Nedra & Patsy's sisters

[UKGuy]

Are you suggesting that JBR was alive, conscious, and docile during the sexual attack?

Even if she'd been a victim of prior molestation, it's hard to justify this from the forensics. A hard object was jabbed into her hymen; again, we'd see some evidence of a struggle, possibly bruising along the thighs, etc.

Though I do tend to believe the 'prior molestation' theory, I also believe that the abuse, though chronic, had not involved any painful injury to JBR prior to the night of the 25th.

Dru,

Are you suggesting that JBR was alive, conscious, and docile during the sexual attack?

Quite possibly, she may have been assaulted twice, the second time as staging to mask the first?

In this context Coroner Meyers autopsy remarks may be relevant:

Detective Arndt told Your Affiant that she witnessed the autopsy of JonBenet Ramsey which was conducted by Dr. John Meyer on December 26, 1996. Detective Arndt told Your Affiant that she observed Dr. Meyer examine the vaginal area of the victim and heard him state that the victim had received an injury consistent with digital penetration of her vagina. Detective Arndt told Your Affiant that Dr. Meyer told her that is was his opinion that the victim had been subjected to sexual contact.

imo sexual contact is not the same as sexual assault, or vaginal trauma, and Coroner Meyer thinks JonBenet had received an injury consistent with digital penetration of her vagina.

So I reckon what he is saying is that at some point prior to her death JonBenet had been engaged in sexual contact with another person(s)?

Even if she'd been a victim of prior molestation, it's hard to justify this from the forensics. A hard object was jabbed into her hymen; again, we'd see some evidence of a struggle, possibly bruising along the thighs, etc.

Only if you think the hard object was the only instrument used to assault JonBenet.

We are disadvantaged in not having seen all the autopsy evidence, i.e. was the missing piece of the paintbrush handle left inside JonBenet, and later redacted?

If so then Coroner Meyer's remarks suggest a prior sexual assault with the jabbing as later staging?

Then we have JonBenet being wiped down, with most of the blood being removed, why do this if the intention is to mask a sexual assault with a fake one?

Is it possible that the original sexual assault was implemented using the unbroken paintbrush handle, JonBenet's screams of distress caused her killer to strangle and whack her over the head?

This would explain the subsequent cleanup, and the garrote as an attempt to include the paintbrush in the staged crime-scene, did her killer think, they will never know it was the paintbrush that caused her vaginal wound, or did her killer not care, simply wishing to buy time?

.

 

[UKGuy]

Let me make it clear that I do not necessarily think the coroner wrote his report according to Team R dictates. But it wouldn't be the first time in history an autopsy report was "adjusted" when needed. It does seem odd that a "ligature strangulation" that was not really forceful enough to actually strangle would be listed as a cause of death. But it was the ligature that was most obvious; the head wound was not apparant on external visual inspection and wasn't seen until the autopsy itself.

DeeDee249,

The information released in the autopsy report was likely minimized so not to yield any advantage to JonBenet's killer.

Technically the cause of death is correct, but it is a general conclusion, since it does not exclude a manual strangulation.

It serves to give the impression that the Ligature strangulation itemised in the Final Diagnosis section, was the major cause of death?

Yet we can see from the forensic evidence that somehow this does not quite tally, particularly when you look closer at the garrote knotting and see it was a fixed knot, and with no underlying soft-tissue damage, a whole hyoid, no trachea damage etc, then although not impossible, it does seem implausible, personally I could not convict anyone on such circumstantial evidence.


.

 

[UKGuy]

does he have an email address so we could ask him,does anyone know?

JMO8778,

He will, but I seriously doubt if he would ever reply, the case is still supposedly open, any remarks attributed to him, and on the record would be newsworthy and may even result in headlines?


.

 

[JMO8778]

Dru,

Quite possibly, she may have been assaulted twice, the second time as staging to mask the first?

In this context Coroner Meyers autopsy remarks may be relevant:

imo sexual contact is not the same as sexual assault, or vaginal trauma, and Coroner Meyer thinks JonBenet had received an injury consistent with digital penetration of her vagina.

