Cords, Knots, and Strangulation Devices

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves
Toltec,

He may have had some kind of personality disorder. This is not uncommon in children where abuse is inter-generational.

Does anyone have any thoughts on this, did Patsy show demonstrative love for Burke and JonBenet?

.

(My Bold)

As a matter of fact I do (LOL). Is anyone surprised? Let me remind everyone again, my hubby is an expert in the field of Child Psychology and used as such in our courts of law. Add to it our years in foster care and I would say yeah, on this I know what Im talking about (not that I know it all).

As we all know, some mental illnesses are hereditary and the P's were proof of that in my opinion. Yet to say that BR had inherited said infliction would be hard to determine unless you knew the child well, such as parent, close friends, family and or care givers. Most signs that a child would give could also be called normal child behaviours, making it difficult to determine without prolonged medical observation. With that said, its not far fetched to say that BR could have inherited his families mental genetics.

However, its my opinion that BR suffered from abuse, emotional neglect to be exact as well as the same measure of perfection that Nedra had used on the P sisters, namely Patsy and the stress that comes with that; Only I dont think he ever measured up to her standards in those days. He was unremarkable compared to JBR.

JR was always gone on business and PR was always focused on JBR and the pageants. Think about it, what could BR have ever done that would equal the Miss America Pageant. BR could have never given PR that, nor could he come close.

Its my opinion that sibling rivalry could have ended up, sibling abuse. Let me give you some info and links on this very topic.


Few experts agree on how extensive sibling abuse is, or where sibling conflict ends and abuse begins. It is rarely studied: only two major national studies, a handful of academic papers and a few specialized books have looked at it in the last quarter-century. And it is as easy to over-dramatize as it is to underestimate.

In 1980, when the sociologist Murray Straus of the University of New Hampshire published "Behind Closed Doors," a groundbreaking national study of family violence, he concluded that the sibling relationship was the most violent of human bonds. Judged strictly by counting blows, he was right: Dr. Straus and his colleagues found that 74 percent of a representative sample of children had pushed or shoved a sibling within the year and 42 percent had kicked, bitten or punched a brother or sister. (Only 3 percent of parents had attacked a child that violently, and only 3 percent of husbands had physically attacked their wives.)

John V. Caffaro, a clinical psychologist and family therapist in private practice in the San Diego suburb Del Mar, defines sibling abuse as a pattern of repeated violence and intimidation.
In an interview, Dr. Caffaro, a co-author of "Sibling Abuse Trauma," said abuse was most often determined by a combination of disengaged upbringing by parents, testosterone and family demographics. It occurs most often in large families composed entirely of closely spaced boys, and least frequently among pairs of sisters, he said.

"A kid can hit a sibling once and it can look pretty bad, but that's not what we consider abuse," he said. "We're looking for a repeated pattern and when that happens, somebody — a parent — has got to be out to lunch."

Abuse occurs most frequently, he said, when a parent is emotionally absent as a result of divorce, long working hours, extensive business travel, alcoholism, preoccupation with his or her own problems or other factors. "One or both parents aren't really around much to do their jobs. It's almost a given," Dr. Caffaro said, adding that "peripheral" fathers are particularly problematic.

"Things are chaotic, boundaries are blurred, and supervision is minimal," he said, noting that those families do not always look chaotic from the outside.

"Sometimes the father is just basically extensively out of town for business and Mom is not a good limit-setter," he said.

In other cases, he added, parents escalate conflicts by playing favorites, ignoring obvious victimization, intervening only to shut the kids up or blaming older children without understanding how younger children helped provoke them. http://www.a-better-child.org/page/873183

Excellent source is SAFE Heres a snip and the link...

Back to the SAFE webpage
“All kids fight.” “You have to expect some sibling rivalry that ends up in some punches-it’s normal.” “Boys will be boys.” “Girls argue, boys get physical.” “Brothers and sisters fight, you have to accept that.”

These kinds of sentiments are commonly expressed about families. Often however, disputes between siblings explode into sustained, severely injurious and even deadly abuse.

Findings from the National Family Violence Survey, funded by the National Institute of Mental Health and summarized in the book Behind Closed Doors-Violence in the American Family (Straus, Gelles, Steinmetz, Anchor Press/Doubleday, 1980), illustrate that sibling violence is not always just a matter of some heated words and a few punches:

At least once a year;

• 42% of all children kicked, bit, or punched a sibling.
• 40% hit with an object.
• 16 % beat up another.
• 0.8% threatened with a knife or gun.
• 0.3% used a knife or gun.
http://www.safe4all.org/

Sibling abuse, including sibling sexual abuse, commonly known as sibling incest, is more prevalent than most people would like to believe. In fact, it is probably the most accepted, and ignored, form of domestic violence.

According to Dr. Vernon Wiehe, professor of social work at the University of Kentucky and author ofPerilous Rivalry: When Siblings Become Abusive, '...as many as 53 out of every 100 children abuse a brother or sister, higher than the percentage of adults who abuse their children or their spouse. What some kids do to their brother or sister inside the family would be called assault outside the family'.

Because of the relationship of perpetrator and victim the abuse is rarely acknowledged or understood within the family. It is often hidden or minimized outside the family. 'Boys will be boys' or 'siblings fight' are often heard phrases which minimize the activity, and the damage caused by such behaviors.

