John Ramsey's Role

[DeeDee249]

madeleine,
I take the view she was already dying. I also think Coroner Myer's Autopsy Report's conclusion is deliberately ambiguous.

That leaves room for another interpretation, it is the sequence that matters, an issue Coroner Meyer did not dwell upon.

I think Coroner Meyer had a good idea what killed JonBenet and how, he just did not itemize it in the AR, like any good ME, he was keeping his cards close to his chest.

.

Mayer had said at one point that he was expecting to be called as a witness if this case came to trial and was saving some of his comments and opinions for that.
As far as the "what came first" back-and-forth- I stand with most investigators on the case in feeling that the head bash came first. However, I do understand what Wecht means. There is one possibility that would make his opinion more acceptable to me- and that is the possibility that the garrote had compressed the vagus nerve, causing the heart to stop and causing instant collapse. This would imply (to me) that the garrote was part of a sexual assault and the compression (and subsequent collapse of JB) was unintentional. I still don't understand why the head bash would have been done at that point. It was completely invisible until the autopsy and assed nothing to the staging for that reason. I have a hard time with Wecht's theory. He wasn't present at the autopsy, though he obviously would be able to interpret Mayer's notations on the amount of blood found.

 

[Chrishope]

Mayer had said at one point that he was expecting to be called as a witness if this case came to trial and was saving some of his comments and opinions for that.
As far as the "what came first" back-and-forth- I stand with most investigators on the case in feeling that the head bash came first. However, I do understand what Wecht means. There is one possibility that would make his opinion more acceptable to me- and that is the possibility that the garrote had compressed the vagus nerve, causing the heart to stop and causing instant collapse. This would imply (to me) that the garrote was part of a sexual assault and the compression (and subsequent collapse of JB) was unintentional. I still don't understand why the head bash would have been done at that point.

No, it doesn't seem to serve a purpose at that point.

It was completely invisible until the autopsy and assed nothing to the staging for that reason.

And for that reason I tend to go along with you that it came first. In addition to adding nothing to the staging it added nothing to making sure she was dead if it came after the garrotting.

I have a hard time with Wecht's theory. He wasn't present at the autopsy, though he obviously would be able to interpret Mayer's notations on the amount of blood found.

I have a hard time with it too because it does not appear that the garrotte loosened easily and therefore isn't really a good EA device.

 

[questfortrue]

Mayer had said at one point that he was expecting to be called as a witness if this case came to trial and was saving some of his comments and opinions for that.
As far as the "what came first" back-and-forth- I stand with most investigators on the case in feeling that the head bash came first. However, I do understand what Wecht means. There is one possibility that would make his opinion more acceptable to me- and that is the possibility that the garrote had compressed the vagus nerve, causing the heart to stop and causing instant collapse. This would imply (to me) that the garrote was part of a sexual assault and the compression (and subsequent collapse of JB) was unintentional. I still don't understand why the head bash would have been done at that point. It was completely invisible until the autopsy and assed nothing to the staging for that reason. I have a hard time with Wecht's theory. He wasn't present at the autopsy, though he obviously would be able to interpret Mayer's notations on the amount of blood found.

You and OTG have the most amazing scientific insights, that I'd really appreciate input on Delmar England's discussion of the strangulation and non-functioning use of the garrote. He seems to indicate that the coroner got something wrong: The coroners' report states: "A deep ligature furrow encircles the entire neck." England wasn't there, but believes it to be a contradiction with what he sees in the picture. England also indicates that the ligature was pulled left side over right side of cord, before the knot was fixed. Please give me some input, since, while I'm of sound mind, I'm far from having a sound scientific mind!

http://www.acandyrose.com/05262001delmaranalysis2.htm

 

[madeleine]

so a possibility is that it all happened within seconds (head bash and strangulation)...is it possible that her head was somehow hit against something DURING the strangulation?the floor,a wall,etc?

btw...the Ramseys had a dog,right?did LE ever find a dog leash in the house?
I was following another case >husband strangled wife with dog leash,additional to the ligature mark on her neck there were some abrasions left from that tiny piece of steel ...I was thinking of that rectangular mark on JB's neck....


was thinking of this part of a leash:


free photo upload

 

[Chrishope]

You and OTG have the most amazing scientific insights, that I'd really appreciate input on Delmar England's discussion of the strangulation and non-functioning use of the garrote. He seems to indicate that the coroner got something wrong: The coroners' report states: "A deep ligature furrow encircles the entire neck." England wasn't there, but believes it to be a contradiction with what he sees in the picture. England also indicates that the ligature was pulled left side over right side of cord, before the knot was fixed. Please give me some input, since, while I'm of sound mind, I'm far from having a sound scientific mind!

http://www.acandyrose.com/05262001delmaranalysis2.htm

One thing about this -

[COLOR=#0000000]"Since the garrote scene is obvious staging, this leaves the head trauma as the element that the garrote scene was designed to obscure in terms of importance. This means the head trauma came first and the perpetrator wished to obscure this fact and distance self from it. Since there is no known benefit that an intruder could gain from the staging, there is no motive for an intruder to do this. Indeed, the staging itself is for the purpose of "creating" an intruder.[/COLOR]"

The statement makes sense, but it's inconsistent with allowing the body to be found in the house. Once the police are called, and the body is found, there will be an autopsy, and the head injury will be discovered. Nothing is obscured at autopsy.

 

[midwest mama]

And there's still some with a "bead" on JR's participation. Here's a theory from a notable prosecutor - Wendy Murphy - which I hadn't heard before.

http://www.examiner.com/article/bos...suspect-new-investigation?cid=taboola_inbound

Thoughts. . .?

Thanks for this. Surprised to learn about Klonopin (Patsy had used) and Ativan not be detectable in drug screenings. Would the coroner have used anything other than a standard drug screen to check for drugs? We know his report showed JB was drug free, but wouldn't that be the expected result if a standard test was used, and if either of those two drugs were ingested, those drugs don't show up in a standard test?

Klonopin is also notorious for causing drooling, and it brings to mind the streaks of fluid which were seen on JB's lower face.

