The Flashlight.....

[gramcracker]

it most definitely was a Maglite, on the kitchen counter. I wonder why you post things which are not true

 

[aussiesheila2]

it most definitely was a Maglite, on the kitchen counter. I wonder why you post things which are not true

If I have posted something which is not true it was not intentional. It is my belief after studying the information available that the flashlight on the kitchen bench was not a Maglite. If you have information that shows I am wrong I would very much like you to post it. Or even just post the information you have that makes you believe it WAS a Maglite. Thanks

 

[gramcracker]

don't have my kindle this weekend so I can't give page #s - but the Schiller/Thomas/Kolar books all describe the FL by its brand name/Maglite, and they also mention that the ML brand is the one preferred by LEOs (because it works dependably and withstands abuse/is sturdy)

 

[aussiesheila2]

don't have my kindle this weekend so I can't give page #s - but the Schiller/Thomas/Kolar books all describe the FL by its brand name/Maglite, and they also mention that the ML brand is the one preferred by LEOs (because it works dependably and withstands abuse/is sturdy)

thanks gram I dont have my books with me at the moment either but I will check all 3 when I get the chance

 

[Tadpole12]

IRM /Steve Thomas, Donald A. Davis, :

flash light:

http://books.google.ca/books?id=pC3...d=0CB8QuwUwAA#v=snippet&q=flash light&f=false

Showing 5 results in this book for flash light

Mag-Llite:
http://books.google.ca/books?id=pC3...&ved=0CB8QuwUwAA#v=snippet&q=Mag-Lite&f=false

Showing 1 results in this book for Mag-Llite



ty otg

 

[otg]

flash light:

http://books.google.ca/books?id=pC3...d=0CB8QuwUwAA#v=snippet&q=flash light&f=false

Showing 5 results in this book for flash light

Maglite:

http://books.google.ca/books?id=pC3...w&ved=0CB8QuwUwAA#v=snippet&q=Maglite&f=false

No results found in this book for Maglite

Hey, Tad.

Mag-Lite:

http://books.google.ca/books?id=pC3...&ved=0CB8QuwUwAA#v=snippet&q=Mag-Lite&f=false

 

[Tadpole12]

http://thewebsafe.tripod.com/02181999pmpt-index.htm

PMPT/Lawrence Schiller:

flashlight (Maglite) p 61, 295, 350, 359, 434, 510-1, 518

 

[UKGuy]

The thing about the maglite, regardless of who used it, be it Intruder or Ramsey is that the user demonstrated forensic awareness they wiped it clean inside and out! This feature was not replicated across the murder site, various forensic items are linked to JR, PR and BR.Could it be the item that caused JonBenet's head injury, absolutely, was it, maybe? Minimally one can conclude the user of the maglite assumed others had seen its use externally, so the user decided to wipe it clean, thus severing any link to the crime scene? I reckon the important question to be answered is was JonBenet's head injury part of the staging or a consequence of her sexual assault?Depending on your answer different theories arise as to why she was killed that night. One thing I am confident of is that PR put her to bed because she had her hair tied up in assymetric ponytails, not a fashion feature for Christmas Parties, i.e White's, so she made it to her bed, as the pineapple snack confirms, e.g. no cleanup! That is life is sweet, all is well, until someone abuses JonBenet in her own bedroom, then staging is required to effect another scenario. If you can accept a time lapse between JonBenet's sexual assault and her head injury, then the latter may suggest staging rather than impulsive violence? i.e. the staging may require disambiguating rather than confirmation via forensic evidence. If a time lapse is incoherent then it simply forms part of the assault on JonBenet, i.e. sexual assault, followed by a whack on the head, for whatever reason? The latter suggests a different scenario from the former, i.e. domestic staging vs domestic homicide?I reckon its the former, even JR suggested it was an "inside job". So was it PR or BR, who was most likely to behave in such an immature manner, and display such pathological behaviour?.

