Was a stun gun used in the crime or not

[Nehemiah]

I was surfing through TV stations very late the other night, and happened upon a stun gun demonstration. A large man was stunned, and he let out a loud scream. He did go limp and another man caught him. I have no idea what I was watching and I fell asleep when it went to a commercial. The loud scream is what caught my attention in thinking that if JB were stunned in her room, someone would have had to have heard her scream. If she were stunned in the basement, then perhaps the scream that Melody S. heard was from the stun gun.

Just thinking.

 

[mihaff]

I agree, the stun gun seems farfetched. it's not like star trek and the person quietly becomes stunned and falls to the ground. someone is making a mountain out of a bug bite

 

[Miss Daisey]

. IMO there was at least one other person in the house that night.

JMO[/QUOTE]
At this point I agree there was "another person in the house that night".

It wouldn't have necessarily have to had been someone the family knew, either.

This little girls pagent pictures protrayed her as an ADULT. She was well known in the community and known to be a CHILD.

It makes sense to me that a pedifile commited this murder. A very clever one too.

 

[Seeker]

It makes sense to me that a pedifile commited this murder. A very clever one too.

No offense Miss Daisey and I'm not sure if all that was part of a quote or not, but it doesn't make any sense to me. If it was a an uknown pedophile why did he kill her? If this is not someone JB knew then she couldn't have told who it was to begin with. Pedophiles usually don't kill their victim and if they do they don't do it in the house & leave a 2 1/2 page rambling ransom note. I've yet to come across another crime like this one...

Westerfield didn't leave any rambling ransom note, nor did he leave Danielle in the house. He just grabbed her and ran. Murdered her in an undisclosed location and discarded her at a dump site.

Kenneth Parnell never left a note either and he didn't even grab Steven from his home.

No pedophile or kidnapper wants to spend the amount of time in the house that the murderer of JonBenet did. These people tend to get in, get what they came for, and get the hell out as quickly as possible.

Another thing is that if this person intended to kill JonBenet (which was apparently the case) why stop at just digitally penetrating her with a paint brush or finger? Pedophiles don't do that and they're not interested in adults, they want their victims to look just like the innocent children they are, not like little adult showgirls... Oh and how is this person suppose to be strangling her, bashing her head in and be getting off at the same time without leaving more DNA.
I don't think it was a kidnapping either. A kidnapper would probably have taken the body with them because the goal is to get the money....you leave the body then you have no collateral, or bargaining chip to get what you want.

This crime was not comitted by any career criminal or they would have done it again IMO.

 

[BlueCrab]

I agree, the stun gun seems farfetched. it's not like star trek and the person quietly becomes stunned and falls to the ground. someone is making a mountain out of a bug bite

mihaff,

I beg to disagree with you mihalf. Those twin marks at three locations on JonBenet's body were not bug bites -- they were obviously stun gun injuries. Almost all of the forensic pathologists who studied photos of the injuries, including the only pathologist who examined and measured the marks in person, say the injuries were consistent with stun gun injuries.

The burns were nearly identical to those made on the test pig using the Air Taser brand stun gun. The experts overwhelmingly say JonBenet was likely stungunned, and I'll put my money on the experts. The evidence is clear to even the lay person if they study the autopsy photos and compare the tiny rectangular injuries to the photos taken of the test pig.

Also, bug bites don't leave rectangular burn marks on the skin -- stun guns do.

JMO

 

[Miss Daisey]

No offense Miss Daisey and I'm not sure if all that was part of a quote or not, but it doesn't make any sense to me. If it was a an uknown pedophile why did he kill her? If this is not someone JB knew then she couldn't have told who it was to begin with. Pedophiles usually don't kill their victim and if they do they don't do it in the house & leave a 2 1/2 page rambling ransom note. I've yet to come across another crime like this one...

Westerfield didn't leave any rambling ransom note, nor did he leave Danielle in the house. He just grabbed her and ran. Murdered her in an undisclosed location and discarded her at a dump site.

Kenneth Parnell never left a note either and he didn't even grab Steven from his home.

No pedophile or kidnapper wants to spend the amount of time in the house that the murderer of JonBenet did. These people tend to get in, get what they came for, and get the hell out as quickly as possible.

