Why BOTH Garrote & Head Bash?

[aussiesheila]

I would like to concentrate on why the perp both Garroted and Bashed JonBenet. There have been various reasons I know of suggested:

1. perhaps the Head Bash occurred first by accident and the Garrote was a coverup (ST) - with an amazing lack of blood loss,
2. the perp enjoyed the Garrote and then finished off with the Head Bash because 3of a struggle - again an amazing lack of blood loss
4. the perp first did the Garrote and then the Head Bash for just sadistic pleasure,
5. the perp first did the Garrote and then the Head Bash as a step by step ritual (eg Celtic midwinter garrote/bash sacrifice).

I'm just a laymen here, but the low loss of blood to the Head Bash suggests to me that it was NOT done immediately after the Garrote and therefore suggests to me that it was planned that way.

I think it is central to the motive and important to discuss in itself. Why do you think both the Garrote and Head Bash were done?

I think reason 2 is the closest to what actually happened.

I think there were about 3 or 4 of JonBenet's regular abusers there taking it in turns to wield the ligature which I believe they had used on many occasions before. I think that the regulars had allowed a newcomer who they had just met to join the group that night, probably because he let it be known that he had a stungun. I think the regulars had heard of stunguns which might have been the 'latest thing' in control mechanisms, perhaps a more convenient way of 'controlling' than the old-fashioned ligature and they were dying to try it out.

So I think the group was trying out the stungun for the first time that night. At one point the newcomer who unbeknownst to them was a sadist and a killer, inserted some long hard object deep into JonBenet's vagina, which caused her incredible pain and she let out a horrific scream. I think this panicked the regulars and the one holding holding the ligature quickly tightened it to stop the scream, but in his frenzy over-tightened it and ended up strangling her. I think at this point the sadistic non-regular got really mad and picked up a baseball bat and hit JonBenet over the head smashing in her skull. He then left immediately taking the stungun with him leaving the others behind with the dead body.

 

[calus_3]

The actions of the Ramseys tell all....I don't care if the police are focusing on them or not. Heck, if the police are focusing solely on them as suspects, it is in their best interest to get in there and scream at them and answer all their questions until they focus elsewhere. Lawyering up and voiding the police so that they continue to focus on the Ramseys (assuming that was the reason the Ramseys withdrew and lawyered up in the first place--I say it was a convenient excuse) just takes that much more time away from finding the real killer. I have never known an innocent person that acted this way.

One other thing, they sure as hell seem pretty satisfied and have seemed satisfied for quite some time since the public spotlight has been off them. As long as they aren't looking at me as a suspect, I will be quiet. Come around to the 10th anniversary and suddenly they make a trip to Boulder to see their son and stop by on the way to the DA. I think they know that 10 year anniversary will bring interest back so they make it look like they are interested. I WOULD HAVE NEVER MOVED FROM BOULDER AND I WOULD BE A THORN IN EVERY ELECTED OFFICIAL, THE DA, and THE GOVERNOR'S SIDE UNTIL THEY FOUND OUT WHO KILLED MY BEAUTIFUL GIRL! I get the feeling that if no one else in this world would ever think about the JBR case again and no media would ever write about it, these people would go on with their lives as if she never existed.

I believe firmly that Patsy wrote the note. A killer would not risk getting caught by a squeaky floor board or perhaps someone up for a drink of water to go upstairs and rummage around looking for paper and a pen after that deed.

I feel they are a$$ deep in this one way or another:

1) Perhaps they are covering for their son who killed her.
2) Perhaps covering for a friend of the family, perhaps their son's friend? Sounds odd and farfetched but there are those that would say "the deed is done and she is gone....no sense in ruining a kid's life". There are some parents that have been caught selling their kids for sex over the internet. Nothing is out of bounds in this world.
3) I have kind of felt all along that perhaps John and/or Patsy were farming John Benet out to friends for sex in the basement and something went wrong.

I hope the truth comes out sometime soon.

Cal

 

[UKGuy]

I believe that it was all premeditated and that the strangulation was not accidental and that the head injury must have came just as JonBenet was deceased from the strangling with the cord. One thing has bothered me though. Why wasn't the face red or discolored from trapped blood like some victims of strangling? I haven't read anything about that happening or why not.

Generally the dusky, purple swollen appearance of a corpse is normally due to it being incompletely suspended, whilst a pale appearance suggests a complete suspension!