Perpetrators are frequently protected by parents and other family members. This protection shields them from dealing with the consequences of their actions. The victim is also not given the help that they need in order to deal with the effects of the abuse. http://www.sasian.org/


Matthew Jonathan Melton, II was born on April 16th, 2003. He was born eight weeks early via emergency C-section because his mom had pre-eclampsia. He spent two weeks in the neonatal ICU because he was only 3 pounds 14 ounces.

On May 17th, 2003, Matthew sustained bilateral skull fractures and a broken rib as a result of sibling assault/abuse. The doctor’s told us that if he lived, he would be in a vegetative state. They also said that he would never walk or talk. He spent two weeks in the hospital with 1 ½ weeks being on life support.

Myself and Matthew's Dad, Matthew, were charged with two felonies and convicted of one, Aggravated Assault by Failure to Protect. We received 6 (six) years probation, which will be up in May of 2010.
Find out more at…. http://siblingabuse.webs.com/matthewsstory.htm

You really need to visit all these sites the last one especially and finish Mathews story.

My next post will be the links to childrens mental Health... Please everyone, do more research on sibling abuse and help to make those around you aware.

Another excellent link/source http://books.google.com/books?id=ai...iolence&source=bl&ots=93xYypiEI2&sig=NMIiWBBn
 
Emotional Neglect: Being Hurt by what is not there

People talk all the time about abuse. Most of the time they mean physical abuse. We all know that broken bones can hurt. We all know that bruises can hurt. But there are other kinds of hurt as well.

Maybe you have also heard about emotional abuse. Sometimes kids are hurt not with fists or hands or belts, but by words that grown-ups use. Kids are told that they are stupid. Or that they are no good. Or that they are ugly. We know that these words hurt too.

Emotional abuse can hurt as much as physical abuse. But it can be harder to see because words don't leave marks on the outside of kids. Words leave marks on the inside.

Sometimes people talk about neglect. When kids are neglected, they do not get the things they need to grow and be healthy. Most of the time, people talk about physical neglect. Kids who do not get enough food are physically neglected. Kids who live in unsafe homes are physically neglected. Kids who do not have warm clothing to wear on cold days are physically neglected.

But there is another type of neglect as well. Kids can suffer from emotional neglect. Emotional neglect means ignoring or rejecting a child's emotional needs or emotional well-being. It can happen when parents overlook a child's signals for help or attention or comforting.

Emotional neglect happens when kids do not get the love and attention that they need to feel good about themselves. Their parents will not tell them how loved they are. Their parents will not show them affection, like hugs and kisses. Their parents will not tell them how important they are.

Their parents will not say "Good job!" when they do something right.

Just as emotional abuse can be harder to see than physical abuse, so can emotional neglect be harder to see than physical neglect. But we know that it can hurt just as much as (or even more than) physical abuse or emotional abuse or physical neglect. Often there Is overlap. Parents who abuse children, either with their words or their fists, may not give their children the love or care they need. A child who Is physically neglected can be emotionally neglected. But emotional neglect can exist by itself. Children may be cared for in every other way but not receive the love and attention that we know they need.

There are many kids who suffer from emotional neglect. You may not know about these kids, even if they are all around you. They suffer not because of something that is done to them, but because of something that is not done for them. Emotional neglect hurts because of something that is not there, something that should be there. Every kid deserves love and attention. Every kid deserves to feel important and worthwhile.

What Does Emotional Neglect Do?

When children are emotionally neglected, it is as if a part of them dies inside. If you are a parent or another important person in a child's life, that child will look to you to help her feel good about herself. When no one will give her the message that she is important, either through words or through smiles or hugs or attention, she feels unloved. When kids go through life without love and attention, they think they do not deserve it. They don't know what good they can do. They don't know how good they are.

When kids think that they do not deserve love and attention, different things can happen. On the one hand, they may become sad and withdraw from the world. They will think that other people do not care for them, and they will not make any effort to get love from others.

On the other hand, it may make them angry. They may become mad at the world and get into trouble. They may think that if they are not loved, then it makes no difference how they act. http://www.vistandpoint.com/on-the-road/2592-emotional-neglect-being-hurt-by-what-is-not-there


Link too childrens Bipolar disorder.... http://www.nmha.org/index.cfm?objectid=CA866DAF-1372-4D20-C8023899E7497020

This is the best site I have ever found, addressing childrens mental illness>>> “The Storm in my Brain” Kids and Mood Disorders….. http://www.dbsalliance.org/pdfs/storm.pdf

CHILDREN OF PARENTS WITH MENTAL ILLNESS>>>> http://www.aacap.org/galleries/FactsForFamilies/39_children_of_parents_with_mental_illness.pdf


When To Seek Help For Your Child>>>> http://www.aacap.org/cs/root/facts_for_families/when_to_seek_help_for_your_child

Another great site for childrens mental health issues>>> http://healthyminds.org/Document-Library/Brochure-Library/Common-Childhood-Disorders.aspx
 
Emotional Neglect:


Agatha_C,
Informative posts, you are clearly experienced in this area. It is emotional neglect that I would prefer to offer as a cause Burke's personality disorder.

This may be unintentional coming from a family of two sisters, no brothers, and the possibility of intergenerational abuse.

There may have been emotions hidden from Burke that may have had negative connotations for Patsy, so resulting in what we term a personality disorder?



.
 
Forgive me if this is pointed out in this long thread (or has been debated elsewhere previously)....