Another thing is that if this person intended to kill JonBenet (which was apparently the case) why stop at just digitally penetrating her with a paint brush or finger? Pedophiles don't do that and they're not interested in adults, they want their victims to look just like the innocent children they are, not like little adult showgirls... Oh and how is this person suppose to be strangling her, bashing her head in and be getting off at the same time without leaving more DNA.
I don't think it was a kidnapping either. A kidnapper would probably have taken the body with them because the goal is to get the money....you leave the body then you have no collateral, or bargaining chip to get what you want.

This crime was not comitted by any career criminal or they would have done it again IMO.

I messed up replying to a quote thinking I could reply to just the last part. I'm just learning how to use this forum. Sorry

It's my opinion on the type of perp. I agree that it wasn't a kidnapping either...rather the RN a means of diversion. Murder was the intended result. But not leaving with the victim and disposing of the body elsewhere doesn't rule out a pedifile based simply on their past MOs.

"This crime was not committed by any career criminal or they would have done it again IMO"

Not necessarily so. He probably HAS done it again or WILL since the Ramsey murder. (IMO) The book isn't closed yet.

Further, IMO, the Ramseys aren't slick enough to continue with media interviews, etc. without having seriously exposed themselves to indictment and prosecution. Two persons involved in a crime will eventually lead to betrayal. UNLESS....UNLESS... the perp was their natural child, Burke. IMO, Patsey Ramsey would NEVER protect or cover up for anybody else but Burke.

 

[BlueCrab]

IMO, Patsy Ramsey would NEVER protect or cover up for anybody else but Burke.

Miss Daisey,

I totally agree. There's enough exculpatory evidence to prove that neither John nor Patsy likely killed JonBenet. But Burke was somehow involved in the death of JonBenet or there wouldn't be a need for all of the Ramsey lies, coverups, and refusals to fully cooperate with the investigation.

JMO

 

[mihaff]

mihaff,

I beg to disagree with you mihalf. Those twin marks at three locations on JonBenet's body were not bug bites -- they were obviously stun gun injuries. Almost all of the forensic pathologists who studied photos of the injuries, including the only pathologist who examined and measured the marks in person, say the injuries were consistent with stun gun injuries.
....
JMO

I have to disagree with you. No official pathologist in this case has ever determined that the marks are from a stun gun. None. You can't count the paid phonies hired by the Ramsey's. It was not from a stun gun. the crack on the head subdued her. period. your faith can't change facts. sorry.

 

[BlueCrab]

I have to disagree with you. No official pathologist in this case has ever determined that the marks are from a stun gun. None. You can't count the paid phonies hired by the Ramsey's. It was not from a stun gun. the crack on the head subdued her. period. your faith can't change facts. sorry.

mihaff,

Gee, I didn't know you were there and witnessed JonBenet's murder. Well, anyhow:

Pg 431, PMPT pb: "When they had gathered sufficient information, Ainsworth, Pete Hofstrom, Trip DeMuth, and Detective Sgt. Wickman met with the coroner, John Meyer. After reviewing the photos and this new information, Meyer concluded that the injuries on JonBenet's face and back were, in fact, consistent with those produced by a stun gun."

Also on pg 431: "Soon after, Ainsworth learned of a 1988 Larimer County murder in which a stun gun had been used on a thirteen-month-old girl, Michaela Hughes, who had been sexually assaulted and killed. Ainsworth met with Dr. Robert Deters, the pathologist on the case, and showed him the autopsy photos of JonBenet. Deters agreed that the marks were consistent with a stun gun injury, but didn't think the body had to be exhumed. Nothing more would be learned by examining the skin tissue."

And, of course, Arapahoe County coroner Dr. Michael Doberson agrees the injuries on JonBenet are consistent with those inflicted by a stun gun. Doberson is considered the nation's leading expert in regard to stun gun injuries, especially after he exhumed the body of Gerald Boggs and proved Boggs had been stungunned and murdered -- thus solving the crime.

The three doctors listed above are all board certified forensic pathologists. I'll take their word for it. The injuries on JonBenet are consistent with those made by a stun gun.

JMO



"

 

[mihaff]

mihaff,

Gee, I didn't know you were there and witnessed JonBenet's murder. Well, anyhow:

Pg 431, PMPT pb: "When they had gathered sufficient information, Ainsworth, Pete Hofstrom, Trip DeMuth, and Detective Sgt. Wickman met with the coroner, John Meyer. After reviewing the photos and this new information, Meyer concluded that the injuries on JonBenet's face and back were, in fact, consistent with those produced by a stun gun."

