The “roughly triangular, parchment-like rust colored abrasion”

[kanzz]

I'm not sure why you would dispute a second wrapping, evidenced not only by the blanching on the front of her neck, but backed up by the detective's first observations and two photographs, one showing the stick hanging on a short length of cord from what is clearly an entwined or entangled piece of her top, and the other showing marks left by the ruched up fabric that had pressed against her shoulder blades indicated by livor mortis and blanching. I've read that livor mortis is set at 10-12 hours, or even earlier in some cases, which would have been late morning/midday. If the cord got swung around her neck a second time as she'd been moved it wouldn't have caused blanching. Do you think it is a fluke that the white mark was there and the cord happened to end up in an accidental second wrap as she was moved?

We also know that certain facts were left out of the coroner's report to aid the police investigation.

Sorry but I don't understand an unwillingness to look at new evidence. Does it upset a theory? Sound theories follow the evidence and are built around the evidence; evidence should not be dismissed to fit a theory.

Same thing applies for trying to explain away the entanglement of the top and the cord, why does an entangled top cause a problem in anyone's theory? You know that livor mortis does not change after that length of time, which they could test by pressing it, so there would be no benefit to altering her clothing to photograph lividity at the house, compared to undressing her and photographing her fully later on or the next day at the lab.

Just posted my thoughts and my opinion. It's about the only thing anybody has, I guess. I wasn't disputing anything except perhaps LA's credibility, which I will probably always question. And I offered an alternative explanation for how the cord might have ended up around JB's neck loosely as well as why her shirt might have been up in the photo. Just that. Just ideas. I don't have any unwillingness at all to view new evidence. I guess somehow my thoughts don't fit your theory. Jeebers, my post wasn't meant to offend.

 

[Tortoise]

Just posted my thoughts and my opinion. It's about the only thing anybody has, I guess. I wasn't disputing anything except perhaps LA's credibility, which I will probably always question. And I offered an alternative explanation for how the cord might have ended up around JB's neck loosely as well as why her shirt might have been up in the photo. Just that. Just ideas. I don't have any unwillingness at all to view new evidence. I guess somehow my thoughts don't fit your theory. Jeebers, my post wasn't meant to offend.

I didn't say I was offended. Don't get me wrong. No one has to agree with me, I can be a lone ranger here with my theories and it doesn't bother me, I'll still be on my trail to find the truth. Maybe I and my test aren't scientific enough or medically factual enough to lend an air of credibility to my experiment(s). Just a guess.

However, what I queried was your disputing of evidence that lends credibility to the results, and no actual basis for rejecting the evidence, which when viewed cumulatively adds weight to the objectivity of it. It's not that your thoughts don't fit my theory, it's that they don't offer an alternative explanation for the evidence. As I said, evidence shouldn't be ignored, it is a building block to working out what happened. I think your reply to me is a bit snarky and unnecessary. Instead of making it personal, why not talk about my observations of the livor mortis and the timing of it, if you have a different idea? You don't have to reply, I'm just saying I would appreciate a discussion of the evidence rather than just a different theory that altogether dismisses evidence and photographs I have taken the time to post to back up what I say.

I'm not here to convince, I'm here to share information and dissect it with anyone who is interested, (if there is a reason for a different take on it), and share what I thought was two really very interesting and significant results. Perhaps I didn't put enough emphasis on them in my explanation.

1. When you pinch the skin of your neck as your head is turned sideways and then move your head forwards, it's not that the thumb and finger move apart, you would expect that on any folded skin, it's where they end up on the neck that is significant. I urge anyone to try it on their own neck, it's a really simple test. The thumb ends up much higher on the neck, in the region of the Adams Apple, and the finger stays at the base of the neck, exactly like the rising curved base of the red triangular abrasion. Could it be that some strangulation victims end up with this strange triangular mark because what they have in common is that their neck was turned to the side when they were strangled? It makes more sense to me than some theories I've read about a special type of silk scarf producing this result. The darker red ring of abrasion along half of the base of the triangle/cone seems to support this folding over and tight pinching of skin.