 

[Chrishope]

And there's still some with a "bead" on JR's participation. Here's a theory from a notable prosecutor - Wendy Murphy - which I hadn't heard before.

http://www.examiner.com/article/bos...suspect-new-investigation?cid=taboola_inbound

Thoughts. . .?

Missed this one. Thanks.

One thing though - we know that she was alive when garrotted. The petechiae tell us that. So did the drugs make her appear to be dead?

 

[otg]

You and OTG have the most amazing scientific insights, that I'd really appreciate input on Delmar England's discussion of the strangulation and non-functioning use of the garrote. He seems to indicate that the coroner got something wrong: The coroners' report states: "A deep ligature furrow encircles the entire neck." England wasn't there, but believes it to be a contradiction with what he sees in the picture. England also indicates that the ligature was pulled left side over right side of cord, before the knot was fixed. Please give me some input, since, while I'm of sound mind, I'm far from having a sound scientific mind!

http://www.acandyrose.com/05262001delmaranalysis2.htm

From the qualifications he states he has (which I have no reason to doubt or question), Delmar England was more qualified to analyze what he saw in the leaked photos than I am to offer an opposing or dissenting view. And in fact, there is not much I would disagree with in what he wrote. The most important point that I feel he makes is about the paradox found in the so-called garrote. The nature of its construction contradicts the very function of its implied purpose. He goes into great detail about the lack of functionality of it, which is something I’ve tried to point out whenever I’ve written about it. I wish he had still been around when I got active in the forums again a few years ago, but my understanding is that he died a few years after he had written this.

The other thing he draws attention to is the dilemma of JR’s calling the ligature “professional”, “intricate”, and “specialized”. (If JR is qualified to make that assessment, how then does he disqualify himself as being capable of making this “specialized garrote”?)

One other thing I’ll comment on (unless you have other specific questions) is your asking about Delmar’s disagreement with the coroner’s description of the furrow. I don’t think he was disagreeing with what Meyer said about it (after all, the picture speaks for itself) so much as he was pointing out his belief that it contradicted how a garrote would be used. And what he stated is correct about how pulling on the ligature around her neck would pull away from where the knot is tied, thereby making it not circumferential. But what Delmar didn’t mention is that once the ligature had accomplished its purpose, the pulling wouldn’t continue during the period of time in which the furrow was formed. That is the reason the furrow is circumferential. He also doesn’t address the white line and surrounding petechiae which I feel is evidence of another separate application of the ligature (but I don't know which pictures were available at that time).

 

[Nom de plume]

From the qualifications he states he has (which I have no reason to doubt or question), Delmar England was more qualified to analyze what he saw in the leaked photos than I am to offer an opposing or dissenting view. And in fact, there is not much I would disagree with in what he wrote. The most important point that I feel he makes is about the paradox found in the so-called garrote. The nature of its construction contradicts the very function of its implied purpose. He goes into great detail about the lack of functionality of it, which is something I’ve tried to point out whenever I’ve written about it. I wish he had still been around when I got active in the forums again a few years ago, but my understanding is that he died a few years after he had written this.

The other thing he draws attention to is the dilemma of JR’s calling the ligature “professional”, “intricate”, and “specialized”. (If JR is qualified to make that assessment, how then does he disqualify himself as being capable of making this “specialized garrote”?)

One other thing I’ll comment on (unless you have other specific questions) is your asking about Delmar’s disagreement with the coroner’s description of the furrow. I don’t think he was disagreeing with what Meyer said about it (after all, the picture speaks for itself) so much as he was pointing out his belief that it contradicted how a garrote would be used. And what he stated is correct about how pulling on the ligature around her neck would pull away from where the knot is tied, thereby making it not circumferential. But what Delmar didn’t mention is that once the ligature had accomplished its purpose, the pulling wouldn’t continue during the period of time in which the furrow was formed. That is the reason the furrow is circumferential. He also doesn’t address the white line and surrounding petechiae which I feel is evidence of another separate application of the ligature (but I don't know which pictures were available at that time).

Good point!

 

[Nom de plume]

Thanks for this. Surprised to learn about Klonopin (Patsy had used) and Ativan not be detectable in drug screenings. Would the coroner have used anything other than a standard drug screen to check for drugs? We know his report showed JB was drug free, but wouldn't that be the expected result if a standard test was used, and if either of those two drugs were ingested, those drugs don't show up in a standard test?

Klonopin is also notorious for causing drooling, and it brings to mind the streaks of fluid which were seen on JB's lower face.

They can't be detected, or weren't detected? Is there a specific test for those drugs that wasn't done? I find it hard to believe that there's any drug on the market, especially a sedative, that can't be detected with the right test. Even GHB can be detected within a certain amount of time.

Interesting thought about the drooling.

 

[DeeDee249]

You and OTG have the most amazing scientific insights, that I'd really appreciate input on Delmar England's discussion of the strangulation and non-functioning use of the garrote. He seems to indicate that the coroner got something wrong: The coroners' report states: "A deep ligature furrow encircles the entire neck." England wasn't there, but believes it to be a contradiction with what he sees in the picture. England also indicates that the ligature was pulled left side over right side of cord, before the knot was fixed. Please give me some input, since, while I'm of sound mind, I'm far from having a sound scientific mind!