Also on pg 431: "Soon after, Ainsworth learned of a 1988 Larimer County murder in which a stun gun had been used on a thirteen-month-old girl, Michaela Hughes, who had been sexually assaulted and killed. Ainsworth met with Dr. Robert Deters, the pathologist on the case, and showed him the autopsy photos of JonBenet. Deters agreed that the marks were consistent with a stun gun injury, but didn't think the body had to be exhumed. Nothing more would be learned by examining the skin tissue."

And, of course, Arapahoe County coroner Dr. Michael Doberson agrees the injuries on JonBenet are consistent with those inflicted by a stun gun. Doberson is considered the nation's leading expert in regard to stun gun injuries, especially after he exhumed the body of Gerald Boggs and proved Boggs had been stungunned and murdered -- thus solving the crime.

The three doctors listed above are all board certified forensic pathologists. I'll take their word for it. The injuries on JonBenet are consistent with those made by a stun gun.

JMO



"

UPDATE 7/18/03 - On the MSNBC Dan Abrams Show last night, Michael Kane (the special prosecutor brought in to handle the Ramsey case) commented for the first time in public about the stun gun myth:
[size=-1]KANE: The thing about the stun gun that everybody keeps coming back to. There was one person who was qualified who actually looked at that little girl’s body on the autopsy table and that was Dr. Meyer, who’s a forensic pathologist. He looked at those very marks and said that they were abrasions. It is a quantum leap-you can take a stun gun and put it up against somebody’s body...and it’s going to leave a burn. It dosen't leave an abrasion. So all these other opinions that have come out that said that this was a stun gun, there is absolutely no way they would ever get into evidence because there is no evidence that these were burns.[/size]
[size=-1]ABRAMS: But, ... there were other experts like Mr. Doberson and others and Lou Smit who have said they absolutely believe that there was a stun gun used.[/size]
[size=-1]KANE: But they’re basing that based on photographs of marks on her body. When the uncontradicted evidence of Dr. Meyer is that these were not burns.[/size]


Source: http://gemart.8m.com/ramsey/stungun.html linked from
http://www.kenpolzin.com/jbr/jbrindex.html

I am not sure where you are getting this stuff. The Arapahoe Cty coroner was responding to photos and press inquiry( even said it was not the best evidence), and Dr Meyer has never claimed the marks were from a stun gun.
The crime scene was staged. The stun gun is a myth. The body was in preparation to be dumped. IMO mr and mrs ramsey know why.

 

[Camper]

My synopsis:

PR & JR covered for a 'family member' a close family member.

PR & JR sued everyone in sight to protect Burke's name.
(hmmm would a Christian family cover for a family perpetrator)

JR hired attorneys for JAR, who had great alibi by friends and family.

No family traditional Christmas movie, cuz:

1. A close family member received a stun gun for Christmas and was 'in' the missing movie that was then wasn't).

The scream was heard by PR % JR, & Mrs. Stanton who wakened her husband to hear a scream that she did/didn't hear)(theory is that JonBenet screamed when gun was used on her)

IF IF a stun gun was used, THEN - PR and JR did NOT hear the scream, because IF IF they rushed to JonBenet aid, she would have still been alive. OR maybe not, IF IF after the scream, she was quickly strangled to keep her quiet. Could a person kill JonBenet in the amount of time that it took the parents to come down two flights of stairs to her aid? Then WHO delivered the head blow, someone else to make it look like something that it wasn't? Who made the garote, and WHEN was it made, was it olde or brande new?

IF IF the Christmas movie was removed/hidden etc., why was the garote not removed/hidden also?

Remaining mystery, WHO tried to hire the MI narc to have a boat accident with JonBenet? You have to admit that was a very creative 'nut' to come up with a story like that.



.

 

[BlueCrab]

UPDATE 7/18/03 - On the MSNBC Dan Abrams Show last night, Michael Kane (the special prosecutor brought in to handle the Ramsey case) commented for the first time in public about the stun gun myth:
[size=-1]KANE: The thing about the stun gun that everybody keeps coming back to. There was one person who was qualified who actually looked at that little girl?s body on the autopsy table and that was Dr. Meyer, who?s a forensic pathologist. He looked at those very marks and said that they were abrasions. It is a quantum leap-you can take a stun gun and put it up against somebody?s body...and it?s going to leave a burn. It dosen't leave an abrasion. So all these other opinions that have come out that said that this was a stun gun, there is absolutely no way they would ever get into evidence because there is no evidence that these were burns.[/size]
[size=-1]ABRAMS: But, ... there were other experts like Mr. Doberson and others and Lou Smit who have said they absolutely believe that there was a stun gun used.[/size]
[size=-1]KANE: But they?re basing that based on photographs of marks on her body. When the uncontradicted evidence of Dr. Meyer is that these were not burns.[/size]


