Cords, Knots, and Strangulation Devices

[otg]

DD, I believe you are right about the coroner having to cut the hair to remove the paintbrush knot, but that’s a big assumption to make without a source. It isn’t mentioned in the AR, so where did you find that Meyers said that? It’s very important, because if true, it completely blows out of the water any supposition that the thing was used as a garrote of any sort (which of course I feel it was not) -- even is she was unconscious.

Fine blonde hair, Meyer noted, was tangled in the knot of the cord around the child's neck as well as in the knot of the cord tied around the stick.

PMPT ppb page 42

A white cord of the same type was wrapped so tightly around the throat and neck that a deep horizontal furrow had been dug into the skin. A gold chain and cross were tangled in that ligature, which was tied behind the neck to a broken stick. Blond hair was snared in the knot, and the coroner had to cut the hair in order to remove the cord, which was tied more like a noose than a twisting garrote.

Steve Thomas ITRMI ppb page 45

Thanks, Toltec, for the sources on the hair being cut.

In the passage from PMPT, Schiller simply states that there was hair tangled in both knots of the ligature. No new information there -- we know that -- we’ve seen the autopsy photos. This doesn’t address how the hair was separated from her body on either of the knots.

In the passage from IRMI, it sounds like to me that Thomas is only speaking to the knot which secured the ligature around her neck, which of course had to be cut to remove it along with the hair that was entangled in the knot. He doesn’t address how the hair specifically in the paintbrush knot was separated. Am I not reading it correctly? Are we assuming that both knots had to be cut loose because they are both on the ligature that had to be removed? I don’t know the answer -- I wish I did.

Looking at the close-up pictures of the cord wrapped around and tied off to the paintbrush, the hair is clearly visible. While it’s difficult to see the hair ends because they are not grouped together like a lock of hair that had been cut, I think if they had been violently pulled out, there would be visible root ends and maybe even some scalp material.

So to me, the hair had to have been cut. The two possibilities are that they were cut by the coroner, or they were cut by the person who tied it (possibly when the cord end was cut close to the paintbrush.)

Please understand, I’m not trying to dispute that Meyers cut the hair tangled into the knot on the paintbrush to remove it -- I believe that was the case. I just want to make sure of it because it is so important to proving that the device was never (and in fact, could never have been) used as implied by its presence. This of course, as I’m sure you and many others understand, would prove once and for all that it was only placed there as staging to cover how the cord had actually strangled JonBenet.

Thanks again, Toltec, for trying to help.
.

 

[SunnieRN]

Yet none of PR's sweater fibers were found on JB's underwear or in her pubic area that had been wiped down. This lends to me, the strengthening of my theory, that Patsy was more involved in the staging than she was in the previous acts. Still guilty in totality, but also implicating another Ramsey or Ramseys.

 

[Tadpole12]

I just want to make sure of it because it is so important to proving that the device was never (and in fact, could never have been) used as implied by its presence. This of course, as I’m sure you and many others understand, would prove once and for all that it was only placed there as staging to cover how the cord had actually strangled JonBenet. - otg

Heyya otg.

Well don't cease your efforts.

I'm still trying to grasp the potential for the garotte to have any functionality beyond the self tightening knot. So the discussions of knots has been of great help, ie aid in visualization, and in effect has redirected attention back to the possibility of a variation of hanging or accidental strangulation.

 

[otg]

Yet none of PR's sweater fibers were found on JB's underwear or in her pubic area that had been wiped down. This lends to me, the strengthening of my theory, that Patsy was more involved in the staging than she was in the previous acts. Still guilty in totality, but also implicating another Ramsey or Ramseys.

Again, Sunnie, your reasoning is impeccable. This doesn't in itself totally exclude the possibility, but it certainly makes it more likely. Yes?
.

 

[SunnieRN]

Again, Sunnie, your reasoning is impeccable. This doesn't in itself totally exclude the possibility, but it certainly makes it more likely. Yes?
.

Most probable IMHO. Thank you!

