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

[joeskidbeck]

http://www.acandyrose.com/crimescene-funeral.htm

Link to items placed in JonBenet's coffin. Here is a snip concerning John and the scarf:

Then it was John turn. He had recently purchased a beautiful silk scarf, and he tucked it around JonBenet as if surrounding her with a final blanket of love.

This doesn't sound to me like it was placed around her neck at all. Maybe he just wanted to get rid of a piece of evidence?[SIZE=+0]
[/SIZE]

 

[MurriFlower]

Well Otg, after having nightmares due to your Grays Anatomy pictures and the horror that was preparing for my instructors anatomy part of my A&P courses, I slept, a couple of hours. I thought about what I typed earlier and I can't get out of my mind why strangulation by one device, differs in looks from another. When we were in A&P, we had several 'corpses' used for our anatomy portion of class work. One of the bodies was a young girl who had been strangled.

At the time, we all thought that was very morbid and spent more time trying to disassociate from her fate, rather than pay attention to the lessons her body bore. The neck is surprisingly strong. There are vulnerable area, near the spine, the hyoid bone, the thyroid, glands, nerves and the jugular veins, to name just a few. But there is a lot of muscle tissue also. My instructor used to tell us "It takes a lot of muscle to hold up those fat heads of yours."

So, we asked, how is someone so easily strangled? He looked at us like we had three heads and said, "It's caused by severe hypoxia." Ummm, but why is it so easy to kill someone this way?

"That's anatomy and physiology," he said, grinning ear to ear. "The complexity of the human body is that in it's strength, are it's most vulnerable weaknesses."

Brilliant man, he gave me a headache! So, the past several minutes, I researched strangling games, for curiosity sake. To think about this possibility, I had to think about whether there was a possibility, let alone a probability, that JonBenet could have been exposed to these behaviors or games. The R's were a mixed family, with adult children and smaller children. They were active in church, with children of different ages, sports, travel and communities. There is also speculation put forth concerning Patsy and her sisters possible abuse.

I found this article, which gives background on the 'choking game'. http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm5706a1.htm

One excerpt is:

The earliest choking-game death was identified as occurring in 1995. Three or fewer deaths occurred annually during 1995--2004; however, 22 deaths occurred in 2005, 35 in 2006, and nine in 2007. Seventy-one (86.6%) of the 82 decedents were male, and the age range of decedents was 6--19 years, with a mean age of 13.3 years (standard deviation = 2.1) and a median age of 13 years. Age distribution of the 82 choking-game decedents during 1995--2007 differed from that of the 5,101 youths aged 6--19 years whose deaths were attributed to suicide by hanging/suffocation during 1999--2005§ (Figure).

Among the 70 deaths for which sufficient detail was reported, 67 (95.7%) occurred while the decedent was alone. Among the 42 deaths for which sufficient detail was reported, 39 (92.9%) parents of decedents said they were not aware of the choking game until the death of their child.

Choking-game deaths occurred in 31 states; no geographic clustering was evident. Deaths did not vary significantly by season or by day of the week. No information regarding decedent drug use, race/ethnicity, or socioeconomic status was available.


Interesting and this leads me to further believe why the scarf was placed with JonBenet. There are a lot more articles, I just found the 1995 date interesting in this one.

SunnyRN can you just clarify for me please. This article says that the victims overwhelmingly are males (86.6%), average age 13 years (around the onset of puberty). Most of the boys practice this on themselves. I assume you are thinking this game was played ON JBR by one of her siblings/parents? Wouldn't this be rather unusual??

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

 

[Steely]

I suppose the mark we are talking about could have at least several different explanations, including some type of burn. One of the confusing components of this is whether or not it was inflicted or occurred before or after death, and how the body reacts in either state. But since the same type mark, as has been pointed out, occurs in other strangulation victims, I thought we should look for a medical explanation. Being that my background is not medical, it is perhaps more difficult for me. However, after reading the information I've passed along, I am of the opinion that the cause of the mark (with JB, and as seen in other cases) is (from the quote above) "the passage of blood (extravasation) from ruptured blood vessels into the interstitial subcutaneous tissue as a result of trauma to the underlying blood vessels". IOW, as our resident nurses have called it, "blood pooling". Hopefully, that makes sense.