Source: http://gemart.8m.com/ramsey/stungun.html linked from
http://www.kenpolzin.com/jbr/jbrindex.html

I am not sure where you are getting this stuff. The Arapahoe Cty coroner was responding to photos and press inquiry( even said it was not the best evidence), and Dr Meyer has never claimed the marks were from a stun gun.
The crime scene was staged. The stun gun is a myth. The body was in preparation to be dumped. IMO mr and mrs ramsey know why.

mihaff,

I told you where I'm getting this "stuff". Dr. John Meyer changed his original analysis of the marks on JonBenet from "abrasions" to "consistent with stun gun injuries" (PMPT pb, pg 431). I gave you the quote and the source. Please re-read it and don't spread misinformation. The case is complicated enough without more misinformation.

Mike Kane, in his remarks, obviously forgot that John Meyer changed his opinion about the stun gun injuries. If Kane actually didn't know about Meyers' change in the autopsy analysis then it's a sad commentary on the quality of the investigation.

Incidentally, the "Stun Gun Myths" links you provided are Cutter's old analyses of the stun gun injuries, which he ended up putting on his own website. Cutter was a former poster here on Websleuths. He was an informed and excellent poster, but his stun gun analyses were inaccurate and proven to be faulty by me a couple of years ago.

Please stick with the opinions of the qualified forensic pathologists who are telling us the marks on JonBenet are consistent with injuries produced by a stun gun.

JMO

 

[Jayelles]

He was an informed and excellent poster, but his stun gun analyses were inaccurate and proven to be faulty by me a couple of years ago.

As I recall BC, your arithmetic was wrong when you posted your arguments.

 

[BlueCrab]

As I recall BC, your arithmetic was wrong when you posted your arguments.

Jayelles,

Nope, my arithmetic was on the money -- Cutter's was off. Go to his site and make the measurements yourself, using HIS crime scene photos (but not the lines he adds to help make a point).

The misalignment of the tiny rectangular marks that Cutter used to "prove" the marks were not from a stun gun are explained by the elasticity of JonBenet's skin when the stun gun was jammed up against her skin. Her skin temporarily deformed, and when the trigger was pulled the marks were made on the deformed skin. When the gun was removed and the skin came back to its original shape, the stun gun injuries were misaligned.

If you recall, I made a fake wooden stun gun with metal prongs identical to a real stun gun and successfully demonstrated on my arm how the twin marks were not only misaligned but also had changed their distances from one another when the gun was slightly twisted while against the skin.

A quick and cheap way to perform the same demonstration on your own arm is to hold two fingers together from the same hand and press the fingernails straight into your forearm of the other arm. It will leave two closely parallel marks on your skin. Then, about two inches away, do it again, but this time twist the two fingers about a quarter of a turn to deform the skin before pressing down to leave the twin fingernail marks on the skin. Compare the two sets of fingernail marks left on your arm. The latter set of marks will not be aligned and the distances will be different.

The stun gun prongs and the marks they left on the test pigs (Lou Smit and Dr. Michael Doberson experiments) were, of course, not misaligned because the steel prongs are strong and the pig's hide is thick and tough. But JonBenet's skin was thin and soft and would easily distort when the stun gun's prongs were jammed against the struggling six-year-old. Thus the slightly misaligned stun gun marks on JonBenet.

JMO

 

[Jayelles]

BC, I checked Cutter's calculations and I agree with him. II used both his images and the images from LP's website. I recall that someone posted a rebuttal (I'm sure it was yourself) and I remember there was a basic arithmetic error which I pointed out. Others pointed it out too, but as I recall, you refused to acknowledge it.

Do you have your rebuttal saved and could you repost it to clear this up?

 

[Camper]

Blue Crab and Jayelles, wouldn't JonBenets body have been visible wrapped in a white blanket, just within a small distance of the doorway on one of the trips through the basement. IF IF IF she had been there? I seem to remember that the hook was not unlatched at the top of the door into the room where she finally was found, by the PD, OR that the hook was not noted by PD, since it was located at the TOP of the door.

