...they discussed the idea of no adult would use a train track to jab a child and try to wake her, and Spitz said there was no circulation at that time. So, JonBenet would have had to of already been strangled and dead when jabbed with the train track.
That piece from Smit shocked me, and it has me convinced that those abrasions occurred post mortem.
However, the train tracks were not necessarily the instrument used to cause those marks. Kolar goes in more detail in his book that those tracks have three prongs, and the middle one would have had to be missing for that theory to work. Sure, the middle prong could have snapped off, but we'll never know what the condition of the train tracks down there was to say that with certainty. Similar to the flashlight being the weapon for the head blow - seems likely, but the door is open for other possibilities.
Further, if the train track was used, we have to ask why. We are assuming Burke did this because it was a toy, specifically his toy, and because he was trying to revive JBR. But what if the jabbing served another purpose? The train tracks were handy to whomever was in the basement doing the staging. If we are already devising ligatures and a garrote, isn't it reasonable to stage some other implications of torture as well?
If we believe the train tracks caused the marks, it is easy to connect that to Burke and assume his motive. But if we believe the marks were made post mortem, then we have to conclude that Burke also strangled JBR and likely moved her body to his bedroom or the basement where the tracks were found (unless the crime occurred in the bedroom or basement).
Or, if we believe Burke was only responsible for the head blow and the rest was staged, and that the jabbing was done post mortem, then the purpose was to further the faked evidence of a monstrous intruder torturing JBR. The train tracks were handy just like the paintbrush used in the garrote, and for me this theory is just as plausible.
Which is all to reaffirm the ending message of this show: although there may be general agreement that RDI and a strong base of support for BDI, we still will never know exactly what happened that night without a confession.
That said, I did find the DNA discussion extremely tantalizing. If they test the flashlight and the garrote and other untested items for DNA, that would help further our knowledge of what happened. Again, I don't think it would be conclusive without a confession, but it would certainly be helpful. And in lieu of that confession, I hope this case remains in the spotlight for another twenty years, if only to never provide the persons responsible with any relief from.public scrutiny.
