Poll: was Patsy involved?

[kanzz]

bbm, I'd love to hear your thoughts on this. You can message me if you'd prefer not to post it here.

TIA

This might belong in another thread, or even a new topic..
I just meant that - if it wasn't for the strangulation, this might not have been ruled a homicide. That is, of course, if someone would have seen to it that JB received prompt medical attention (whether or not she survived, which seems unlikely). The R's might have been able to pass it off as an accident of some sort.

When we talk about who did it, it gets a little sketchy sometimes with the head bash and the strangulation both being involved in this crime, but I think most of us agree it was the strangulation that killed JB. There was more than one crime committed that night, but ultimately it's the murder we are discussing for the most part. That's why, when I see "xDI", I automatically think "x" strangled her.

 

[MURDERER_SERVANT]

I guess everyone thinks differently on XDI cause when I see XDI , I interpret that as X broke her sculp into two with that fatal bash ..

The strangulation , garrote may be part of the cover up and staging. As long as we don't know as a fact whether the intent for strangulation was to kill her , that 's my take on that.

 

[OliviaG1996]

This might belong in another thread, or even a new topic..
I just meant that - if it wasn't for the strangulation, this might not have been ruled a homicide. That is, of course, if someone would have seen to it that JB received prompt medical attention (whether or not she survived, which seems unlikely). The R's might have been able to pass it off as an accident of some sort.

When we talk about who did it, it gets a little sketchy sometimes with the head bash and the strangulation both being involved in this crime, but I think most of us agree it was the strangulation that killed JB. There was more than one crime committed that night, but ultimately it's the murder we are discussing for the most part. That's why, when I see "xDI", I automatically think "x" strangled her.

Do we know for a fact that the cord itself caused JBR's death? I think it's very probable that JBR was strangled with something else and that the cord was added for "foreign faction" effect via staging with the deep furrow being caused by post-mortem swelling.

 

[andreww]

I'm trying to follow what you're saying. Why would the noose need to be tightened? I can see her adding the paintbrush (if it wasn't already there), but don't understand why the noose would need to be tightened when she's already dead. I guess I just wasn't aware that anybody thought/felt this way.

Oh wait, are you saying BR did the head bash and then PR did the strangulation? In that case, I see it as PDI. When I think of "it" - I think of "murder".

But for the strangulation, this might not be a homicide case. (That is probably another topic altogether)

I feel Burke did the head bash. I also feel that there is evidence to show that there may have been a sexual assault as well and this, and the fact that JB already appeared to be dead, was the reason that 911 was not called. Patsy then stages it to look like she was strangled, possibly not knowing that she was still alive she tightens the noose trying to draw attention away from the invisible head wound. She wipes JBs groin and changes her clothing, destroying evidence of the sexual assault. She wipes down the flashlight, ensuring there is no evidence of that being the weapon. Then she writes the grotesque ransom note to explain the scene.

Patsy, a movie buff, may have had this line from Jagged Edge in mind that night..

You want people to think 'Jesus do you think he could have done that to his own wife?'. If I was going to kill my wife, that's the way I'd do it.

 

[kanzz]

Do we know for a fact that the cord itself caused JBR's death? I think it's very probable that JBR was strangled with something else and that the cord was added for "foreign faction" effect via staging with the deep furrow being caused by post-mortem swelling.

In reading the AR, I don't question that the cord caused JB's death. The first three lines alone are sufficient evidence for me to think that, but there is also narrative to support it, imo.

FINAL DIAGNOSIS:
I. Ligature strangulation

a. Circumferential ligature with associated ligature furrow of neck
​

 

[kanzz]

I feel Burke did the head bash. I also feel that there is evidence to show that there may have been a sexual assault as well and this, and the fact that JB already appeared to be dead, was the reason that 911 was not called. Patsy then stages it to look like she was strangled, possibly not knowing that she was still alive she tightens the noose trying to draw attention away from the invisible head wound. She wipes JBs groin and changes her clothing, destroying evidence of the sexual assault. She wipes down the flashlight, ensuring there is no evidence of that being the weapon. Then she writes the grotesque ransom note to explain the scene.

Patsy, a movie buff, may have had this line from Jagged Edge in mind that night..

Help me out a little.. I'm not trying to be picky, I just want to make sure I'm catching what you're throwing. Talk to me like I'm a newbie.
When you say, "tightens the noose" - are you saying the noose was already there and she tightened it? or are you saying that PR applied the noose and strangled JB?

I'm thinking the later - am I right? This case is so convoluted!

 

[andreww]

Help me out a little.. I'm not trying to be picky, I just want to make sure I'm catching what you're throwing. Talk to me like I'm a newbie.
When you say, "tightens the noose" - are you saying the noose was already there and she tightened it? or are you saying that PR applied the noose and strangled JB?

I'm thinking the later - am I right? This case is so convoluted!

Thats exactly what I'm saying, that Patsy applied and tightened the noose. But yes, much later. I think there was a medical report that indicated that the strangling was as much as a couple of hours after the head blow, which to me takes Burke out of the equation for that aspect of it.