2. The skin of the neck stretches out and doesn't fold like that when you turn your head, if the arms are raised up already. This seems to be important in determining that JonBenet's arms weren't already strung up above her head before she was strangled. It might help someone to revise a theory of the sequence of what happened, particularly if they speculate that JonBenet was suspended by her arms in some sort of a rough game.

It doesn't really need saying lol, but everyone is free to ignore, criticise and disagree with what I think, I'm not special right, just another sleuther, but I don't think it's unreasonable to ask for a basis of disagreement with hard evidence such as livor mortis and timings. I see you chose not to get into discussion on these points in your reply, and that is fine, but please don't say it's because I'm defensive of my theory and won't accept challenges of it. I welcome discussion and hope there is more. That it will uncover new things we didn't already know before. Some will be happy I know to stick with what they are already married to, and feel threatened by it if it doesn't match a view that is by now firmly entrenched. I've read the same old same old stuff repeated ad nauseam here over the years, and I'm trying to inject fresh perspective on it and get closer to the truth.

Please feel free to join me, or not. If it doesn't appear to be an objective disagreement, I may challenge it. It is the only way to really move forwards, if that is a possibility.

 

[Tortoise]

My interest now is in looking to see whether a double wrap of the cord and a few other bits of information can help to determine who did it, by trying to look at the purpose behind the actions.

I'll be back with a list of the sequence of a few things that are known.

 

[UKGuy]

IF the parents did the strangulation, if, then they had to know about the head injury. There is no other reason for them to strangle JonBenet. That ligature is not accidental or done by a parent in loss of temper. The head injury would have been a slow death and they could have left it so the 'intruder' bashed her over the head. But that didn't look sadistic enough to ensure the police would look outside the home.

I think there are too many 'problem solving' attributes to this strangulation for it to have been done by a child. Things like cleaning blood off her thighs, putting clean clothes on and leaving fibres on her genital area before she was strangled, tying back her hair (probably ensuring to put back the cloth hair tie she had worn that evening on top of the elastic band) possibly to hide the skull depression, turning her over to not see her face, moving her cross so it would not be in the way, knowing where the swiss army knife was next to the pull ups, trying a grapefruit knife first, thinking of getting the cord and tape from the back of Patsy's painting (my theory, not proven), leaving fibres on the body and the tape, I could probably think of a few more.

Yes, when I said to hide the head injury and molestation, I meant to offer an alternative reason for death, to prevent these coming to light.

Tortoise,

IF the parents did the strangulation, if, then they had to know about the head injury.

This is an invalid inference. More so when we do not know what they knew, and we can infer they never knew it all, e.g. pineapple snack left in place.

I think there are too many 'problem solving' attributes to this strangulation for it to have been done by a child.

Not if the parents are fabricating an elaborate asphyxiation staging for their child, precisely to mask his childish strangulation?

Yes, when I said to hide the head injury and molestation, I meant to offer an alternative reason for death, to prevent these coming to light.

ITA. The staging is an answer for all those who think the sexual assault is only staging, i.e. Chief Beckner, why make what can be portrayed as an accident due the a head injury, into a sexual assault and homicide?

Until Kolar's BDI All has been refuted its helpful to consider this along with the parents adding on their version of a nasty homicide crime-scene, so producing the wine-cellar vista.

 

[Afterimage]

LOL...you have to have a thick skin and be fire proof to post here. lol

Tortoise...your theory is very similar to mine, (so far), and I came to quite a few of the same conclusions as you.

All of us here are really (for the most part) just speculating. There just isn't enough evidence to fill in what exactly happened from start to finish.

For example...I believe that JB was bashed in the head at the table where the pineapple was...but (I think UK guy) believes she was bashed in the head in her bedroom. However...there is no proof for where she was exactly hit.

We know for sure is that JB was hit in the head that night and we know there was a staging to cover up the crime. We know that the likelihood of an intruder is very slim. However...there is no proof for who did what. We can only speculate. There is no proof that JB was sexually assaulted that night or if the injuries to her vagina were from the staging. We know there was prior sexual abuse, but there is no proof on who actually abused her. Again we can only speculate.