So I reckon what he is saying is that at some point prior to her death JonBenet had been engaged in sexual contact with another person(s)?


Only if you think the hard object was the only instrument used to assault JonBenet.

We are disadvantaged in not having seen all the autopsy evidence, i.e. was the missing piece of the paintbrush handle left inside JonBenet, and later redacted?

If so then Coroner Meyer's remarks suggest a prior sexual assault with the jabbing as later staging?

Then we have JonBenet being wiped down, with most of the blood being removed, why do this if the intention is to mask a sexual assault with a fake one?

Is it possible that the original sexual assault was implemented using the unbroken paintbrush handle, JonBenet's screams of distress caused her killer to strangle and whack her over the head?

This would explain the subsequent cleanup, and the garrote as an attempt to include the paintbrush in the staged crime-scene, did her killer think, they will never know it was the paintbrush that caused her vaginal wound, or did her killer not care, simply wishing to buy time?

.

no no,UK,I don't think it was left inside her.The staged sexual assault was attempted to be hidden by wiping her down,redressing her and covering her w/ the blanket...because,per the RN ...there was a previous plan to get her out of the house.JR wouldn't have wanted that staged assault left on her now that she was to be found in the house,for he knew he could be charged w sexual assault,and maybe the murder too.
For some reason,the plan to get her out of the house was dropped,and THEY decided to get out of the house...ie-so they restaged the scene,called 911,planned to let LE find her and then hop off on that plane that was going to be ready to go to MI(or,wherever they wanted it to go).

And how would that buy time?

 

[JMO8778]

DeeDee249,

The information released in the autopsy report was likely minimized so not to yield any advantage to JonBenet's killer.

Technically the cause of death is correct, but it is a general conclusion, since it does not exclude a manual strangulation.

It serves to give the impression that the Ligature strangulation itemised in the Final Diagnosis section, was the major cause of death?

Yet we can see from the forensic evidence that somehow this does not quite tally, particularly when you look closer at the garrote knotting and see it was a fixed knot, and with no underlying soft-tissue damage, a whole hyoid, no trachea damage etc, then although not impossible, it does seem implausible, personally I could not convict anyone on such circumstantial evidence.


.

Thomas's book says the 'deep furrow in her neck was concealed with a pageant gown'...so it was deep.I don't think it's circumstantial..she could have been strangled w the rope bf it was made into a garrotte...either way,it was just simply enough to cut off her airway,but not damage any internal tissues.

 

[UKGuy]

Thomas's book says the 'deep furrow in her neck was concealed with a pageant gown'...so it was deep.I don't think it's circumstantial..she could have been strangled w the rope bf it was made into a garrotte...either way,it was just simply enough to cut off her airway,but not damage any internal tissues.

JMO8778,

Thomas's book says the 'deep furrow in her neck was concealed with a pageant gown'...so it was deep.

What pageant gown, where?

Some people think that the circumferential furrow has arisen due to postmortem swelling, this may be correct, and would explain the lack of soft-tissue dammage.

As you suggest she may have been ligature strangled minus the garrote, but again there is no underlying damage to her neck?

I guess I am missing something here?


.

 

[UKGuy]

no no,UK,I don't think it was left inside her.The staged sexual assault was attempted to be hidden by wiping her down,redressing her and covering her w/ the blanket...because,per the RN ...there was a previous plan to get her out of the house.JR wouldn't have wanted that staged assault left on her now that she was to be found in the house,for he knew he could be charged w sexual assault,and maybe the murder too.
For some reason,the plan to get her out of the house was dropped,and THEY decided to get out of the house...ie-so they restaged the scene,called 911,planned to let LE find her and then hop off on that plane that was going to be ready to go to MI(or,wherever they wanted it to go).

And how would that buy time?

JMO8778,

no no,UK,I don't think it was left inside her.

Don't think or dont know?

So if the staged sexual assault was abandonded, why was the garrote left in place?


So you reckon JR does not want a sexual assault staging, even although an autopsy will eventually reveal all?


.

 

[rashomon]

JMO8778,

What pageant gown, where?