 

[otg]

I'm still trying to grasp the potential for the garotte to have any functionality beyond the self tightening knot. So the discussions of knots has been of great help, ie aid in visualization, and in effect has redirected attention back to the possibility of a variation of hanging or accidental strangulation.

I commend you on your diligence in researching this, Tad. It's all very good information you've shared here on the different possibilities on the knot.

But trust me on this... You won't find anywhere a specific knot that will match what was tied on the paintbrush. It's just not a structured, identifiable knot that could be repeated -- even by the person who did it. It's too random in how the wraps go around and around the stick. It's not anything specific to any particular profession or hobby.

The more you read about knots, and learn about how they're wink: Agatha) used, the more you'll begin to see what I've been trying to get everyone to understand. This whole thing about the knots and the cord speaks to what happened. Eliminate the staging and how the "crime scene" was obviously altered, and look at how the ligature strangled JonBenet. Then the reason for staging and throwing in things unrelated to her death like the RN begin to make sense (IMO).

Don't let me discourage you from continuing to research -- it's good exercise. But just don't expect to find that specific knot shown anywhere but in the autopsy photos, or where someone has attempted to duplicate it.
.

 

[UKGuy]

Yet none of PR's sweater fibers were found on JB's underwear or in her pubic area that had been wiped down. This lends to me, the strengthening of my theory, that Patsy was more involved in the staging than she was in the previous acts. Still guilty in totality, but also implicating another Ramsey or Ramseys.

SunnieRN,

Once the wine-cellar is established as a staged crime-scene, this is a feature that all IDI theories must account for, none do of course.

Next up is the forensic evicence and there is enough to implicate both parents and very little to implicate Burke.

As you say none of Patsy's fibers seem to appear on JonBenet's genital area, whilst fibers from John's black israeli manufactured shirt does.

This suggests the possibility of more than one staging event, but curiously the big question is, why would Patsy stage on behalf of John?

Patently she was fully aware that some kind of molestation was being obsfucated, she may even have injured JonBenet internally as part of her staging event.

So however you spin it both Patsy and John seem to be partners in crime?


.

 

[NEWBIE-DI]

I am new to this forum, so my heartiest “hello.” First, I commend you all for continuing to seek the truth. As painful or as ugly as the truth in this horrific case may be, I strongly believe it needs to be uncovered and revealed to the world so this case may finally be put to rest. Unlike many of you who having been closely examining this case for years, I have only begun taking an interest in it for a few short weeks now, so please excuse me if I egregiously make an error in “fact.” After reviewing this site and others, and reading much on the case, I’m of the belief that all the physical and circumstantial evidence lends itself to a RDI theory, most likely a BDI theory, with both parents staging a cover-up of the “crime” or “truth” to attempt to make it appear that an “intruder” did it.

I believe the entire case is predicated on four motives: sex, shame, embarrassment and tremendous overwhelming fear. First, on the part of BR in the murder or accidental death of JBR, and second, on the part of the parents in staging a cover-up.

I’ve theorized eleven BDI “scenarios” so far—some involving BR committing premeditated murder, others non-premeditated or accidental death.

Outlined below is the BDI scenario I most suspect. I welcome your highly regarded expert feedback on this and would like to know if any of the purported facts or evidence, that you are all so aware of, outwardly “disprove” this possible scenario.

[NOTE: I apologize up front for the uncomfortable discussion of “child sex” below, but it is sadly a huge segment of this case, and the “sexual violation” of JBR somehow plays into her death no matter whom or what killed her.]

ONE BDI THEORY “SCENARIO”

It’s a fact that JBR often slept with BR in his bed. I think this close bodily contact, late at night, under the covers, warm bodies beside each other, led to “touching,” “cuddling” and “sexual games.” BR was just shy of his 10th birthday and 10-year-old boys are sexually curious. Kids play “doctor.” Kids play “house.” Most kids are sexually curious and most kids sexually explore; their own bodies, friend’s bodies, and sometimes even sibling’s bodies. It’s common.

I think at some point BR began to fondle JBR during these “sleep togethers.” It was light touching, possibly genital touching, and JBR enjoyed it. Not unheard of for girls as young as 6 to enjoy genital stimulation.

