The “roughly triangular, parchment-like rust colored abrasion”

I'm going to revive this thread because it relates to the purpose of an experiment I did on my 19 year old son's neck today, and I followed a link here from one of otg's recent posts about the triangular (cone) shaped abrasion on JonBenet's neck.

(promise it was just an experiment, I didn't strangle him!)

It all started the other day when I did a mini experiment on my own neck, turning my head to look towards my shoulder, and noticing a fold of skin that formed between the side of my neck and the front of my neck. Similar to this picture here. Sorry I'm not sure how big the image is going to appear in my post, you may need to temporarily enlarge your screen to see the part in detail that I have put a ring around.



So it's a fold of skin, and when I loosely held it between my thumb and index finger, and then turned my head to the front, my fingers widened apart, and if I drew an imaginary line between my fingers it would be in the same angle as the rising base of the cone shaped mark on JonBenet's neck.

This fold of skin is really a wider piece of skin that has creased over itself when the neck turns.

What many people don't know because it doesn't appear to be common knowledge, is that the cord was wrapped around JonBenet's neck twice. It was wrapped around and knotted at the back of her neck and then a second wrap was made at the base of her neck. This is why there is a white circle where blood was displaced as livor mortis set in, and it is also why there is a lower red ring mark where the skin was abraded from the tightening. After the tightening, I don't believe the second wrap of cord was left tight enough to leave a furrow, it seems to have been left tied around JonBenet's shirt at the back.

Before I get further into that, I'll continue describing what I think caused the cone shaped red mark. JonBenet was lying on her belly, with her head turned to her left shoulder, her right cheek pressed against the floor, and the skin of the left side of her neck in a natural fold as described. When the cord was wrapped a second time it pinched this fold of skin tightly, causing blood vessels to rupture. Later when she was turned over and the tightening of the cord was relaxed, her head moved to the right (as she was found) and the triangular pinched fold of skin eased back into its normal position, leaving the triangular/cone shaped blood vessel burst visible, on the left side of her neck.

Now for some pictures with some parts marked up to show what I mean -


the black line I've drawn follows the red line of the second wrap of the cord, and notice where it runs more or less exactly half way along the base of the cone shape. That is because this cone shaped piece of skin would have been folded over on itself when it was pinched. The next picture shows a black line drawn in where the cone shaped section of skin would have been folded -



I'll continue in another post about my experiment with my son, and concerning back up for the information that the cord was wrapped a second time.

This photo shows the blanching of the second wrap, which doesn't show up in the above photos.

Sorry I will continue with my original post shortly, but just wanted to post this transcript from Linda Arndt's interview on Good Morning America in 1999

Arndt: The doctor hadn't seen an injury like that. The doctor couldn't believe what was done to her body. Her, her head, uh, the depth of that ligature around her neck. It was so deep that twice that cord had been wrapped around her neck, and uh, and it looked like it was only one loose time around

Click to expand...

http://www.acandyrose.com/05191998arndtvsboulder.htm

So, back to my test.

I thought it would be better to test this on someone else rather than myself, so that I could check out different positions that JonBenet may have been in, to cause these results.

So my son laid on the floor, on his front, first of all with his arms down by his side, and his head turned to his left shoulder. The pinch test I explained above was incredible, to replicate this cone shaped 'abrasion' as he moved his head back so his nose was pressed into the carpet. I think the tightening of the cord would have caused this trapped piece of flesh to temporarily swell like a bulb shape.

I then got him to raise his arms above his head, to see if I could replicate it again. The fold of skin disappeared, there was nothing to pinch! Having his shoulders up stretched out the skin of his neck.

That is why I must conclude that JonBenet had her arms tied up above her head after she was strangled. I think it was staging to simulate a suspension (that never happened).

Just moving on now to evidence that the cord was left somehow loosely wrapped into JonBenet's shirt at the back.



I've already posted this in another thread about the rigor and livor mortis but it's worth repeating here since it's linked to the second wrap of the cord and the red triangular abrasion.

The paintbrush stick was left dangling on a short length of cord, estimated to be roughly 6 or 7 inches. You can see where it had been pressed into her back, causing blanching, as she laid on top of it, in the cellar. The total length of the cord from the stick to the knot on the neck was 17 inches, which means there was 10 or 11 inches of cord for the second wrap around the neck.

