Loved to Death

[Tadpole12]

Hi WhiteFang.

I found your mention of the Chamberlain case very interesting.

It is, ... is it?
a parallel to the JBR case?
http://www.law.umkc.edu/faculty/projects/ftrials/chamberlain/reconvictionchamberlain.html

I have often thought of that Dingo, and the momentum of sensationalism, as I read through my copy of ST's book.


Your posting, comprised of 'creative writing', the mention of various means by which JBR could have been killed, it read as .... deranged and had great shock value, as that was your intent.

 

[WHITEFANG]

"Patsy pulls it off, violently and JB's head is bashed HARD into either a doorknob, sink edge or faucet. Patsy realizes in HORROR that she has been too rough, too forceful and JB slumps, instantly unconscious, to the floor."

This is when she fractures her skull and drives a portion of skull bone out of the skull itself and down into the brain?

 

[WHITEFANG]

"There were two broad strands in the Crown's case against the Chamberlains. The first was comprised of the evidence from which the jury were invited to conclude that during her short absence from the barbecue Mrs.. Chamberlain took Azaria to the front passenger seat of the car and cut her throat. In this part of its case the Crown alleged that after the murder Azaria's body was initially secreted in the car and later the same evening buried in the sand on the nearby dune. It was further alleged that the Chamberlains or one of them subsequently disinterred the body, removed the clothing and placed it where it was found, having first cut it so as to simulate dingo damage. The jury were invited to find that Azaria's blood was not shed in the tent, but was transferred there on Mrs.. Chamberlain's person or clothing after the murder.


The second strand in the Crown's case was comprised of the evidence from which the jury were invited to conclude that a dingo did not take the baby. It was alleged that Mrs. Chamberlain's story of having seen a dingo at the tent was a fabrication. This part of the case depended upon the proposition that if the jury were satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that a dingo did not take Azaria, they were entitled to accept the only other explanation for her disappearance, which was that she had been murdered by her mother."

 

[WHITEFANG]

SuperDave,
Would you mind explaining your position, again, why you believe there was no bruising on JonBent's skull?

 

[MurriFlower]

"There were two broad strands in the Crown's case against the Chamberlains. The first was comprised of the evidence from which the jury were invited to conclude that during her short absence from the barbecue Mrs.. Chamberlain took Azaria to the front passenger seat of the car and cut her throat. In this part of its case the Crown alleged that after the murder Azaria's body was initially secreted in the car and later the same evening buried in the sand on the nearby dune. It was further alleged that the Chamberlains or one of them subsequently disinterred the body, removed the clothing and placed it where it was found, having first cut it so as to simulate dingo damage. The jury were invited to find that Azaria's blood was not shed in the tent, but was transferred there on Mrs.. Chamberlain's person or clothing after the murder.


The second strand in the Crown's case was comprised of the evidence from which the jury were invited to conclude that a dingo did not take the baby. It was alleged that Mrs. Chamberlain's story of having seen a dingo at the tent was a fabrication. This part of the case depended upon the proposition that if the jury were satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that a dingo did not take Azaria, they were entitled to accept the only other explanation for her disappearance, which was that she had been murdered by her mother."

Yes there were parallels as to the public perception of the parents (mainly the mother's), but the main difference here was that the body of the baby was never found, but still she was convicted of her murder.

This could have a thread of it's own, but as Mrs C was exhonerated after spending quite a few years in jail, I'm sure your first amendment wouldn't be much protection!!

 

[MurriFlower]

SuperDave,
Would you mind explaining your position, again, why you believe there was no bruising on JonBent's skull?

Just a little OT here, but I was listening to a radio interview yesterday with the mother of a 12yo boy who suffered brain damage after being hit by a car. So severe was the injury that it was initially feared he would not survive, or if he did he would be permanently in a vegetative state. Ten years later he, due to his mother's dedication, he can now walk, talk, ski and drive a car.

Anyway, I caught only a small part of the interview, but a couple of things I found interesting.

When the mother arrived on the scene of the accident, only a couple of minutes later, her son was obviously very badly injured. Blood oozed from his nose and ears. He then vomited, and unbeknown to her, this blocked his airway, and his breathing stopped for several minutes until the paramedics arrived.

I just thought this might put in perspective the RDI theory about JBR appearing to be dead. The lack of any obvious signs of head injury would not have necessarily caused a parent to assume brain injury/death, just unconsciousness. JBR also vomited following the head injury, but as she appears to have been on her stomach, this would not have blocked the airway, so she would have still been breathing. I find it difficult to see why any parent then would follow this up by 'staging' a totally off the wall 'murder by garrotte' to cover up such an accident.

The other interesting thing she said, was that in the 72 critical hours following her son's injury, she reportedly behaved very calmly. When asked how she was feeling, she said 'it was surreal, like being in a movie. I felt I was acting and following a script'.

The perception of PR 'acting' is consistent with the way this mother also felt when she was obviously in 'shock' herself. Not the acting of aguilty person, but just normal behaviour.

 

[BBB167893]

SuperDave,
Would you mind explaining your position, again, why you believe there was no bruising on JonBent's skull?

Fang, I'm always willing to answer questions if I think it will lead to greater understanding.