....it is established that the cord around the stick and her hands is parachute cord. I can see that, yes.

Has anyone noticed or discussed that the 'cord' around her neck is not parachute cord, though?

If you look closely you will notice that the bottom edge of the neck ligature has 'fringey lace' for lack of better term. It's also not as thick and braided like the parachute cord.

I am certain that the ligature around her neck is a satiny ribbon trim like, or similar to, this:
Satin_Picot_ribbon.jpg


See what I'm talking about:
CS_Neck_Arrow-1.jpg


I presume that trim ribbon came from all the craftstuff in the craft/hobby room, and was used for trim on Jonbenet's costumes, and/or the craft stuff that PR and JBR used to make. You can find that trim in sewing stores, online craft/sewing stores, etc.

Someone had to find or know where to get that ribbon. That is not parachute cord though.
 
Forgive me if this is pointed out in this long thread (or has been debated elsewhere previously)....

....it is established that the cord around the stick and her hands is parachute cord. I can see that, yes.

Has anyone noticed or discussed that the 'cord' around her neck is not parachute cord, though?

If you look closely you will notice that the bottom edge of the neck ligature has 'fringey lace' for lack of better term. It's also not as thick and braided like the parachute cord.

I am certain that the ligature around her neck is a satiny ribbon trim like, or similar to, this:
Satin_Picot_ribbon.jpg


See what I'm talking about:
CS_Neck_Arrow-1.jpg


I presume that trim ribbon came from all the craftstuff in the craft/hobby room, and was used for trim on Jonbenet's costumes, and/or the craft stuff that PR and JBR used to make. You can find that trim in sewing stores, online craft/sewing stores, etc.

Someone had to find or know where to get that ribbon. That is not parachute cord though.

I have never seen it established anywhere that the cord around her neck was parachute cord. In fact it was typical multipurpose nylon cord, and identical cord was found selling in two Boulder stores, McGuckin's Hardware and an Army-Navy store. Police also found the identical tape in McGuckin's also. There was also a receipt from an R credit card from McGuckin's from early December indicating two purchases for items selling for the identical price and in the identical department, as the cord and tape found on the body.
There is also seen in the photos of her neck a gold neck chain (which had a little gold cross pendant on it) which was noted by the coroner.
The ligature around her neck is identical to the cord around her wrist, and there was no satin trim. It was all from one long piece of cord.
 
Okay....

...what about considering that the stick with rope contraption is a commando rope with toggle as taught in the Scouts:
http://books.google.com/books?id=_A4uLcyyS5IC&pg=PA58&lpg=PA58&dq=boy+scouts+teach+commando+toggle+ropes&source=bl&ots=Qs4rVHpIUe&sig=5PikdblrS4bJj2nl7_etNhMmXyY&hl=en&ei=4c2DTbbaO8-BtgeDg7HHBA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=6&ved=0CCgQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q&f=false

Look at pages 58 and 59 of this Boys' Life magazine from December 1978 in the link above. On page 59, it shows an 'EYE SPLICE' of the rope too: a piece of the rope stuck in the other part of the rope, similar to how the end of the rope is secured on the wrapped part of the rope to fasten it to the stick.

All over the internet it is discussed how they learn to make these in Scouts: boy scouts, eagle scouts, etc.
I have to say that the stick on jbr looks whittled at each end to look like a toggle: does it not possibly look like a homemade commando rope with toggle?

MakingACommandoRope.jpg
 
Shoelaces...that's my belief. LE was looking for shoes with no laces in the home.

The gold necklace is what you see, not trim.
 
Police have already established what kind of cords it was. They found the EXACT cord selling at the local hardware store. It wasn't a shoelace.
LE were looking to see if anyone in the home owed Hi-Tec shoes because there was a print from such a shoe in the mold on the WC floor.

BR did know how to tie knots, though, as did JAR and of course, JR as well, being a boat owner. The family sailed, and all sailors tie knots. He also whittled- and the housekeeper LHP used to complain that BR walked through the house whittling and the sawdust was all over the house. Eventually, she took his Swiss Army knife away from him, putting it in a high cabinet outside the kids' bedrooms.
A Swiss Army knife was found in the basement, not far from the WC.
 
Burke told the Grand Jury he owned a pair of Hi-Tecs. They had a compass on the shoelace. Fleet White Jr. confirmed that Burke owned these brand of Hi-Tec.
 
I was wondering if the idea of the strangulation device came from a medical tourniquet .
 
Part - 1

If I could convince anyone (especially people in law enforcement) of one thing, it is this:

The piece of evidence in JonBenet’s death that everyone keeps referring to as a “garrote” is not a garrote. Let me say that again to make sure at least everyone who reads this knows what I’m saying... There was no “garrote” found on JonBenet’s neck!

There are two types of garrotes. One was an execution device used years ago (beginning in the early 1600’s until the last century) by Spain. It consisted of a seat where the condemned was constrained, and around his neck a metal strap was placed which was attached to a device that tightened it until he was strangled to death. It was not intended to be a quick death -- it was a means of a slow, torturous death. See examples here:
http://diretesydim.es/wp-content/uploads/2008/01/Garrote.JPG
http://www.1947project.com/tags/garrote
http://www.medievality.com/garrotte.html

The other type of garrote is an assassination tool. It has even been issued to American Special Forces members serving in other countries. It was effective because it is small, silent, and deadly (No jokes here, okay?). It consists of a length of usually flexible wire (think piano wire), or less commonly, cord. On either end is either a stick of some sort (or handle) to be held in each hand, a ring for holding on a single finger in each hand, or in some cases a ball that could be grasped in the palms.