 

[midwest mama]

The thing about the maglite, regardless of who used it, be it Intruder or Ramsey is that the user demonstrated forensic awareness they wiped it clean inside and out! This feature was not replicated across the murder site, various forensic items are linked to JR, PR and BR.Could it be the item that caused JonBenet's head injury, absolutely, was it, maybe? Minimally one can conclude the user of the maglite assumed others had seen its use externally, so the user decided to wipe it clean, thus severing any link to the crime scene? I reckon the important question to be answered is was JonBenet's head injury part of the staging or a consequence of her sexual assault?Depending on your answer different theories arise as to why she was killed that night. One thing I am confident of is that PR put her to bed because she had her hair tied up in assymetric ponytails, not a fashion feature for Christmas Parties, i.e White's, so she made it to her bed, as the pineapple snack confirms, e.g. no cleanup! That is life is sweet, all is well, until someone abuses JonBenet in her own bedroom, then staging is required to effect another scenario. If you can accept a time lapse between JonBenet's sexual assault and her head injury, then the latter may suggest staging rather than impulsive violence? i.e. the staging may require disambiguating rather than confirmation via forensic evidence. If a time lapse is incoherent then it simply forms part of the assault on JonBenet, i.e. sexual assault, followed by a whack on the head, for whatever reason? The latter suggests a different scenario from the former, i.e. domestic staging vs domestic homicide?I reckon its the former, even JR suggested it was an "inside job". So was it PR or BR, who was most likely to behave in such an immature manner, and display such pathological behaviour?.

Hmm....someone who was familiar with forensics?

And the 2 ponytails do signal she was prepared for bed by someone.

How many (whose) hairbrushes were taken into evidence?

 

[UKGuy]

Hmm....someone who was familiar with forensics? And the 2 ponytails do signal she was prepared for bed by someone.How many (whose) hairbrushes were taken into evidence?

midwest mama,Sure, somone who thought: "If R says I did it and used the flashlight, then my prints on the flashlight will back this up," so no prints mean no connection! Also it was likely used directly in JonBenet's bedroom as the light in her room was not working.I reckon the two ponytails are more important than the pineapple snack since they tell us more.What would hairbrushes tell us?.

 

[gramcracker]

there were numerous hairs/hair fibers from various locations listed in the SWs but the only hairbrush I saw was "hairs taken from JR's hairbrush"

 

[midwest mama]

midwest mama,Sure, somone who thought: "If R says I did it and used the flashlight, then my prints on the flashlight will back this up," so no prints mean no connection! Also it was likely used directly in JonBenet's bedroom as the light in her room was not working.I reckon the two ponytails are more important than the pineapple snack since they tell us more.What would hairbrushes tell us?.

As already pointed out there were hairs taken from JR'S hairbrush. I suppose to collect DNA? Is it possible JR'S hairbrush could have been used to make JB'S 2 ponytails?

 

[Chrishope]

As already pointed out there were hairs taken from JR'S hairbrush. I suppose to collect DNA? Is it possible JR'S hairbrush could have been used to make JB'S 2 ponytails?

I don't know much about 6 year old girls. I suppose JR could have made the pony tails, using his brush. Someone else could also have done it, but why use his brush? Could JBR have made them herself do you think? Did they have to be made at bedtime, or could they have been made later when she was out of bed?

There is no reason for any of the Rs to wipe the outside of the FL to remove their finger prints. Nothing suspect about R prints on the R's FL, regardless of what claims are made. It seems likely, at least to me, that there was something obvious such as hair/skin particles that had to be wiped off. It would be odd for someone "familiar with forensics" to be so careful about the FL yet so seemingly careless about other evidence (assuming an RDI scenario). Maybe something so obvious that even w/o any special concern for forensics it became obvious wiping down was in order?

I'm not sure it was wiped inside. If the batteries were slipped into place by letting them slip between forefinger and thumb, which is how many people would load such a FL, then there would be no fingerprints to be lifted from the batteries, but that's not exactly the same thing as being wiped down.

 

[UKGuy]

As already pointed out there were hairs taken from JR'S hairbrush. I suppose to collect DNA? Is it possible JR'S hairbrush could have been used to make JB'S 2 ponytails?

midwest mama,Entirely possible, particularly if JonBenet simply used his brush, no conspiracy theory required, just common sense..

 

[gramcracker]

I'm not sure it was wiped inside. If the batteries were slipped into place by letting them slip between forefinger and thumb, which is how many people would load such a FL, then there would be no fingerprints to be lifted from the batteries, but that's not exactly the same thing as being wiped down.