As these nighttime “games” progressed, BR may have wanted “more.” He may have wanted JBR to touch his penis or even may have suggested the idea of penis-vagina penetration or oral sex. JBR resisted. That was “too” much. But the “urge” to try “more” may not have been “too much” for BR. *advertiser censored* was extremely prevalent by 1996 and it would have been easy, even likely, that BR may have been exposed to images of adult hardcore sex by seeing adult magazines, videos or images on the internet. Boys have a way of finding, stealing and getting *advertiser censored*. And pornographic images are designed to “stimulate” sexual urges which can be overwhelming and confusing to a young boy on the verge of puberty. JBR was also an unusually “sexualized” child because of her participation in beauty pageants which could have further lead to BR’s “stimulation.”

Approximately a week before JBR’s death, BR struck JBR in the face with a golf club. An extremely dangerous act that can potentially maim or kill. Unless this act was a total accident, someone usually strikes someone because they are angry at them or frustrated by them. I theorized BR was “sexually” frustrated by JBR. He wanted to go further with their nighttime games and she didn’t. Hitting her with the golf club was an expression of his growing “sexual” frustration towards her.

In the early morning hours of the 26th, I think either JBR came to BR (or vice-versa). One or both were hungry and they went to the kitchen for food. They returned to either JBR or BR’s room. Got into bed together. Touching began. BR again wanted to “go further” this time and he did. He either digitally penetrated JBR or penetrated her with his penis, and it broke her hymen. That sharp pain really hurt her. It may have caused bleeding. Reacting to the sharp pain, JBR’s first instinct was “to go tell their parents on BR.” As JBR made a move to go do this, BR got extremely scared. He filled with shame, embarrassment and fear at what he had done to his little sister and the fear of what his parents might do to him. Maybe he even saw that what he did had caused bleeding from JBR’s vagina which would have terrified BR. JBR made an attempt to go “tell on” BR to their parents. Filled with shame and fear, BR tried to stop JBR. In the struggle she was either pushed, tripped or fell resulting in her smashing her head into something hard and cracking her skull. Or it’s possible, out of sheer panic-stricken terror, that BR struck JBR (again) with “the flashlight,” “the bat” or another object to stop her. Either way it resulted in her being knocked unconscious. Now… even more filled with fear, BR is faced with his sister: 1) bleeding from her vagina, 2) intending to “tell on him” for sexually violating her, and 3) knocked out cold from head trauma and possibly dead. BR may have thought that he had killed her. Bottom line is he was terrified. In his mind, the game of sexual exploration he was playing with his sister moments ago had now turned terrifyingly tragic. Kids fear “getting in trouble” most of all. They live in fear of doing things that will make their parents angry at them. So… BR’s reaction is to avoid taking the blame for his sister’s bleeding vagina and death.

So… BR drags JBR’s limp and seemingly lifeless body downstairs into the basement. Takes his Swiss Army Knife with him. Penetrates her vagina with “the paint brush” to make it appear that that act caused her bleeding vagina, not his finger or penis. Ties the noose around JBR’s neck (having learned how to tie knots in the Boy Scouts) and strangles her from above causing her death. His “plan” is to completely deflect the blame of her genital bleeding and death onto “other reasoning” and/or possibly “another person,” possibly a mysterious home “invader.”

At this point, BR may have been “caught in the act” by one of his parents. Possibly PR heard noises and ended up in the basement and found JBR dead—strangled to death and with a paint brush sticking out of her vagina--and BR with her. This may have resulted in the reported “scream.” PR screaming upon seeing JBR dead. Or… BR got his parents and showed them JBR in the basement. Either way, the parents immediately know it is BR that did this to his sister, not an intruder. Panic and horror ensue. Their daughter strangled to death, her head smashed and sexually violated by their son, the parents instantly realized there’s no way out except to lie about what truly happened. If the truth comes out, that their son “raped” or “violated” and killed his sister, even accidentally, they realize Burke’s life would be destroyed and their “standing” as a family in the community and business world would be shattered. Friends, business associates and people in the community would never look at them the same way again. They’d be “pariah,” looked at as the bizarre parents of bizarre children involved in a bizarre incestuous murder/death. They would never again be revered, up-standing, Christian pillars of the community. They would have to live the rest of their lives in shame and embarrassment. And the fear of that overwhelmingly terrified them. So they attempt to stage a cover up of the truth. And JR and BR continue to do so until this day.