Accidental ligature strangulation is very very rare, and usually occurs due to some mechanical agent, say a scarf becoming trapped in machinery, or a moving vehicle etc. The other more common causes of ligature strangulation , are homicide and Sexual Asphyxia.

Considering Sexual Asphyxia, the more common cause is strangulation during Auto Erotic Asphyxiation, say due to some malfunction or miscalculation. During Erotic Asphyxiation, or Consensual Sexual Asphyxia. When the latter results in death, the death is accidental, and not a homicide! Otherwise if it is non-consensual, and for the benefit of the person who is restricting the others air supply then it is an intentional criminal act!

Reviewing JonBenet's post mortem photographs, its possible to speculate that the person who garroted her, simply whacked her on the head to finish her off, her actual post mortem posture may reflect this, since her arms are extended above her head.

This arm extension may have occurred simultaneously with her death, she may have been holding or grasping at something, when whacked on the head or suffered cranial trauma, this can result in what is termed a Cadaveric spasm, which is distinct from rigor mortis, cadaveric spasm occurs under extremely violent and emotional circumstances.

If this speculation is partially correct then along with the evidence that suggests her body was relocated to the wine-cellar, we appear to have a violent homicide followed by some staging?


.

 

[LinasK]

Generally the dusky, purple swollen appearance of a corpse is normally due to it being incompletely suspended, whilst a pale appearance suggests a complete suspension!

Accidental ligature strangulation is very very rare, and usually occurs due to some mechanical agent, say a scarf becoming trapped in machinery, or a moving vehicle etc. The other more common causes of ligature strangulation , are homicide and Sexual Asphyxia.

Considering Sexual Asphyxia, the more common cause is strangulation during Auto Erotic Asphyxiation, say due to some malfunction or miscalculation. During Erotic Asphyxiation, or Consensual Sexual Asphyxia. When the latter results in death, the death is accidental, and not a homicide! Otherwise if it is non-consensual, and for the benefit of the person who is restricting the others air supply then it is an intentional criminal act!

Reviewing JonBenet's post mortem photographs, its possible to speculate that the person who garroted her, simply whacked her on the head to finish her off, her actual post mortem posture may reflect this, since her arms are extended above her head.

This arm extension may have occurred simultaneously with her death, she may have been holding or grasping at something, when whacked on the head or suffered cranial trauma, this can result in what is termed a Cadaveric spasm, which is distinct from rigor mortis, cadaveric spasm occurs under extremely violent and emotional circumstances.

If this speculation is partially correct then along with the evidence that suggests her body was relocated to the wine-cellar, we appear to have a violent homicide followed by some staging?


.

UKGuy, you've summed up my thinking exactly! This is exactly the scenario I believe happened! I think John was abusing her, took it too far, panicked and finished her off with a head whack and Patsy covered for him by writing the note. JB had been his personal minature Patsy complete with wardrobe to chronically abuse. She could not have intentionally gotten the head injury first, or the perp would have majorly risked cracking her skull open and had a bloody mess to deal with- assuming the perp(s) care about appearances, which considering all the staging of the crime scene, they obviously do. Closed head-injuries with minimal blood loss are rare. I worked for 13 years with head injury patients.

 

[UKGuy]

UKGuy, you've summed up my thinking exactly! This is exactly the scenario I believe happened! I think John was abusing her, took it too far, panicked and finished her off with a head whack and Patsy covered for him by writing the note. JB had been his personal minature Patsy complete with wardrobe to chronically abuse. She could not have intentionally gotten the head injury first, or the perp would have majorly risked cracking her skull open and had a bloody mess to deal with- assuming the perp(s) care about appearances, which considering all the staging of the crime scene, they obviously do. Closed head-injuries with minimal blood loss are rare. I worked for 13 years with head injury patients.

LinasK,

What I was referring to in that paragraph was more the legal niceties regarding AEA, EA.

That is if JonBenet and another person beneath the age of criminal responsibility indulged in EA, and JonBenet was killed, then her death would legally be described as an Accident, and not a deliberate homicide! e.g. there would be no requirement for a murder investigation.

The scenario you describe is probably not to far away from what transpired, its just who took part, is the difficult part, and of course why?


.