Some people think that the circumferential furrow has arisen due to postmortem swelling, this may be correct, and would explain the lack of soft-tissue dammage.

As you suggest she may have been ligature strangled minus the garrote, but again there is no underlying damage to her neck?

I guess I am missing something here?

We have had some discussion about this too on Forums for Justice:

http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/showthread.php?p=143289#post143289

Delmar England (poster name EasyWriter on FFJ) for example doubts
that JonBenet was strangled at all, and is of the opinion that the furrow was caused by post-mortem swelling. But doesn't post-mortem swelling start in the abdominal area frst? If yes, then the furrrow could not have been caused by it, since the autopsy report says JonBenet's abdomen was flat.

 

[rashomon]

JMO8778,
So if the staged sexual assault was abandonded, why was the garrote left in place?

To direct the attention away from the head wound as the perceived cause of JonBenet's death (from the Ramseys' point of view) and as a red herring intended to lead investigators to believe that "no parent would garrote their child, therefore an intruder must have done this."
Their plan worked marveloulsy with Lou Smit, didn't it. Smit believed exactly what the Ramseys wanted him to believe.

 

[UKGuy]

We have had some discussion about this too on Forums for Justice:

http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/showthread.php?p=143289#post143289

Delmar England (poster name EasyWriter on FFJ) for example doubts
that JonBenet was strangled at all, and is of the opinion that the furrow was caused by post-mortem swelling. But doesn't post-mortem swelling start in the abdominal area frst? If yes, then the furrrow could not have been caused by it, since the autopsy report says JonBenet's abdomen was flat.

rashomon,

Thanks for your link, well I guess that is open for debate then, but since the alignment of the furrow is as close to horizontal as you can hope, e.g. there is no upward angle, then it appears to me, JonBenet was not forcibly ligature strangled?

.

 

[UKGuy]

To direct the attention away from the head wound as the perceived cause of JonBenet's death (from the Ramseys' point of view) and as a red herring intended to lead investigators to believe that "no parent would garrote their child, therefore an intruder must have done this."
Their plan worked marveloulsy with Lou Smit, didn't it. Smit believed exactly what the Ramseys wanted him to believe.

rashomon,

Maybe, nobody noticed she had a head injury all the way to the mortuary, it was already an invisible injury, it does not really need anything to deflect it.

I reckon Lou Smit was singing along to John Ramsey's tune, the intruder, the erotic asphyxiation etc, I reckon are all hints from John, some of this are in the interviews Lou Smit did with John.

Also John's Intruder Scenario is more likely pragmatic post-homicide planning, you can see this if you read through all his suggestions, evolving from it must be an inside job, to the intruder.


.

 

[BBB167893]

Maybe, nobody noticed she had a head injury all the way to the mortuary, it was already an invisible injury, it does not really need anything to deflect it.

Perhaps you miss the point, sir. The idea was that, to me, JB lived a spectcular life. She had to have a spectacular death as well.

 

[UKGuy]

Perhaps you miss the point, sir. The idea was that, to me, JB lived a spectcular life. She had to have a spectacular death as well.

SuperDave,

You must have majored in psychology? So rather than panicking and thinking irrationally as some have suggested, JonBenet's killer(s) had her past and future resume in mind?

So you reckon the function of the garrote etc was to enhance her postmortem profile?



.

 

[JMO8778]

JMO8778,

He will, but I seriously doubt if he would ever reply, the case is still supposedly open, any remarks attributed to him, and on the record would be newsworthy and may even result in headlines?


.

it's not like that hasn't happened before,no?

 

[JMO8778]

JMO8778,

What pageant gown, where?

the one she wore at her funeral

Some people think that the circumferential furrow has arisen due to postmortem swelling, this may be correct, and would explain the lack of soft-tissue dammage.

As you suggest she may have been ligature strangled minus the garrote, but again there is no underlying damage to her neck?

I guess I am missing something here?

like what?
It's possible she was strangled enough to cut off her airway, but not damage internal tissues,no?

 

[JMO8778]

JMO8778,

Don't think or dont know?