Another quote concerning Linda Arndt seeing the livor mortis on JonBenet's back (meaning her back was showing) as she was carried up from the basement, in Jim Byfield's affidavit -

The girls lips were blue; she appeared to have livor mortis on her back side of her body

Click to expand...

http://web.dailycamera.com/extra/ramsey/1997/09/30-4.html

This picture also seems to show that the top was caught up at the back, by the impressions left on JonBenet's shoulders



I can't decide if the stick was used to insert under the first wrap of the cord, to tighten it. It looks as if her neck is very red at the back but that could just be petechiae (sp?). Looking at the inside of the cord there certainly appears to be a brown mark on it where the stick may have rubbed against it, or her skin bled slightly.

Thinking about it, it means, if JonBenet's arms were down by her sides, that she wasn't struggling or scratching at her neck, as some people think, leaving nail marks.

Tortoise said:

Thinking about it, it means, if JonBenet's arms were down by her sides, that she wasn't struggling or scratching at her neck, as some people think, leaving nail marks.

Click to expand...

I agree 100% that she was not struggling and those are not nail marks.

Tortoise said:

Thinking about it, it means, if JonBenet's arms were down by her sides, that she wasn't struggling or scratching at her neck, as some people think, leaving nail marks.

Click to expand...

Tortoise,
Interesting post. What do you reckon happened. Was the cord wrapped once thus asphyxiating JonBenet. Then along comes, say Patsy, who winds on the remaining cord, adding the paintbrush, so causing the contusions?

Wound on twice explains the hair being caught in the knotting, since JonBenet is now dead, and the paintbrush is mere staging, i.e. no attention to detail.

There is only one circumferential furrow at the back of her neck, not two or a crossing of furrows that you might expect if two circumferential cords were used, although part of the same length of cord?

.

UKGuy said:

Tortoise,
Interesting post. What do you reckon happened. Was the cord wrapped once thus asphyxiating JonBenet. Then along comes, say Patsy, who winds on the remaining cord, adding the paintbrush, so causing the contusions?

Wound on twice explains the hair being caught in the knotting, since JonBenet is now dead, and the paintbrush is mere staging, i.e. no attention to detail.

There is only one circumferential furrow at the back of her neck, not two or a crossing of furrows that you might expect if two circumferential cords were used, although part of the same length of cord?

.

Click to expand...

I think the second wrap was used to pull on the first wrap, that they were done at the same time, but I've no idea why or how the shirt became involved at the back. It doesn't look to be by accident. I had wondered whether the shirt was changed after the strangulation but it's something else that needs working through, or reconstructing. That is when little things that don't make sense suddenly become clear.

And of course the mucous on the upper right sleeve needs to be considered, but I think that was after the strangulation, when her head rested to the right, as evidenced by the mucous stain on her right cheek.

Tortoise said:

So my son laid on the floor, on his front, first of all with his arms down by his side, and his head turned to his left shoulder.

Click to expand...

What a guy!!!

Thank you for all this, it's very fascinating.

Tortoise said:

I think the second wrap was used to pull on the first wrap, that they were done at the same time, but I've no idea why or how the shirt became involved at the back. It doesn't look to be by accident. I had wondered whether the shirt was changed after the strangulation but it's something else that needs working through, or reconstructing. That is when little things that don't make sense suddenly become clear.

And of course the mucous on the upper right sleeve needs to be considered, but I think that was after the strangulation, when her head rested to the right, as evidenced by the mucous stain on her right cheek.

Click to expand...

Tortoise,
Presumably the knotting is at the front, i.e. it was tied with JonBenet on her back?

Looking at the cord there appears to be just one loop which has the paint brush tied to one terminating end and the other terminating end is the excess which was used to create the second loop?

If the above is also your understanding why bother with a second loop, the first loop should be sufficient to asphyxiate JonBenet by pulling on the paintbrush, or am I missing something?

The shirt seems to have ridden up at the back, then stayed this way when JonBenet was laid on her back causing the blanching pattern?

.

UKGuy said:

Tortoise,
Presumably the knotting is at the front, i.e. it was tied with JonBenet on her back?