A lot (probably most) people on this forum have their own pet theory.

Even if one of the two remaining Ramseys confessed...could you believe everything they said about that night? I think they would change some details in order to minimize the damage to their ego.
So, unfortunately we most likely will never know what happened and what each member did the whole night.

Keep going Tortoise...I like reading your posts.

 

[Tortoise]

Tortoise,


This is an invalid inference. More so when we do not know what they knew, and we can infer they never knew it all, e.g. pineapple snack left in place.

I'm just popping out for a while so I'll return to your post later UKGuy, but just wanted to get in a quick response to your first line.

If the parents did not know about the head injury, are you saying the following is a valid inference? -

Burke fatally injures JonBenet by bashing her over the head
Parents find JonBenet unconscious and strangle her, without knowing she has been injured.

Perhaps I misunderstood you? Because that seems absurdly unlikely to me. You're right we can't know it because we don't have a video or a confession but we can make logical inferences and that would seem to be beyond the realms of reasonably possible, to most, I would think. Would you not agree?

 

[Tortoise]

LOL...you have to have a thick skin and be fire proof to post here. lol

Tortoise...your theory is very similar to mine, (so far), and I came to quite a few of the same conclusions as you.

All of us here are really (for the most part) just speculating. There just isn't enough evidence to fill in what exactly happened from start to finish.

For example...I believe that JB was bashed in the head at the table where the pineapple was...but (I think UK guy) believes she was bashed in the head in her bedroom. However...there is no proof for where she was exactly hit.

We know for sure is that JB was hit in the head that night and we know there was a staging to cover up the crime. We know that the likelihood of an intruder is very slim. However...there is no proof for who did what. We can only speculate. There is no proof that JB was sexually assaulted that night or if the injuries to her vagina were from the staging. We know there was prior sexual abuse, but there is no proof on who actually abused her. Again we can only speculate.

A lot (probably most) people on this forum have their own pet theory.

Even if one of the two remaining Ramseys confessed...could you believe everything they said about that night? I think they would change some details in order to minimize the damage to their ego.
So, unfortunately we most likely will never know what happened and what each member did the whole night.

Keep going Tortoise...I like reading your posts.

Thanks Afterimage. I need a little bit more time to gather my notes on this, but I think I have got to the stage where I can make some very bold statements about who did parts of this, which will be interesting to put forward for robust dissection. May not be ready for a couple of days while I work on it, but I'll be back later anyway.

 

[UKGuy]

I'm just popping out for a while so I'll return to your post later UKGuy, but just wanted to get in a quick response to your first line.

If the parents did not know about the head injury, are you saying the following is a valid inference? -

Burke fatally injures JonBenet by bashing her over the head
Parents find JonBenet unconscious and strangle her, without knowing she has been injured.

Perhaps I misunderstood you? Because that seems absurdly unlikely to me. You're right we can't know it because we don't have a video or a confession but we can make logical inferences and that would seem to be beyond the realms of reasonably possible, to most, I would think. Would you not agree?

1. IF the parents did the strangulation, if, then they had to know about the head injury.

If this were valid it would also mean that the following was valid:

2. If the parents never knew about the head injury then the parents did not strangle JonBenet

For those interested and want to check it out, the first inference is called modus ponens the second modus tollens, and they are classical rules of logic.

Burke fatally injures JonBenet by bashing her over the head
Parents find JonBenet unconscious and strangle her, without knowing she has been injured.

Sure you can make logical inferences but the above quote is not an inference its just an assumed sequence of events.

Yet, it is quite possibly exactly what happened. The parents would know JonBenet has been injured how or why might elude them, i.e. BR is saying little.

There is even the outside possibility that it was one of the parents who whacked JonBenet on the head.

.

 

[Tortoise]

If this were valid it would also mean that the following was valid:


For those interested and want to check it out, the first inference is called modus ponens the second modus tollens, and they are classical rules of logic.


Sure you can make logical inferences but the above quote is not an inference its just an assumed sequence of events.

Yet, it is quite possibly exactly what happened. The parents would know JonBenet has been injured how or why might elude them, i.e. BR is saying little.

