Actually, the brain remembers trauma far easier than pleasant things. Science. It would be pretty traumatic to have a sibling murdered when you're a 10 year old boy.
Who Killed Jon Benet Ramsey? Poll
- Thread starter newtv
- Start date
New Posts
-
VERDICT WATCH Abby & Libby - The Delphi Murders - Richard Allen Arrested - #215
- Latest: FrostedGlass
-
Support for Kate Middleton, Princess of Wales- Latest: BetteDavisEyes
-
-
- Status
Actually, the brain remembers trauma far easier than pleasant things. Science. It would be pretty traumatic to have a sibling murdered when you're a 10 year old boy.
I agree. This is a personal tidbit but none of you know who I am anyway so it doesn't matter. I actually immediately remember what I got for my ninth birthday, because that year my father wss away working and my mother was, I guess, completely drunk. That morning I sat on her bed and she didn't mention anything about my birthday. I asked her if I got to pick a special breakfast for my birthday and she looked very alarmed. She was slurring a lot and told me to go upstairs to the attic and see if I could find the jacket on the table. I did. A little spring rain coat. She said, that's your present. It wasn't wrapped. No card. No toys. Nothing. Keep in mind we were Ramsay rich. If I came from poverty I wouldn't have expected much and a random unwrapped jacket would probably be great.
All day long I thought there would be some special surprise and this all was a joke. No, there was nothing. My mom forgot my birthday. Because she was an alcoholic. My dad forgot perhaps because he was always working.
This isn't nearly as traumatic as my sister being killed. No one even got hurt that particular day. But I remember it like it was yesterday.
I have heard that children can and do suppress traumatic memories though. The happy times are indeed the most forgotten of all. Other children remember trauma in vivid detail. Usually trauma that is most forgotten is sexual abuse. Maybe because a child doesn't even have the context to understand what is happening to them. I would imagine, even if Burke was abused, even sexually, he would most likely remember the night his sister was killed unless maybe he saw the whole thing and was helpless to stop it. I don't think it would be like that based on the evidence we have. My guess is that it's maybe 95 percent likely he remembers.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
webweaved
Member
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2015
- Messages
- 554
- Reaction score
- 34
It tore me up to read this because I tenderly understand it. I'm so sorry you went through that. Hugs. I see you post this stuff sometimes and it stands out to me for reasons I dont want to get into. :facepalm:
I don't believe BR has no memory of his sister dying. Vivid or not. The bad stuff is easier to remember. Unfortunately, many of us carry it with us. If I can remember great details at 8, I doubt someone at 8 or 9 cant. Now denial...that's another monster. Regardless of what ever ever happened in Boulder, BR was a child and hes a victim too. Regardless of what he did or didn't do, the parents control you at that age. They give access and also cut access to your resources to what you need. We don't know what happened in that house or what exactly happened that night. Tons of opinions and most are horrific to think about. Possibly very true but horrific. Tons of money does not mean you get what you need, not as a child. You are at the parents mercy. These kids were acting out and acting out, something was NOT being addressed with them. IMO, they were failed on all fronts of home life. Something behind those doors in my opinion was NOT good for them. So sad!
I check this thread close to Christmas every year. It's a painful time with this story because she was alive on Christmas morning and dead (most likely by midnight...Christmas end. Nothing changes with the story too much year after year. No one offers any more from the family. No one is looking for a killer and I think it screams volumes. I dont think BR will ever talk. He now has to go out into the world and make a life, possibly make a family, pay bills, I dont follow him in any respect so I dont know what he does for a living or at all....I might have read he works for his father or in that line of business. Dont quote me on that. Now why would he ever say anything ugly against his father? and bite the hand that feeds him? Right. Good luck with that. Its the only family he has or knows. He wont bite innocent or not. Denial, suppress, survive. JMO.