Looking at the cord there appears to be just one loop which has the paint brush tied to one terminating end and the other terminating end is the excess which was used to create the second loop?

If the above is also your understanding why bother with a second loop, the first loop should be sufficient to asphyxiate JonBenet by pulling on the paintbrush, or am I missing something?

The shirt seems to have ridden up at the back, then stayed this way when JonBenet was laid on her back causing the blanching pattern?

.

Click to expand...

My best guess is the first loop was knotted while JonBenet was on her tummy. This because her hair is tied in the knot, and her hair is hanging down and swooped around her neck with the cord, as we can see. So then maybe the back ponytail was put in because her hair was getting in the way.

Yes, the remaining length is the excess used to create the second loop, maybe the slip knot wasn't slipping because her hair was caught in it, or the excess cord was too long to apply sufficient leverage?

I don't think the shirt is merely ridden up at the back, I think it may have the cord threaded up from underneath and out through the neckline or something like that, because it looks like that from the way the fabric is gathered up, and if it wasn't caught there would be nothing keeping it bunched up when she was carried.

Ambitioned said:

What a guy!!!

Thank you for all this, it's very fascinating.

Click to expand...

That's what he gets for popping home for the weekend from uni! :happydance:he he

Tortoise said:

My best guess is the first loop was knotted while JonBenet was on her tummy. This because her hair is tied in the knot, and her hair is hanging down and swooped around her neck with the cord, as we can see. So then maybe the back ponytail was put in because her hair was getting in the way.

Yes, the remaining length is the excess used to create the second loop, maybe the slip knot wasn't slipping because her hair was caught in it, or the excess cord was too long to apply sufficient leverage?

I don't think the shirt is merely ridden up at the back, I think it may have the cord threaded up from underneath and out through the neckline or something like that, because it looks like that from the way the fabric is gathered up, and if it wasn't caught there would be nothing keeping it bunched up when she was carried.

Click to expand...

Tortoise,
I'm with you on the first loop. Without being able to see the knotting in detail its difficult to decide on the need for the second loop.

I don't think the shirt is merely ridden up at the back, I think it may have the cord threaded up from underneath and out through the neckline

Click to expand...

BBM: This would really be new, why would that be done, would simply wrapping the cord around the neck not be sufficient?

Did the knotted part of the cord stay in one place or was there slippage since tying knots to the side of her neck seems fiddly to me, when the back of her neck should have been available, assuming JonBenet was lying face down on her stomach?

ETA:
I'm trying to reconcile Kolar's BDI All with say that first loop, and a parent with the second loop, as staging by adding the paintbrush, does this fly?

.
.

UKGuy said:

Tortoise,
I'm with you on the first loop. Without being able to see the knotting in detail its difficult to decide on the need for the second loop.


BBM: This would really be new, why would that be done, would simply wrapping the cord around the neck not be sufficient?

Did the knotted part of the cord stay in one place or was there slippage since tying knots to the side of her neck seems fiddly to me, when the back of her neck should have been available, assuming JonBenet was lying face down on her stomach?

ETA:
I'm trying to reconcile Kolar's BDI All with say that first loop, and a parent with the second loop, as staging by adding the paintbrush, does this fly?

.
.

Click to expand...

It's my next project. Working out what happened with her shirt at the back. I like a brain teaser.

And the other thing to think about too is her gold cross. Where was that in all of this, because if it was hanging down her front as she would normally wear it, I can't work out why it was lining the first loop the way it was and hanging down at the back. Looks like it might have been getting in the way also and they swung it round to her back.

I've just seen your edit. It's my belief that the strangulation was 100% parents, and it was done to hide the head injury and sexual molestation. I don't know if Kolar is strangulation first and head blow second or vice versa, but all I see here is one strangler with one purpose, and an assistant running about to get knives, cord, tape, gloves, elastic bands, clean underwear and blankets. And the purpose of the strangulation was not sexual gratification, it was to make this look like a deranged non-familial killer. I think they hoped the police would take one look at the ligature and say cause of death strangulation, let the parents have her body for burial, why would there be anything else hidden to find? No probing for sexual injuries or the head injury, since there was no blood on her scalp and they thought her lower clothing was clean of blood since they'd wiped her down.