Ever see the movie Marathon Man with Dustin Hoffman? In it, his brother (played by Roy Scheider) is some sort of “secret agent”. In one scene, he is attacked by an assassin who uses a garrote. You can see the scene here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=asGnaw3vSCU. Be forewarned, it is bloody and violent; but as an added bonus for the ladies, you get to see Scheider doing pushups in his skivvies at the beginning of the clip.

Examples of assassin garrotes can be seen here:
http://www.hayesotoupalik.com/U.S. Clandestine Items.htm (Items 001013 Ring type, and 000894 Stick type)
http://www.flickr.com/photos/90927002@N00/2320060516/in/photostream/
http://i21.photobucket.com/albums/b286/AirkatKnives/Other Knives/Garrote1.jpg

How it is used here:
http://www.donrearic.com/images/garrottev5.jpg


The pictures we have all seen of what was found attached to JonBenet’s neck was not used to strangle her. Think about the mechanics of how that would have been done. The only way it could have been used would be to hold the stick and pull; but then her body would have to at the same time be pushed away to overcome the force of the knot holding the cord. Could that have been the case? Possibly, but not very likely, and certainly not very effectively. Not nearly as effective as simply wrapping the cord one time around the neck and pulling in opposite directions if (and this is very important) if strangulation was the intent.

What I read that some people say is that the stick was used to twist the cord around her neck. Ask yourself this: How would that be done? If the stick on the end of a 17-inch long piece of cord was twisted until it started tightening the loop around the neck, the person would be twisting it for longer than it took Mary Lacy to find out that John Karr was just an oddball kook who had absolutely nothing to do with JonBenet’s death. The other way that the stick could have been used to tighten the cord would be by placing it under the knotted loop around her neck and twisting it like a tourniquet. But then, if that were done, when the stick was removed it would have left the neck loop loose where it had been -- not to mention the fact that the knot around the middle of the stick would have served no purpose and would actually have hindered using it as a tourniquet type device.

Think about this, check out the links, and add your comments. I’ll add more when I have the chance later.

bumping for importance of topic
 
Now consider this. Look at all of the knots on the pieces of cord that were left at the scene. There are four. Three of them are very simple knots, but one is very different. It looks complicated. It looks, it looks... like someone else tied it.

For now though, let’s look at the one knot that was left tied around her wrist. I can’t say with a great deal of certainty from looking at the available photos what each of the knots are, but at least this one (shown in this picture: http://www.acandyrose.com/AnatomyColdCase031.jpg) appears to be a collapsed (or capsized, or spilled) Square Knot (a.k.a. Reef Knot). While the Square Knot is usually prone to collapse, and certainly not as much as its half-witted cousin the Granny Knot, it can. But it can also be tied not as a Square Knot, but as what it ends up as when a Square Knot does collapse -- a Girth Hitch (also known by many other names). Since I can see this knot better than any of the others, I can tell you that that is exactly what it is. It is a Girth Hitch tied over the cord that was looped around the wrist. Here is a demonstration of how to tie it (It is shown with a red and a blue cord so you can determine the two from one another, but in our case the blue cord would be the same cord coming from around the back of the wrist.):
http://www.animatedknots.com/girth/

One more thing of note on this knot is that since, in the autopsy photo, it is loosely tied, that indicates that it was tied this way, and not as a Square Knot which collapsed due to a strain on it. It also means that it wasn’t really tied to completely subdue someone or prevent escape. It can easily be untied or slipped loose.

The knot on the opposite end, 15.5” away is what the coroner called “a double loop knot”. I can’t really tell what the knot may have been when it was originally tied because it is too small in the only photos we have available; but it is not a complicated or sophisticated knot. What is extraordinary about it is the “double loop”. I’m speculating here, but what I think that is is the loop that went around the other wrist which was loosened and removed by John Ramsey when he “discovered” her body in front of Fleet White. I think that because of the way it was tied, he pulled more than enough of the cord through the first part of the knot, and then pulled the cord around her wrist enough to remove it, leaving the excess from that first pull sticking out looking like an extra loop.

I've gotta get some sleep now to get up early for work tomorrow. I'll be back tomorrow with more. Hope I'm not boring anyone. The knots, whether intended or not, are a signature. They are the handwriting of the person who tied them, and are a really important part of what was left behind if we can understand what they are saying.

bumping for importance of topic
 
What can I tell you about this knot? Unfortunately, it’s difficult to tell from the only available pictures exactly what the knot is that is tied here. It doesn’t appear to have any particular design or structure to it. It’s not one that I recognize from my “repertoire”, and I have searched as many sources as I can find. It may well be some type of knot that is the result of its collapsing due to the strain put on it. If anyone else thinks they can identify it, given the limited views we have of it, please do. Until that time, I will say that I think it is a “simple” knot tied by someone who wasn’t trying to accomplish a specific purpose other than to secure a loop around JonBenet’s neck, realizing that we don’t know at this point what that person’s ultimate goal was in placing it there. If that person had a specific purpose, it would well have been better served with a better knot designed for the purpose (if the person was skilled at knot tying).

