Was Burke Involved? # 4

[johnjay]

Thank you. I'm glad you understand the importance of the correct terminology. A garrote and a tourniquet are both specific devices that imply how they are used. I'm not trying to be pedantic, but without that understanding, anyone's theory (whether it is in line with my thoughts or not) will be off. A garrote has two handles and is not tied around a victim's neck -- simply wrapped. A tourniquet is tied around a limb (usually to stop excess bleeding) or a neck with a separate rigid object slipped under it to twist and tighten the ligature. What was found on JonBenet's neck was neither.

It seems there is a variety of ways that garrotes can work. They can be the two handled pull type. They can add a stick which is twisted to tighten. And they can be the noose with a knot and push on the back of a person to tighten.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garrote

A typical military garrote consists of two wooden handles attached to a length of flexible wire; the wire is looped over a sentry's head and pulled taut in one motion.[SUP][[/SUP]


A stick may be used to tighten the garrote; the Spanish word actually refers to the stick itself, so it is a pars pro toto where the eponymous component may actually be absent. In Spanish, the term may also refer to a rope and stick used to constrict a limb as a torture device.[SUP][2][/SUP][SUP][5][/SUP]

The Indian version of the garrote frequently incorporates a knot at the center intended to aid in crushing the larynx while someone applies pressure to the victim's back, usually with a foot or knee.

This later developed into a practice of strangulation by which the condemned was tied to a wooden stake with a looped section of rope placed around his neck. A wooden stick would then be placed in the loop and twisted by an executioner, causing the rope to tighten until it strangled the prisoner.

 

[spitsthetruth]

Perhaps I can offer a little assistance on issues concerning head blow vs strangulation and which came first. Note evidence related to showing no signs of a struggle from JBR.. Also, look at the charges from the 1999 GJ and you will note Accessory to Murder 1. That is premeditated murder. The accidental head blow as it were that may have caused brain death would not be premeditated I don't believe. The garrote being applied causing physical death by asphyxiation would deffo be pre-meditated. From using the different sources it is what I can discern.

Post edited...gave poor example, was involved in multiple conversations.

Also must point out this follows the path the CBS doc went down and that looks similar to the original path of JK, Lee and Spitz.

 

[otg]

Exactly how do you think this ligature was used?

Ohhhhhh, don't get me started, johnjay. I can just imagine that as the WS audience is reading this, 75% of them are rolling their eyes worrying I'm going to start again. I'll just say for now that I think the paintbrush was broken and tied on the end of the cord after she was already dead from the strangulation to obscure how she was actually strangled and what the paintbrush had been used for before she died.

Also, do you know what kind of knots were used on both ends? Do we have the exact dimensions of the cord?

Exact dimensions of all the cords/ligatures are in the AR:

Tied loosely around the right wrist, overlying the sleeve of the shirt is a white cord. At the knot there is one tail end which measures 5.5 inches in length with a frayed end. The other tail of the knot measures 15.5 inches in length and ends in a double loop knot. This end of the cord is also frayed.

Wrapped around the neck with a double knot in the midline of the posterior neck is a length of white cord similar to that described as being tied around the right wrist. This ligature cord is cut on the right side of the neck and removed. A single black ink mark is placed on the left side of the cut and a double black ink mark on the right side of the cut. The posterior knot is left intact. Extending from the knot on the posterior aspect of the neck are two tails of the knot, one measuring 4 inches in length and having a frayed end, and the other measuring 17 inches in length with the end tied in multiple loops around a lenght of a round tan-brown wooden stick which measures 4.5 inches in length. This wooden stick is irregularly broken at both ends and there are several colors of paint and apparent glistening varnish on the surface. Printed in gold letters on one end of the wooden stick is the word "Korea". The tail end of another word extends from beneath the loops of the cord tied around the stick and is not able to be interpreted. Blonde hair is entwined in the knot on the posterior aspect of the neck as well as in the cord wrapped around the wooden stick. (Are you reading this, ThinkHard?) It appears to be made of a white synthetic material. Also secured around the neck is a gold chain with a single charm in the form of a cross.
​

 

[UKGuy]

It seems there is a variety of ways that garrotes can work. They can be the two handled pull type. They can add a stick which is twisted to tighten. And they can be the noose with a knot and push on the back of a person to tighten.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garrote

johnjay,
Tourniquet's and garrotes are specialized with a particular design, what was tied to JonBenet's neck was neither. To avoid head-scratching I usually refer to it as a ligature/paintbrush device.

.

 

[johnjay]

johnjay,
Tourniquet's and garrotes are specialized with a particular design, what was tied to JonBenet's neck was neither. To avoid head-scratching I usually refer to it as a ligature/paintbrush device.

.

From what I've seen in that Wikipedia link the term garrote refers to a broad range of strangulation devices. I see nothing wrong with referring to the device used on JBR as a garrote. But I don't really care what people call it, I'm more interested in how it was used, and that's not obvious to me. If it was used by pushing on JBR's back then I would expect some serious bruising in the process - actually, I'm having trouble believing that's the way it was used because that would have put all kinds of forces on her neck.

 

[otg]

It seems there is a variety of ways that garrotes can work. They can be the two handled pull type. They can add a stick which is twisted to tighten. And they can be the noose with a knot and push on the back of a person to tighten.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garrote

I'm not sure, I'm certainly no expert, but I think you may be misinterpreting what you read at Wikipedia. I didn't mention the type of execution device that was used even into this century in some countries. I felt that would cloud the issue. The "stick" referred to on the Wikipedia page goes on either end to allow a good grip by the assailant. They also use small rings on the ends of some that allow only a finger or thumb to do the pulling, making the device small and easy.to conceal. The "knotted" version used by Indians had the knot in the center so it would go over the larynx and put additional pressure there. That's completely unnecessary because it requires more pressure to crush the larynx than it does to shut off the blood supply to the brain (hence the need for additional force on the back of the neck). Depriving the brain of oxygenated blood causes unconsciousness in ten to fifteen seconds, and death within five minutes (typically).

 

[otg]

Perhaps I can offer a little assistance on issues concerning head blow vs strangulation and which came first. Note evidence related to showing no signs of a struggle from JBR.. Also, look at the charges from the 1999 GJ and you will note Accessory to Murder 1. That is premeditated murder. The accidental head blow as it were that may have caused brain death would not be premeditated I don't believe. The garrote being applied causing physical death by asphyxiation would deffo be pre-meditated. From using the different sources it is what I can discern.

Post edited...gave poor example, was involved in multiple conversations.

Also must point out this follows the path the CBS doc went down and that looks similar to the original path of JK, Lee and Spitz.

:sigh: Premeditation is not the only way Murder-1 can be committed.

 

[otg]

From what I've seen in that Wikipedia link the term garrote refers to a broad range of strangulation devices. I see nothing wrong with referring to the device used on JBR as a garrote. But I don't really care what people call it, I'm more interested in how it was used, and that's not obvious to me. If it was used by pushing on JBR's back then I would expect some serious bruising in the process - actually, I'm having trouble believing that's the way it was used because that would have put all kinds of forces on her neck.

YES (to the bolded part)!

 

[HMSHood]

Looking at Burke Ramsey, I am more convinced he is an injustice collector.

Injustice Collectors
http://www.psybersquare.com/family/family_injustice.html

Characteristics of Injustice Collectors:
1.) Injustice Collectors are convinced that they are never wrong. How is it possible that they are never wrong? It is simple: They are always right.

2.) Injustice Collectors never apologize. Ever. For anything.

3.) Injustice Collectors truly believe that they are morally and ethically superior to others and that others chronically do not hold themselves to the same high standards as the injustice collector does.

4.) Injustice Collectors make the rules, break the rules and enforce the rules of the family. They are a combined legislator, police, and judge and jury of

5.) Injustice Collectors never worry about what is wrong with themselves as their "bad list" grows. Their focus is always on the failings of others.

6.) Injustice Collectors are never upset by the disparity of their rules for others with their own expectations of themselves.

7.) Injustice Collectors rationalize their own behavior with great ease and comfort.

Burke Ramsey shows 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, and 7.

He always thinks she is right no matter what. Injustice collector get angry very easily. They are very negative people and complain non-stop.

 

[colette]

[video=youtube;d59-dUBn3LY]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d59-dUBn3LY[/video]

 

[Heymom]

Looking at Burke Ramsey, I am more convinced he is an injustice collector.

Injustice Collectors
http://www.psybersquare.com/family/family_injustice.html

Characteristics of Injustice Collectors:
1.) Injustice Collectors are convinced that they are never wrong. How is it possible that they are never wrong? It is simple: They are always right.

2.) Injustice Collectors never apologize. Ever. For anything.

3.) Injustice Collectors truly believe that they are morally and ethically superior to others and that others chronically do not hold themselves to the same high standards as the injustice collector does.

4.) Injustice Collectors make the rules, break the rules and enforce the rules of the family. They are a combined legislator, police, and judge and jury of

5.) Injustice Collectors never worry about what is wrong with themselves as their "bad list" grows. Their focus is always on the failings of others.

6.) Injustice Collectors are never upset by the disparity of their rules for others with their own expectations of themselves.

7.) Injustice Collectors rationalize their own behavior with great ease and comfort.

Burke Ramsey shows 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, and 7.

He always thinks she is right no matter what. Injustice collector get angry very easily. They are very negative people and complain non-stop.

This is a new term to me. I think it's just sociopathic/narcissistic behavior.

 

[Djoop]

Injustice collectors are narcissists..

 

[BOESP]

<respectfully snipped for focus>The paintbrush attached to the cord served no purpose other than to possibly give more of a grip to the person pulling on it if that is how it was used.

BBM: I see the possibility that the ligature and paintbrush handle contraption would allow the user to pull and tighten the ligature without having to look directly at JonBenet.

 

[BOESP]

From what I've seen in that Wikipedia link the term garrote refers to a broad range of strangulation devices. I see nothing wrong with referring to the device used on JBR as a garrote. But I don't really care what people call it, I'm more interested in how it was used, and that's not obvious to me. If it was used by pushing on JBR's back then I would expect some serious bruising in the process - actually, I'm having trouble believing that's the way it was used because that would have put all kinds of forces on her neck.

Will all due respect, Wikipedia (which I often read) is not vetted by experts so you may get incorrect information from them. In a medical/legal sense, a ligature device was used on JonBenet. Even the autopsy says so.

Off my soapbox. :tantrum:

 

[HMSHood]

Injustice collectors are narcissists..

This is a new term to me. I think it's just sociopathic/narcissistic behavior.

Agreed on that.

 

[spitsthetruth]

curious but what is your opinion of how the charges of accessory murder 1 were applied in this case if the path is BR commits accidental head wound and JR or PR applies garrote.

This was a general law reference I have used in the past: [h=3]First Degree Murder: Definition[/h] In most states, first-degree murder is defined as an unlawful killing that is both willful and premeditated, meaning that it was committed after planning or "lying in wait" for the victim

 

[BBB167893]

If it was somehow looped with the other end of the line. Twisting it would tighten the garrote. Is that not how a garrote works?

Actually, a garrote in the true sense has a handle on each end. The cord is slipped over the head from behind and the handles are crossed behind the neck. I'm at a loss to explain how twisting this ligature would tighten it.

 

[otg]

curious but what is your opinion of how the charges of accessory murder 1 were applied in this case if the path is BR commits accidental head wound and JR or PR applies garrote.

This was a general law reference I have used in the past: First Degree Murder: Definition

In most states, first-degree murder is defined as an unlawful killing that is both willful and premeditated, meaning that it was committed after planning or "lying in wait" for the victim

In Colorado, First Degree Murder can also be the charge when a person is accidentally killed during the commission of another felony (robbery, kidnapping, burglary, rape, child abuse, etc.). In Colorado, that is what is called Felony Murder (1st-degree). Other states call that "aggravating circumstances" which raises the level (or degree) of the crime -- even if the death is accidental. As long as the death occurs during the commission of another felony, it does not matter if it was accidental or unintentional.

The applicable statute (scroll to "Felony Murder"):
C.R.S. 18-3-102


As to your question (what is your opinion of how the charges of accessory murder 1 were applied in this case if the path is BR commits accidental head wound and JR or PR applies garrote)...
This is my opinion only and cannot be taken as legal advice and all that bs...:giggle: but, if Burke caused the head would and either of the Ramsey parents applied a ligature to strangle her, that parent would not be an accessory (after the fact), that parent would be a murderer. If both parents worked together to commit the murder, they would be accomplices (not accessories). The accessory charge means that the person so charged acted after the crime was committed (after the fact) and could not have stopped it from happening, but that person acted to protect, shield, assist, and prevent apprehension of the person who did commit the crime.

 

[spitsthetruth]

TY otg, For me I try to follow what I think was the path of events to the GJ. I believe the CBS documentary walked this same path with the same players drawing similar conclusions. A lot of subtleties were noted during the CBS doc which served as big clues to me. One not so subtle reference was that they all noted was BR was not involved in the cover up. Perhaps this was to avoid lawsuits and such but it kinda served as a tip that they like JR or PR. I also keep in mind that there is a ton of evidence still crucial to this case we don't know that has supported their beliefs. I follow this path because it would be the one that actually mattered if justice was ever to be served.

But thanks for the info mucho....your basically saying that accessory charge could be charged for the Head Strike then. Seems there is no charge for the asphyxiation by strangulation then as the head blow would have caused Brain death?

 

[otg]

TY otg, For me I try to follow what I think was the path of events to the GJ. I believe the CBS documentary walked this same path with the same players drawing similar conclusions. A lot of subtleties were noted during the CBS doc which served as big clues to me. One not so subtle reference was that they all noted was BR was not involved in the cover up. Perhaps this was to avoid lawsuits and such but it kinda served as a tip that they like JR or PR. I also keep in mind that there is a ton of evidence still crucial to this case we don't know that has supported their beliefs. I follow this path because it would be the one that actually mattered if justice was ever to be served.

But thanks for the info mucho....your basically saying that accessory charge could be charged for the Head Strike then. Seems there is no charge for the asphyxiation by strangulation then as the head blow would have caused Brain death?

I'm not sure if I made my thoughts clear on what you were asking, or if I'm misunderstanding you now. I was trying to give generic answers to possibilities and maybe my response got muddled. Let me try this...

There are several principles that would affect possible charges:

• It doesn't matter what an "infant" (the term in Colorado for a child under the age of 10) does, he/she cannot be charged with any crime they might commit because the lawmakers felt an infant was not capable of forming "criminal intent." So while Burke could have theoretically caused her death (intentionally or accidentally), he can never be charged criminally. (That's an important fact about CO law to understand when you hear someone in LE or the DA's office say he was never considered a suspect.)
• It doesn't matter which act (the head blow or the strangulation) was the actual cause of death if both acts contributed to the homicide or could have caused it without the other. Sometimes (like in this case) it's difficult for the ME to determine which of the actions actually caused death, and whatever the ME thought might (or would) be contested in court by a defense attorney if two individuals were separately responsible each act. So if either act contributed to (or would have in itself) caused death, the person who did either act could be charged.
• If the person knew beforehand about the crime and encouraged or solicited the crime, he/she is an accomplice and can be charged for the same crime as the person who actually commits it.
• If the person only found out about the crime and assisted "after the fact" to hide the crime or help the person who committed it escape justice, he/she is an accessory and the punishment is not as severe as for the crime itself.
• It's not necessary for the State (the DA, "the people") to specify which of two people who acted together to commit a crime is responsible for each act. If only one does the action which causes the death but the other was acting only as an accomplice, that accomplice is considered by law to be equally responsible for the crime as the principle (the one who commits the act). An example of this is a bank robbery where one of two masked robbers shoots and kills a guard during the robbery when he tries to pull his gun. If both masked robbers are caught, the state doesn't have to prove which one actually fired the gun because they were acting as accomplices in a crime where a murder was committed (which leads us to the next idea).
• In the previous example, the homicide was committed during an armed robbery. When the guard was shot, neither robber had planned or premeditated killing him. But he was killed during the commission of a felony crime, which in CO makes it a "Felony Murder" which is a First Degree Murder. The state doesn't have to prove premeditation or intent. Same thing would apply if in driving away from the bank, the getaway driver accidentally runs over a pedestrian and he dies. Now the driver and each of the robbers in the car can be charged with that death as a Felony Murder even though it was an accident -- it was committed during the commission of another felony crime (robbery).

I hope this helps and doesn't make it even more confusing. It's late and I make mistakes when I'm tired (like in my last post where the word "would" should have been "wound" in the phrase "if Burke caused the head would").