 

[OliviaG1996]

In reading the AR, I don't question that the cord caused JB's death. The first three lines alone are sufficient evidence for me to think that, but there is also narrative to support it, imo.

FINAL DIAGNOSIS:
I. Ligature strangulation

a. Circumferential ligature with associated ligature furrow of neck
​

Thank you for that. The way I see it, BR's discussion wih DS about whether or not JBR was strangled manually along with Kolar's assertion that JBR was first "strangled" via shirt collar is enough for me to believe the ligature was used to cover up an attempted first strangulation.

 

[UKGuy]

I feel Burke did the head bash. I also feel that there is evidence to show that there may have been a sexual assault as well and this, and the fact that JB already appeared to be dead, was the reason that 911 was not called. Patsy then stages it to look like she was strangled, possibly not knowing that she was still alive she tightens the noose trying to draw attention away from the invisible head wound. She wipes JBs groin and changes her clothing, destroying evidence of the sexual assault. She wipes down the flashlight, ensuring there is no evidence of that being the weapon. Then she writes the grotesque ransom note to explain the scene.

Patsy, a movie buff, may have had this line from Jagged Edge in mind that night..

andreww,

12-29-1996 Search Warrant

Det. Arndt informed Your Affiant that Dr. Meyer stated to her that he observed red stains in the crotch area of the panties that the child was wearing at the time that the child's body was subjected to the external visual examination. Dr. Meyer stated to Det. Arndt that the red stain appeared to be consistent with blood. Det. Arndt further informed the Affiant that Dr. Meyer stated to her that after examining the panties (as described above), he observed the exterior pubic area of the child's body located next to the areas of the panties containing the red stains and found no visible reddish stains in that area. Dr. Meyer stated to Det. Arndt that his opinion is that the evidence observed is consistent with the child's pubic area having been wiped by a cloth.

12-29-1996 Search Warrant

Detective Arndt told Your Affiant that she witnessed the autopsy of JonBenet Ramsey which was conducted by Dr. John Meyer on December 27, 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 constant with digital penetration of her vagina. Detective Arndt told Your Affiant that Dr. Meyer told her that it was his opinion that the victim had been subjected to sexual contact. For further details on the autopsy see the attached document entitled Addendum To

Later that night Dr. Andrew Sirotnak assistant professor of pediatrics along with Coroner Meyer reexamined JonBenet's genitals and confirmed Meyer's earlier finding: Vaginal Injury.


So from the AR can we assume JonBenet was sexually assaulted then wiped clean, as per Meyer's verbatim remarks regarding no visible reddish stains?


As per the AR, how did the birefringent material arrive inside JonBenet, surely not by accident?

This implies that the person doing the staging also inserted either a digit or the paintbrush into JonBenet, this assumption is consistent with the AR.

Since patently the birefringent material cannot arrive until after the paintbrush is broken?

If the case is BDI we have all the above, if its partially BDI, we also have in addition a parent vaginally assaulting JonBenet. Some cannot imagine, say Patsy undertaking such an assault, never mind the ligature asphyxiation?

So if its Patsy doing the staging as you suggest, she must have wiped JonBenet down and inserted her finger or the paintbrush inside JonBenet?

.

 

[andreww]

andreww,

12-29-1996 Search Warrant


12-29-1996 Search Warrant


Later that night Dr. Andrew Sirotnak assistant professor of pediatrics along with Coroner Meyer reexamined JonBenet's genitals and confirmed Meyer's earlier finding: Vaginal Injury.


So from the AR can we assume JonBenet was sexually assaulted then wiped clean, as per Meyer's verbatim remarks regarding no visible reddish stains?


As per the AR, how did the birefringent material arrive inside JonBenet, surely not by accident?

This implies that the person doing the staging also inserted either a digit or the paintbrush into JonBenet, this assumption is consistent with the AR.

Since patently the birefringent material cannot arrive until after the paintbrush is broken?

If the case is BDI we have all the above, if its partially BDI, we also have in addition a parent vaginally assaulting JonBenet. Some cannot imagine, say Patsy undertaking such an assault, never mind the ligature asphyxiation?

So if its Patsy doing the staging as you suggest, she must have wiped JonBenet down and inserted her finger or the paintbrush inside JonBenet?

.

Who says the birefringent material couldn't get there until after the brush was broken? I feel that Burke may have inserted the paintbrush while "playing doctor". I feel that is the reason that Patsy couldn't call 911, because JBR was bleeding from the vagina.

 

[UKGuy]

Who says the birefringent material couldn't get there until after the brush was broken? I feel that Burke may have inserted the paintbrush while "playing doctor". I feel that is the reason that Patsy couldn't call 911, because JBR was bleeding from the vagina.

andreww.
A per the AR, I'm saying that. Also consider Steve Thomas' description, i.e. splinter.

Now if you are correct then the brush was already broken when inserted by BR.

I do not think her injuries suggest this to be the case.

I posted all the above to demonstrate that patently jonBenet, was bleeding Vaginally and that we have two witness's to confirm this.

You must explain why Burke Ramsey would break the paintbrush, why he was in the basement, and why he would wipe JonBenet down?

Given all that what is left as PR's role?

.