IA, none of us are sure that the batteries were wiped down but we know the outside was, we know that neighbors reported seeing "moving" light and that lights which were normally seen were off instead (and vice versa). so all of that combined with the I'm-not-sure-I-don't-know-I-don't-remember re the FL persuades me that something is up in that category

re the quote: the 10" ML uses two D batteries and the 12.5" uses three. the Ds are about 1.5" by 2.5"



re the quote, I loaded my D batteries a few times and I used two/three fingers plus my thumb. since I'm also known as Captain OCD by my family, they demo'd it for me (not knowing why) and they did the same thing

(I got the usual :waitasec: from them but I've learned to ignore it)

 

[UKGuy]

All wiped clean, including batteries. Which determines the inference that an R wished to be excluded from consideration, regardless of the ubiquity of R biological detritus?e.g. The wiper might be the stager?

 

[Chrishope]

IA, none of us are sure that the batteries were wiped down but we know the outside was, we know that neighbors reported seeing "moving" light and that lights which were normally seen were off instead (and vice versa). so all of that combined with the I'm-not-sure-I-don't-know-I-don't-remember re the FL persuades me that something is up in that category

re the quote: the 10" ML uses two D batteries and the 12.5" uses three. the Ds are about 1.5" by 2.5"

View attachment 54799

re the quote, I loaded my D batteries a few times and I used two/three fingers plus my thumb. since I'm also known as Captain OCD by my family, they demo'd it for me (not knowing why) and they did the same thing

(I got the usual :waitasec: from them but I've learned to ignore it)

I'm persuaded as well. My point is simply that there is no need for a Ramsey to worry about his/her prints on the family FL. The FL was probably wiped down to remove other forensic evidence; the prints are unimportant. (Unless they belong to an intruder, which I don't buy at all)

 

[midwest mama]

I'm persuaded as well. My point is simply that there is no need for a Ramsey to worry about his/her prints on the family FL. The FL was probably wiped down to remove other forensic evidence; the prints are unimportant. (Unless they belong to an intruder, which I don't buy at all)

ITA. A Ramsey "familiar with forensics" (as UK Guy surmised) would not have had a need to wipe the flashlight simply for the purpose of removing fingerprints. They would have wanted to remove any other traces of evidence they thought specifically related to the crime: hair, fibers, wine cellar/floor dust/debris, glass shard dust, etc?

So, which Ramsey would have been most likely, under the circumstances at the time, to be the one to think like that?

 

[questfortrue]

IA, none of us are sure that the batteries were wiped down but we know the outside was, we know that neighbors reported seeing "moving" light and that lights which were normally seen were off instead (and vice versa). so all of that combined with the I'm-not-sure-I-don't-know-I-don't-remember re the FL persuades me that something is up in that category

re the quote: the 10" ML uses two D batteries and the 12.5" uses three. the Ds are about 1.5" by 2.5"

View attachment 54799

re the quote, I loaded my D batteries a few times and I used two/three fingers plus my thumb. since I'm also known as Captain OCD by my family, they demo'd it for me (not knowing why) and they did the same thing

(I got the usual :waitasec: from them but I've learned to ignore it)

This was my only forensic test, too. One 12.5” M.L. which I loaded with 3 batteries. It took my thumb and 2 fingers. One would leave at least partial prints, imo.

IIRC, PR tried to claim initially that it wasn’t their M.L. But when shown a drawer where the flashlight was supposed to be and wasn’t, plus which LHP and friend JF told LE it belonged to the Rs, PR was placed in the corner about the M.L. I can see 3 reasons for distancing from the M.L.:

• It had forensic evidence on it, WC dust or something else.
• The plan was to blame it on an (inside job) intruder.
• A stager may have felt the M.L. disrupted their narrative of everyone went to bed, except JR who claimed he stayed up to help BR put a toy together, and then why would a flashlight be on the counter.

In trying to discern any other motivation for cleaning off the M.L., I also came up with a 4th reason - “overthinking” the situation, kind of like why were there no fingerprints on the RN. PR does an American Ninja Warrior mantling flip using the rails of the bannister, in order to read the RN from below. Hmmm. :dunno: MHO.

 

[gramcracker]

ITA, qft. "overthinking" was the stager's "signature." one of the stagers, that is