http://www.acandyrose.com/05262001delmaranalysis2.htm

I went back to look at the crime photos showing JB's neck and the garrote before I read Delmar's analysis. I don't get the impression he felt the coroner was wrong. There IS a deep ligature furrow encircling her entire neck. One of the crime photos shows her head and neck from the back, with the garrote removed and you can clearly see the awful red furrow that goes around her neck. From the front, in the other photos, you can see the white cord and knot, tightly tied but only wrapped once. However, there are other marks on her throat which indicate it had been wrapped around at least twice- once before death (the red marks) and once after death (the white mark). However we have never seen how her head/neck looked in situ or before she was placed on the autopsy table and manipulated for the autopsy. By that time, rigor mortis was in decline, and the coroner himself can break rigor as he performs the autopsy. What Delmar seems to be saying is that the garrote does not seem to function as a true garrote- he is correct if that is what he means. Garrotes do not have knots. They function by holding an end in each hand and pulling in opposite directions as it winds around the throat. A knot defeats the purpose and interferes with the mechanical process of the garrote's function. It was Smit who pushed the "erotic asphyxiation" aspect because there was NO way people would associate that with a family member. Nothing about the cord or the way it was applied indicates any kind of sexual activity to me.
Erotic asphyxiation (whether performed on some one else or on one's self -called AUTO-erotic asphyxiation) is not meant to kill- it is meant to restrict blood flow to the brain and cause the victim to lose consciousness at the moment of orgasm. It is said to increase the feeling. Sometimes it backfires- and the person dies. In the case of a small child who would not actually feel an orgasm, the closing of the eyes, moaning, gasping, etc would LOOK like an orgasm to the person doing the strangling and be stimulating for that reason. In an erotic asphyxiation, the cord is usually compressed and released multiple times. This does not mean there was no sexual assault. There was. But it wasn't combined with the strangulation, IMO.
In JB's case, the cord was knotted tightly and then wound around her throat until she died. The almost perfect circumferential pattern made by the cord, combined with the lack of evidence her lips/tongue struggled against the tape indicate she was unconscious (but still alive) when she was strangled. My feeling is that the head bash had already knocked her out.

 

[Chrishope]

I went back to look at the crime photos showing JB's neck and the garrote before I read Delmar's analysis. I don't get the impression he felt the coroner was wrong. There IS a deep ligature furrow encircling her entire neck. One of the crime photos shows her head and neck from the back, with the garrote removed and you can clearly see the awful red furrow that goes around her neck. From the front, in the other photos, you can see the white cord and knot, tightly tied but only wrapped once. However, there are other marks on her throat which indicate it had been wrapped around at least twice- once before death (the red marks) and once after death (the white mark). However we have never seen how her head/neck looked in situ or before she was placed on the autopsy table and manipulated for the autopsy. By that time, rigor mortis was in decline, and the coroner himself can break rigor as he performs the autopsy. What Delmar seems to be saying is that the garrote does not seem to function as a true garrote- he is correct if that is what he means. Garrotes do not have knots. They function by holding an end in each hand and pulling in opposite directions as it winds around the throat. A knot defeats the purpose and interferes with the mechanical process of the garrote's function. It was Smit who pushed the "erotic asphyxiation" aspect because there was NO way people would associate that with a family member. Nothing about the cord or the way it was applied indicates any kind of sexual activity to me.
Erotic asphyxiation (whether performed on some one else or on one's self -called AUTO-erotic asphyxiation) is not meant to kill- it is meant to restrict blood flow to the brain and cause the victim to lose consciousness at the moment of orgasm. It is said to increase the feeling. Sometimes it backfires- and the person dies. In the case of a small child who would not actually feel an orgasm, the closing of the eyes, moaning, gasping, etc would LOOK like an orgasm to the person doing the strangling and be stimulating for that reason. In an erotic asphyxiation, the cord is usually compressed and released multiple times. This does not mean there was no sexual assault. There was. But it wasn't combined with the strangulation, IMO.
In JB's case, the cord was knotted tightly and then wound around her throat until she died. The almost perfect circumferential pattern made by the cord, combined with the lack of evidence her lips/tongue struggled against the tape indicate she was unconscious (but still alive) when she was strangled. My feeling is that the head bash had already knocked her out.

I agree that it was not an EA device. The knot kept it from being easily loosened, therefore it couldn't operate for that purpose, at least not more than once. As you say, it would ordinarily be tightened and loosened repeatedly.

It's not technically true that a garrotte can't have a knot. http://www.donrearic.com/thegarrotte.html It's not really an important point. The main thing is the knot on the cord around JB's neck didn't loosen easily, therefore it's not a suitable EA device.

Was the tape on her mouth at that time?

 

[midwest mama]

I went back to look at the crime photos showing JB's neck and the garrote before I read Delmar's analysis. I don't get the impression he felt the coroner was wrong. (snipped)....... What Delmar seems to be saying is that the garrote does not seem to function as a true garrote- he is correct if that is what he means. Garrotes do not have knots. They function by holding an end in each hand and pulling in opposite directions as it winds around the throat. A knot defeats the purpose and interferes with the mechanical process of the garrote's function. It was Smit who pushed the "erotic asphyxiation" aspect because there was NO way people would associate that with a family member. Nothing about the cord or the way it was applied indicates any kind of sexual activity to me.
Erotic asphyxiation (whether performed on some one else or on one's self -called AUTO-erotic asphyxiation) is not meant to kill- it is meant to restrict blood flow to the brain and cause the victim to lose consciousness at the moment of orgasm. (snipped)................. In an erotic asphyxiation, the cord is usually compressed and released multiple times. This does not mean there was no sexual assault. There was. But it wasn't combined with the strangulation, IMO.
In JB's case, the cord was knotted tightly and then wound around her throat until she died. The almost perfect circumferential pattern made by the cord, combined with the lack of evidence her lips/tongue struggled against the tape indicate she was unconscious (but still alive) when she was strangled. My feeling is that the head bash had already knocked her out.

IMO, the head bash should be considered coming first, in spite of a could of opinions that it followed the strangulation. Though I also want to think that from the coroner's information, we should look more at the bash as happening closer to the time of the strangulation, rather than allowing for that outside range of 90 minutes that Rourke gives.

If JB lost urine at the time of death, and it was predominantly in the front of her lj's and large size 12 Bloomies with the small dot of blood in them, then would it follow that she was also on the floor next to the paint tray where the urine was later detected in the carpet? With just a small dot of blood, should we think the head bash had already happened before the molestation? IOW, head bash, vaginal jab (while she was unconscious and would not rally enough to scream), then strangled? Is it possible that one followed the other in a somewhat short period of time?

If JB had been fed (laced into the pineapple) Klonopin or Ativan purposefully to make her compliant enough to be physically carried to the basement, then quickly bashed, molested and strangled, then it would be a clear case of premeditation. Why would the perpetrator want to do this?