 

[UKGuy]

I am new to this forum, so my heartiest “hello.” First, I commend you all for continuing to seek the truth. As painful or as ugly as the truth in this horrific case may be, I strongly believe it needs to be uncovered and revealed to the world so this case may finally be put to rest. Unlike many of you who having been closely examining this case for years, I have only begun taking an interest in it for a few short weeks now, so please excuse me if I egregiously make an error in “fact.” After reviewing this site and others, and reading much on the case, I’m of the belief that all the physical and circumstantial evidence lends itself to a RDI theory, most likely a BDI theory, with both parents staging a cover-up of the “crime” or “truth” to attempt to make it appear that an “intruder” did it.

I believe the entire case is predicated on four motives: sex, shame, embarrassment and tremendous overwhelming fear. First, on the part of BR in the murder or accidental death of JBR, and second, on the part of the parents in staging a cover-up.

I’ve theorized eleven BDI “scenarios” so far—some involving BR committing premeditated murder, others non-premeditated or accidental death.

Outlined below is the BDI scenario I most suspect. I welcome your highly regarded expert feedback on this and would like to know if any of the purported facts or evidence, that you are all so aware of, outwardly “disprove” this possible scenario.

[NOTE: I apologize up front for the uncomfortable discussion of “child sex” below, but it is sadly a huge segment of this case, and the “sexual violation” of JBR somehow plays into her death no matter whom or what killed her.]

ONE BDI THEORY “SCENARIO”

It’s a fact that JBR often slept with BR in his bed. I think this close bodily contact, late at night, under the covers, warm bodies beside each other, led to “touching,” “cuddling” and “sexual games.” BR was just shy of his 10th birthday and 10-year-old boys are sexually curious. Kids play “doctor.” Kids play “house.” Most kids are sexually curious and most kids sexually explore; their own bodies, friend’s bodies, and sometimes even sibling’s bodies. It’s common.

I think at some point BR began to fondle JBR during these “sleep togethers.” It was light touching, possibly genital touching, and JBR enjoyed it. Not unheard of for girls as young as 6 to enjoy genital stimulation.

As these nighttime “games” progressed, BR may have wanted “more.” He may have wanted JBR to touch his penis or even may have suggested the idea of penis-vagina penetration or oral sex. JBR resisted. That was “too” much. But the “urge” to try “more” may not have been “too much” for BR. *advertiser censored* was extremely prevalent by 1996 and it would have been easy, even likely, that BR may have been exposed to images of adult hardcore sex by seeing adult magazines, videos or images on the internet. Boys have a way of finding, stealing and getting *advertiser censored*. And pornographic images are designed to “stimulate” sexual urges which can be overwhelming and confusing to a young boy on the verge of puberty. JBR was also an unusually “sexualized” child because of her participation in beauty pageants which could have further lead to BR’s “stimulation.”

Approximately a week before JBR’s death, BR struck JBR in the face with a golf club. An extremely dangerous act that can potentially maim or kill. Unless this act was a total accident, someone usually strikes someone because they are angry at them or frustrated by them. I theorized BR was “sexually” frustrated by JBR. He wanted to go further with their nighttime games and she didn’t. Hitting her with the golf club was an expression of his growing “sexual” frustration towards her.