But what is more important than analyzing exactly what it is, I feel, is what it did. After all, it is the knot tied on the cord which caused the deep ligature furrow, and probably the one which caused the strangulation (more on that later). I should note here that all of this is just my opinion, and that it is based on the information and pictures that have been made public. I do not claim that I am any kind of authority or expert at this, or anything else.

This knot was clumsily (IMO) tied to her neck and acted as a “slip knot”. [Definition: A slip knot, also called a running knot, is a broad classification of knots that basically refers to any knot that can "slip" along the rope or cord, and/or can be untied by simply pulling one of the ends. A slip knot is sometimes referred to as a simple noose, and has wide range of applications.] How easily it will slip will depend on the exact slip knot that is tied, and how tightly it is tied to the rope or cord it is attached to.

Now, a couple of things I want to call your attention to, because it will be important later when we put all of this together. I know it’s difficult, but while we’re on the subject of this particular knot, take a look at the leaked autopsy photo showing the ligature still on JonBenet’s neck (Don’t ask me to post it here -- you can all find it.) Take note of, and remember for later, the position (circumferentially around the neck) of where it is. Can we call it her right side below the ear?

Next I’ll tell you about the “knot” I saved for discussing last -- the one on the broken paint stick.
.

bumping for importance of topic
 
I should mention first, as a way of better understanding terms used and what is talked about in discussions about knots, that when the word “hitch” is used, it' is referring to any type of knot that is used to attach a length of rope (or cord) to another object such as a post or another rope (Think of a “Hitching Post”, as used in Western movies.). Remember in Part - 2 of this thread, I described that knot as a Girth Hitch tied over the cord that was looped around the wrist. This is usually not done because it requires both ends to be free when tied around something, unless the loop is made first and then slipped over the object (in this case, JonBenet’s right wrist).

For background, because I keep hearing the word “Prusik” come up, let me give a little information on it from different sources -- all cited and linked at the end of each (my bold for emphasis):

Dr. Karl Prusik (1896 - 1961) (also spelled Prussik) was an Austrian mountaineer who is known as the inventor of the prusik knot. He died in May 1961 at the age of 65.

The benefit of the knot is that, when weighted, it grips the rope that it is tied around. When the weight is removed, it is free to slide. This enables it to be used in a number of self rescue situations or for ascending a rope.
(Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karl_Prusik)

A Prusik is a friction hitch or knot used to put a loop of cord around a rope, applied in climbing, canyoneering, mountaineering, caving, rope rescue, and by arborists. The term Prusik is a name for both the loops of cord and the hitch, and the verb is "to prusik". More casually, the term is used for any friction hitch or device (otg comment: There are also mechanical devices which serve the same purpose.) that can grab a rope. The word is often misspelled as Prussik, Prussick or Prussic.

The Prusik Hitch is named for its alleged inventor, Austrian mountaineer Dr. Karl Prusik. It was shown in a 1931 Austrian mountaineering manual for rope ascending. It was used on several mountaineering routes of the era to ascend the final summit peak, where a rope could be thrown over the top and anchored so that climbers could attain the summit by prusiking up the other side of the rope.

A prusik made from cord does little or no damage to the rope it is attached to, although some mechanical prusiks can cause damage, especially if the device slips during prusiking.

Depending on which variant is used, Prusik hitches have the advantage of working in both directions. Most mechanical rope-grabs work like a ratchet, moving freely up the rope, but grabbing when a load is placed down on them. Traditional Prusiks will grab when pulled by the tail, either up or down, and will slide either way when pushed by the barrel.

Although prusik can be used in a general way, the Prusik Hitch is a specific hitch. The two main alternatives are the Bachmann knot and the Klemheist knot (see also the Tarbuck knot). Each has its advantages and disadvantages, mainly in how easy they are to use for climbing a rope.
(Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prusik_knot)

There are numerous other knots these days that perform the same function, and this knot has largely been superseded. The one advantage that the Prusik knot has is that it is symmetrical, so is effective regardless of the direction of pull.
(Source: http://ozultimate.com/canyoning/knots/prusik/)

To tie a Prusik, it's basically the same as a Lark's head, (Cow hitch) (otg comment: Remember the Girth Hitch from Part - 1? This is a different name for the same knot.) done twice.
(Source: http://fmg-www.cs.ucla.edu/geoff/prusik_knot.html)

The only purpose in this long description of what the word “Prusik” actually means is to show that if you hear it stated that this knot is a Prusik, you understand that the word can have different meanings; and that if you hear second or third hand from a source that the knot is a Prusik, the exact intended meaning (i.e., whether generally speaking or specifically) could have been lost in the re-telling from its original source.

(For further reading on types of friction hitches, this is an excellent article:
http://www.rockclimbing.com/Articles/General/A_scientific_study_of_common_friction_knots._273.html)

As you have now read above, a Prusik Hitch, or any similar type of friction hitch, may be used in different hobbies, occupations, or endeavors. So even were that the specific knot used, it can’t be deduced that the person who tied it had to have a knowledge of mountain climbing, or sailing, or anything else. The only similarity between the knot tied on the paintbrush and any type of known or defined prusik is that the cord appears to be wrapped around a number of times and then terminated in a loop from the cord.

Comparing this knot to the Prusik Hitch, notice that in the Prusik Hitch both ends of the cord are pulled through the loop that is wrapped around whatever it is tied to. In the knot used on the paintbrush, the ends of the cord (as best we can determine from the available photos) are pulled through in different directions and from under different parts of the wrapped pieces.