 

[icedtea4me]

*snip*
So if its Patsy doing the staging as you suggest, she must have wiped JonBenet down and inserted her finger or the paintbrush inside JonBenet?

Or it was secondary transfer via the cloth with which she was wiped.

 

[UKGuy]

Or it was secondary transfer via the cloth with which she was wiped.

icedtea4me,
mmm, so why should the Coroner not suggest so, or even Steve Thomas?

The splinter come birefringent material was inside JonBenet , that does not occur via secondary transfer, other than digital transfer.

Alike Conan Doyle's dogs who do not bark in the night the birefringent material serves a similar role in alerting people to postmortem assault?

Not saying this as fact , just outlining the possibility.

.

 

[Rott Mom]

I'm not sure where to post this...is anybody watching "How It Really Happened" right now on HLN?

 

[Pinkland]

I'm not sure where to post this...is anybody watching "How It Really Happened" right now on HLN?

I just watched it.

Sent from my SM-G360T1 using Tapatalk

 

[Pinkland]

I just watched it.

Sent from my SM-G360T1 using Tapatalk

What i found interesting...supposedly Patsy's fingerprints were found on the spoon as well as the bowl.

Also, some "handwriting experts" thought Patsy unlikely but not excluded from writing the note.

All found that Burke was unlikely to have done the crime, this includes the investigator whom interviewed Burke 45 mins after JonBenet was found

Overall it was balanced. Not sure we're some of these facts came from though.

Sent from my SM-G360T1 using Tapatalk

 

[singularity]

By the way, BDI has been the "hot topic" for years now. It won't be shoved under the rug for a long while.

No it hasn't. A handful believed it and discussed it on the various sites and then CBS placed it on front street.

Once the lawsuit is settled and people come back to reality and the possibility of more info surfacing, under the rug it goes. It'll stay there too.

The wording of the indictments points to an unknown third person.

No it doesn't....that's your interpretation of it. No offense.

Kolar's assertion that JBR was first "strangled" via shirt collar is enough for me to believe the ligature was used to cover up an attempted first strangulation.

Now you're talking....

We just disagree on who did that strangulation.


Pinkland...

Also BDI seems to act as if John and Patsy were to be charged together..which isn't the case. Thus the existence of a third party is moot. There would be a second party not a third.

Nailed it.

 

[UKGuy]

No it hasn't. A handful believed it and discussed it on the various sites and then CBS placed it on front street.

Once the lawsuit is settled and people come back to reality and the possibility of more info surfacing, under the rug it goes. It'll stay there too.


No it doesn't....that's your interpretation of it. No offense.

Now you're talking....

We just disagree on who did that strangulation.


Pinkland...




Nailed it.

singularity,
There is nothing in Colorado Statute or Federal Law that requires perpetrators to be charged conjointly.

Separate charges is the norm and the usual rout to putting people in the dock.

PDI is the staged case, one that ST, after his litigation with LW, wishes you to believe, shades of the Donald here, sounds familiar?

For those living in the UK : http://www.truecrimelibrary.com/product/true-crime-march-2017/

I read the first two pages, then gave up, as I thought it was a rehash, i.e. all the usual suspects, but I'll have to check again for what they say about new dna evidence, probably blows IDI out of the water?

The case is BDI all day long with PR staging a crime scene, then along comes JR who fabricates a new crime scene, even admitting, Oh I broke that window, when it was probably Patsy as part of a prior staging.

Just look at what money can buy you in the US of A, Justice and a Presidency. how long will the Donald last?

I'll bet folks at Disney are gnashing their teeth, a non trademarked Donald is all over twitter and the airwaves, wow!

.
.

 

[Pinkland]

singularity,
There is nothing in Colorado Statute or Federal Law that requires perpetrators to be charged conjointly.

Separate charges is the norm and the usual rout to putting people in the dock.

PDI is the staged case, one that ST, after his litigation with LW, wishes you to believe, shades of the Donald here, sounds familiar?

For those living in the UK : http://www.truecrimelibrary.com/product/true-crime-march-2017/

I read the first two pages, then gave up, as I thought it was a rehash, i.e. all the usual suspects, but I'll have to check again for what they say about new dna evidence, probably blows IDI out of the water?

The case is BDI all day long with PR staging a crime scene, then along comes JR who fabricates a new crime scene, even admitting, Oh I broke that window, when it was probably Patsy as part of a prior staging.

Just look at what money can buy you in the US of A, Justice and a Presidency. how long will the Donald last?

I'll bet folks at Disney are gnashing their teeth, a non trademarked Donald is all over twitter and the airwaves, wow!

.
.

I'm not sure what my President has to do with this conversation but let me assure you....this college educated American woman voted for Donald Trump, as did my entire family of over a hundred in the key state of Ohio, most of whom are lifelong democrats.

Again you seam to be really fond of making accusations without a shred of evidence.

Sent from my SM-G360T1 using Tapatalk

 

[icedtea4me]

*snip*
The splinter come birefringent material was inside JonBenet , that does not occur via secondary transfer, other than digital transfer.
*snip*

A transfer via any source other than the one of origin (primary) is, at the minimum, secondary.