Why do you guys think Officer French told Reichenbach when he greeted him at the door that it was a kidnapping but "something's not right"? Was it the note? Behavioral clues? Has anyone ever asked French what led him to say this?
webweaved
Member
- Joined
- Aug 2, 2015
- Messages
- 554
- Reaction score
- 34
Good question. I'd like to know too. Maybe it was a gut feeling? JMO.
I don't need to brush up on anything. You need to brush up on this case. None of your scenarios are plausible.
You think that an intruder snuck in, killed her, and as totally separate occurrence they wrote the note? Just because they thought maybe B did it? Did they ask him? Did they call an ambulance? No. So that's a totally stupid idea.
If it was an adult with developmental problems, how did he leave absolutely no evidence except the note? Ditto the teenager.
Many people think it was an intruder. Then they actually read the facts on this case and realize no one entered that house that night.
fruity
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Nov 15, 2011
- Messages
- 3,300
- Reaction score
- 101
Wrong. For my 9th birthday I got a cabbage patch doll. The night before my birthday it was SO hot that my cousin and I soaked our pillows in water before going to bed and we got into trouble. I was wearing a white nightie with pink flowers on it. My pillowcase was green. My younger cousin ate banana ice cream in my birthday and threw it all up - I won't give details about that, but let's just say that Darrell Lea must use strong food colouring.
I remember my 3rd birthday just as clearly. I remember sliding on water on the brown tiles on our back patio and falling over. I remember playing on my swing set when my Grandparents drove into our yard in their Aqua coloured car (Pop was wearing a cream coloured shirt with brown stripes) and giving me my present. I also remember what they gave me for Christmas when I was 4.
I am not quite 40 years old but I have MANY clear memories from way before I was 9 years old.
I bet it was a combination of everything.
The odd note. PR's odd behavior (peeking through her fingers...). The parents not comforting each other. Inviting friends over.
I'm a strong believer in intuition. I think people are more attuned to the atmosphere than we give ourselves credit for. I think the energy in the house that morning had to have been very tense and strange. Just...off. I think cops have to hone this skill to solve cases, though they probably don't realize that is what they're doing.
You forget that the Ramsey's conveniently made their alibi so simple that even a 9 year old would have no problem remembering it. "Burke, we all came home and went straight to bed. You didn't see or hear anything."
As far as Burke's interviews went, from what I recall they weren't exactly thorough. The interview with the psychologist was more about his feelings than it was about fact from what I recall.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
The overwhelming sentiment of IDIs is that there just isn't any evidence to arrest any of the three family members for this crime. That is actually correct and I will not argue that point. However, what IDI fails to concede, what the rest of the planet clearly sees, is that there is overwhelming evidence that all three people in that house made efforts to deceive LE by either lying, destroying or manufacturing evidence. The undeniable conclusion here is that they are covering for one person in that house. Who actually did the deed at this point makes no difference. One of them did and the rest of them covered it up.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
elannia
Active Member
otg, can you send me the links again for the 911 call with BR talking. TIA
eileenhawkeye
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Sep 16, 2010
- Messages
- 8,755
- Reaction score
- 132
I was 9 when 9/11 happened, so the same age as Burke when a traumatic event happened and I remember a lot from that day. I don't find the "Do you remember what you got from your birthday?" relevant because birthdays happen every year; your sister being murdered does not. Memories of birthdays are going to mesh together.
I think the brain is wired to remember traumatic events in great detail, possibly as a mechanism to avoid repeating mistakes. I remember very little from my early years, but there are a half dozen events that stand out vividly, and all of them were bad.
otg
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2010
- Messages
- 2,410
- Reaction score
- 195
Gladly, my friend. Unless you are looking for something specific, I answered about the same question for AndHence recently (who hasn't bothered responding to it) in the 911 thread. That post, and the links in it to other posts, have what I think you want as well as a little background information:
http://www.websleuths.com/forums/sh...Voice-on-The-911-Tape&p=12259834#post12259834
Elannia, the 911 call is what first brought me to WS. It's important to me. I wish everyone could hear what is there. If there is anything else you need, just pretend I'm James Taylor :wink: .