Is is possible she was taken to the basement to be posed for kiddie *advertiser censored* photos, without being able to resist, but managed to muster a scream upon rallying enough during the process? If she had been wearing the ligature as a "prop" for the photos, and her hands were tied up over her head, would it explain there being a ligature in place, but it later used for final strangulation?

 

[madeleine]

we always assumed that she was already dead when she was wiped off and redressed...what if it's not so?
scenario:someone was playing games (sexual) and went too far this time (she bled)...and maybe this time JB protested and wanted to go tell...and she needed to be silenced...maybe the perpetrator got panicked when he saw her bleeding,it was something unexpected...and got panicked...and maybe that's why the large panties were picked (were already at hand down in the basement)...it's not like the abuser would have said,ok honey,let's go upstairs,we need to look in your drawer for a clean pair of pants ,be quiet and follow me....

 

[Chrishope]

I went back to look at the crime photos showing JB's neck and the garrote before I read Delmar's analysis. I don't get the impression he felt the coroner was wrong. There IS a deep ligature furrow encircling her entire neck. One of the crime photos shows her head and neck from the back, with the garrote removed and you can clearly see the awful red furrow that goes around her neck. From the front, in the other photos, you can see the white cord and knot, tightly tied but only wrapped once. However, there are other marks on her throat which indicate it had been wrapped around at least twice- once before death (the red marks) and once after death (the white mark). However we have never seen how her head/neck looked in situ or before she was placed on the autopsy table and manipulated for the autopsy. By that time, rigor mortis was in decline, and the coroner himself can break rigor as he performs the autopsy. What Delmar seems to be saying is that the garrote does not seem to function as a true garrote- he is correct if that is what he means. Garrotes do not have knots. They function by holding an end in each hand and pulling in opposite directions as it winds around the throat. A knot defeats the purpose and interferes with the mechanical process of the garrote's function. It was Smit who pushed the "erotic asphyxiation" aspect because there was NO way people would associate that with a family member. Nothing about the cord or the way it was applied indicates any kind of sexual activity to me.
Erotic asphyxiation (whether performed on some one else or on one's self -called AUTO-erotic asphyxiation) is not meant to kill- it is meant to restrict blood flow to the brain and cause the victim to lose consciousness at the moment of orgasm. It is said to increase the feeling. Sometimes it backfires- and the person dies. In the case of a small child who would not actually feel an orgasm, the closing of the eyes, moaning, gasping, etc would LOOK like an orgasm to the person doing the strangling and be stimulating for that reason. In an erotic asphyxiation, the cord is usually compressed and released multiple times. This does not mean there was no sexual assault. There was. But it wasn't combined with the strangulation, IMO.
In JB's case, the cord was knotted tightly and then wound around her throat until she died. The almost perfect circumferential pattern made by the cord, combined with the lack of evidence her lips/tongue struggled against the tape indicate she was unconscious (but still alive) when she was strangled. My feeling is that the head bash had already knocked her out.

Not sure about "wound around". That is, I'm not sure what you mean. If you mean a second turn was put around her neck, I don't think so. (This is a separate issue from your comment that it was placed once before death, once after) The "garrotte" was basically a noose. A simple noose with a single knot. It worked by pulling tight. There would be no need for a second turn.

The knot apparently prevented the noose from loosening, even w/o any tension on the line. That's why it's still tight in the autopsy photos.

Because there is no upward angle at the back we can rule out a normal hanging situation.

Some have speculated on unusual hanging situations, but it appears to me the knot would not tighten deep into the furrow w/o some pressure against it. IOWs for the furrow to be deep at the back of the neck, where the knot is, this was a two handed operation.

 

[Chrishope]

http://www.acandyrose.com/05262001delmaranalysis2.htm

[COLOR=#0000000][COLOR=#0000000]"[/COLOR]As it turns out, I do have the background of experience and knowledge that enables me to evaluate this part of the crime scene by definitive criteria. Its not that I go around garroting individuals, but do know the physics involved as well as being long schooled in ropes, knots, handles and that sort of thing. Indeed, these things have been so much a part of my life that evaluation of the garrote scene is almost by mental reflex taking less than a minute. The read is easy as well as loud and clear."

OK,[COLOR=#0000000] I accept his self-r[COLOR=#0000000]e[COLOR=#0000000]ported expertise. I have no reason to doubt him.

[COLOR=#0000000]I am not an expert, but do have a total of [COLOR=#0000000]8[/COLOR] years experience in the [COLOR=#0000000]Navy, and[COLOR=#0000000] Coast Guard.[/COLOR] I think I have enough knowledge to reconstru[COLOR=#0000000]ct the [COLOR=#0000000]knot a[COLOR=#0000000]c[COLOR=#0000000]cording to Mr. England's instructions. [/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR]
[COLOR=#0000000][sniped[COLOR=#0000000]][/COLOR][/COLOR]

"First, let's look at the cord around the neck and the knot. Having only a single-angle picture to look at, I can't say with certainty exactly how the knot was formed, so this is a little iffy, but not much. From what I do see and don't see, I think my conclusions are fundamentally correct."

[COLOR=#0000000]OK[/COLOR]

"One end of a rather long cord is passed under the throat and around the neck. This end is then passed over and under the other part of the cord after it encircles the neck. It is then passed over and under itself, then over once more and through the space created by the first over and under; then pulled tight to close the knot and leave a small compressed slip loop created by the action."

[COLOR=#0000000]I followed this very closely, doin[COLOR=#0000000]g it several times, [/COLOR]using a chair arm in place of the throat. [/COLOR]

"Aside from the fact that this version of a garrote is inherently grossly inefficient compared to some other versions, the first structural inefficiency to notice is the knot arrangement that compresses against the cord. This causes friction reducing the free travel of the cord to reduce the loop for the purpose of strangulation. This is especially true of a small cord easily compressed, and difficult to release. (This is hardly suitable to the perverted sexual activity, not explained, but apparently imagined by Smit.)"