Probably not the thread for discussing this, but I see all activity that night (apart from the basement) focused solely around the spiral staircase end of the house. JonBenet's room and her nightie and blanket and bathroom drawer left open, John Andrew's room with bathroom drawers left pulled open, the laundry area outside the bedrooms where the knife was hidden, the spiral staircase, the drawer there where the torch was usually kept, the notepad, everything. Why did they avoid the front staircase area, if that is where the basement entrance was?

Tortoise said:

It's my next project. Working out what happened with her shirt at the back. I like a brain teaser.

And the other thing to think about too is her gold cross. Where was that in all of this, because if it was hanging down her front as she would normally wear it, I can't work out why it was lining the first loop the way it was and hanging down at the back. Looks like it might have been getting in the way also and they swung it round to her back.

I've just seen your edit. It's my belief that the strangulation was 100% parents, and it was done to hide the head injury and sexual molestation. I don't know if Kolar is strangulation first and head blow second or vice versa, but all I see here is one strangler with one purpose, and an assistant running about to get knives, cord, tape, gloves, elastic bands, clean underwear and blankets. And the purpose of the strangulation was not sexual gratification, it was to make this look like a deranged non-familial killer. I think they hoped the police would take one look at the ligature and say cause of death strangulation, let the parents have her body for burial, why would there be anything else hidden to find? No probing for sexual injuries or the head injury, since there was no blood on her scalp and they thought her lower clothing was clean of blood since they'd wiped her down.

Probably not the thread for discussing this, but I see all activity that night (apart from the basement) focused solely around the spiral staircase end of the house. JonBenet's room and her nightie and blanket and bathroom drawer left open, John Andrew's room with bathroom drawers left pulled open, the laundry area outside the bedrooms where the knife was hidden, the spiral staircase, the drawer there where the torch was usually kept, the notepad, everything. Why did they avoid the front staircase area, if that is where the basement entrance was?

Click to expand...

Tortoise,

I've just seen your edit. It's my belief that the strangulation was 100% parents, and it was done to hide the head injury and sexual molestation.

Click to expand...

Do we know that the parents were aware of the head injury? How does ligature asphyxiation hide that, or do you mean offer an alternative reason for apparent death?

Similarly for the sexual assault how does a ligature asphyxiation explain that away?

This is why I query the need for two loops, i.e. BR could have done one and the parents the second?

Here the parents are staging a strangulation, one that is graphically visible.

Why did they avoid the front staircase area

Click to expand...

Its maybe just a pragmatic thing, or you cannot be seen from the outside? On the cross it appears to have been snagged on the cord. Yet there is no imprint on her neck from compression of the cord.

I think the primary crime-scene is upstairs, most likely JonBenet's bedroom, possibly BR's? Note the paintbrush was not brought to JonBenet she was taken to the paintbrush. That's my reading of it anyway.

.

UKGuy said:

Tortoise,

Do we know that the parents were aware of the head injury? How does ligature asphyxiation hide that, or do you mean offer an alternative reason for apparent death?

Similarly for the sexual assault how does a ligature asphyxiation explain that away?

This is why I query the need for two loops, i.e. BR could have done one and the parents the second?

Here the parents are staging a strangulation, one that is graphically visible.


Its maybe just a pragmatic thing, or you cannot be seen from the outside? On the cross it appears to have been snagged on the cord. Yet there is no imprint on her neck from compression of the cord.

I think the primary crime-scene is upstairs, most likely JonBenet's bedroom, possibly BR's? Note the paintbrush was not brought to JonBenet she was taken to the paintbrush. That's my reading of it anyway.

.

Click to expand...

IF the parents did the strangulation, if, then they had to know about the head injury. There is no other reason for them to strangle JonBenet. That ligature is not accidental or done by a parent in loss of temper. The head injury would have been a slow death and they could have left it so the 'intruder' bashed her over the head. But that didn't look sadistic enough to ensure the police would look outside the home.

I think there are too many 'problem solving' attributes to this strangulation for it to have been done by a child. Things like cleaning blood off her thighs, putting clean clothes on and leaving fibres on her genital area before she was strangled, tying back her hair (probably ensuring to put back the cloth hair tie she had worn that evening on top of the elastic band) possibly to hide the skull depression, turning her over to not see her face, moving her cross so it would not be in the way, knowing where the swiss army knife was next to the pull ups, trying a grapefruit knife first, thinking of getting the cord and tape from the back of Patsy's painting (my theory, not proven), leaving fibres on the body and the tape, I could probably think of a few more.