 

[rashomon]

I think the head bash occurred first, and that Patsy delivered the blow to JB's head when catching John molesting her. For whatever reason, her fury was directed at JonBenet. The blow causes massive hemmorhaging inside JB's brain and it becomes clear to them that JB probably will not survive the blow or remain severely brain damaged.
Patsy doesn't want to be exposed as the killer, and John doesn't want to be exposed as JB's chronic abuser. They realize they are in this together and decide to stage a scene. JB is taken down to the basement to prevent Burke from seing anything. The strangling/garotting is staged as a sexaul assault crime to hide signs of prior abuse. JB is already nearing death when taken down to the basement, and so the injury inflicted to her vagina causes only little bleeding. JB finally dies from strangulation.
I think the Ramseys originally wanted to dump the body somewhere outside but then didn't dare to do it for fear of being seen.
They then write a ransom note together, to make it appear like 'a kidnapping gone wrong'. Which is why we have that bizarre scenario unparalleled in criminal history: A allleged kidnapping victim dead in her own home together with a ransom note.

 

[BlueCrab]

I think the head bash occurred first, and that Patsy delivered the blow to JB's head when catching John molesting her. For whatever reason, her fury was directed at JonBenet. The blow causes massive hemmorhaging inside JB's brain and it becomes clear to them that JB probably will not survive the blow or remain severely brain damaged.
Patsy doesn't want to be exposed as the killer, and John doesn't want to be exposed as JB's chronic abuser. They realize they are in this together and decide to stage a scene. JB is taken down to the basement to prevent Burke from seing anything. The strangling/garotting is staged as a sexaul assault crime to hide signs of prior abuse. JB is already nearing death when taken down to the basement, and so the injury inflicted to her vagina causes only little bleeding. JB finally dies from strangulation.
I think the Ramseys originally wanted to dump the body somewhere outside but then didn't dare to do it for fear of being seen.
They then write a ransom note together, to make it appear like 'a kidnapping gone wrong'. Which is why we have that bizarre scenario unparalleled in criminal history: A allleged kidnapping victim dead in her own home together with a ransom note.

rashomon,

How do you account for Burke's fingerprints on the bowl of pineapple?

How do you account for the unanimous consensus of the CBI's six handwriting experts that John didn't write the ransom note and it was highly unlikely that Patsy wrote it?

BlueCrab

 

[rashomon]

rashomon,

How do you account for Burke's fingerprints on the bowl of pineapple?

How do you account for the unanimous consensus of the CBI's six handwriting experts that John didn't write the ransom note and it was highly unlikely that Patsy wrote it?

BlueCrab

Burke's fingerprints on the bowl of pineapple would have the same significance to me than Patsy's fingerprints being on them too. Both lived in the household.
What is interesting is that no unidentified fingerprints were found on the bowl, which is why we can be certain that no members of a 'small foreign faction' served JB pineapple and then waited for the pineapple to pass the stomach before killing her.
And in terms of the handwriting: I think that both John and Patsy concocted the note and Patsy wrote it. As far as I'm informed, she could not be excluded as the writer of the note.
From looking at the handwriting I get the feeling that the writer must have been in an absolute emotional turmoil, and that this was no professional kidnapper who wrote it.

 

[Toltec]

The head bash came first....as it most likely happened in the bedroom or kitchen....or possibly the den. (John's blue bathrobe was found in the den.....hmmmm). I believe the flashlight was used....and it was found in the kitchen.

As a parent, you're first instinct is to lay your daughter down in her own bed...then try and revive her. If they believed she was already dead...then they most likely searched for a cord to start the crime-staging process.

The fibers of the cord being found on her bed sheet suggested to me that they cut the cord on her bed. Also the paring knife found in the second floor landing could have been the knife that cut the cord.

The garrote was made downstairs...in the basement. There are broken shards of the brush near the wine cellar. There it was placed on an already unconcious JonBenet.

The killer then wrappped JonBenet in her blanket and placed her gently in the wine cellar.

A week ago I watched a CSI episode in that the forensics extracted skin cells from a rope used to hang a man. There they got a DNA sample of the killer. Could it still be possible to check for that in this case?

 

[tipper]

The head bash came first....as it most likely happened in the bedroom or kitchen....or possibly the den. (John's blue bathrobe was found in the den.....hmmmm). I believe the flashlight was used....and it was found in the kitchen.