[COLOR=#0000000]Agreed, it does not function well for EA purposes if it is suppose[COLOR=#0000000]d to release easily. [/COLOR][/COLOR]


"The coroners' report states: "A deep ligature furrow encircles the entire neck." This is in contradiction with what I see in the picture. This encircling furrow cannot happen with the arrangement shown in the picture. "

[COLOR=#0000000]Quite the opposite. Mr[COLOR=#0000000]. England [COLOR=#0000000]has already informed us that the[COLOR=#0000000] knot does[COLOR=#0000000]n't release [COLOR=#0000000]easily, and in testing it, I found that it coul[COLOR=#0000000]d be pulled with one hand while the other hand was over the knot and it would tighten up over a hard chair arm. I [COLOR=#0000000]tested it on my wri[COLOR=#0000000]st tying one end to a clea[COLOR=#0000000]t and pulling my wrist[COLOR=#0000000] with my[COLOR=#0000000] free hand over the knot. On soft tissue this made a cir[COLOR=#0000000]cumferential furrow. Because I pulled snug, r[COLOR=#0000000]ather th[COLOR=#0000000]an tight, it was no[COLOR=#0000000]where near as deeep as the furrow on JB's neck. This part of my test pr[COLOR=#0000000]o[COLOR=#0000000]ved a bit foolish, as [COLOR=#0000000]I th[COLOR=#0000000]en had to untie the knot with one hand. Luckily I managed to get it off[COLOR=#0000000]. [/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR]

"Although it is possible to strangle someone with this apparatus, it will leave tell tell marks far different from those described by the coroner.[COLOR=#0000000]" ...

[/COLOR][COLOR=#0000000][COLOR=#0000000]Ac[COLOR=#0000000]tually it leaves exactly the marks described. [/COLOR][/COLOR]
[/COLOR][COLOR=#0000000]
[/COLOR]..."Pulling on the long cord leading away from the neck will apply the heaviest pressure farthest away from the point of the pull, to the front of the throat." ...

[COLOR=#0000000]Agreed. [/COLOR][COLOR=#0000000]

..." [/COLOR]This force cannot apply circumference pressure to cause the encircling ligature furrow described by the coroner. Even if the slip feature is held and pushed as the cord is pulled, it will still tend to lift away with the degrees of pressure graduated from front to back with the least at the point of the knot."

[COLOR=#0000000][COLOR=#0000000]No. Just the opposite. [COLOR=#0000000]If the slip knot is h[COLOR=#0000000]el[COLOR=#0000000]d and pushed a[COLOR=#0000000]s the other end is pulled, it constricts, and does not [COLOR=#0000000]release at all. One would have to push the knot hard to make a deep f[COLOR=#0000000]urrow, but once in place, it holds fast and would make exactly th[COLOR=#0000000]e ma[COLOR=#0000000]r[COLOR=#0000000]ks we see in the autopsy photos. [/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR]

"(By all means, set up something of reasonable equivalence and test for yourself.)"

Being off from work today, I did just exactly that, and found it could make a deep ligature furrow, and hold it indefinitely.

I was using 1/4" nylon line.


I agree with Mr. England that the "garrotte" was not twisted with a stick. I also agree that the somewhat decorative knot that holds the paintbrush/handle is unnecessary and less efficient than a simple slip knot would be. I suspect this was intended to make it look "intricate".

[COLOR=#0000000]"If after the cord was put around the neck, dividing the cord into right and left parts, one part in each hand, the two parts brought across each other and pulled hard while pressing downward on the neck would apply a circumference pressure to account for the encircling ligature furrow.[COLOR=#0000000]"

[/COLOR][COLOR=#0000000][COLOR=#0000000]Yes i[COLOR=#0000000]t would, but the "garrotte" as we see it in the phot[COLOR=#0000000]os also accounts for it. [/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][COLOR=#0000000]


[/COLOR]"The knot was made AFTER the pressure was applied[COLOR=#0000000]and after the ligature furrow created.[/COLOR][COLOR=#0000000][COLOR=#0000000]

[/COLOR][COLOR=#0000000][COLOR=#0000000]Not necessarily. This is possible, but the "garrotte" as we see it in the photos would also do this. [/COLOR][/COLOR][COLOR=#0000000]

"[/COLOR]The cord was held tightly and close as the knot was made; which is why and how hair got entangled in the knot.[/COLOR]"

Could be that it was made after putting it around the neck, but it is not at all necessary that it be done this way to form the ligature furrow. It does help explain the hair in the knot.


By all means, try this at home, following Mr. England's instructions. Be careful. Don't use it on your neck (-:

(Update, if you try it, put the "garrotte" around the middle of your forearm. Pulling snug, then pulling it off, you should see, just for a few moments, a white circle around your arm. The white mark will be there, even under the knot. If you use natural fiber rope, be very careful, as it is much less slippery than nylon and will be very hard to loosen up)

The reason I questioned this analysis in the first place is because it does not function well as an EA device, given that it does not loosen easily. Since it doesn't loosen easily, I wondered why it couldn't make the deep ligature furrow in Mr. England's estimation. My own tests show that it could make the ligature furrow. Once it's tightened, it stays that way by itself.

I would agree that maybe, just exactly under the knot, there might be less pressure, and therefore the furrow would not be as deep, but the furrow will still be there, and nearly as deep as the rest of the furrow.

I must also add that I did not use the exact line that the killer used, so my test really only shows that the furrow could be made, with that knot, and the type of line I used. It might be that the line actually used is slipperier and the know will not hold. In that case, it serves moderately well as an EA device.

 

[midwest mama]

They can't be detected, or weren't detected? Is there a specific test for those drugs that wasn't done? I find it hard to believe that there's any drug on the market, especially a sedative, that can't be detected with the right test. Even GHB can be detected within a certain amount of time.

Interesting thought about the drooling.

In checking the autopsy report, it said the toxicology came from a blood test. It reported the bladder was empty of urine, so I assume that is why there was no reference to also using urine for testing. The autopsy report is dated as 12/27/96, signed off by Meyer.