Yes, when I said to hide the head injury and molestation, I meant to offer an alternative reason for death, to prevent these coming to light.

Tortoise said:

Sorry I will continue with my original post shortly, but just wanted to post this transcript from Linda Arndt's interview on Good Morning America in 1999

Arndt: The doctor hadn't seen an injury like that. The doctor couldn't believe what was done to her body. Her, her head, uh, the depth of that ligature around her neck. It was so deep that twice that cord had been wrapped around her neck, and uh, and it looked like it was only one loose time around

Click to expand...

http://www.acandyrose.com/05191998arndtvsboulder.htm

Click to expand...

"It was so deep that twice that cord had been wrapped around her neck, and uh, and it looked like it was only one loose time around."
BBM

This sentence is fairly self-contradictory, imo. So deep it was wrapped twice, but only loose once. Huh?

I always thought Meyer would have made mention of the cord being around her neck twice if he found it to be significant. Perhaps the cord had gotten inadvertently swung around the second time during the moving of the corpse - from her belly outside the WR to her back in the WR; to being carried up the stairs with her head above JR's and then placed on the floor at the top of the stairs; to being carried to the living room and placed near the Christmas tree; to being rolled onto her side for the ME photos.


Also I think he would have mentioned if the shirt had been bound up in the ligature cord. It seems this photo of her on her side might have been to illustrate lividity at the time the ME was there. moo

Maybe that big red mark is where the stick was inserted under the cord tied around her neck and then twisted.

kanzz said:

"It was so deep that twice that cord had been wrapped around her neck, and uh, and it looked like it was only one loose time around."
BBM

This sentence is fairly self-contradictory, imo. So deep it was wrapped twice, but only loose once. Huh?

I always thought Meyer would have made mention of the cord being around her neck twice if he found it to be significant. Perhaps the cord had gotten inadvertently swung around the second time during the moving of the corpse - from her belly outside the WR to her back in the WR; to being carried up the stairs with her head above JR's and then placed on the floor at the top of the stairs; to being carried to the living room and placed near the Christmas tree; to being rolled onto her side for the ME photos.


Also I think he would have mentioned if the shirt had been bound up in the ligature cord. It seems this photo of her on her side might have been to illustrate lividity at the time the ME was there. moo

Click to expand...

I'm not sure why you would dispute a second wrapping, evidenced not only by the blanching on the front of her neck, but backed up by the detective's first observations and two photographs, one showing the stick hanging on a short length of cord from what is clearly an entwined or entangled piece of her top, and the other showing marks left by the ruched up fabric that had pressed against her shoulder blades indicated by livor mortis and blanching. I've read that livor mortis is set at 10-12 hours, or even earlier in some cases, which would have been late morning/midday. If the cord got swung around her neck a second time as she'd been moved it wouldn't have caused blanching. Do you think it is a fluke that the white mark was there and the cord happened to end up in an accidental second wrap as she was moved?

We also know that certain facts were left out of the coroner's report to aid the police investigation.

Sorry but I don't understand an unwillingness to look at new evidence. Does it upset a theory? Sound theories follow the evidence and are built around the evidence; evidence should not be dismissed to fit a theory.

Same thing applies for trying to explain away the entanglement of the top and the cord, why does an entangled top cause a problem in anyone's theory? You know that livor mortis does not change after that length of time, which they could test by pressing it, so there would be no benefit to altering her clothing to photograph lividity at the house, compared to undressing her and photographing her fully later on or the next day at the lab.

One idea I came up with, for the reason her top was put like that, and her arms bound above her head (after she was strangled), to make it appear she had been suspended by her wrists, was to expose the back abrasions.

Given that the stager wanted this to look like a torture scene and the perpetrator an outright sadist, and not something anyone who loved her could do to her, these injuries on her face and her back and one of her calves (train tracks or whatever) were added for shock value, to give an immediate impression to investigators, and he/she didn't want to leave it covered over by her top.