“If this knot were tied to a rope, could it be used to scaling or rappelling?” you might ask. Yes, possibly, but not very effectively, and I don’t believe a serious climber would be willing to place his life in the ability of this knot to help him. This is not the type of knot that would be used by a person skilled at knot tying and knowledgeable of the purpose of a particular knot to be used in a way that is implied by its use here.

otg’s Analysis (So what the hell is it?):

The way this was attached to the paintbrush, it looks to have been randomly wrapped multiple times (at least eight, possibly as many as eleven times) around the stick and then terminated by slipping under one or two of the wraps, maybe even with a simple overhand, and then tightened. There is no symmetry or apparent planning in tying the knot. It is simply a haphazardly attached length of cord on a piece of a broken paintbrush. Nothing more, nothing less.

This is, of course, just my opinion, and it is based only on the available photos of it. And I have to acknowledge the possibility that it may well be different if I were able to actually see the thing and examine it more closely. (But I’m no expert and that will never happen.)

Now notice also (while we’re here on this knot) that the end of the cord closest to the paintbrush is not frayed. In other words, the end is straight and at a right angle to the length of the cord, and there is no part of the braiding that is longer than the rest. This means that it was cut while the cord was not being pulled or under any sort of tension (see below for explanation on fraying). The opposite end of this length of cord, coming from the ligature that was around JonBenet’s neck, is frayed, maybe by as much as 2-cm. This information will become (I think) important later on when we discuss exactly what happened.

Fraying:

As you must surely know, there are many different types of cord and rope, each with a specific purpose. It may be twisted, woven, or braided. You’ve surely observed the way common rope or twine is made, by twisting and winding three separate strands together. Looking at the cord that was left on JonBenet’s body, you can tell that, unlike common rope or twine, it is braided on the outside.

From IRMI, by Steve Thomas:
“I (Thomas) retrieved one sample package, a fifty-foot length of white Stansport 32-strand, 3/16-inch woven cord that I had bought. Van Tassell (sp) pulled the cord out, frayed an end, held it against the end of the neck ligature, and said, ‘Look.’ The soft white braid and the inner weave appeared identical. ‘I think this is the same cord,’ he said.”

So if that is correct (and the pictures seem to support it), the cord used had two separate parts: the braided outside and the woven center. With a high number of outer braided strands (32), this cord would be relatively elastic and “springy”. If you don’t happen to have any Stansport 32-strand (braided), 3/16-inch woven (center) cord lying around the house to try what I’m going to try and describe, imagine it in your mind and understand the mechanics of what happens.

When the cord is pulled and tension is placed on it, it stretches. If you cut it while it is under tension, the first portions that are cut begin pulling back into a relaxed position (their natural state while not under tension) while the remaining portions of the cord continue pulling away from the already cut portions. This all happens in a short period of time during the cut, but what you have remaining afterward is two separate pieces of cord, each with a frayed end.

How much fraying occurs is going to depend on the following variables:
  1. Distance between the two ends being pulled.
  2. Amount of tension that is placed on it (or, how much it is pulled).
  3. Length of time spent in making the cut.

This post is getting pretty long, so think about what I’ve written so far, and I’ll be back when I have time to post more. I’ll pop in and out when I can to discuss what I’ve written so far, and meanwhile I’ll be working on the next part.
.

Thanks, otg
 
part - 5 [:laugh:tying :dance: It all together]

okay, so let’s look now at what we’ve got so far in a continuance of my previous part-numbered posts.

Four knots: Each one different, but with similarities in the lack of complexity of three, and a strikingly different fourth knot tied onto a stick broken on both ends, but which we know is the middle section of a twice broken paintbrush. The difference between the three as opposed to the fourth indicates to me that it was probably tied by someone other than the person who tied the others. Let’s consider for now that it is therefore part of the staging that was done after the fact.

Remember: What we are doing here is looking only at evidence we are sure of that we have to try and determine what happened to cause jonbenet’s death. Forget for the time being about ransom notes, fiber evidence, people’s behavior, 911 calls, and everything else that happened afterward and may be staging or simply reactions to what happened. Look only at what we know.

So, while we are looking at what we know, we have to bring in another piece of evidence -- the body that was on one end of the cord. If you look at the picture of the right side of jonbenet’s face, you see the ligature still attached with her hair and a gold chain caught under it. You’ll also see on her neck below this a whitish, “blanched” area with reddened areas above and below it, as well as a darkened red area about in the center of her neck which, because of the lack of clarity in the picture, we can’t tell with certainty if it is an abraded area or a localized grouping of petichiae.

Nevertheless, what is evident is that this blanched area is where the strangulation occurred that probably actually caused her death. (i know what you’re thinking: “what about the head wound?” -- we’ll get there. Be patient.) this is the area that rashomon pointed out in an earlier post as possibly being from the infamous “double wrap” (which i believe is a red herring, and i’ll explain later so as not to get too far sidetracked for now).