Burke's first interview with the psychologist was required by Child Protective Services to determine if he was being abused and needed to be removed from the home.
I don't want to try to psychoanalyze him too much, but a few things that I might suggest show something. BR was unconcerned about the commotion that morning. He was more interested in his Nintendo and making a fire in Michigan. At her funeral he was skipping through the graveyard. At his mother's funeral there is a picture of him smiling, looking unconcerned. Perhaps death just doesn't phase him.
I don't want to try to psychoanalyze him too much, but a few things that I might suggest show something. BR was unconcerned about the commotion that morning. He was more interested in his Nintendo and making a fire in Michigan. At her funeral he was skipping through the graveyard. At his mother's funeral there is a picture of him smiling, looking unconcerned. Perhaps death just doesn't phase him.
Certainly his lack of interest that morning is most revealing. This would have, and should have been a very traumatic event for Burke. He should have been petrified with fear and he should have been ultra inquisitive about what was going on. His nonchalant behaviour tells be that he was already aware of what was going on. He was not concerned about the outcome because he already knew the outcome.
Certainly his lack of interest that morning is most revealing. This would have, and should have been a very traumatic event for Burke. He should have been petrified with fear and he should have been ultra inquisitive about what was going on. His nonchalant behaviour tells be that he was already aware of what was going on. He was not concerned about the outcome because he already knew the outcome.
F
Fides
Guest
Perhaps because, as scary as quasi-Islamic foreign factions can be, they don't typically tiptoe in and out of wealthy suburban homes without leaving a trace except an opus full of Americanisms politely requesting a pittance.
elannia
Active Member
otg
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2010
- Messages
- 2,410
- Reaction score
- 195
(variously snipped for relevance):
Many of the articles we read will give different time frames for the different stages of lividity. Thats because there are so many variables that can affect its progression and its appearance, and it must also be understood that the entire process is something that occurs gradually over a period of time. Also, it has to first be noted that we are speaking about something that is based on the visible appearance of a victim. IOW, it is not something easily measured or quantified. It is this visible appearance that is the reason most sources will state that livor mortis begins at around 20 to 30 minutes after death (and even death itself can be said to be not so much an event as much as a process). Of course the chemical changes and microscopic process which causes livor mortis begins after (or in some cases just prior to) death. But until the process has advanced to the point of being noticeable on a victim, it would not be correct to say that it exists because it is the visible appearance of the victims body that the term livor mortis refers to. This was pointed out by questfortrue in one of her posts above.
The word livor comes from Latin referring to a color (usually bluish-grey, with purple sometimes included). Ever use the word livid to describe being extremely mad? The word has become synonymous with being mad because of that purplish-red color that might show up in a persons face under stress.
What does show up before livor mortis is pallor mortis. This isnt talked about much because it occurs in the first half-hour or so before livor mortis can be seen, and its unusual for a murder victim to be found and examined by an investigator that quickly after death. Also, since the state of pallor mortis is a subjective determination, accuracy in estimating time of death is impossible using it.
Knowing the basics about how livor mortis occurs and how it is affected by objects pressing on the skin surface or the surface on which the body is lying is how an experienced investigator might be able to determine whether or not a body has been moved. But like so many other things, it has its limitations.
As amateurs, we all think of the obvious from pictures weve probably seen showing examples of bodies that have been found by LE that had been turned over before discovery with the fixed livor mortis on the upper portions of the body. (I wont post examples of this -- if anyone can stand the shock of looking at such things, Im sure they already have or can easily find what Im talking about.) Various examples show a white area where the victim may have been lying on an arm or hand, their clothing, an object, etc. But what if, after dying, the body had been turned over before its lividity was fixed? Investigators would have no indications on the body that it had been turned over within that period of time. And how about if it was partially fixed and then turned over? There might be two patterns of lividity in such a case.
