Who Killed Jon Benet Ramsey? Poll

[Anti-K]

And let me just get this straight okay? The intruder closes the train room door and puts the chair back in front of it. He closes the WC door and re latches the hidden latch. He writes the ransom note, then carefully returns the pen and pad to exactly where he found them. Then he walks out the pantry door and leaves it wide open???

Again, John said he checked all the main floor doors that morning, even going out to check the garage? Why would he neglect to check the Pantry door?

I think it's pretty obvious that with the number of people in the house that day, somebody must have cracked the door to let in some fresh air. It was photographed and the Ramsey's jumped all over it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don’t think you intended it, but you have just constructed a Straw Man.

I’m not speaking for other IDI; just me. If IDI, the killer only used the path between basement and bedroom; entry point and exit (almost none of the house). He may have made sounds, just none that were heard. I think he may have spent as little as 30 – 45 minutes in the house (I know what the experts say). 2 ½ pages of handwriting, items used in crime not sourced to home; items removed from home but items used in crime that could be traced to home not removed; the acts performed on the victim; trace evidence (hair, fiber, DNA) not sourced to the home found on the tape, the ligatures, the body, and the genital area.

This is more than “barely any evidence except possible degraded trace DNA,” which, as an aside, is an inaccurate description of the DNA evidence. Yes, all this could have an innocent explanation but so far they looked and didn’t find one. This, too, is fact.

And, the door, as I understand it, was not left open. It was left ajar.

One of the people, maybe it was Fernie (books packed by contractors, mb cratered on desktop, I’m without usual resources), supposedly found the door AJAR when he arrived. Beckner (in his depo? maybe?) said that it had been left open by crime techs; but, Fernie? arrived before the crime techs. Or, something like that.
.
Not sure if this is the same door:
“Police found no signs of forced entry, which led to speculation that no outsider could have gotten in. In fact, law-enforcement officials told NEWSWEEK that the police knew several windows and a door had been unlocked that night.”
http://tinyurl.com/jjqonuo
…

AK

 

[Annapurna]

I'm just curious, what linked Burke to the wine cellar? Patsy I know because her Christmas outfit fibers were on the duct tape - and John pulled the tape off JBR's mouth before carrying her body upstairs, so it didn't happen when PR hugged her body. Burke is linked to the pineapple snack for sure but I was just wondering about his connection to the wine cellar though.

BR's tDNA was identified on the pink barbie nightgown (which had blood on it also). Is it relevant? Thats a whole different story, it could have come from the washing machine, who knows.

To address the "open door". I think you're right andreww, I recall hearing it was a detective who opened that. I never considered it could be documenting the lack of pry marks and I think that's a great deduction.

I think that BDI does solve a lot of the holes in the case. However I find it hard to believe that the whole of the BPD (or at least a few of them) plus 2 DA's would cover for him. If they knew, why the whole John Karr fiasco? That wasn't cheap, and it made the DA's office look pretty stupid. Additionally there was still resources put into the investigation after the GJ hearings. We know this because of Kolar and his book. I imagine that if at least a few higher-ups knew about this, then they would not have assigned cold case resources towards it. I find the "conspiracy of silence" theory (pops up all the time) to be very unlikely. I am not a lawyer so I'm not going to attempt to dissect the Colorado Children's law (or w/e its called), but would they really just leave it as an "open" case if it was solved? Couldn't they just seal it or something? Police departments don't like having unsolved cases. And if it was really clear to at least some of the investigators, I suspect someone may have leaked that info. This was one of the most high-profile cases ever. The tabloids would have paid a fortune for an insider story like that.

As for why didn't he talk? His behavior is a little...off. He skipped through the graveyard at her funeral. Etc., Etc. There have been suggestions that he could have Asperger's or a similar ASD which made it easier for him to detach any emotion from this event. Additionally he was never really pushed hard in the questioning. He was the weak link and the R's knew that, so they took steps to make sure he wasn't questioned much. He had a conversation with a psychologist (interesting stuff, she asked him "do you have any secrets?" he put a book over his head and said "if I told you it wouldn't be a secret." Sounds like a display of anxiety + maybe something a parent said?) but other than that not very much.