There is even the outside possibility that it was one of the parents who whacked JonBenet on the head.

.

Ok, so it wasn't a valid inference but it is a logical inference, is what I think you're saying.

Indeed it's a possibility that one of the parents dealt the blow to her head, and I haven't ruled that out, but we were discussing the other scenario.

.

 

[Tortoise]

Tortoise,


Not if the parents are fabricating an elaborate asphyxiation staging for their child, precisely to mask his childish strangulation?

Which part would you say is elaborate? And what is a childish strangulation?

 

[UKGuy]

Which part would you say is elaborate? And what is a childish strangulation?

Tortoise,
Lets take the childish scenario first, so as per Kolar, i.e. BDI All. BR might have restrained JonBenet by her shirt collar so strangling her, he might have restrained her manually, unknowingly compressing her vagus nerve causing JonBenet to enter a coma, or he simply asphyxiated JonBenet either manually or by using some instrument, i.e. cord, belt, cloth, etc.

The popular theory is that BR whacked JonBenet on the head in anger.

This would be followed by some minimalist childish staging, e.g. size-12's and his long johns, possibly the nylon cord as a restraint?

For the elaborate part, along come the parents who tidy up the crime-scene, presumably her bedroom, since if it had been the breakfast bar then the pineapple snack would have been cleaned away.

JR wipes the blood off JonBenet's as fibers from his shirt are on JonBenet's size-12's and body.

PR constructs the ligature and ties it in place, as fibers from her red top are embedded into the knotting on the ligature. Presumably she assaults JonBenet with the paintbrush and asphyxiates JonBenet, then wraps her in the blanket and places her into the wine-cellar, or even the crawl space in the train room?

So the parents were attempting to stage away whatever forensic evidence BR had left behind. Primarily an evident neck injury and bleeding from a sexual assault.

As I've already mentioned the parents had the option of presenting JonBenet as the victim of a household accident, i.e. she fell down the stairs, thus avoiding both potential sexual assault and homicide charges, this they declined.

So the elaboration in the staging is the ligature/paintbrush device along with the ransom note, and placing JonBenet into the wine-cellar none of which are required to claim she had been the victim of an intruder.

The R's game plan was to hope she was not discovered, i.e. assumed long gone and kidnapped. Then the R's would flee interstate by air and refuse to return.

.

 

[TeaTime]

Just because one couldn't SEE the injury to her head doesn't mean it could not be felt. A chunk of her skull was pushed into her brain, I am sure her parents felt it and that is how they knew she was mortally wounded by the head blow.

It is now and has been for some time my opinion that the strangulation was in response to the parents finding JBR unconscious, with shallow, labored breathing and a very faint, erratic heartbeat. The paintbrush may have still been inside her and hence became the handle of the ligature, minus each end.

 

[UKGuy]

Just because one couldn't SEE the injury to her head doesn't mean it could not be felt. A chunk of her skull was pushed into her brain, I am sure her parents felt it and that is how they knew she was mortally wounded by the head blow.

It is now and has been for some time my opinion that the strangulation was in response to the parents finding JBR unconscious, with shallow, labored breathing and a very faint, erratic heartbeat. The paintbrush may have still been inside her and hence became the handle of the ligature, minus each end.

TeaTime,
BBM: You may well be correct, but an elaborate ligature asphyxiation in combination with a paintbrush was not required to kill JonBenet.

A gentle parental hand over her mouth and nostrils or a pillow, etc would have sufficed.

The R's attempted to minimize the sexual assault and maximize the visibility of any neck injury!

.

 

[Tortoise]

Ok, UKGuy, thanks for your reply.

Now I've heard Kolar's theory, I can say I don't agree with it.

Possibly the parents hoped JonBenet wouldn't be discovered, but I doubt they would have left her behind to rot away in the cellar.

 

[UKGuy]

Ok, UKGuy, thanks for your reply.

Now I've heard Kolar's theory, I can say I don't agree with it.

Possibly the parents hoped JonBenet wouldn't be discovered, but I doubt they would have left her behind to rot away in the cellar.

