reason. It started to fall into place. The only thing that kept me in the "accident" camp was that I've always maintained that the staging was so sloppy is because it was such a spur-of-the-moment panic deal. But now I wonder if it wasn't just the works of a delusional person.

Do you not argue from the position of an intentional homicide?



.