The GJ charge is a little bit confusing, but essentially what it meant was that the GJ couldn't decide which R had done it, so they charged both of them as being involved in the circumstances leading up to her death. This eliminates the "cross-finger-pointing" defense, as they can say they worked together. Since it wouldn't be for 1st degree murder, the burden of proof would have been different. The GJ went for a charge that would be more likely to stick. I'm reminded of the Casey Anthony case, the prosecutors over shot & went for murder 1 with the death penalty, if they had gone with a lesser charge she would have probably been found guilty (manslaughter, negligence, abuse of a corpse, etc.).




Now to address the severity of the wounds. This is where the waters get murky. You're right, that head wound is REALLY bad. Its so bad that I don't really believe it was done with the flashlight (also because they could have just put it back in the drawer if it were and no one would have noticed, if it was the murder weapon you'd think they wouldn't just leave it on the counter). So what could it be? I don't know. OTG did some really excellent analysis on this subject. He identified in some crime scene photos what appears to be a metal bar near the furnace (which is on the hallway to the WC IIRC). There was also one of the massive trophies in JB's room knocked over.

BOESP will tell you that it appears to be a "high velocity, low pressure" wound (right B? I wasn't sure if that's what you said) meaning that she was thrown into something rather than something hit her. Another possibility. I wish I knew a doctor who knew about head wounds to ask. I've tried to look into this subject but I can't find specific information.

I think her wounds look like a deliberate attempt to kill. This can be true even if BDI. Kolar says that the triangular bruise on her neck was not caused by the ligature. If we believe this then the likely cause was a shirt collar. So here is a theory that is an extension of that: She was thrown by the shirt collar. Or, she was dragged by the collar after being hit ( I don't think it could be before, she was probably standing due to the angle).

Or another theory: Perhaps the ligature was something applied by B as a way to control JB initially, like a leash. OTG has a theory (thanks! I always appreciate your work) in which JB was taken to the basement by B with the "leash" tied around her neck. Maybe it was like a game to him. He ties the string to something (he doesn't know any better). Then he molests her. She reacts, he grabs something to hit her with. She becomes unconscious and falls. The rope tightens with her body weight, but not completely. B runs away because he knows he hurt her and doesn't want to get in trouble. Slowly edema causes the furrow to deepen, the brain to swell. She dies. B eventually goes to check on her. He finds his mom. I like this theory because it helps to explain why she died without assigning so much blame. I have a problem with this theory because PR was dressed and she probably wouldn't have let her kids play that way.

So I guess I have more questions than answers, as always. That's what keeps us coming back to this case.

 

[Anti-K]

Look the fact that Fleet moved that suitcase makes no difference in that John didn't mention that he found it out of place under the unlatched window whilst on the hunt for an entry/exit point.

The only thing Fleets moving the case does do is make me wonder why the Ramsey's and Lou Smit continued to perpetrate the myth that it was put their by an intruder as a means to exit through that window.

You can't have it both ways.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think the Ramseys were essentially clueless and went with what they were told by Smit and by Douglas. I think Smit was sincere in his opinions. I disagree with a lot of them but I don’t think there is a valid reason to question their sincerity.

Andreww, I think when someone says that they think Mr Ramsey knew everything but maybe he knew nothing r maybe he figured it out later, or maybe Mr Ramsey… that’s having it both ways. And, it’s okay, because there is some uncertainly involved and all you know is it’s RDI.

With the suitcase and window, Smit, et. al are saying the same thing – there is some uncertainty involved and all they know is that he came in and went out somewhere, somehow.
…

AK

 

[Anti-K]

And let me just get this straight okay? The intruder closes the train room door and puts the chair back in front of it. He closes the WC door and re latches the hidden latch. He writes the ransom note, then carefully returns the pen and pad to exactly where he found them. Then he walks out the pantry door and leaves it wide open???

Again, John said he checked all the main floor doors that morning, even going out to check the garage? Why would he neglect to check the Pantry door?

I think it's pretty obvious that with the number of people in the house that day, somebody must have cracked the door to let in some fresh air. It was photographed and the Ramsey's jumped all over it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Since I’m in the mood for sharing my own IDI take on events: if IDI, I am not convinced that the train room, or the window or the suitcase, or the chair had anything to do with anything crime related. Yes, if necessary – apparently, it sometimes fell on it’s own – he latched the wc door (the latch was not hidden - you can see it in the attached photo (top of door).

Virtually all IDI believe the note was written first. I believe this, too. Yes, he returned the pad and pen (or, at least placed them where they were found). I don’t think there is an IDI consensus, but I think he left by the butler door. I think he may have left – NOT panicked –but, hurriedly and the door did not catch behind him when he closed it.