None of us know for sure,do we?I'm sure that's your point, but...
I don't think it likely would have been,why would it,if she was to be found in the house?Even if she was to be found outdoors,leaving an article that had been inside the house in such a place would be very incriminating for the R's,correct?It would be like,'Opps,JR sexually assaulted her, but forgot to remove what he used to do it with'.
I edited to add: it was a *staged sexual assault...why would they leave the item used to do it inside her? It would be a dead giveaway.(no pun intended).

So if the staged sexual assault was abandonded, why was the garrote left in place?

because,per the RN,she was to be 'beheaded' if LE was contacted.do you think they could bring themselves to cut her head off? It had to do.
LE *was called,and so now they have an excuse for her death.
EDITED to add: you're saying the garrote itself is sexual staging..maybe at first it was,but it served 2 purposes I think,the second being an attempt to hide manual strangulation.
As far as the wrist ligatures go...I posted bf about it,but I think JR forgot to change the wrist ligatures to being tight,like she was bound tightly in order to remove her from the house more easily.(I think the loose staging was part of the sexual staging)..and that's why JR decided to 'find' her in the end...so he could say they were tightly bound,when he knew in fact they weren't.WHY would he lie about it,otherwise?
I think he made a beeline for the basement for that reason,around 10am or so when LA lost track of him.I don't think it was possible for them to be changed though..bc rigor had already set in.So the way she was posed,with her arms above her head..had to stand.
I also think he may have broke the window during that time while down there,since none were noticed broken when the house was initially searched.

So you reckon JR does not want a sexual assault staging, even although an autopsy will eventually reveal all?


.

I think he tried to hide and restage it as best he could,for as long as he could..which wouldn't be long..why do you think he wanted to get out of town so quickly??

 

[JMO8778]

To direct the attention away from the head wound as the perceived cause of JonBenet's death (from the Ramseys' point of view) and as a red herring intended to lead investigators to believe that "no parent would garrote their child, therefore an intruder must have done this."
Their plan worked marveloulsy with Lou Smit, didn't it. Smit believed exactly what the Ramseys wanted him to believe.

that too,I forgot about her hair being restyled to cover it.

 

[UKGuy]

the one she wore at her funeral
like what?
It's possible she was strangled enough to cut off her airway, but not damage internal tissues,no?

JMO8778,

Not that I know of, since there was no damage to her soft-tissues directly beneath the ligature, e.g. no broken blood vessels, no carpillary damage, no compression etc. Coroner Meyer took cross-sections of her skin and analysed them.

I could accept a strangulation of the sort you mention with her hyoid remaining intact, but there would have to be some soft-tissue damage.

This is what makes the Ligature strangulation anomalous, and Coroner Meyer must know this.


.

 

[JMO8778]

UK..from ST's 'JonBenet',hardback,p. 62-

"Cosmetics and a pageant gown concealed the deep furrow around her neck".

and from p. 287:

"In my scenerio,she choked JonBenet from behind,with a grip on the broken paintbrush handle,pulling the ligature.JonBenet,still unconcious,would never have felt it.There are only 4 ways to die: suicide,natural,accidental and homicide.This accident,in my opinion,had just become a murder".

___

The only thing I would add is that I'm not so sure it was an accident, that I think JR may have been the one to strangle JB with the ligature,and that there's *no doubt (in my mind anyway) he helped (dicated rather) Patsy write the RN to frame Merrick and friends.
I can only imagine the look on JM's face, (if it didn't fall to the floor first),when he first read that RN..I think it all came together for him in that moment,as to why JR kept pointing the finger at him.

 

[JMO8778]

JMO8778,

Not that I know of, since there was no damage to her soft-tissues directly beneath the ligature, e.g. no broken blood vessels, no carpillary damage, no compression etc. Coroner Meyer took cross-sections of her skin and analysed them.

I could accept a strangulation of the sort you mention with her hyoid remaining intact, but there would have to be some soft-tissue damage.

This is what makes the Ligature strangulation anomalous, and Coroner Meyer must know this.


.

then see my post below..why would ST say that??