And thank you, Steely, for the links. I will read those later when I have more time.
.

OTG, I'm not arguing with you! I promise! I honestly think your explanation is probably much more likely than a curling iron (still working on this theory and I realize it SOUNDS implausible but I'm preparing to share more about it.) I think you've done an absolutely outstanding job researching this. I am so impressed by your thought provoking and information filled posts. I appreciate your research so very much.

What about the possiblity the mark was made through more than one process? (Possibly two or more contributing factors? Possibly at different times...before, and/or during, and/or after death) I remember seeing a photo of this mark where someone had circled an area and wrote there was a deeper area of abrasion at the lower edge. Can someone post that link if they have it handy? Thanks!

 

[MurriFlower]

OTG, I'm not arguing with you! I promise! I honestly think your explanation is probably much more likely than a curling iron (still working on this theory and I realize it SOUNDS implausible but I'm preparing to share more about it.) I think you've done an absolutely outstanding job researching this. I am so impressed by your thought provoking and information filled posts. I appreciate your research so very much.

What about the possiblity the mark was made through more than one process? (possibly two or more contributing factors?) I remember seeing a photo of this mark where someone had circled an area and wrote there was a deeper area of abrasion at the lower edge. Can someone post that link if they have it handy? Thanks!

Anyone with photo editing software can find the outline of a gun muzzle perfectly clearly by adjusting brightness/contrast and tone adjustment etc. Try it.

 

[passionflower]

at the 23rd party. JBR was crying saying she didn't feel pretty............
could she have gotten this mark at the party? or that day?
Just a thought

 

[Steely]

Anyone with photo editing software can find the outline of a gun muzzle perfectly clearly by adjusting brightness/contrast and tone adjustment etc. Try it.

I don't have photo editing software, sure wish I did! What outline of a gun muzzle and where? On the cone shaped neck mark? I'm sorry, I'm confused.

 

[Steely]

I think this is a must-read to learn more about:
"EXAMINATION AND INTERPRETATION OF FINDINGS IN ASPHYXIAL DEATHS"
http://www.iafm1972.org/pdfs/mlmanual/CHAPTER-27.pdf

 

[MurriFlower]

I don't have photo editing software, sure wish I did! What outline of a gun muzzle and where? On the cone shaped neck mark? I'm sorry, I'm confused.

Yes, Ok, well here it is, don't mind the green colour, it's just I changed the 'hue' there is no trickery here, this is a clear outline that looks like where a gun muzzle was pressed hard into her skin.

 

[passionflower]

under hanging I noticed: brownish, dry appearance....opposite the knot

 

[belimom]

Yes, Ok, well here it is, don't mind the green colour, it's just I changed the 'hue' there is no trickery here, this is a clear outline that looks like where a gun muzzle was pressed hard into her skin.

Minus the darkened part, the outline in general looks similar to the outline of the so-called "footprint" or caribiner or whatever (which couldn't be a footprint if it's roughly 2.5" or so long (which isn't far off of the measurements for the mark on her neck):

ETA: I do not necessarily believe they are from the same object, but I did notice similarities and wanted to put it out there for others to see.

 

[MurriFlower]

Minus the darkened part, the outline in general looks similar to the outline of the so-called "footprint" or caribiner or whatever (which couldn't be a footprint if it's roughly 2.5" or so long (which isn't far off of the measurements for the mark on her neck):

I think the measurements are in cm and it looks like about 13cm or ~6". Don't you think that the 'caribiner' shape is actually raised rather than indented?

 

[belimom]

I think the measurements are in cm and it looks like about 13cm or ~6". Don't you think that the 'caribiner' shape is actually raised rather than indented?