…

AK

 

[BOESP]

<snipped for relevance>

BOESP will tell you that it appears to be a "high velocity, low pressure" wound (right B? I wasn't sure if that's what you said) meaning that she was thrown into something rather than something hit her. Another possibility. I wish I knew a doctor who knew about head wounds to ask. I've tried to look into this subject but I can't find specific information.

Hi Anna - the nature of the head trauma appears to me to be from a low velocity/high pressure action, consistent with pushing her head against something - her body (head) being in motion and hitting a stationary object. A lot of people disagree with this.

 

[Ellie9]

Hi Anna - the nature of the head trauma appears to me to be from a low velocity/high pressure action, consistent with pushing her head against something - her body (head) being in motion and hitting a stationary object. A lot of people disagree with this.

Could she have been dropped from a higher position to a hard ground? For example someone dropped her from the top of basement stairs onto the basement floor? Or would there have been tell tale signs of something like that?

If not that high up, could someone like an adult had her in both arms and dropped or threw her down, back facing down, to a hard floor?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[andreww]

I don’t think you intended it, but you have just constructed a Straw Man.

I’m not speaking for other IDI; just me. If IDI, the killer only used the path between basement and bedroom; entry point and exit (almost none of the house). He may have made sounds, just none that were heard. I think he may have spent as little as 30 – 45 minutes in the house (I know what the experts say). 2 ½ pages of handwriting, items used in crime not sourced to home; items removed from home but items used in crime that could be traced to home not removed; the acts performed on the victim; trace evidence (hair, fiber, DNA) not sourced to the home found on the tape, the ligatures, the body, and the genital area.

This is more than “barely any evidence except possible degraded trace DNA,” which, as an aside, is an inaccurate description of the DNA evidence. Yes, all this could have an innocent explanation but so far they looked and didn’t find one. This, too, is fact.

And, the door, as I understand it, was not left open. It was left ajar.

One of the people, maybe it was Fernie (books packed by contractors, mb cratered on desktop, I’m without usual resources), supposedly found the door AJAR when he arrived. Beckner (in his depo? maybe?) said that it had been left open by crime techs; but, Fernie? arrived before the crime techs. Or, something like that.
.
Not sure if this is the same door:
“Police found no signs of forced entry, which led to speculation that no outsider could have gotten in. In fact, law-enforcement officials told NEWSWEEK that the police knew several windows and a door had been unlocked that night.”
http://tinyurl.com/jjqonuo
…

AK

The unlocked doors were upstairs. I believe there was a door from JBs room to a balcony that was unlocked.

Again, the best evidence we have came from John who told officers that he checked every main floor door. That statement was made when police arrived so;

1) we know his memory wasn't affected by time.

2) he was look for a entry point and he lived in the house, so we know that search would have been thorough. It would be highly unlikely that he would forget a door.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[andreww]

I think the Ramseys were essentially clueless and went with what they were told by Smit and by Douglas. I think Smit was sincere in his opinions. I disagree with a lot of them but I don’t think there is a valid reason to question their sincerity.

Andreww, I think when someone says that they think Mr Ramsey knew everything but maybe he knew nothing r maybe he figured it out later, or maybe Mr Ramsey… that’s having it both ways. And, it’s okay, because there is some uncertainly involved and all you know is it’s RDI.

With the suitcase and window, Smit, et. al are saying the same thing – there is some uncertainty involved and all they know is that he came in and went out somewhere, somehow.
…

AK

Two things;

1) I've always maintained that John pretty much figured out what happened by 11:00 am. We don't know the whole story because we can't believe a lot of what he has said. Perhaps as he went to bed he heard the kids fighting, then as he reads the ransom note, he notices it looks like Patsy's handwriting. Maybe Patsy's acting was unconvincing, who knows? But I am definitely not having it both ways.

2) The window. Smit certainly did push the window theory, he wouldn't have flaunted video of himself going through it if he didn't believe it. Smit may have been skeptical in his own mind, but he really had no other viable options. John had literally locked all other doors, if the intruder theory was going to work, he had to have come through that window, and he had to exit through that window.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[andreww]

Since I’m in the mood for sharing my own IDI take on events: if IDI, I am not convinced that the train room, or the window or the suitcase, or the chair had anything to do with anything crime related. Yes, if necessary – apparently, it sometimes fell on it’s own – he latched the wc door (the latch was not hidden - you can see it in the attached photo (top of door).

