Black Mark On Her Mandible

[s_finch]

Thanks!! Now I can more clearly see and understand why it wasn't a stun gun.

 

[Trocaria]

"The marks on the back are like the marks left by the Air Taser stun gun."

Not even close.

Ok, suppose you enlighten me, how is it not close? I have seen the photos on the candyrose web site in which there are pictures of the marks on her back compared to the marks left on the pig who was zapped with what is being held out to be the Air Taser model of a stun gun. Looked like a good match to me.

To be frank, I am now more interested in that mark on her lower jaw. You had posted that one could see the outline of a boat in it? Have you blown up the photo already for I would like to see that. I would also like to know what coat JBR had on that night...

 

[Maybe So]

This is a photo of actual stun gun marks on the body of Gerald Boggs who was proven to have been stun gunned just before his murder. This photo was taken at his autopsy. As you can see, the mark is vastly different than that on JBR...

http://gemart.8m.com/ramsey/boggspics.jpg

Boggs was exumed and had been dead quite a bit longer than JBR when his pictures were taken of the stun gun marks.

 

[Trocaria]

Boggs was exumed and had been dead quite a bit longer than JBR when his pictures were taken of the stun gun marks.

Not to mention the fact that he'd been embalmed. That would alter things.

 

[angelwngs]

I still don't buy the theory. She had snaps against her face and against her back? Why would she still be in a jacket?..if she was awake and eating pineapple in her home then I doubt she was still dressed in a jacket or coat by the time of her murder 1 or 2 hours later.

~~~~~~~~~~~~
I had just always assumed that the button or snaps could also mean from a source other than what JonBenet was wearing. They could be snaps or buttons on the murderer's clothing which was pressed against her or buttons or snaps or something of the like on the surface of wherever her body was controlled into submission, molested, and strangled. If someone tried to fit her into the suitcase in the basement there are usually snaps on the inside to secure removable little toiletry items. (Covered buttons on seat cushions and on backs chairs, sofas or ottomons are commonly used in upholstery, even some older matresses had 'buttons'.)

I wonder what objects were in the bathroom, near the stairs, etc. that could have made those marks if she fell or was dropped after the trauma to her head happened. They really don't look small enough to have been caused by her being hit or falling on the hand loom for making potholders, IMO.

 

[aspidistra]

I have also read speculation that it might be impressions from the beads of a necklace/bracelet that JonBenet or the person who murdered her may have been wearing. It is interesting to note that these marks occurred on her back as well.

Karr said the marks were all from the jewelry he wore (a ring) when trying to revive her, or the first device he used to strangle her, which he took with him. A lot of people post photos showing tests on a pig, that it could all be from a stun gun. I don't buy it. No need to use a stun gun if she knew her killer and trusted them and would not cry out.

 

[s_finch]

Boggs was exumed and had been dead quite a bit longer than JBR when his pictures were taken of the stun gun marks.

http://gemart.8m.com/ramsey/stungun.html

This link shows both the pig testing and also stun gun photos of Boggs during the autopsy and after he was exumed. The pics are not gross. It also shows how the supposed stun gun marks on JBR are too far apart to qualify as being from a stun gun. To my knowledge, no one has produced a stun gun with the spacing or marking pattern that would fit the marks on JBR.

 

[aspidistra]

http://gemart.8m.com/ramsey/stungun.html

This link shows both the pig testing and also stun gun photos of Boggs during the autopsy and after he was exumed. The pics are not gross. It also shows how the supposed stun gun marks on JBR are too far apart to qualify as being from a stun gun. To my knowledge, no one has produced a stun gun with the spacing or marking pattern that would fit the marks on JBR.

The stun gun was a theory. I hate theories where you have to do weird tests and manipulate the results to make them fit. The stun gun is and always will remain just a theory. I know they were sincere in trying to explain the marks on her body. Why did they not just think harder of other possible ways they could have occurred.

 

[s_finch]

The stun gun was a theory. I hate theories where you have to do weird tests and manipulate the results to make them fit. The stun gun is and always will remain just a theory. I know they were sincere in trying to explain the marks on her body. Why did they not just think harder of other possible ways they could have occurred.

From my readings (ME, LE investigators, etc) some of the brightest minds have tried to pinpoint the source of those marks. The pathologist who did the autopsy on JBR said they appeared to be "abrasions" and since no other theories or possibilites have been found, I'm believing (based on the pathologists report and autopsy photos) that they are abrasions. What caused the abrasions?? I dunno. Had to be something her body rested on for a time.

 