Tortoise,
BBM: 100% this is what the R's planned. JR was heard making flight arrangements on the phone that morning and told he was not leaving by a detective!

Kolar also thinks it all began in the breakfast bar and BR did the head whack and asphyxiation along with moving JonBenet to the basement, i.e. BDI All.

.

 

[Tortoise]

Tortoise,
BBM: 100% this is what the R's planned. JR was heard making flight arrangements on the phone that morning and told he was not leaving by a detective!

Kolar also thinks it all began in the breakfast bar and BR did the head whack and asphyxiation along with moving JonBenet to the basement, i.e. BDI All.

.

JR was making flight arrangements half an hour after JonBenet had been brought up from the basement. That isn't leaving her to turn into a skeleton in a basement room. They knew at that time that they would get lawyered up and get her body back for burial.

 

[Miz Adventure]

Tortoise,
, then wraps her in the blanket and places her into the wine-cellar, or even the crawl space in the train room?


.

Hold on - did you say 'crawl space'?

That's the first time I've heard of this.

It fits in nicely with my theory about how this whole thing happened (See My Theories thread).

I thought maybe the R's had put her body in one of their cars out in the garage, (before John realised it was a mistake and used his 'hidden time' to go get the body and put her in the wine cellar)

 

[UKGuy]

Hold on - did you say 'crawl space'?

That's the first time I've heard of this.

It fits in nicely with my theory about how this whole thing happened (See My Theories thread).

I thought maybe the R's had put her body in one of their cars out in the garage, (before John realized it was a mistake and used his 'hidden time' to go get the body and put her in the wine cellar)

Miz Adventure,
Yes, its an ad hoc theory of mine, so to explain why Fleet White never saw JonBenet the first time round, also offers a reason why JR vanished for a period that morning, he might also have tied the restraints and put the duct tape on JonBenet's mouth at the same time?

Also any forensic evidence can be explained away by JR with his story he was helping BR in the train room the night before. Which I do not believe.


.

 

[Miz Adventure]

I'm having a problem with all this.

I'm certain the R's are guilty as heck in covering up this crime. (I believe BR was the culprit - both the head bashing AND the strangling)

I can't my mind over the obstacle that keeps getting in the way. I honestly cannot envisage PR or JR strangling JBR. It's a picture that just doesn't sit right with me. I don't actually think that JR had anything to do with sexually molesting his daughter either.

I think the couple covered up for their son. PR found JBR lying on the floor - and that is the scream the neighbours heard. The couple knew they were the only people in the house. How would it look to the police? Their daughter garrotted in their locked home? They knew that Burke wuld be taken away from them and they were not going to let that happen.

They HAD to invent an intruder. Abd that is what they did.

 

[UKGuy]

I'm having a problem with all this.

I'm certain the R's are guilty as heck in covering up this crime. (I believe BR was the culprit - both the head bashing AND the strangling)

I can't my mind over the obstacle that keeps getting in the way. I honestly cannot envisage PR or JR strangling JBR. It's a picture that just doesn't sit right with me. I don't actually think that JR had anything to do with sexually molesting his daughter either.

I think the couple covered up for their son. PR found JBR lying on the floor - and that is the scream the neighbours heard. The couple knew they were the only people in the house. How would it look to the police? Their daughter garrotted in their locked home? They knew that Burke wuld be taken away from them and they were not going to let that happen.

They HAD to invent an intruder. Abd that is what they did.

Miz Adventure.
BBM: Not quite. They invented an abduction and offered the ransom note as corroboration. It was a failed abduction because the kidnapper decided to assault JonBenet, resulting in her death so he put her in the wine-cellar. Of course the kidnapper is an intruder which Lou Smit then amplified.

I can't my mind over the obstacle that keeps getting in the way. I honestly cannot envisage PR or JR strangling JBR. It's a picture that just doesn't sit right with me.

The R's decided to fake injuries on JonBenet so to mask those that went before, so she was asphyxiated using the paintbrush handle and was possibly assaulted internally with the paintbrush. Of course, all behavior which only an intruder would inflict.

.