JonBenets arms were stretched totally upward, which has always indicated to me that she may have been stashed in tight quarters for 'later removal', thusly might have had imprints on her body from protruding material of whatever was holding her 'out of sight earlier'.

I know the BPD gets bashed and it would seem rightly so, but do we have to bash the ME too? Isn't it possible that the ME knew precisely what he said and wrote in the autopsy report?




.

 

[Miss Daisey]

Miss Daisey,

I totally agree. There's enough exculpatory evidence to prove that neither John nor Patsy likely killed JonBenet. But Burke was somehow involved in the death of JonBenet or there wouldn't be a need for all of the Ramsey lies, coverups, and refusals to fully cooperate with the investigation.

JMO

I don't know what you're referring to by "all of the Ramsey lies, coverups", etc. I understand their refusals to "fully cooperate with the investigation". As I've posted before, had I been in their shoes, I'd have done exactly the same once the media and police focused, immediatly, on them as the perps.

I'm not defending the Ramseys. I just always have thought they didn't kill their child but wasn't sure they weren't protecting their natural son, Burke.

I'm not altogether sure, either, that an intruder (or at least a fifth person inside their family circle) didn't do the crime. Sometime the obvious is right under our noses and we complicate the circumstances of the crime by thinking it's so elaboratly planned or carried out.

But the fact of the matter is: someone managed to get that child from her bedroom...on the second floor of very large home..with a complicated floor plan...down to the basement without her parents being aware...killed her and exited the home or went back to bed.. without being seen or heard. Whatever happened after that is anybodys guess.

 

[BlueCrab]

BC, I checked Cutter's calculations and I agree with him. II used both his images and the images from LP's website. I recall that someone posted a rebuttal (I'm sure it was yourself) and I remember there was a basic arithmetic error which I pointed out. Others pointed it out too, but as I recall, you refused to acknowledge it.

Do you have your rebuttal saved and could you repost it to clear this up?

Jayelles,

Before we go any further, please be informed I don't refuse to acknowledge anything that has been reasonably proven to me.

All I have on the subject under discussion here are my notes. From these notes I see that Cutter's mistake was his method of measuring the distance between the twin electrodes of the stun gun and the distance between the twin marks on JonBenet's back as viewed from the autopsy photos.

Measurements of injuries of this nature MUST be made from the centerline of the injuries, not from the edges of the injuries. Injuries often change in size (they usually get bigger) and shape that spread in different directions as minutes and hours pass after the injury occurred, thus changing the distances between them if the measurements aren't made from the centerlines of the injuries. Cutter measured from the inside edge of one of the twin injuries to the inside edge of the accompanying injury on JonBenet's back. It was a glaring error. He should have measured from the centerline of one injury to the centerline of the other injury.

Cutter said he measured 2.9 cm between the tiny rectangular marks on JonBenet's back and 3.4 cm between the tiny rectangular electrodes of the Air Taser stun gun. But please disregard what Cutter SAID. Using Cutter's own photos or any of the autopsy photos on other sites, if you measure the distance between the centerlines of the injuries and the distance between the centerlines of the electodes they BOTH measure the same distances -- about 3.6 cm.

Cutter measured wrong. The stun gun theory is not a myth; it is evidence based.

JMO

 

[mihaff]

The stun gun is as real as the ramson note and the small foreign faction, the tooth fairy and BC's logic. All non existent. Lets see the small foreign faction of asian UC students break in the house through a basement window, without their ransom note, sit down write it, wait in the house until all is asleep, sneak up stairs, stun gun a sleeping child, scoop her up, carry her to the basement, crack her in the head with some hard object enough to crush her skull, look around and find Patsy's paint supplies, garote the child and molests her, cover her body and then I guess walk out a locked door. Yeah that makes sense.

 

[BlueCrab]

The stun gun is as real as the ramson note and the small foreign faction, the tooth fairy and BC's logic. All non existent. Lets see the small foreign faction of asian UC students break in the house through a basement window, without their ransom note, sit down write it, wait in the house until all is asleep, sneak up stairs, stun gun a sleeping child, scoop her up, carry her to the basement, crack her in the head with some hard object enough to crush her skull, look around and find Patsy's paint supplies, garote the child and molests her, cover her body and then I guess walk out a locked door. Yeah that makes sense.

mihaff,

Your attacks sound familiar.

JMO