[Maybe So]

http://gemart.8m.com/ramsey/stungun.html

This link shows both the pig testing and also stun gun photos of Boggs during the autopsy and after he was exumed. The pics are not gross. It also shows how the supposed stun gun marks on JBR are too far apart to qualify as being from a stun gun. To my knowledge, no one has produced a stun gun with the spacing or marking pattern that would fit the marks on JBR.

skin is flexible and human bodies not competely flat and rigid so the difference in spacing of the marks is could be accounted for by the skin moving....so I believe they are stun gun marks. Boggs had been dead a lot longer than JBR and the pig was not dead but alive...so the comparisons are not going to look absolutely the same. I think they look enough the same to make a stun gun being used a possibility.

 

[aussiesheila]

skin is flexible and human bodies not competely flat and rigid so the difference in spacing of the marks is could be accounted for by the skin moving....so I believe they are stun gun marks. Boggs had been dead a lot longer than JBR and the pig was not dead but alive...so the comparisons are not going to look absolutely the same. I think they look enough the same to make a stun gun being used a possibility.

Feel free to go on believing the marks could have been made by a stun gun Maybe So, the coroner did. I think of all the suggestions that have been put up to explain the marks the stun gun one is the most likely to be correct.

I don't think the coroner had ever heard of stun guns at the time he did the autopsy and it wasn't until later that information regarding the existence of such devices was brought to his attention. Then he agreed that the marks could have been made by a stun gun. The following quote is from PMPT "When they had gathered sufficient information, Ainsworth, Pete Hofstrom, Trip DeMuth, and Detective Sgt. Wickman met with the coroner, John Meyer. After reviewing the photos and this new information, Meyer concluded that the injuries on JonBenet's face and back were, in fact, consistent with those produced by a stun gun." If the marks had been caused by something hard like a stud pressing hard into her skin, the coroner would have been able to determine that, since that would leave an indentation rather than a burn-like abrasion. And you are absolutely correct IMO about skin being flexible and human bodies not being competely flat and rigid accounting for differences in spacing, and I should add, child skin not being the same as adult skin.

 

[WolfmarsGirl]

In the autopsy photos of JonBenet there is a black mark on her mandible (looks fingertip sized) whereas the other marks on her still appear to be reddish to reddish purple in color - has the black mark ever been explained?

Hi lovebites When I see a question about JBR's marks on her body, I always find it easier to just quote myself than to re-explain my theory. Plus, I am just plain lazy these days, lol . Here you go:

WolfmarsGirl Stun Gun? Not!



Member since: 12/4/02 -

?

I have a theory about the "stun gun" marks. First of

all, does anyone know if Patsy wore any rings on a

regular basis, or if she had any on at the White's

party? I'll get back to that thought in a moment.



Anyway, as peculiar as this sounds, I had a dream last

night about JB. Ok, so I am doped up on cold medicine,

so give me a little bit of room here, lol.



Basically, in the dream, I was holding JB, in a way I

often hold my own little girl. It was just a flash of

a second in my dream, but the whole thing even made

sense in the morning.



So, I tried the 'dream hold' on my daughter today.

Yes, she thinks I am nutty, lol, but I figured that a

good hug between us is welcomed at any time, no matter

what my motive.



I sat on the floor with my child in my lap, with her

legs both hanging over my left leg. She was kind of

sitting up, laying her weight on her left hip, facing

me. I held her head in my right hand and the fingers

on my right hand ended up on her right cheek and/or or

on her neck. So, I gave her a kiss on the nose, lol...



My left arm was over her right side and my left hand

ended up, quite naturally, on the lower, left side of

her back.



This is typically how I hold her when I 'rock' my

great-big baby girl, or when I carry her quickly in a

rain-storm (when walking would be too slow), or any

other time I have to move her in a hurry and I want to

get a good grip on her and hold her close at the same

time.



Try it with your own child. Make sure his or her face

is close to your face (and don't forget the kiss on

the nose.) This hug kind of looks like holding a

guitar.



Now, back to Patsy's rings (or not). Now, if PR

accidentally killed (or thought she killed) JB, there

would have been a lot of squeezing and rocking with

mother and child in this exact position. If PR was

wearing two or more rings on each hand AND she held,

and squeezed JB in this manner, (a little too hard out

of grief and overwhelming anguish) would those rings

leave marks similar to the "stun gun" marks? I think

so.



The positioning of where a grown-up's fingers would

land on a child of JB's size match up perfectly to

where the marks were found on her body. AND, the

distance between the marks (within each set of marks)