I can't read the numbers so I'm not sure. I was going off of the post below. Anyone know which is the correct size - 6" or 2 1/2"? FYI, even at 6", it can't be a footprint of JBR. That would be more like a toddler or preschooler...

...(BBM)...I apologize for posting this without questioning it. Something didn’t seem right about it to me.

The 6” length referred to by Mikie was wrong. Apparently Mikie didn’t realize that the scale shown in the crime scene photo was in centimeters and not in inches. Here is the original photo without his outline:
http://denver.rockymountainnews.com/art/extra/ramsey/img041.jpg

The scale used by investigators in this photo can be found on this page (Bureau Scale Set), along with the ABFO No. 2 Scale, designed by the American Board of Forensic Odontology, which can be seen in so many of the autopsy photos.

Looking back at the original photo of the supposed “bare footprint”, the length would be about 6 or 7 cm, or about 2½ inches for those of us on this side of the pond. That would be way too small for a child’s footprint. So the question becomes: What is it that is being shown in that photo?
...(snipped)...

 

[otg]

Hi Otg, I am not a coroner and the people I see are patients, still alive, still healing, but there are a few areas I would love to address.

Otg, I do not in any way shape or form, believe these marks are from a stun gun. I have seen stun gun injuries on prisoners who were at our community hospital in the past. They are uniform in shape. You could place one on top of the other and they would be identical. These marks were all three different.

Nor do I think any of the other marks are from a stun gun. We’ll have to address them at another time. Since you are more familiar than I... any suggestions who should begin?

How about the one large mark on her cheek? That one too baffles me. Maybe we can look at it next. Didn't someone say they saw a smiley face there or something?

I also could not find a word for the mark which mostly results from strangulation with a soft object. The mark is very distinctive. I wish we had a coroner at our hospital as a coroner would most likely be the person to have a name for this mark.It amazes me, the mark that a softer object leaves, verses a rope or a wire. I would think that exerting the pressure to the neck would create the mark, not the type of object that is used. The act of strangulation is occurring, exerting pressure, so all I can figure out, is that the softer cloth may more easily 'crimp' a portion of the skin. The fact that the mark is always in the same spot would have me tend to turn away from that theory however.

Uh, oh, Sunnie. Are you trying to trick me into thinking that I had already agreed with you on the soft nature of the strangulation material?

I cannot exclude that as a possibility, but neither can I draw that as a conclusion. At this time anyway, I think the mark (which I will refer to as a “CTE” -- see above) is the result of the trauma to the underlying blood vessels, not necessarily the result of the type of material used to cause the strangulation.

If on the other hand, it is because of the material, why would it occur in that same area in different strangulation victims? If it was because of the softer cloth crimping a portion of the skin, as you conjectured, it seems it could just as easily occur in other locations as well? Of course, possibly, it could be (just thinking out loud here, or “spitballing” as SuperDave calls it) that the “crimp” is more likely to occur in that one area because of the softness of the underlying structures of the neck, i.e. the area between the throat cartilages and the sternomastoid (sternocleidomastoideus in referenced drawings).

You explained perfectly, the types of skin injuries that occur. The differences in them as well as how they differ from bruises, blood blisters or blood pooling. Now that we understand the type of mark on JonBenets neck, we also understand the type of object it was most probably made by.

I’m not convinced that we can conclude the type of material used simply by the nature of the mark, Sunnie. I still tend to think it could be caused by any type of material used in strangulation, and is simply the result of trauma to the underlying blood vessels and how the blood is trapped on the surface within that area identified as the carotid triangle.

The next question is where there sexual choking games occurring in the Ramsey household. If so, between whom. Does it have anything to do with the scarf that was placed in JonBenets coffin? Or am I heading too far ahead at this point?

The sexual choking games, to me at this point, is more than I can surmise. First of all, I don’t get the point. I mean, the purpose of choking associated with sex is supposedly for heightened arousal. Arousal for whom? Usually it’s for the person being choked. Also, it is usually self-inflicted, or if it is inflicted second-person, it still is for the arousal of the person being choked -- not the person doing the choking (although in very rare instances, that may be the case).