As a parent, you're first instinct is to lay your daughter down in her own bed...then try and revive her. If they believed she was already dead...then they most likely searched for a cord to start the crime-staging process.

The fibers of the cord being found on her bed sheet suggested to me that they cut the cord on her bed. Also the paring knife found in the second floor landing could have been the knife that cut the cord.

The garrote was made downstairs...in the basement. There are broken shards of the brush near the wine cellar. There it was placed on an already unconcious JonBenet.

The killer then wrappped JonBenet in her blanket and placed her gently in the wine cellar.

A week ago I watched a CSI episode in that the forensics extracted skin cells from a rope used to hang a man. There they got a DNA sample of the killer. Could it still be possible to check for that in this case?

How do you account for the lack of blood and bruising while they tried to revive her, made a plan, searched for cord etc.

Maybe my parental instincts are off but - my daugther broke her collar-bone last Sunday and it never occurred to me that the driveway wasn't a fine place for her to remain while I checked her out.

My recollection is there was some speculation in the newspapers a couple of years ago about the possibility of DNA on the cord. I think whoever did this was wearing gloves while in the house but if not, maybe that's where DNA-X came from.

 

[concernedperson]

Burke's fingerprints on the bowl of pineapple would have the same significance to me than Patsy's fingerprints being on them too. Both lived in the household.
What is interesting is that no unidentified fingerprints were found on the bowl, which is why we can be certain that no members of a 'small foreign faction' served JB pineapple and then waited for the pineapple to pass the stomach before killing her.
And in terms of the handwriting: I think that both John and Patsy concocted the note and Patsy wrote it. As far as I'm informed, she could not be excluded as the writer of the note.
From looking at the handwriting I get the feeling that the writer must have been in an absolute emotional turmoil, and that this was no professional kidnapper who wrote it.

I cannot find an agrument with anything you have written. In fact, I could have written it myself. You obviously aren't swayed by the Ramsey's hyperbole.

 

[capps]

J MAC,

Maybe if you calm down a little,and turn your "CAPS" off,(we're getting the impression that you're yelling at us),we can then have a discussion.

In this forum,we like to have,if possible,some kind of credible resources,to back up your statements.

For instance,you state that there is a clear full footprint on the suitcase,can you give a credible resource,as to where you got that information?

Welcome to the JBR forum!

 

[Thorkim]

No J Mac, I do not understand.

 

[UKGuy]

The head bash came first....as it most likely happened in the bedroom or kitchen....or possibly the den. (John's blue bathrobe was found in the den.....hmmmm). I believe the flashlight was used....and it was found in the kitchen.

As a parent, you're first instinct is to lay your daughter down in her own bed...then try and revive her. If they believed she was already dead...then they most likely searched for a cord to start the crime-staging process.

The fibers of the cord being found on her bed sheet suggested to me that they cut the cord on her bed. Also the paring knife found in the second floor landing could have been the knife that cut the cord.

The garrote was made downstairs...in the basement. There are broken shards of the brush near the wine cellar. There it was placed on an already unconcious JonBenet.

The killer then wrappped JonBenet in her blanket and placed her gently in the wine cellar.

A week ago I watched a CSI episode in that the forensics extracted skin cells from a rope used to hang a man. There they got a DNA sample of the killer. Could it still be possible to check for that in this case?

Toltec,

If she was killed downstairs was she taken upstairs to have her bindings cut?

How do you know it was the killer who wrapped her in a blanket, also when was the garrote placed around her neck, was this prior to being wrapped in the blanket or after?

IMO she was most likely killed in one location, lets say her bedroom, moved out of there while that was cleaned up, to say the spare bedroom where more staging re-dressing, hair styling took place, then relocated from there down to the basement, where staging appropriate to an abduction from her bed, could be attempted, lying hidden and tethered upstairs simply does not correspond with most of the detail in the RN, excepting the hint that she was already dead, by threatening not to return her for burial!

Explicitly her crime scene had already been staged and a RN written, but circumstances and reality revealed the requirement that this be revised, so she was re-located, partially re-dressed, and the big clue is the white blanket!

 

[Rupert]

Toltec,

If she was killed downstairs was she taken upstairs to have her bindings cut?

How do you know it was the killer who wrapped her in a blanket, also when was the garrote placed around her neck, was this prior to being wrapped in the blanket or after?