is just about the distance between two adult fingers.



Of course, the rings would most likely have been on

backward. That is the only problem I have with this

theory. However, as I am typing, two of my rings are

reversed and they swing around constantly.



I even thought about trying this trick with four

smiley-faced-stamper rings. But, since I don't want my

poor little girl to be too severely emotionally

scarred by my obsessive sleuthing, lol, I didn't

conduct this further experiment.


I did conduct an additional 'experiment.' I am

posting a link to marks I made on the smooth part of

my right hand. I squeezed my right hand with my left

hand. I had two, round-cut rings on my left hand.

Both rings are mounted with four-prongs.


Please see the link below:


http://www.geocities.com/wolfchick942003/photopage.html


With very little effort, I was able to reproduce the

exact markings I see on the autopsy photos of Jonbenet

Ramsey.


In addition, the marks fell approximately 3.5

centimeters apart.



As I outlined in my forum post, the angle of the marks

on Jonbenet (from the autopsy photos) line up in an

identical pattern and angle to where an adult's

fingers would rest if that adult was holding a child

as I described. It is crucial to note that this is a

very common position for a parent (typically a mom) to

hold and/or rock their small child.


The positions are the same. The markings made by me

are nearly identical to the marks on Jonbenet's body.


One more piece of evidence had occurred to me: Patsy

Ramsey wore, at one point, a large ring on the 2nd

finger of her right hand. This larger ring would fall into the position of the large mark on Jonbenet's cheek, if Patsy did, in fact, hold and squeeze the child prior to death.


Once again:

*The positions of the marks can be explained, within a

fraction of an inch.

*The distance between two marks of either pair of

marks can be explained.

*The angle of the marks (extremely important!) can be

explained.

*The 'weapon' or cause of the marks can be explained.

* If Patsy's rings made the marks, then evidence, or

at least witnesses can testify to their existence.

*Both the occurrence of the marks and the location of

the marks can be easily re-created in any court room.

* This theory explains why 'stun gun' marks are NOT

equidistant (as they would be expected to be) on the

body of Jonbenet.


New info:

I was looking over the autopsy photos of JBR at ACandyRose and I noticed a close-up of her face and the mark on her face.

Inside of the large mark, I could see a definite, clear pattern. So, I pulled up the picture of Patsy's ring and I saw a pattern ON the ring that matched, in my opinion, exactly to the pattern in abrasion.

The Patsy photo is not very clear, so I tried to blow it up for a better look. The enlargement only distorts the photo. However, I can tell the ring is a cluster ring with the stones forming somewhat of an 'x' pattern (just like the pattern in the abrasion).

I found a similar ring on another website and I took out the colors and made a negative image of the ring.

When I put the adjusted photo of JBR's abrasion and the adjusted photo of the cluster ring (not Patsy's but close), the patterns matched!

So, in the link you will see my 'hand' experiment, plus the ring, JBR's face mark and the patterns I see in both.

My idea is this: If we can find the ring Patsy had on her right hand on the night of the murder and we have a clear photo of the abrasion on JBR's cheek in evidence somewhere (I hope), then LE can match the ring to the abrasion.

If the patterns line up (and I think they will), then the ring print is just about as good as a fingerprint, IMO.

Thanks for listening...Please look at the link below.

http://www.geocities.com/wolfchick942003/photopage.html

 

[PagingDrDetect]

Originally Posted by Maybe So
Boggs was exumed and had been dead quite a bit longer than JBR when his pictures were taken of the stun gun marks.

If you looked at the photos shown in the link I gave you would see that the photo on the left was taken after Boggs was exumed 8 months after he was buried, and the photo on the right was taken at the time of his autopsy. Both photos are appropriately captioned to reflect this. Obviously, the pertinant photo to look at and why I gave that link was the one on the right that shows the stun gun marks at the time of the autopsy. In THAT photo it can clearly be seen that the marks are entirely different than those left on JBR.

Originally Posted by aussiesheila
Feel free to go on believing the marks could have been made by a stun gun Maybe So, the coroner did. I think of all the suggestions that have been put up to explain the marks the stun gun one is the most likely to be correct.