In the early morning hours of the 26th, I think either JBR came to BR (or vice-versa). One or both were hungry and they went to the kitchen for food. They returned to either JBR or BR’s room. Got into bed together. Touching began. BR again wanted to “go further” this time and he did. He either digitally penetrated JBR or penetrated her with his penis, and it broke her hymen. That sharp pain really hurt her. It may have caused bleeding. Reacting to the sharp pain, JBR’s first instinct was “to go tell their parents on BR.” As JBR made a move to go do this, BR got extremely scared. He filled with shame, embarrassment and fear at what he had done to his little sister and the fear of what his parents might do to him. Maybe he even saw that what he did had caused bleeding from JBR’s vagina which would have terrified BR. JBR made an attempt to go “tell on” BR to their parents. Filled with shame and fear, BR tried to stop JBR. In the struggle she was either pushed, tripped or fell resulting in her smashing her head into something hard and cracking her skull. Or it’s possible, out of sheer panic-stricken terror, that BR struck JBR (again) with “the flashlight,” “the bat” or another object to stop her. Either way it resulted in her being knocked unconscious. Now… even more filled with fear, BR is faced with his sister: 1) bleeding from her vagina, 2) intending to “tell on him” for sexually violating her, and 3) knocked out cold from head trauma and possibly dead. BR may have thought that he had killed her. Bottom line is he was terrified. In his mind, the game of sexual exploration he was playing with his sister moments ago had now turned terrifyingly tragic. Kids fear “getting in trouble” most of all. They live in fear of doing things that will make their parents angry at them. So… BR’s reaction is to avoid taking the blame for his sister’s bleeding vagina and death.

So… BR drags JBR’s limp and seemingly lifeless body downstairs into the basement. Takes his Swiss Army Knife with him. Penetrates her vagina with “the paint brush” to make it appear that that act caused her bleeding vagina, not his finger or penis. Ties the noose around JBR’s neck (having learned how to tie knots in the Boy Scouts) and strangles her from above causing her death. His “plan” is to completely deflect the blame of her genital bleeding and death onto “other reasoning” and/or possibly “another person,” possibly a mysterious home “invader.”

At this point, BR may have been “caught in the act” by one of his parents. Possibly PR heard noises and ended up in the basement and found JBR dead—strangled to death and with a paint brush sticking out of her vagina--and BR with her. This may have resulted in the reported “scream.” PR screaming upon seeing JBR dead. Or… BR got his parents and showed them JBR in the basement. Either way, the parents immediately know it is BR that did this to his sister, not an intruder. Panic and horror ensue. Their daughter strangled to death, her head smashed and sexually violated by their son, the parents instantly realized there’s no way out except to lie about what truly happened. If the truth comes out, that their son “raped” or “violated” and killed his sister, even accidentally, they realize Burke’s life would be destroyed and their “standing” as a family in the community and business world would be shattered. Friends, business associates and people in the community would never look at them the same way again. They’d be “pariah,” looked at as the bizarre parents of bizarre children involved in a bizarre incestuous murder/death. They would never again be revered, up-standing, Christian pillars of the community. They would have to live the rest of their lives in shame and embarrassment. And the fear of that overwhelmingly terrified them. So they attempt to stage a cover up of the truth. And JR and BR continue to do so until this day.

NEWBIE-DI,
Interesting theory, and you may be correct, since a ramsey resident, did kill JonBenet. Your theory suggests a sexually precoscious 10-year old boy, who like the intruder left no forensic evidence at the crime-scene, who nonchantly left the house the next day, never to return.


.

 

[Toltec]

I believe the cords are new shoestrings, found in a drawer somewhere. Kids sometimes wear out shoestrings before their shoes, so I assume Patsy would buy replacement shoestrings.

 

[DeeDee249]

I believe the cords are new shoestrings, found in a drawer somewhere. Kids sometimes wear out shoestrings before their shoes, so I assume Patsy would buy replacement shoestrings.

Don't shoestrings have those little "glued" ends or plastic ferrules on ends so they can pass easily through the eyelets? I don't think the cord had evidence of that, and the ends were described as frayed, not cut. An identical type of cord was found sold as actual cord, in McGuckin's hardware.

 

[Agatha_C]

Tape and cord IMO came from the paint supplies and left with BR or who ever helped them that night.

 

[joeskidbeck]

Newbie-DI, VERY interesting theory. If this is what happened, I believe that Patsy finished the staging and purposefully used John's black shirt to insure his compliance with the "plan". After all, if he doesn't, all she has to do is point the finger at him for the molestation and there is his shirt fibers in the worst place they could possibly be.
Very interesting, indeed. The kinda sad part is that John may not have known anything about it till the next morning and by then, there was nothing he could do to un-implicate himself, so he had to go along. Guys, I am not defending John here whatsoever, if he knew at any time what happened to his baby girl, it was his responsibility to her to tell the truth! Hey, Newbie-DI, welcome to Websleuths! Please post often, we would love to hear more of your opinions.

 

[SunnieRN]

SunnieRN,

Once the wine-cellar is established as a staged crime-scene, this is a feature that all IDI theories must account for, none do of course.

Next up is the forensic evicence and there is enough to implicate both parents and very little to implicate Burke.

As you say none of Patsy's fibers seem to appear on JonBenet's genital area, whilst fibers from John's black israeli manufactured shirt does.

This suggests the possibility of more than one staging event, but curiously the big question is, why would Patsy stage on behalf of John?

Patently she was fully aware that some kind of molestation was being obsfucated, she may even have injured JonBenet internally as part of her staging event.

So however you spin it both Patsy and John seem to be partners in crime?


.

I can't believe that Patsy would cover for John. I don't believe that she would have stayed with him if he molested and killed JB.

I also can't believe that John would cover for Patsy. He had lost a daughter and it devastated him. Why would he let Patsy walk?

So, that leaves Burke. I truly believe that Burke had to be guilty. This is the only scenario that fits all the pieces together in the staging.

There are PR fibers, JR fibers and evidence of staging.

Di, welcome to Websleuths! I look forward to more of your posts!! I believe you hit the proverbial nail on the head.

 

[joeskidbeck]

You know, I really hate it that Burke is looking more and more guilty, but for me, he is.
Unless he talks to LE and very soon, I will be convinced. I believe that Burke talking to them would be John and Lin Wood's biggest nightmare. Even though I know LW would be sitting there telling him what he could and could not say.

 

[otg]

I am new to this forum, so my heartiest “hello.”

Welcome to the forum, NEWBIE-DI. Of course, I understand your selection of a hat to wear here, but you know now that you will always be called "newbie" even after you are a seasoned vet.

I also want to give you a pat on the back for so quickly speaking up and expressing your thoughts (much of which I agree with). If you feel you need more case information, there are lots of people here who have links and information to share, and who are more than willing to help out. And believe me, they really know the case and the evidence.
.

 

[BBB167893]

I can't believe that Patsy would cover for John. I don't believe that she would have stayed with him if he molested and killed JB.

Sadly, Sunnie, it happens more often than you think. In fact, if stats are to be believed, it's the rule, not the exception.

I also can't believe that John would cover for Patsy. He had lost a daughter and it devastated him. Why would he let Patsy walk?

Speculation: he'd lost one daughter already and now another. Would he lose his wife, too? She'd have died in prison. Plus, there was his ego. He couldn't admit that he screwed up his first marriage to marry a killer. End speculation. (This assumes he was completely clear of anything.)

 

[SunnieRN]

I see the points you are making SD, but respectfully disagree at this point. I may have to eat my words at some point, but I truly believe that this bonding of P and J, their solidarity against friends, employees and acquaintances was due to the protection of their child, who was still alive.

 

[BBB167893]

I see the points you are making SD, but respectfully disagree at this point. I may have to eat my words at some point, but I truly believe that this bonding of P and J, their solidarity against friends, employees and acquaintances was due to the protection of their child, who was still alive.

In a way, I agree.

 

[Steely]

madeleine,

Material on JonBenet's feet was described as lint which might mean she was in her bed prior to her death, since lint can be the debri from cotton or linen sheets?


.

...Or could it mean her socks had been recently removed leaving lint on her feet? Where were her socks from that day found? This was winter in Colorado...did she often wear socks to sleep? If she was asleep when put in bed...did she still have her socks on? Were her socks removed from her and used by a perp to catch his own DNA evidence then removed from the house and destroyed or kept as a souvenir? Or were her socks used to wipe or clean evidence from her body and then removed from the home?