Here are some things from a couple of website reports that I find interesting with regard as to the possibility of Klonopin not being detected by Meyer's blood toxicology test:
------------------------------------------------------------
(for info only):Common street names of benzodiazepines include “Benzos” and
“Downers”. The five most encountered benzodiazepines on the illicit
market are alprazolam (Xanax®), lorazepam (Ativan®), clonazepam (Klonopin®), diazepam (Valium®), and temazepam (Restori®). The method of abuse is typically oral or snorted in crushed form. The DEA notes a particularly high rate of abuse among heroin and cocaine abusers.In 2009, benzodiazepines ranked only second (312,931) behind narcotic pain relievers (342,983) in the number of emergency
department visits involving nonmedical use of pharmaceuticals
(DAWN). In 2010, the American Association of Poison Control Centers
reported a total of 81,427 benzodiazepine single-substance exposures.
In the United States, benzodiazepines are schedule IV controlled drugs
of the Controlled Substance Act.
-----------------------------------------------------
Benzodiazepines are sometimes used for criminal purposes; they serve to incapacitate a victim in cases of drug assisted rape or robbery.[145]
-----------------------------------------------------
The use of a drug to modify a person’s behavior for criminal gain is not a recent phenomenon. However, the recent increase in reports of drug-facilitated crimes (sexual assault, robbery) has caused alarm in the general public. The drugs involved can be pharmaceuticals, such as benzodiazepines (flunitrazepam, lorazepam, etc.), hypnotics (zopiclone, zolpidem), sedatives (neuroleptics, some anti-H1) or anaesthetics (γ-hydroxybutyrate, ketamine), drugs of abuse, such as cannabis, ecstasy or LSD, or more often ethanol. To perform successful toxicological examinations, the analyst must follow some important rules: (1) obtain as soon as possible the corresponding biological specimens (blood and urine); (2) collect hair about 1 month after the alleged event; (3) use sophisticated analytical techniques (gas or liquid chromatography coupled to tandem mass spectrometry, MS/MS, headspace gas chromatography); and (4) take care in the interpretation of the findings. Drugs used to facilitate sexual assaults can be difficult to detect (active products at low doses, chemical instability), possess amnesic properties and can be rapidly cleared from the body (short half-life). In these situations, blood or even urine can be of low interest. This is the reason why some laboratories have developed an original approach based on hair testing.
----------------------------------------------------------
Who interprets forensic toxicology tests, and how? Toxicologists, chemists, and pathologists all need to be involved to correctly interpret results.

''The first thing we would do is a basic screen for drugs in the urine and in the blood," Magnani says. The search would be for drugs such as opiates, amphetamines, marijuana, alcohol, and barbiturates, she says. (5 classes underlined)

The basic toxicology screen typically uses an immunoassay, Robin says. This type of test looks for drugs in the blood using specific antibodies that detect various classes of drugs.

Getting a complete and accurate forensic toxicology test result can be a lengthy process for a variety of reasons, according to the College of American Pathologists and experts interviewed by WebMD.

There may be a lot of specimens that need to be tested, which means more testing time. And as an investigation proceeds, information about the possibility of another drug being involved may surface, so even more testing may be needed.

"Four to six weeks is pretty standard," Magnani says of the time line for forensic toxicology testing.
---------------------------------------------------------------------

Finally, this from a website devoted to forums discussing actual results:

It appears that most benzo's, except clonazepam come back +benzo's on an initial screen. I think you are right about the metabolite of clonazepam not being picked up on the general benzodiazepine screen.

---------------------------------------------------
From: https://www.labcorp.com
Seven Drug Class Panel Screen C/O Confirm C/O Method
Amphetamines 50 ng/mL IA, GC/MS
* Amphetamine 20 ng/mL
* Methamphetamine 20 ng/mL

Barbiturates 100 ng/mL IA, GC/MS
* Amobarbital 100 ng/mL
* Butalbital 100 ng/mL
* Pentobarbital 100 ng/mL
* Phenobarbital 1000 ng/mL
* Secobarbital 100 ng/mL

Benzodiazepines 50 ng/mL IA, GC/MS
* Desalkylflurazepam 20 ng/mL
* Diazepam 20 ng/mL
* Flurazepam 20 ng/mL
* Nordiazepam 20 ng/mL
* Oxazepam 20 ng/mL
* Temazepam 20 ng/mL

Cannabinoids 10 ng/mL IA, GC/MS
* THC 1 ng/mL
* Carboxy THC 5 ng/mL

Cocaine 20 ng/mL IA, GC/MS
* Cocaine 10 ng/mL
* Benzoylecgonine 10 ng/mL

Opiates 50 ng/mL IA, GC/MS
* Codeine 20 ng/mL
* Morphine 20 ng/mL

Phencyclidine 2.5 ng/mL 2.5 ng/mL IA, GC/MS

From what I can tell from the info I read, it takes at least a 7 panel screen to get to the class of drugs that clonazepam would fall under, and then the other types of benzo's show, but not clonazepam.

After reading through this information, it appears that Meyer may have used the standard 5 panel screen, which DOES NOT detect for benzo's. If he used a 7 panel, it would not show clonazepam. And most confusing is why he signed off on conclusive findings on the same day of the autopsy that he found a blood toxicology negative. According to information about forensic screening when there's been a crime, it takes several weeks to get clear results.

There would need to be a period of time to pass before hair could be used to provide answers. Hair is the ultimate test for conclusive testing, but it cannot be done from hair collected until much later after the crime. (Because of the time the chemicals need to pass into the hair, I understand). So, yes, not exhuming the body would shut down any possibility of getting the most accurate, conclusive results for that class of drugs.

OK you scientific whizzes - help me out here. Am I interpreting that Klonopin might have slipped through Meyer's forensic test cracks?

 

[midwest mama]

we always assumed that she was already dead when she was wiped off and redressed...what if it's not so?
scenario:someone was playing games (sexual) and went too far this time (she bled)...and maybe this time JB protested and wanted to go tell...and she needed to be silenced...maybe the perpetrator got panicked when he saw her bleeding,it was something unexpected...and got panicked...and maybe that's why the large panties were picked (were already at hand down in the basement)...it's not like the abuser would have said,ok honey,let's go upstairs,we need to look in your drawer for a clean pair of pants ,be quiet and follow me....