Virtually all IDI believe the note was written first. I believe this, too. Yes, he returned the pad and pen (or, at least placed them where they were found). I don’t think there is an IDI consensus, but I think he left by the butler door. I think he may have left – NOT panicked –but, hurriedly and the door did not catch behind him when he closed it.

View attachment 85532
…

AK

If he were going to write the note prior to the crime, why would he have not brought a note with him? I know you are going to say risk, but carrying a RN for a kidnapping that hasn't happened is far less risky than leaving with two practice notes, rope and duct tape in your pocket, not to mention the dead girl in the basement.

As for the door, John stated that the were all locked and closed. Why are you trying to push that BS?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Annapurna]

Could she have been dropped from a higher position to a hard ground? For example someone dropped her from the top of basement stairs onto the basement floor? Or would there have been tell tale signs of something like that?

If not that high up, could someone like an adult had her in both arms and dropped or threw her down, back facing down, to a hard floor?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Ellie, this is suggested whenever BOESP's theory is presented. The usual rebuttal is that she would have presented more injuries to her neck. Of course there were indeed injuries to her neck, but not the type consistent with a fall (I'm not an expert though.)

BOESP I am definitely considering this theory. It seems to fit without the hoops to jump through of being whacked on the head. Do you have research that you used to conclude this? When I googled it all I found was gunshot wound info. TIA. The main reason I am considering this theory is that it could also explain the triangular bruise, I take Kolar at his word that the bruise was not caused by the ligature, but rather by a previous event. Therefore it is possible that she was thrown by her shirt collar (the bruise appears to match a bruise caused by a softer fabric). Again, not an expert so I'm not 100% on this, I just believe Kolar as he has the experience and the most recent look at the case files.

I just have a hard time believing the flashlight was used. It was around what, 9.5 pounds? It was also left on the counter. I think its more likely PR or someone used it while writing the note. I just can't believe that with the disposal of her panties, the roll of duct tape (if there was one, some people think it could have been taken off something else) and the careful clean-up that the flashlight would have just been left on the counter. I can't really see the cops finding that and saying a-ha! this must be the weapon. It seems unlikely. If the flashlight wasn't out they probably would have figured it was a bat or something.

 

[Fides]

Nice post.
…

AK

Thanks AK. I think John's call to schedule the flight to Atlanta is his ride in a white Bronco.

 

[andreww]

Ellie, this is suggested whenever BOESP's theory is presented. The usual rebuttal is that she would have presented more injuries to her neck. Of course there were indeed injuries to her neck, but not the type consistent with a fall (I'm not an expert though.)

BOESP I am definitely considering this theory. It seems to fit without the hoops to jump through of being whacked on the head. Do you have research that you used to conclude this? When I googled it all I found was gunshot wound info. TIA. The main reason I am considering this theory is that it could also explain the triangular bruise, I take Kolar at his word that the bruise was not caused by the ligature, but rather by a previous event. Therefore it is possible that she was thrown by her shirt collar (the bruise appears to match a bruise caused by a softer fabric). Again, not an expert so I'm not 100% on this, I just believe Kolar as he has the experience and the most recent look at the case files.

I just have a hard time believing the flashlight was used. It was around what, 9.5 pounds? It was also left on the counter. I think its more likely PR or someone used it while writing the note. I just can't believe that with the disposal of her panties, the roll of duct tape (if there was one, some people think it could have been taken off something else) and the careful clean-up that the flashlight would have just been left on the counter. I can't really see the cops finding that and saying a-ha! this must be the weapon. It seems unlikely. If the flashlight wasn't out they probably would have figured it was a bat or something.

At this point, does it really make a difference what was used? The bat probably makes more sense. How long had it been outside? And it still had train room carpet fibres on it? Ad didn't one of the neighbours hear a metallic dragging sound? I tend to agree with you about the flashlight though. The house had lights, and the flashlight wouldn't have come out until someone didn't want those lights to be seen, likely after the crime was committed. The murder weapon was likely something that would have been out in the open, and it would have been disposed of or hidden after. The flashlight fits neither of those criteria.

 

[andreww]

Thanks AK. I think John's call to schedule the flight to Atlanta is his ride in a white Bronco.

Yep. I would have actually believed the whole "we just wanted to go home" story, but he started with that business meeting BS.

 

[BOESP]

Could she have been dropped from a higher position to a hard ground? For example someone dropped her from the top of basement stairs onto the basement floor? Or would there have been tell tale signs of something like that?