(WARNING: Discussion of an adult nature is about to happen. Children, and those who might easily be embarrassed or offended, should please leave the room.)

Autoerotic asphyxia has been around since the 1600’s, when observers noticed that males executed at public hangings experienced noticeable erections, lasting in some instances past death. It was even found that sometimes, men had ejaculated after death. (Actually, this was because of the relaxation of muscles after death and the release of many different bodily fluids. Nevertheless, I’m reminded here of a line toward the end of the song “Start Me Up” by the Rolling Stones.) The logic was that if it was good for him, why not try it, and stop it just before you die? The problem with this, like many other paraphilias, is that it tends to progress to an uncontrollable point. Witness to that end: Albert Dekker in the 60’s, Stephen Milligan of the UK in 1994, and most recently David Carradine. I remember hearing about this when I was much younger when it was called “terminal sex” because the person came so close to death, and people who did this on a regular basis were called “gaspers”. It’s probably much more common than most people realize. But again, it is usually done for self-arousal by the person doing it.

Anyway, the point of all that is that because of its nature, I have a hard time believing that JonBenet was being strangled repeatedly as part of some sort of “sex-game”.

(Okay, end of adult content. The children can come back now.)

As to the scarf that John placed in the coffin... That’s a bit odd. I don’t think it was a way of getting rid of evidence as someone had suggested (too many opportunities prior to that to have already done so, and why do it in front of everyone), and I don’t think it was a way to cover her neck wound (that should have already been done by the mortician). But I’m gonna have to just mark that one up as odd (not the first thing on my “odd list”, BTW).
.

 

[otg]

I first of all don't think it's a burn because the ME would have called it a burn, IMHO, not an abrasion. I do think it's possible that the whole cord/strangulation could have been set up to cover up the triangle mark. That's a theory that I have read elsewhere - and that the triangle mark may be key in what had happened previously that evening.

How would the strangulation have covered up the triangular mark, belimom? Even in the pictures with the ligature still on it is plainly visible. As to somehow relating to events earlier in the evening, what would that be? I'm sorry, I just don't follow you there. Do you mean that it was the result of some prior abuse, or something that happened in the car while delivering presents?
.

 

[belimom]

How would the strangulation have covered up the triangular mark, belimom? Even in the pictures with the ligature still on it is plainly visible. As to somehow relating to events earlier in the evening, what would that be? I'm sorry, I just don't follow you there. Do you mean that it was the result of some prior abuse, or something that happened in the car while delivering presents?
.

OTG, just thinking of possibilities here. Something I read elsewhere and thought I'd throw it out there. We're just discussing all possibilities from all angles. For one, it's also possible (probable?) that the strangulation was not the primary COD - that it was staged after the fact (or pretty close to it) of another grave injury. Just like everyone else, I'm looking at all angles. You're right: the cord in no way covers up the mark, but it sure got at least one theorist (and probably more) thinking that twisting the cord caused the mark - no the cord itself but whatever was used to twist. I don't think that, but see? It has at least some people thinking that the mark and cord/strangulation are related.

FYI, I haven't sleuthed this case nearly as much as most of you on this thread. I've read alot but don't have it all catalogued away and it all blends together after awhile. However, it was this case that initially caused me to stumble across WS to begin with, and it is the one case that haunts me more than any other. I wasn't there. I don't know what happened. None of us do. I'm just thinking out loud. I respect everyone else's theories -- even IDI which I really don't believe -- and I'd like the same. Thank you.

 

[SunnieRN]

SunnyRN can you just clarify for me please. This article says that the victims overwhelmingly are males (86.6%), average age 13 years (around the onset of puberty). Most of the boys practice this on themselves. I assume you are thinking this game was played ON JBR by one of her siblings/parents? Wouldn't this be rather unusual??

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fainting_game

Thank you MF. The statistics you posted are from the article. The year the 'game' was first recognized by the article is what I found interesting and still do, as we know forms of this type of sexual gratification have existed for much longer than 1995.