I think we can all agree that the head injury JB suffered was extremely traumatic and would almost certainly have killed her on its own. When the body suffers a severe injury like this, the body's systems immediately go into action. The body enters essentially a state of hibernation: the heart rate drops, blood is drawn away from exterior surfaces like the skin, and respiration slows to a crawl. This is known as shock. Now, a bruise is an area of bleeding under the skin that is visible on the surface. Given the horrific nature of JB's head injury, it is VERY likely that she went into shock. The scalp is a very thin area of skin over bone. It, along with the shinbone, is the thinnest area of skin over bone in the body. The blood vessels in the scalp are close to the surface. That's why so much heat is lost through the head, because there's no insulation. Shock, among other things, draws blood away from the skin to conserve heat. It makes sense, then, that the head would be a primary focus for conservation.

Simply put, there was probably a short supply of blood to the skin of the scalp to form a bruise.

 

[WHITEFANG]

as soon as the blood vessels burst where she was struck on the head, bruising occurred, Super. Lots of bruising.

 

[BBB167893]

I just thought this might put in perspective the RDI theory about JBR appearing to be dead. The lack of any obvious signs of head injury would not have necessarily caused a parent to assume brain injury/death, just unconsciousness.

You forget one important thing, MurriFlower: the person who inflicted that head injury on JB would very likely have heard the skull crack. That puts a whole other dimension on it.

I find it difficult to see why any parent then would follow this up by 'staging' a totally off the wall 'murder by garrotte' to cover up such an accident.

Well, that's kind of the point I've been trying to make, MurriFlower: it is difficult for people to understand. But as I've said in the past, we're not talking about "any parent." It was an off-the-wall scenario because, IN MY OPINION, it was an off-the-wall person.

 

[BBB167893]

as soon as the blood vessels burst where she was struck on the head, bruising occurred, Super. Lots of bruising.

Fang, I can't figure what you're trying to do here. You just got through asking me why there was no bruising. NOW, you're telling me that there was. I just don't get what is going on here.

 

[madeleine]

PMPT,307

"Some of the FBI experts thought that the hard blow to Jonbenet's head had been intentional.The injury did not have the characteristics of an accident"

 

[BBB167893]

PMPT,307

"Some of the FBI experts thought that the hard blow to Jonbenet's head had been intentional.The injury did not have the characteristics of an accident"

Yes, I read that. Just to keep in mind: when we say "accident," we mean more like a mistake.

 

[WHITEFANG]

Fang, I can't figure what you're trying to do here. You just got through asking me why there was no bruising. NOW, you're telling me that there was. I just don't get what is going on here.

I have been trying to understand your reasoning regarding bruising on the head. Bruising occurs where blood vessels break. It is instantaneous. Shock did not stop the formation of bruises on her head. Shock did not draw blood away from the bruises on her head. She had massive rupturing of blood vessels where her head was smashed and significant observable discoloration on her head from this bruising.

 

[Tadpole12]

I have been trying to understand your reasoning regarding bruising on the head. Bruising occurs where blood vessels break. It is instantaneous. Shock did not stop the formation of bruises on her head. Shock did not draw blood away from the bruises on her head. She had massive rupturing of blood vessels where her head was smashed and significant observable discoloration on her head from this bruising.

Hi WHITEFANG.

Here's some general info on bruising and contusions.

Bruise:
[ame]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bruise[/ame]

cerebral contusions:
[ame]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cerebral_contusion[/ame]


Bruising is a process, takes time.

 

[joeskidbeck]

I have been trying to understand your reasoning regarding bruising on the head. Bruising occurs where blood vessels break. It is instantaneous. Shock did not stop the formation of bruises on her head. Shock did not draw blood away from the bruises on her head. She had massive rupturing of blood vessels where her head was smashed and significant observable discoloration on her head from this bruising.

Did the autopsy report say that there wasn't any bruising on her head and that the dr. didn't even see the injury until he pulled her scalp back? (sorry to be so graphic).

 

[BBB167893]

I have been trying to understand your reasoning regarding bruising on the head.

I was about to say the same!

Bruising occurs where blood vessels break. It is instantaneous. Shock did not stop the formation of bruises on her head. Shock did not draw blood away from the bruises on her head. She had massive rupturing of blood vessels where her head was smashed and significant observable discoloration on her head from this bruising.

I don't get it. First you tell me there was none. Now you're telling me that there was, even though it tends to strengthen my argument.

I have to admit, I'm confused.

 

[DeeDee249]

Did the autopsy report say that there wasn't any bruising on her head and that the dr. didn't even see the injury until he pulled her scalp back? (sorry to be so graphic).

The coroner wasn't alone with JB when performing the autopsy- there were several others there- Det. Linda Arndt among them. His final written report does not contain his spoken comments while completing the autopsy. But according to those who were there, Mayer did not find the skull fracture and the bleeding or bruising until he peeled back her scalp. When the skullcap was removed, he then saw the mild swelling in the brain. Had she lived longer, her whole face and head would have been swollen and she would have bled from the nose, ears, mouth.

 

[WHITEFANG]

I was about to say the same!



I don't get it. First you tell me there was none. Now you're telling me that there was, even though it tends to strengthen my argument.

I have to admit, I'm confused.

We are confusing. Super, when did I say there wouldn't be any bruising?

 

[WHITEFANG]

Super, just in case you didn't "hear" me. Would you refer me to the places where I said there would be no bruising on her head?

I am confused by your confusion that I confused you with.

 

[BBB167893]

Super, just in case you didn't "hear" me. Would you refer me to the places where I said there would be no bruising on her head?

I think it was on another thread. I'll search.