If not that high up, could someone like an adult had her in both arms and dropped or threw her down, back facing down, to a hard floor?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The autopsy reveals blunt force trauma to the head. A fall *could* be consistent with that, however, her other injuries don't seem to match up to that; a fall doesn't seem to fit imo.

 

[BOESP]

Ellie, this is suggested whenever BOESP's theory is presented. The usual rebuttal is that she would have presented more injuries to her neck. Of course there were indeed injuries to her neck, but not the type consistent with a fall (I'm not an expert though.)

BOESP I am definitely considering this theory. It seems to fit without the hoops to jump through of being whacked on the head. Do you have research that you used to conclude this? When I googled it all I found was gunshot wound info. TIA. The main reason I am considering this theory is that it could also explain the triangular bruise, I take Kolar at his word that the bruise was not caused by the ligature, but rather by a previous event. Therefore it is possible that she was thrown by her shirt collar (the bruise appears to match a bruise caused by a softer fabric). Again, not an expert so I'm not 100% on this, I just believe Kolar as he has the experience and the most recent look at the case files.

I just have a hard time believing the flashlight was used. It was around what, 9.5 pounds? It was also left on the counter. I think its more likely PR or someone used it while writing the note. I just can't believe that with the disposal of her panties, the roll of duct tape (if there was one, some people think it could have been taken off something else) and the careful clean-up that the flashlight would have just been left on the counter. I can't really see the cops finding that and saying a-ha! this must be the weapon. It seems unlikely. If the flashlight wasn't out they probably would have figured it was a bat or something.

BBM: gunshot trauma is high velocity/low pressure. A professional maglight will weight around 2.5 pounds.

My information on the head wound came from my now-retired cousin who was an emergency room physician in a major hospital in the Southeast and from a non-medical person with experience in this matter (now deceased).

You are welcome.

 

[Anti-K]

Could she have been dropped from a higher position to a hard ground? For example someone dropped her from the top of basement stairs onto the basement floor? Or would there have been tell tale signs of something like that?

If not that high up, could someone like an adult had her in both arms and dropped or threw her down, back facing down, to a hard floor?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

No to everything. This child was struck a massive blow. Somebody hit her with something; intentionally. Somebody didn’t care about this child, and they wanted her dead. They wanted her dead so bad that they killed her twice: head blow and asphyxiation. Occam’s razor. Shave, shave, shave…
…

AK

 

[Anti-K]

The unlocked doors were upstairs. I believe there was a door from JBs room to a balcony that was unlocked.

Again, the best evidence we have came from John who told officers that he checked every main floor door. That statement was made when police arrived so;

1) we know his memory wasn't affected by time.

2) he was look for a entry point and he lived in the house, so we know that search would have been thorough. It would be highly unlikely that he would forget a door.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes, there was an unlocked door upstairs, but there was also at least one door unlocked downstairs: the door leading from the garage to the house; and, possibly a second door &#8211; the butler door. Which door this quote refers to is not known.
&#8230;

AK

 

[Anti-K]

Two things;

1) I've always maintained that John pretty much figured out what happened by 11:00 am. We don't know the whole story because we can't believe a lot of what he has said. Perhaps as he went to bed he heard the kids fighting, then as he reads the ransom note, he notices it looks like Patsy's handwriting. Maybe Patsy's acting was unconvincing, who knows? But I am definitely not having it both ways.

2) The window. Smit certainly did push the window theory, he wouldn't have flaunted video of himself going through it if he didn't believe it. Smit may have been skeptical in his own mind, but he really had no other viable options. John had literally locked all other doors, if the intruder theory was going to work, he had to have come through that window, and he had to exit through that window.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

1) So, you think Mr Ramsey was/is essentially innocent and only clued into his wife&#8217;s evil deeds after the fact &#8211; around 11:00; and, therefore, his participation in the night&#8217;s events, the murder, the cover-up, etc was nonexistent? You realize, of course, that many RDI disagree with this. In fact, some RDI think the opposite is true (which demonstrates how nebulous evidence for RDI really is).

2) Yes, Smit did push the window theory. I don&#8217;t doubt his sincerity.
&#8230;

AK

 

[Anti-K]

If he were going to write the note prior to the crime, why would he have not brought a note with him? I know you are going to say risk, but carrying a RN for a kidnapping that hasn't happened is far less risky than leaving with two practice notes, rope and duct tape in your pocket, not to mention the dead girl in the basement.