Otg, I believe the second strangulation, which actually killed her, was to cover the first instance. As usual, just my opinion.

 

[MurriFlower]

Thank you MF. The statistics you posted are from the article. The year the 'game' was first recognized by the article is what I found interesting and still do, as we know forms of this type of sexual gratification have existed for much longer than 1995.


Otg, I believe the second strangulation, which actually killed her, was to cover the first instance. As usual, just my opinion.

Thank you SunnieRN,

Perhaps I didn't make my question clear. Are you suggesting that JBR performed the fainting game on herself or are you suggesting someone else performed it on her as a sexual strangulation game? If the former, is there any statistics on 6yo girls playing the fainting game? If the latter, what do you suggest would be the motivation for someone else to do this, as it is the stranglee that receives the 'buzz' in the sexual strangulation game, not the strangler? Have you formed an opinion on who may have done the strangling?

 

[SunnieRN]

Thank you SunnieRN,

Perhaps I didn't make my question clear. Are you suggesting that JBR performed the fainting game on herself or are you suggesting someone else performed it on her as a sexual strangulation game? If the former, is there any statistics on 6yo girls playing the fainting game? If the latter, what do you suggest would be the motivation for someone else to do this, as it is the stranglee that receives the 'buzz' in the sexual strangulation game, not the strangler? Have you formed an opinion on who may have done the strangling?

I have no idea 'if' the fainting game occurred in the R household, or, if it did, who was involved. Smaller children mimic older children. I have, for quite some time, believed Burke to be involved in JonBenet's molestation, whether in play, experimentation or abuse. I have no idea as to what actually occurred, however I can not rule out a possibility of this having occurred.

The one thing I have learned, in life, is be prepared to be surprised. The R's were around many people, had a lot of access to the internet, video games and books. I don't find role playing, imitation at all far fetched.

Do I think that if Burke, or Burke and a friend were involved that they would have purposely killed JonBenet? No, but stranger things have certainly happened.

 

[otg]

OTG, just thinking of possibilities here. Something I read elsewhere and thought I'd throw it out there. We're just discussing all possibilities from all angles. For one, it's also possible (probable?) that the strangulation was not the primary COD - that it was staged after the fact (or pretty close to it) of another grave injury. Just like everyone else, I'm looking at all angles. You're right: the cord in no way covers up the mark, but it sure got at least one theorist (and probably more) thinking that twisting the cord caused the mark - no the cord itself but whatever was used to twist. I don't think that, but see? It has at least some people thinking that the mark and cord/strangulation are related.

FYI, I haven't sleuthed this case nearly as much as most of you on this thread. I've read alot but don't have it all catalogued away and it all blends together after awhile. However, it was this case that initially caused me to stumble across WS to begin with, and it is the one case that haunts me more than any other. I wasn't there. I don't know what happened. None of us do. I'm just thinking out loud. I respect everyone else's theories -- even IDI which I really don't believe -- and I'd like the same. Thank you.

I’m not sure if you misunderstood me, or if I am now misunderstanding you, belimom. In no way was I being disrespectful toward anything you said. I was simply discussing with you and trying to understand what you were suggesting. That’s what we do here. None of us knows what happened. We throw ideas out, let people discuss them, ask questions, and give possible answers. All this to try and figure out what did happen.

I’m not certain what happened anymore than anyone else. If you, or anyone else, can convince me that you are right about something and I’m wrong, I will absolutely concede the point and change my mind.

Again, if you thought I was being anything other than straightforward with you, I sincerely apologize. You will get no disrespect from me about a sincere post.
.

 

[belimom]

I’m not sure if you misunderstood me, or if I am now misunderstanding you, belimom. In no way was I being disrespectful toward anything you said....(snipped)...

Okay - I must be misunderstanding the bold and italicized font, which to me is sarcasm or emphasis, just like all caps is yelling. I apologize if I read too much into your post. If that's just your style, I can accept that.