Yes, and this would be in keeping with the bottoms of her feet having dust debris on them.

If she had been changed between the molestation and death, and she was capable of compliance, we can envision the size 12's and the lj's going on before anything else that would have allowed her to have her feet on the floor prior to the bash and strangulation.

 

[midwest mama]

http://www.acandyrose.com/05262001delmaranalysis2.htm

[COLOR=#0000000][COLOR=#0000000]"[/COLOR]As it turns out, I do have the background of experience and knowledge that enables me to evaluate this part of the crime scene by definitive criteria. Its not that I go around garroting individuals, but do know the physics involved as well as being long schooled in ropes, knots, handles and that sort of thing. Indeed, these things have been so much a part of my life that evaluation of the garrote scene is almost by mental reflex taking less than a minute. The read is easy as well as loud and clear."

OK,[COLOR=#0000000] I accept his self-r[COLOR=#0000000]e[COLOR=#0000000]ported expertise. I have no reason to doubt him.

[COLOR=#0000000]I am not an expert, but do have a total of [COLOR=#0000000]8[/COLOR] years experience in the [COLOR=#0000000]Navy, and[COLOR=#0000000] Coast Guard.[/COLOR] I think I have enough knowledge to reconstru[COLOR=#0000000]ct the [COLOR=#0000000]knot a[COLOR=#0000000]c[COLOR=#0000000]cording to Mr. England's instructions. [/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR]
[COLOR=#0000000][sniped[COLOR=#0000000]][/COLOR][/COLOR]

"First, let's look at the cord around the neck and the knot. Having only a single-angle picture to look at, I can't say with certainty exactly how the knot was formed, so this is a little iffy, but not much. From what I do see and don't see, I think my conclusions are fundamentally correct."

[COLOR=#0000000]OK[/COLOR]

"One end of a rather long cord is passed under the throat and around the neck. This end is then passed over and under the other part of the cord after it encircles the neck. It is then passed over and under itself, then over once more and through the space created by the first over and under; then pulled tight to close the knot and leave a small compressed slip loop created by the action."

[COLOR=#0000000]I followed this very closely, doin[COLOR=#0000000]g it several times, [/COLOR]using a chair arm in place of the throat. [/COLOR]

"Aside from the fact that this version of a garrote is inherently grossly inefficient compared to some other versions, the first structural inefficiency to notice is the knot arrangement that compresses against the cord. This causes friction reducing the free travel of the cord to reduce the loop for the purpose of strangulation. This is especially true of a small cord easily compressed, and difficult to release. (This is hardly suitable to the perverted sexual activity, not explained, but apparently imagined by Smit.)"

[COLOR=#0000000]Agreed, it does not function well for EA purposes if it is suppose[COLOR=#0000000]d to release easily. [/COLOR][/COLOR]


"The coroners' report states: "A deep ligature furrow encircles the entire neck." This is in contradiction with what I see in the picture. This encircling furrow cannot happen with the arrangement shown in the picture. "

[COLOR=#0000000]Quite the opposite. Mr[COLOR=#0000000]. England [COLOR=#0000000]has already informed us that the[COLOR=#0000000] knot does[COLOR=#0000000]n't release [COLOR=#0000000]easily, and in testing it, I found that it coul[COLOR=#0000000]d be pulled with one hand while the other hand was over the knot and it would tighten up over a hard chair arm. I [COLOR=#0000000]tested it on my wri[COLOR=#0000000]st tying one end to a clea[COLOR=#0000000]t and pulling my wrist[COLOR=#0000000] with my[COLOR=#0000000] free hand over the knot. On soft tissue this made a cir[COLOR=#0000000]cumferential furrow. Because I pulled snug, r[COLOR=#0000000]ather th[COLOR=#0000000]an tight, it was no[COLOR=#0000000]where near as deeep as the furrow on JB's neck. This part of my test pr[COLOR=#0000000]o[COLOR=#0000000]ved a bit foolish, as [COLOR=#0000000]I th[COLOR=#0000000]en had to untie the knot with one hand. Luckily I managed to get it off[COLOR=#0000000]. [/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR]

"Although it is possible to strangle someone with this apparatus, it will leave tell tell marks far different from those described by the coroner.[COLOR=#0000000]" ...

[/COLOR][COLOR=#0000000][COLOR=#0000000]Ac[COLOR=#0000000]tually it leaves exactly the marks described. [/COLOR][/COLOR]
[/COLOR][COLOR=#0000000]
[/COLOR]..."Pulling on the long cord leading away from the neck will apply the heaviest pressure farthest away from the point of the pull, to the front of the throat." ...

[COLOR=#0000000]Agreed. [/COLOR][COLOR=#0000000]

..." [/COLOR]This force cannot apply circumference pressure to cause the encircling ligature furrow described by the coroner. Even if the slip feature is held and pushed as the cord is pulled, it will still tend to lift away with the degrees of pressure graduated from front to back with the least at the point of the knot."

[COLOR=#0000000][COLOR=#0000000]No. Just the opposite. [COLOR=#0000000]If the slip knot is h[COLOR=#0000000]el[COLOR=#0000000]d and pushed a[COLOR=#0000000]s the other end is pulled, it constricts, and does not [COLOR=#0000000]release at all. One would have to push the knot hard to make a deep f[COLOR=#0000000]urrow, but once in place, it holds fast and would make exactly th[COLOR=#0000000]e ma[COLOR=#0000000]r[COLOR=#0000000]ks we see in the autopsy photos. [/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR]

"(By all means, set up something of reasonable equivalence and test for yourself.)"

Being off from work today, I did just exactly that, and found it could make a deep ligature furrow, and hold it indefinitely.

I was using 1/4" nylon line.


I agree with Mr. England that the "garrotte" was not twisted with a stick. I also agree that the somewhat decorative knot that holds the paintbrush/handle is unnecessary and less efficient than a simple slip knot would be. I suspect this was intended to make it look "intricate".