To explain the physiology of blanching in my unprofessional, nonmedical way, from what i have learned, the blanching occurs when pressure is applied forcing the blood out of the surface of the skin. After death, because of a lack of blood circulation, the surface blood does not return, leaving this area that is whiter than the rest of the skin surface. This is what a coroner or an experienced detective would look for as an apparent cause of death if there was no ligature or other means of strangulation left behind. And by “experience detective”, i mean one whose first reaction when a dead body is produced is not to immediately ask everyone present to hold hands in a circle around the deceased and say the lord’s prayer and then sing the first two stanzas of "kumbaya". (okay, i threw in that last part -- i don’t want to add to all the misinformation that’s already out there or start a new rumor.)

so, i will assert here that i believe this blanched area is where the cord actually strangled her causing her death. If you look at the angle at which it rises from the front of her neck toward the back, you see it is going upward. This is what we talked about in earlier posts about the “v” pattern that would be formed pointing in the direction the ligature was pulled. This pattern would indicate “how” the person was strangled and has been written about extensively by brent turvey. If you have followed me up to this point, and with the knowledge we have from our other readings, by now you should see that (get ready… i’m gonna say it…) jonbenet was hanged.

I know this goes against everything a lot of people have speculated, theorized, postulated, and professed, but believe me on this -- it is what happened. This is what the known evidence tells us. Now we have to figure out how it happened, and why it happened. Now we have to go beyond the things we know, and figure a scenario that will take into account all that we do know with reasonable certainty and fit with everything else we know. This is where we step away a bit from the clear evidence and get into theory.

I’ll leave this at that for now for you to think about before i post my theory later. Let’s see if anyone else comes up with the same thing i think happened before i post it. Remember that a lot of what we think we know may be staging or simply red herrings. Look at what the evidence tells us, and then the other things that are so perplexing about this will all make sense if we are right.
.

ommho
 
.
A quick refresher for anyone who might have missed how I got to the point I am at:

As you read what I am about to write, I ask you to put aside your beliefs about what happened. Forget about the things that happened afterward that make you think that “RDI”, or “IDI”. Forget about the things that you want to believe because you just can’t image that someone in a certain situation would do this, or not do that. Forget about what someone might or might not have said in an interview three of five years after the fact. And forget about any “expert’s” opinion, or what was printed in a newspaper article or tabloid journal (surely we know not to put much faith in any of that). Forget it all for now and look only at the evidence of what caused JonBenet’s death.

If you have followed my numbered posts so far, you know that I believe that the ligature evidence and the markings on her neck show that JonBenet was strangled by hanging -- not the staged “garrote”. There is just way too much that points away from the paintbrush being actually used in the way it is tied to the cord to think that it is not part of the staging that was done to hide what actually happened.

So even if you disagree with me on this, consider for a moment that when she died, if the paintbrush was not there, how could she have been hung? I would point out again the frayed ends of the cord that I talked about before. If the knot tied to the paintbrush was not there, what we have left is three somewhat similar knots (similar in their lack of complexity) tied somewhat randomly with no particular intent other than to hold them in place. Consider that before she was killed, the cord was one continuous piece in the way that it was used, and that it was eventually cut while under strain causing the fraying.

I think that this was the case, and that the scenario went something like this:

The right wrist was tied first, and then the left wrist. Neither of these two knots was tied tightly. They were put there simply to restrain, or at least add a feeling of restraint -- maybe even in a “playful” way. Then the longer end of the cord is put over one of the many pipes that run all over the basement and then tied around her neck with a slipknot so it can be tightened just enough to make JonBenet feel like she has to stay right there. It would not have been secured tightly around her neck; it would have some slack in it and lie loosely around her neck and rest at the base of her neck. There is no intent to kill or harm her in any way with the cord. This is all done simply to make her feel she can’t go running out of the room. This was all done to keep her there while the reason for doing it was carried out. That reason was the “molestation”.

As so many “experts” have pointed out, there was no sexual gratification in a traditional sense. There was no semen found anywhere on or in her body, there was none found in the room, there was no penile or large object insertion. The only thing that occurred of a sexual nature was insertion of something “consistent with digital insertion” -- something that was inserted causing the acute injuries noted in the autopsy report. Whether or not this had occurred in the past is still being debated and will probably never be resolved with any certainty, but the acute injuries cannot be denied. It’s possible (and I give credence to it) that similar things had happened in the past. Perhaps this was an escalation of what had happened prior to that night. For now though, let’s go on and leave that debate for another time. The assault (and that is what it was) that happened associated with her death is fact that is documented in the AR. It was, I believe, the reason she was brought to the basement as far away from the others in the house as possible.

By the lack of damage to her neck internally (“Examination of the thyroid cartilage, cricoid cartilage and hyoid bone disclose no evidence of fracture or hemorrhage.”), I would posit that the hanging did not occur from a high distance. Was she standing on something or simply standing in place? Either could be the case, but because of the lack of damage to her neck, I would think she was simply standing on the floor.

Once this was done, the molestation began. Some may reason that JonBenet had to have been a willing, docile, or at the least -- a passive participant in this, at least at the start. It could be argued that her “sexuallization” by Patsy may have contributed to that. But certainly at her age, no one could expect her to know just how vulnerable she was at that point or how much danger she was in because of the circumstances that had been set up. I won’t try to argue any of those points here, because I’m trying to look only at what the evidence tells us happened to cause her death.

So JonBenet is restrained with the cord tied around her wrists, and the continuous piece of cord goes from her left wrist over something above her head, and then is tied around her neck. The end of the artist’s paintbrush (unbroken) is inserted enough to cause injury and obviously _____ pain (ladies can add what ever adjective they feel appropriate in the space before the word “pain” -- sharp, extreme, terrible, intense, severe, tremendous). She screams. The scream may have been from the pain; it could have been from her looking down and seeing the blood. According to one account, Melody Stanton was awakened by “one loud, incredible scream”. She related that it was “obviously from a child” and that it lasted 3 to 5 seconds and then abruptly stopped. After the scream began -- panic. An object is picked up and she is struck over the head (“and then abruptly stopped”). Exactly what the object was is debatable. Even the investigators who are privy to all of the evidence disagree. Was it a bat, a flashlight, or maybe even a fireplace log tool? I think it was a putter golf club turned to where the tip of the back end of it hit her head with the full weight and force concentrated in that one small area.

Regardless of what the object was, the blow to her head caused her to lose consciousness. Her head dropped and her body fell forward. The weight of her upper torso pulling on the cord raised her left arm and tightened the left wrist knot on itself. At the same time, the slipknot around her neck tightened and strangled the life out of her.

Everyone likes to ask and debate, which came first -- the head blow or the strangulation? Experts can’t agree. What they do agree on is that either one of the injuries alone could have caused her death. Technically, in this scenario, the head blow came first. But there would only be a second or so between the two injuries, so they effectively occurred simultaneously. This is the reason the autopsy findings are so inconclusive on the exact cause of death -- both injuries were killing her at the same time.

“CLINICOPATHLOGIC CORRELATION: Cause of death of this six year old female is asphyxia by strangulation associated with craniocerebral trauma.”

This is how the evidence says JonBenet died. There was no murder. There was no violent rape. There was no jealousy or rage involved in the head blow, only fear of being caught and a desire to stop the scream. There was never any kidnapping. There was no crime committed in her death -- just a terrible, tragic accident. Everything else is staging and cover-up. But that is where the crime was committed. The cover-up was a crime, but it will never be proven.

So now to explain the staging that is associated with the evidence that we know and that we have discussed here.

It should be obvious by now that I think that the sexual aspect of this was of a juvenile nature. It was a curiosity of sex that was being acted out on a person of convenience. It, and the cord tied around her neck, created a dangerous situation that was set up by someone who didn’t have the maturity to imagine the possible consequences of the things that were done. So I believe that when faced with a situation that might have required an immediate response, he didn’t know what to do. Did John and Patsy hear the scream and go running through the house to find where it came from and discover what happened, or did Burke wait until he felt he had to go wake them and tell them what had happened because they didn’t hear her scream? (We’ll never know the answer to that, but consider Patsy’s later statement: “Why didn’t I hear my baby?”) But either way, when they did find JonBenet dead and hanging from the ceiling, John’s first reaction, as would any father’s reaction be, would be to cut the cord and get her down. Because of the weight of JonBenet on the cord, this would cause the cord to fray as it was cut. It would be obvious at this point that she was dead. Medical attention would be of no value. Even Patsy would have known that Jesus was not going to “raise her baby from the dead as He did Lazurus”.

So they were faced with the question of what to do. If they called the police, they would face everyone in the community knowing what had happened. I don’t imagine they knew that Burke was one-month shy of being able to be charged with any crime, so for all they knew, he might be charged with negligent homicide or wrongful death.

Now it’s time to do something. I believe they decided at this point to stage the entire thing to look like someone else was responsible. They also tried to completely remove any evidence of the sexual aspect, cleaning the blood from her body and changing any clothes that may have had any blood on them. The end of the paintbrush with blood and vaginal fluids was broken off so it would be small enough that it could be hidden, discarded, burned, or carried out in a pocket or anything else. Then the brush part was broken off to leave a wooden stick to tie the cord to, making it look like (in their minds anyway) a professional killing device. In the process of breaking it, small pieces of wood break off in shards and go unnoticed until found much later by BPD. The cord is tied to the middle piece so close to JonBenet’s hair that it gets caught in the knot.
[Sidenote: Ever wonder when she was found if the stick was tangled in her hair, if the hair had been pulled out by the root, or if it had been cut with scissors? Have you ever heard it said?]


Granted, there is a lot in the overall picture of what was found afterward that is still left unanswered. Did all of the staging and cover-up happen in the basement, or was she carried upstairs at some point between her death and her being laid out in the wine cellar? Was her body moved a second time before being “discovered” by John when he loosened and removed the knot on her left wrist? Was the broken brush end of Patsy’s paintbrush in the paint tote tested for fingerprints, and if it had none -- why not? Why was the flashlight and even the batteries in it wiped clean of fingerprints? How did the pineapple play into all this?

I’m sure you have your own questions, and we can debate them from now on, but the answers won’t change the evidence of how JonBenet. And if you consider the scenario I just laid out, doesn’t everything else in the behavior of all the people associated with this make sense? Does it not explain why Burke’s voice can be heard on the 911 call? Does it make sense now why Burke would stay in his room all morning long not coming down to ask what all the commotion was when they were supposed to be leaving for Michigan that morning? And when he was led through the house to leave for someone else’s home, why didn’t he even ask, “What are the police and all these people doing here? Did something happen?” Does it not explain some of the bizarre things that John and Patsy did and said after their child was killed, and why they would hire attorneys almost immediately to help them avoid being questioned by police? And how about John Andrew’s answer to what should be done to the person who killed his sister? -- “He should be forgiven

If you at least consider this, is there anything that doesn’t make sense?
.


Worth repeating...
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
163
Guests online
2,311
Total visitors
2,474

Forum statistics

Threads
604,115
Messages
18,167,752
Members
231,951
Latest member
leannepalmer85
Back
Top