How about a situation where a body is picked up in one location and placed in the exact same position somewhere else? If both surfaces were the same with nothing else underneath, would not the lividity pattern be the same? Unless the person disturbed something like the dirt or debris with their hands while sliding them under the body to lift it, there would be nothing apparent to show that the body had been moved.
And what if a body were lying on something (say, a blanket) that could be used to slide the body from one location to another? Would there be any clues that this had happened? Maybe there would be signs on the surface of the ground or in the dirt, dust or debris on the floor that would tell investigators that the body had obviously been moved. If they examined the body where it was located, they could look and document (with photos) exactly what was underneath the body in order to match it with the patterns on the underside of the victim. Any fold in the blanket, any high spot in the floor or in the dirt underneath should show up as a blanched area in the lividity of the body.
This Im sure is nothing new to anyone who has given it any thought. But apply this to the situation with the discovery of JonBenets body. Did the ME examine the body in situ and compare the lividity patterns with the surface on which it lied? Did he compare the blanched lines in her back to the folds in the blanket to see if anything didnt match? Did he have photos taken of the body being lifted from where it was found so investigators could later compare it with the lividity pattern? Hell, did he even bother going to the basement to look at the location where the body was reported to have been found after having missed the chance to see it where it was discovered? The answer, of course, to all these questions is NO. Investigators allowed people to wander around the house unsupervised, asked two possible suspects to search the crime scene, and even moved the body from one room to another before the ME had been called. One person (a possible suspect at that time) was even allowed to go back to the basement after discovery of the body to look for himself and handle crucial evidence. Later, (as CorallaroC pointed out) did the CSIs carefully examine the surface of the basement floor to see if the blanket or the body might have been moved? Would they have even had the experience or training to know exactly what to be looking for? Would they have known how important it was to knowing whether or not someone at the house that morning might have moved the body? Like so many other things associated with this case, these things are all failures by investigators to determine something that might have helped understand exactly what happened -- and might have answered the question posed in title of this thread.
Because of these things that were not done, no one in authority can say (or has said) with certainty that JonBenets body was moved -- or that it was not moved. We can all state our opinions and explain our reasoning. But without the information that should have been gathered, we simply dont know and cant say that the body was or was not moved. There are no established facts here.
CorallaroC, I understand what you're saying. Since the topic of livor mortis has been introduced, there's some additional explanation needed (supplementing AK's info).
It takes 20-30 minutes after death for livor mortis to begin. Then theres an 8-12 hour window after death when livor mortis becomes fixed. During that time period, if her body were moved, a pathologist would be able to tell. However, if the livor mortis is fixed in the 8-12 hour window, moving the body gently after this window, leaving her still on her back, wouldnt necessarily alter the pattern. This is my understanding. If JonBenét died at 12:00-1:00 am, it seems as though it would be possible for her body to have been gently moved to a more visible spot in the wc. (This could have taken place during the time of 10:00-11:00 am, when JR visited the basement.) But there certainly have been no factual statements supporting whether a move took place or not. Your viewpoint is well taken.
Id like to touch on something that was discussed earlier in this thread when I didnt have the time to respond. Above are several posts from when it was discussed. So much has been written about livor mortis, and many articles have been linked with plenty of information. I wont bother linking more because I dont think more information is needed as much as understanding exactly what it means in relation to this case. Its that understanding and relating it to this case that is difficult because of things Ill try to point out.
Many of the articles we read will give different time frames for the different stages of lividity. Thats because there are so many variables that can affect its progression and its appearance, and it must also be understood that the entire process is something that occurs gradually over a period of time. Also, it has to first be noted that we are speaking about something that is based on the visible appearance of a victim. IOW, it is not something easily measured or quantified. It is this visible appearance that is the reason most sources will state that livor mortis begins at around 20 to 30 minutes after death (and even death itself can be said to be not so much an event as much as a process). Of course the chemical changes and microscopic process which causes livor mortis begins after (or in some cases just prior to) death. But until the process has advanced to the point of being noticeable on a victim, it would not be correct to say that it exists because it is the visible appearance of the victims body that the term livor mortis refers to. This was pointed out by questfortrue in one of her posts above.