[COLOR=#0000000]"If after the cord was put around the neck, dividing the cord into right and left parts, one part in each hand, the two parts brought across each other and pulled hard while pressing downward on the neck would apply a circumference pressure to account for the encircling ligature furrow.[COLOR=#0000000]"

[/COLOR][COLOR=#0000000][COLOR=#0000000]Yes i[COLOR=#0000000]t would, but the "garrotte" as we see it in the phot[COLOR=#0000000]os also accounts for it. [/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][/COLOR][COLOR=#0000000]


[/COLOR]"The knot was made AFTER the pressure was applied[COLOR=#0000000]and after the ligature furrow created.[/COLOR][COLOR=#0000000][COLOR=#0000000]

[/COLOR][COLOR=#0000000][COLOR=#0000000]Not necessarily. This is possible, but the "garrotte" as we see it in the photos would also do this. [/COLOR][/COLOR][COLOR=#0000000]

"[/COLOR]The cord was held tightly and close as the knot was made; which is why and how hair got entangled in the knot.[/COLOR]"

Could be that it was made after putting it around the neck, but it is not at all necessary that it be done this way to form the ligature furrow. It does help explain the hair in the knot.


By all means, try this at home, following Mr. England's instructions. Be careful. Don't use it on your neck (-:

(Update, if you try it, put the "garrotte" around the middle of your forearm. Pulling snug, then pulling it off, you should see, just for a few moments, a white circle around your arm. The white mark will be there, even under the knot. If you use natural fiber rope, be very careful, as it is much less slippery than nylon and will be very hard to loosen up)

The reason I questioned this analysis in the first place is because it does not function well as an EA device, given that it does not loosen easily. Since it doesn't loosen easily, I wondered why it couldn't make the deep ligature furrow in Mr. England's estimation. My own tests show that it could make the ligature furrow. Once it's tightened, it stays that way by itself.

I would agree that maybe, just exactly under the knot, there might be less pressure, and therefore the furrow would not be as deep, but the furrow will still be there, and nearly as deep as the rest of the furrow.

I must also add that I did not use the exact line that the killer used, so my test really only shows that the furrow could be made, with that knot, and the type of line I used. It might be that the line actually used is slipperier and the know will not hold. In that case, it serves moderately well as an EA device.

AWESOME - thanks, Chrishope!

Question: Did you do this a right-hander or left-hander. IIRC, England said to pass the ligature under the front of the neck from behind starting on the left and up to the right??

Question: If you had to pick one or the other as a judgement for the use of the ligature after your experiment (and I think your choice of a 1/4: nylon was appropriate), would you say:
a) the ligature was most likely used just as a strangulation device, or b) the ligature could have been used as an EA device, but
malfunctioned

If this case would ever go to court, I am sure the prosecution would want to demonstrate both of the points above, and "handed-ness" and the complicity of sexual activity would need to be demonstrated.

We're just giving our opinions here, so no worries about what your answers are, OK???

 

[Chrishope]

AWESOME - thanks, Chrishope!

Question: Did you do this a right-hander or left-hander. IIRC, England said to pass the ligature under the front of the neck from behind starting on the left and up to the right??

I'm not sure England's instructions are clear on that point. I started by slipping the rope under the "throat" from left to right. I don't see that it would make much difference in how the knot functions, so long as it's constructed per instructions. I could try it the other way, just to be sure. I'm right handed.

Question: If you had to pick one or the other as a judgement for the use of the ligature after your experiment (and I think your choice of a 1/4: nylon was appropriate), would you say:

a) the ligature was most likely used just as a strangulation device, or b) the ligature could have been used as an EA device, but malfunctioned

I tend to think it was not used as an AE device simply because it wouldn't function well for that purpose - within the limits of my understanding of that very pervy activity. It's always possible that it was just badly constructed for the purpose, and therefore "malfunctioned" -e.g. would not loosen quickly and easily when tension on the long end is released. I'd think this would be obvious very quickly, so the perp should have been able to loosen it and prevent accidental strangulation.

This might be worth going into in a bit more detail. My (limited) understanding of EA devices is that they should tighten/loosen with little effort. IOWs the slip knot should be very "slippery". It tightens when tension is placed on the long end, by pulling. When tension is released, the knot should slip back, releasing pressure on the neck - to the point where the victim isn't choking anymore. The knot I tied, per Mr. England's instructions, does not loosen simply by releasing tension on the rope. IOWs when one stops pulling, the knot stays where it was. If it was very tight, then the knot stays, keeping the "noose" very tight.

It's not that hard to release the tension, just take two fingers, put them under the knot, and pull the knot in the direction that loosens the noose. (e.g. pull the knot up the standing end) But loosening doesn't happen automatically when one stops pulling.

The depth of the furrow is, as far as I can tell, consistent with strangulation, not EA activity. That doesn't really rule out prior EA, with a more appropriate device, with the final garrotte (the one we see in the picture) as staging.

To boil it down, all I"m really saying is that the "garrotte" just as we see it in the publicly available autopsy pics, with one wrap around the neck, and the knot tied per Mr. England's instructions, would in fact produce the ligature furrow we see in the picture. It would do this because the knot fails to slip back and allow tension to be released.

It is necessary to place a hand over the knot as one is pulling the long end to make the knot close against the neck. Once done, the knot stays until it is pulled loose.

When testing on a chiar arm, one can place tremendous tension on the rope, pulling it until the knot almost touches. That's because with me sitting in the chair testing, it's impossible to pull hard enough to lift the chair. With the same "garrotte" around JB's neck, pulling it hard would pull her. If she was on the floor, for example, it would pull her up before the knot ever touched her neck. The killer had to have done this with two hands, one over the knot as he pulled with the other, imo.

Not to bore with details about rope, but the JB "garrotte" was braided nylon. Mine was nylon, but the more traditional 3-strand, right-laid.

If this case would ever go to court, I am sure the prosecution would want to demonstrate both of the points above, and "handed-ness" and the complicity of sexual activity would need to be demonstrated.

I think handedness might actually be hard to prove, as the knot would be "above" or "below" the standing end, depending on how the perp started the process - under from left to right, or vice versa. He could also have been standing at her head, facing her feet when he constructed it.

We're just giving our opinions here, so no worries about what your answers are, OK???

What, me worry? (-: