Do you think a Stungun was used?

DNA Solves
DNA Solves
DNA Solves

Are you convinced by the stungun theory?

  • Yes - I am 100% convinced that a stungun was used

    Votes: 54 18.4%

  • No - I've read the facts and I'm not convinced

    Votes: 179 60.9%

  • I have read the facts but I am undecided

    Votes: 51 17.3%

  • What stungun theory?

    Votes: 10 3.4%
  • Total voters
    294

New Posts

No. The marks were abrasions and not burns. Also, in Kolar's book he says that the marks do not match stun gun marks. They are close but not a match.
 
I always thought the burn/abrasion on the side of her face was a cigarette/cigar burn. Once reading the full transcripts and seeing the questions about the cigar boxes in the cellar, John playing dumb, and Patsy trying to distance them from the cigars by claiming they never smoked made me even more suspicious. They would only ask such questions if the cigars actually meant something. If they truly don't know what that mark is, shame on them for not doing further tests.
 
singularity said:
I always thought the burn/abrasion on the side of her face was a cigarette/cigar burn. Once reading the full transcripts and seeing the questions about the cigar boxes in the cellar, John playing dumb, and Patsy trying to distance them from the cigars by claiming they never smoked made me even more suspicious. They would only ask such questions if the cigars actually meant something. If they truly don't know what that mark is, shame on them for not doing further tests.
Click to expand...

:cow: Teams of experts examined and experiments were conducted to grab a match of the abrasions on JonBenet's face [back, et al]. Kolar claims the marks may have been made by jabbing the toy train rail with a missing middle pin. Missing middle pins are not atypical for that particular rail part. I will go on record as believing the marks to be stun gun of some mild type. There's a photo of JonBenet wearing the red and white Little House on the Prairie dress where her legs show twin 'stun gun' marks. That is not a coincidence. It's a clue. Either way, toy rail or stun gun - a weapon was used in an abusive manner. This child was brutalized before death. Even Burke stated that he was shocked by the electric fence while at the Party on the 25th.

Cigars were purchased for Patsy's 40th bday party held, in Nov 1996, at the prestigious hotel in Denver known for sexual promiscuity. Those birthday cigars were lit thus enjoyed and smoked by the revelers and party goers including PR. Perhaps the rest of those party cigars were left innocuously in the box in the Rs wine cellar in lieu of having a cigar humidor. The cigar box was on a chair in the WC.

FW bent down and picked up the duct tape to examine it. The duct tape was moved after placement by the kidnapper on JBs mouth when first removed by JR in the WC then the tape is moved again by FW who dropped it after revisiting the WC or CS. The strip of duct tape had a beaver hair on it along with + - 420 other fibers.

The Rs had opp to purchase a top shelf stun gun of highest grade and model whether when shopping in FL or Amsterdam. This was quite the dysfunctional family financed by gov't contracts. They were not All-American as they portrayed themselves. Their home and children were neglected and abused. JRs CEO of a billion $ sales corp. w/ a rather large cottage in Charlevoix, MI and a jet to fly them to their homes and other places is a Fat Cat's Life.

They had no intention whatsoever for all of those JonBenet competitive pageant videos being made public, unless it was premed. Those videos were worth some good money then, in 1996-7. JBs videos were possibly sold on the www. before we saw them. I'm outnumbered in feeling that international marketing videos of JBR was possible. Sex moved the market. AG was the money maker.

There could have been a filming that Christmas night that went awry. It may be the reason no footage of Christmas morning is available. JB was not cooperative in the filming nude and was stunned. The Rs didn't mean for it, the head bash, to happen. It went too far. The abuser went too far this time. But it was too late. It could not be fixed for Patsy. She failed to protect her child by choosing to expose her sexuality instead.

If this was an accident, then, why jump to a fantastical sexual assault encounter with a garrote strangulation + kidnap RN bs solution as a defense to be stuck with forever? GMAB

It was a brutal sexual assault upon JonBenet that occurred while she was naked and alive and held in bindings. Her bedding fibers are not found in the basement. She was on the blue duvet at some point in the night, after leaving the Ws, during a game that went wrong.

I don't know who killed JBR but her parents should've been imprisoned at that time for allowing it to happen to their daughter, the selfish partners, according to the GJTB. JBs parents refused the exhumation for more study on the marks. Let her be. JR.
 
singularity said:
I always thought the burn/abrasion on the side of her face was a cigarette/cigar burn. Once reading the full transcripts and seeing the questions about the cigar boxes in the cellar, John playing dumb, and Patsy trying to distance them from the cigars by claiming they never smoked made me even more suspicious. They would only ask such questions if the cigars actually meant something. If they truly don't know what that mark is, shame on them for not doing further tests.
Click to expand...

yep, always wondered about that too
plus I am not convinced that the marks on her face and the ones on her backs were caused by the same object
to me at least the ones on her face are not the same size, one is bigger than the other??
 
ANYWAY, even IF a stun gun was used, how exactly does this prove the existence of an intruder?
what, kids are always tempted to play with knives, guns, stuff they are not allowed to touch....why wouldn\t a stun gun be tempting?
it\s not impossible that an adult family member used it to silence her either

so....
 
BlueCrab said:
UKGuy,

The stun gun injuries on JonBenet are not hunches. They are evidence. The injuries have been examined, measured, and photographed. Most experts agree they are stun gun injuries. The photos are public information for all to see and comment upon for themselves.

If you have a credible theory the injuries are something other than stun gun injuries then please advance the theory and we'll discuss it. In the meantime we should consider the injuries to be what the coroner, the experts, the measurements, etc., seem to clearly tell us they are -- stun gun injuries.

BlueCrab
Click to expand...

There's Kolar's train track theory which seems credible to me.
 
A good rule of thumb is that if Team Ramsey claims something, the opposite is true.

In other words, no stun gun was used.

The head blow came first.

And there WAS prior sexual abuse.
 
I'll never forget seeing Lou Smit on "The Today Show" when he originally presented the stun gun theory. He had a photo that showed a thin blue line (no pun intended) on JonBenet's skin running between the two marks he said were caused by a stun gun. He said (or words to this effect) that the blue line was caused by the blue charge that passed between the rods on the stun gun. It looked more like a part of her vascular system to me.
 
expat79 said:
A good rule of thumb is that if Team Ramsey claims something, the opposite is true.

In other words, no stun gun was used.

The head blow came first.

And there WAS prior sexual abuse.
Click to expand...

Yes, that is a great way to swing when on the fence about something.
 
It was entirely too obvious after the CBS demonstration that stun guns do NOT leave those kind of marks. It was also too obvious that the train track is an exact fit to the abrasion in measurement and shape.
 
TeaTime said:
It was entirely too obvious after the CBS demonstration that stun guns do NOT leave those kind of marks. It was also too obvious that the train track is an exact fit to the abrasion in measurement and shape.
Click to expand...

So in your theory, Burke smashes Jonbenet in the head with a flashlight while eating pineapple or playing with toys. And then he either goes by himself to his room or the basement to get some train tracks OR he hauls her lifeless body up the stairs to his room or down the stairs to the basement so he can prod and poke her with train tracks. Am I getting it right?
 
mauidreemn said:
So in your theory, Burke smashes Jonbenet in the head with a flashlight while eating pineapple or playing with toys. And then he either goes by himself to his room or the basement to get some train tracks OR he hauls her lifeless body up the stairs to his room or down the stairs to the basement so he can prod and poke her with train tracks. Am I getting it right?
Click to expand...

I'm going with hauls her down the basement, grabbing her under her arms, did some stuff leading up to the garrote, this took a bit of time, and the poking with the trains tracks. I think this is pretty much what Kolar was implying in his book with some additional information he gave on Tricia's program.
 
This seems like a good spot. I just saw some of tonight's HLN special. I had hopes when I saw Ron Walker and Stephen Pitt, but take it from me: this one's not worth anyone's time. They're not just ignorant of the facts, they're telling outright LIES.

Which brings me to this thread. The stun gun was Lou Smit's baby. And what I just don't get after all this time is why Smit is treated like some kind of hero in this case. Because he is not. Even people who don't agree with him, like Jim Clemente and Co. seem to regard him as a good guy, just misguided. And after a while, he was anything but. Tricia, cynic, and a lot of the other veterans will know what I'm talking about. I don't doubt that he may have been a very good guy once, but his actions in this case were not only unprofessional in the extreme, they crossed the line into downright illegal.

The stun gun is exhibit A. He just whipped it up out of thin air, AGAINST the pathologists. I understand that Smit was from another era of police work. And for whatever it's worth, I've gone on record as saying that no amount of forensic technology will ever replace the old techniques of running down leads and talking to suspects. I understand that sometimes all a policeman has is a hunch, and you follow up that hunch. But you don't keep banging your head against a wall, and that's what he did. He disregarded the coroner and the other pathologists until he found one who would agree with him. I can see a defense lawyer doing that, but not a COP. You have to give up after a while.

And as bad as that was, this man STOLE police evidence! And blackmailed (no other word for it) the DA into dropping the complaint. He SHOULD have gone to jail! Instead, he gets Michael Tracey and David Mills to cook up a story about the police and Mike Kane trying to "destroy evidence." And just like Daniel Ellsberg with the Pentagon Papers, a heel becomes a hero.

God forgive me for saying this, but I'm not sorry he's dead. He never should have been brought onto this case to begin with. And failing that, he should have been yanked off of it the minute he became prayer pals with the Ramseys. May God have mercy on his soul.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Fairfield County Jane Doe (1993)?

Members online

... and 131 more.
Total: 437 (members: 132, guests: 305)

Online statistics

Members online
132
Guests online
305
Total visitors
437
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
609,474
Messages
18,254,663
Members
234,662
Latest member
LikeCandy
Back
Top