The word livor comes from Latin referring to a color (usually bluish-grey, with purple sometimes included). Ever use the word livid to describe being extremely mad? The word has become synonymous with being mad because of that purplish-red color that might show up in a persons face under stress.
What does show up before livor mortis is pallor mortis. This isnt talked about much because it occurs in the first half-hour or so before livor mortis can be seen, and its unusual for a murder victim to be found and examined by an investigator that quickly after death. Also, since the state of pallor mortis is a subjective determination, accuracy in estimating time of death is impossible using it.
Knowing the basics about how livor mortis occurs and how it is affected by objects pressing on the skin surface or the surface on which the body is lying is how an experienced investigator might be able to determine whether or not a body has been moved. But like so many other things, it has its limitations.
As amateurs, we all think of the obvious from pictures weve probably seen showing examples of bodies that have been found by LE that had been turned over before discovery with the fixed livor mortis on the upper portions of the body. (I wont post examples of this -- if anyone can stand the shock of looking at such things, Im sure they already have or can easily find what Im talking about.) Various examples show a white area where the victim may have been lying on an arm or hand, their clothing, an object, etc. But what if, after dying, the body had been turned over before its lividity was fixed? Investigators would have no indications on the body that it had been turned over within that period of time. And how about if it was partially fixed and then turned over? There might be two patterns of lividity in such a case.
How about a situation where a body is picked up in one location and placed in the exact same position somewhere else? If both surfaces were the same with nothing else underneath, would not the lividity pattern be the same? Unless the person disturbed something like the dirt or debris with their hands while sliding them under the body to lift it, there would be nothing apparent to show that the body had been moved.
And what if a body were lying on something (say, a blanket) that could be used to slide the body from one location to another? Would there be any clues that this had happened? Maybe there would be signs on the surface of the ground or in the dirt, dust or debris on the floor that would tell investigators that the body had obviously been moved. If they examined the body where it was located, they could look and document (with photos) exactly what was underneath the body in order to match it with the patterns on the underside of the victim. Any fold in the blanket, any high spot in the floor or in the dirt underneath should show up as a blanched area in the lividity of the body.
This Im sure is nothing new to anyone who has given it any thought. But apply this to the situation with the discovery of JonBenets body. Did the ME examine the body in situ and compare the lividity patterns with the surface on which it lied? Did he compare the blanched lines in her back to the folds in the blanket to see if anything didnt match? Did he have photos taken of the body being lifted from where it was found so investigators could later compare it with the lividity pattern? Hell, did he even bother going to the basement to look at the location where the body was reported to have been found after having missed the chance to see it where it was discovered? The answer, of course, to all these questions is NO. Investigators allowed people to wander around the house unsupervised, asked two possible suspects to search the crime scene, and even moved the body from one room to another before the ME had been called. One person (a possible suspect at that time) was even allowed to go back to the basement after discovery of the body to look for himself and handle crucial evidence. Later, (as CorallaroC pointed out) did the CSIs carefully examine the surface of the basement floor to see if the blanket or the body might have been moved? Would they have even had the experience or training to know exactly what to be looking for? Would they have known how important it was to knowing whether or not someone at the house that morning might have moved the body? Like so many other things associated with this case, these things are all failures by investigators to determine something that might have helped understand exactly what happened -- and might have answered the question posed in title of this thread.
Because of these things that were not done, no one in authority can say (or has said) with certainty that JonBenets body was moved -- or that it was not moved. We can all state our opinions and explain our reasoning. But without the information that should have been gathered, we simply dont know and cant say that the body was or was not moved. There are no established facts here.
- Status