I don't think the coroner had ever heard of stun guns at the time he did the autopsy and it wasn't until later that information regarding the existence of such devices was brought to his attention. Then he agreed that the marks could have been made by a stun gun. The following quote is from PMPT "When they had gathered sufficient information, Ainsworth, Pete Hofstrom, Trip DeMuth, and Detective Sgt. Wickman met with the coroner, John Meyer. After reviewing the photos and this new information, Meyer concluded that the injuries on JonBenet's face and back were, in fact, consistent with those produced by a stun gun." If the marks had been caused by something hard like a stud pressing hard into her skin, the coroner would have been able to determine that, since that would leave an indentation rather than a burn-like abrasion. And you are absolutely correct IMO about skin being flexible and human bodies not being competely flat and rigid accounting for differences in spacing, and I should add, child skin not being the same as adult skin.

DID Dr. Meyer agree the marks were made by a stun gun? If so, why is it that he was not the one to appear in Tracey's crockumentary, and Dr. Dobson was used instead? Michael Kane, the special prosecutor assigned to the Ramsey case at the time said Dr. Meyer DID NOT agree that the marks were made by a stun gun...

7/18/03 - On the MSNBC Dan Abrams Show last night, Michael Kane (the special prosecutor brought in to handle the Ramsey case) commented for the first time in public about the stun gun myth:

KANE: The thing about the stun gun that everybody keeps coming back to. There was one person who was qualified who actually looked at that little girl’s body on the autopsy table and that was Dr. Meyer, who’s a forensic pathologist. He looked at those very marks and said that they were abrasions. It is a quantum leap-you can take a stun gun and put it up against somebody’s body...and it’s going to leave a burn. It dosen't leave an abrasion. So all these other opinions that have come out that said that this was a stun gun, there is absolutely no way they would ever get into evidence because there is no evidence that these were burns.

ABRAMS: But, ... there were other experts like Mr. Doberson and others and Lou Smit who have said they absolutely believe that there was a stun gun used.

KANE: But they’re basing that based on photographs of marks on her body. When the uncontradicted evidence of Dr. Meyer is that these were not burns.

Dr. Meyer and Dr. Wecht performed the autopsy, therefore they were the only doctors to have examined these marks in person and not from a photo. The autopsy report reflects their findings that the marks are ABRASIONS...

Autopsy Report:
On the left lateral aspect of the lower back, approximately sixteen and one-quarter inches and seventeen and one-half inches below the level of the top of the head are two dried rust colored to slightly purple abrasions. The more superior of the two measures one-eighth by one-sixteenth of an inch and the more inferior measures three-sixteenths by one-eighth of an inch. There is no surrounding contusion identified.

And what about that Dr. Dobson that Tracey used in his crockumentary saying he believed the marks were stun gun marks? He later said you couldn't tell...

MICHAEL DOBSON: "They came over and showed me some pictures from the (Ramsey) autopsy and asked for my opinion, whether they could be stun gun injuries," Dobersen recalled. "I told them that they could be; that was a possibility. But there were a lot of things they could do to narrow down the possibilities of what it could be."

Dobersen told Boulder investigators to do what The New Yorker reports they eventually did - measure the distance between the wounds and compare that to stun guns.
"Besides", he added, "the only definitive way to tell if electrocution was involved in JonBenet's death is to re-examine her body and look for very characteristic changes in skin tissue."

"You really can't tell from a photo," Dobersen said.
(The Boulder Daily Camera - January 13, 1998)

If Dr. Meyer DID agree that the marks were stun gun burns, why did Tracey have to use Dr. Dobson in his crockumentary instead of Dr. Meyer who actually saw the marks with his own eyes? Could it be that by the time Tracey was putting the crockumentary together Dr. Meyer no longer believed that the marks were stun gun marks once forencic experts all agreed they were not? Or could it be that Dr. Meyer never did believe they were stun gun marks at all and Schiller in PMPT was simply mistaken?

And what about Dr. Wecht the only coroner other than Dr. Meyer to have seen the marks with his own eyes? Here's what Dr. Wecht had to say about those marks...

Dr. Cyril Wecht: "The stun gun theory has been around for some time. I know for a fact that this was submitted to various experts in stun guns and manufacturers, criminalists, forensic pathologists, law enforcement people, they all rejected it."

"I also know for a fact that Mr. Smit, pursuant to his own request, presented this to one of the top-flight forensic scientists, who along with another top-flight forensic scientist of a different subspecialty, rejected it."
(Court TV - The Crier Report - 05/01/01)

Smit tried hard with his pig demonstration to show that the marks were made by a stun gun, however, he only ended up showing they weren't. Not only is the spacing between marks off be a considerable amount, but the rectangular aspect of the larger mark shows that it could not directionally match up to the stun gun. The rectangular mark is literally "going the wrong direction" to meet the second smaller mark. ALL the forensic experts have agreed that the marks were not made by a stun gun. Lou Smit himself has even backed off the stun gun theory.

 

[BBB167893]

"It looks bigger than a stun gun mark - to me it looks to be the size of a fingertip."

It is. The contacts are not that large.

"Just thinking out loud, but if she was grabbed hard around the face, I guess there'd be more than one of these marks? or could a thumb dig in more because the pressure is more dispersed with the other side of the hand amoung the four fingers and the thumb is applying pressure all on it's own on whatever side it's on?"

Possible.

"ELECTRICAL INJURIES ....Electrical burns are generally small, gray, charred marks with a grayish-white rim (blood was driven out, then vessels were seared closed)."

Werner Spitz: "These are not burns."

"As you can see, the mark is vastly different than that on JBR..."

Anyone can see that.

"Ok, suppose you enlighten me, how is it not close?"

Because stun gun marks are electrical burns. These marks were not burns. I can tell you for a fact that this was not a stun gun, because when a stun gun is applied, it makes the person jump all over the place. There wouldn't be just two neat little marks. There would be multiple, erratic marks. I used one on myself to prove it. Stupid, I know, but it was worth it! I happen to own one of these things.

"I have seen the photos on the candyrose web site in which there are pictures of the marks on her back compared to the marks left on the pig who was zapped with what is being held out to be the Air Taser model of a stun gun. Looked like a good match to me."

Anyone can see they look nothing alike.

"skin is flexible and human bodies not competely flat and rigid so the difference in spacing of the marks is could be accounted for by the skin moving....so I believe they are stun gun marks."

No, sir. The marks would be all over the place.

Dr. Cyril Wecht: "The stun gun theory has been around for some time. I know for a fact that this was submitted to various experts in stun guns and manufacturers, criminalists, forensic pathologists, law enforcement people, they all rejected it."

"I also know for a fact that Mr. Smit, pursuant to his own request, presented this to one of the top-flight forensic scientists, who along with another top-flight forensic scientist of a different subspecialty, rejected it."

Dr. Robert Stratbucker is probably the expert on stun gun injuries. He said "no way." In fact, he's the one Smit talked to. Stratbucker later said that Smit didn't hear what he wanted, so he didn't contact him again.

 

[Eagle1]

Thanks for the experiment, pictures, and theory that PR may have been holding and rocking JBR after the death, which made the ring prints.

I'll go along with either that or the stun gun. Bought an Inquirer this week, which accuses Helgoth, but I'm thinking, whoever shot Helgoth from the left side, (Helgoth was right-handed) and staged the scene probably is the real killer, and it could even be Kenady, who talked about Helgoth the way Michael Tracey talks about his suspects.

The real killer would know whether or not a stun gun was used, and if he planted on at Helgoth's death scene, that may be a clue there really was one. Just because it's showing in the "suicide" picture, we can't assume it wasn't staging. Staging which, for once may be telling us something.

 

[BBB167893]

"Thanks for the experiment, pictures, and theory that PR may have been holding and rocking JBR after the death, which made the ring prints."

WMG's the best, Eagle1.

 

[WolfmarsGirl]

Thanks for the experiment, pictures, and theory that PR may have been holding and rocking JBR after the death, which made the ring prints.

I'll go along with either that or the stun gun. Bought an Inquirer this week, which accuses Helgoth, but I'm thinking, whoever shot Helgoth from the left side, (Helgoth was right-handed) and staged the scene probably is the real killer, and it could even be Kenady, who talked about Helgoth the way Michael Tracey talks about his suspects.

The real killer would know whether or not a stun gun was used, and if he planted on at Helgoth's death scene, that may be a clue there really was one. Just because it's showing in the "suicide" picture, we can't assume it wasn't staging. Staging which, for once may be telling us something.

No problem, Eagle I did this experiment a couple of years ago...when I actually thought there would be an answer to this case...

Yes, if the stun gun was planted on Helgoth, then either there was a stun gun used in the crime or whoever planted it there wants the world to think there was a stun gun used in the crime.

 

[WolfmarsGirl]

...WMG's the best, Eagle1.

Awww...thanks SuperDave :blushing:

 

[tumble]

Awww...thanks SuperDave :blushing:

You are worth all praise for that theory WMG. The unusual way PR wears her rings, very strange.

Do you BTW have more indications of PR wearing the rings like that besides that TV appearance, just to settle that is was not at just that specific occasion?

 

[WolfmarsGirl]

I also wanted to add that LE was very interested in Patsy's rings - at least for a moment. I am not sure where the quote is located, but at one point, an examiner asked Patsy if she usually removed her jewelry at night. Then, he specifically mentioned, "rings."

I don't know if that line of questioning means much, but they must have been going somewhere with it, right?