As for the door, John stated that the were all locked and closed. Why are you trying to push that BS?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

IMO, if IDI, the note was prepared in advance, possibly on a different paper and then copied to the notepad on-site. Some IDI think he actually removed the notepad from the house on a previous occasion, drafted the RN at leisure and then returned the pad with note on the night of the crime.

I don&#8217;t know that he removed any cord or tape from the house, He may have used up all the cord and tape that he brought with him.
&#8230;

AK

 

[Anti-K]

Thanks AK. I think John's call to schedule the flight to Atlanta is his ride in a white Bronco.

I’m curious about where it is that Kolar said that the triangular “bruise” was not caused by the asphyxiation. What “experience” is it that you think Kolar has that would allow him to make such a claim?

.
Here are a few comments I copied from a (not case related) discussion forum; the thread is titled “MagLites, flash light or weapon?” http://tinyurl.com/mylqt4d

“If you've never owned a maglite, imagine if somebody made a steel mace, and then as an afterthought, added a flashlight to the end. “

"So we need to make a flashlight that is distinctly different from all other flashlights, something that really says Maglite." "How about one so big and heavy that you can straight up murder somebody with it?"

“Keep one in the car for emergencies, much less explaining than a baseball bat.”

“Its not a big flashlight, its a club for destroying your enemies! The flashlight part is just a bonus.”
.

Another quote from my notes, not sure where this one came from: Maglite flashlights have been known to be used as a ready substitute for a baton. Security and police personnel often carry Maglite flashlights as they can be employed as a defensive weapon, especially at night or in dark locations. Police officers will often use Maglites during traffic stops or suspect confrontation, as the beam can disorient an attacker and the flashlight can be swung as a baton as a measure of last resort in self-defense.

From: Alert A Periodic Training Guide Provided Complimentary To Prosecution And Law Enforcement Agencies; Issue 3, “Use-Of-Force Tactics And Non-Lethal Weaponry”
http://www.aele.org/alert-tactics.html

IMPACT WEAPONS
In 1987 the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP) surveyed 2,914 police agencies, most of which were in the U.S. A series of questions related to the types of weapons issued or permitted; the percentage of agencies that had approved each weapon mentioned is indicated below:
o 89% 3 to 6 cell flashlights

Among a list of Strengths and Weaknesses of the flashlight as weapon it is noted, as a weakness, that “Multi-cell lights are very heavy; a blow to the head can be fatal or cause permanent paralysis.” .
.

"Cops had long suspected that a weighty black flashlight was used to inflict the fatal 8-inch head wound on the six-year-old beauty queen after she was garroted," reported Dick Woodbury, Time's Denver bureau chief. <snip> "Police believe the flashlight's heavy rubber coating seems consistent with an instrument that could deliver a crushing blow yet not cause bleeding," the magazine reports, without identifying a source. http://tinyurl.com/l53mx5s

From the Thomas book:
“… Some perceived it as a possible murder weapon, although that was never proved.
“Dr Werner Spitz, the forensic scientist, even ran macabre tests to see if the heavy flashlight could have inflicted the kind of massive skull fracture that was found on Jonbenet. To do so, a child’s cadaver was obtained so he could strike the skull with a similar flashlight and examine the resulting injury pattern. He said the results were consistent, that the damage could have been caused by the flashlight – but it could also have been caused by other things.” P. 239

From Nancy Grace:
DR. WERNER SPITZ, FORENSIC PATHOLOGIST: …. This was not an accident, and I will tell you in a minute why and...
VELEZ-MITCHELL: Tell us right now.
SPITZ: Well, she did -- it could not have been an accident because she is hit in the head with a heavy instrument, which caused a rectangular fracture in the skull, into which it is possible to sink the head of a 3- mag flashlight. It`s similar to what the police carry, but the police carry a 5-mag. This is a 3-mag flashlight, which was seen on pictures on the kitchen counter. And you need to pick up this thing and heave it over the head and strike with force into the head. How can that be an accident?
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0608/17/ng.01.html

And, from Discovery News:
Dr.WS: I would certainly believe that the flashlight is the instrument of death.
LC: What makes you so sure that it's compatible. How do you know?
Dr.WS: Because it fits right into the ....?.. It doesn't fit into the defect where it leaves some area to play with. It fits perfectly.
http://thewebsafe.tripod.com/03172000spitzondiscovery.htm
…

AK