IMO she was most likely killed in one location, lets say her bedroom, moved out of there while that was cleaned up, to say the spare bedroom where more staging re-dressing, hair styling took place, then relocated from there down to the basement, where staging appropriate to an abduction from her bed, could be attempted, lying hidden and tethered upstairs simply does not correspond with most of the detail in the RN, excepting the hint that she was already dead, by threatening not to return her for burial!

Explicitly her crime scene had already been staged and a RN written, but circumstances and reality revealed the requirement that this be revised, so she was re-located, partially re-dressed, and the big clue is the white blanket!

UKGuy,
You brought up a good point. Something I haven't yet really looked into. Why the redressing? This could be a clue as to the identity of the perp. If it was an intruder, what would make them do that?

The "Wednesday" panties were too big for JonBenet and I recall were meant as a gift for some daughter of a friend of Patsy.

If it was like the Steve Thomas theory, then maybe the original panties were soiled and that's why they were changed.

Also, why is the white blanket a "big clue" to you?

Rupert

 

[UKGuy]

UKGuy,
You brought up a good point. Something I haven't yet really looked into. Why the redressing? This could be a clue as to the identity of the perp. If it was an intruder, what would make them do that?

The "Wednesday" panties were too big for JonBenet and I recall were meant as a gift for some daughter of a friend of Patsy.

If it was like the Steve Thomas theory, then maybe the original panties were soiled and that's why they were changed.

Also, why is the white blanket a "big clue" to you?

Rupert

Rupert.

Exactly, why the redressing, why a white blanket or two? Do intruders stage homicides, well occassionally, over 90% are hanging style asphyxiations designed to appear as suicides. You get the occassional homicide occurring in a car, then the victim plus the car is rolled into a river or down a ravine to suggest a vehicle accident. There are others, so staging is not that uncommon in homicides.

The redressing is a complex issue, which some people deny occurred, but JonBenet's final appearance was not uniform, she had day clothes on above the waist and night clothes on below the waist, assuming she wore underwear to bed, an important point since the Ramsey's say she was put to bed sleeping.

So you can view this as either ignorance on the stagers part e.g. an indication of their relationship to the R's, or the R's attempting to make the staging look authentic!

Staging will reflect the perpetrators identity, since they always add some personal element to the staging.

Yes her panties may have been soiled, or contaminated with forensic evidence from the perpetrator, thus requiring their removal, they may also have been removed as a trophy, sexual sociopaths display traits such as this during the commission of crimes.

We have explored the Wednesday panty issue in another thread, suffice to say without some of the information that the BPD hold on her clothing, we cannot come to many firm conclusions. But it should be possible to demonstrate if she wore the size-12 underwear to the White's, since there will be forensic underwear fibers on the inside of her black satin pants. Removed when she went to bed!

The redressing which I would suggest were multiple redressing events, undertaken by different people at different points in time. The non-uniform manner in which she is dressed and her hair styled, no socks, yet her jewellry is all there, albeit some is entangled in the ligature knotting, has the fingerprints and fashion perspective of different people.

But her favorite barbie nightgown is lying close by readied to be placed on her to conclude her bedside abduction scenario, but this never occurred, and the patently unfinished aspects of her staging along with the other elements e.g. paintbrush handle employed in the garrote, the tape, even the cord may have all been lying around, as part of the domestic Christmas clutter.

Similarly with the blanket(s) they may have been sourced down in the basement. What need does an intruder have of a blanket? If an intruder wrapped the blanket around her prior to reaching the basement, then the homicide occurs, we have a considerate intruder who then re-wraps her up again! That I would suggest is straining credulity to its limits.

As I questioned in the last post: "when was the garrote placed around her neck, was this prior to being wrapped in the blanket or after?" Since FW and JR state she was recovered wrapped pappoose style in the white blanket.

This tells you someone picked JonBenet up from another place in the house, already stiff, and relocated her, but we know the staging occurred in the wine-cellar since the remains of the paintbrush handle was recovered from the paint tote and shards of wood from the handle lay close by on the floor.

So the big clue in the white blanket is that it tells you it was placed around her body after the staging occurred, else there would be more forensic evidence on it, plus with it being papoose style and not simply draped over her corpse, confirms this.

Just to ask the rhetorical question before the point arises, how do you stage a sexual assault using the paintbrush handle or a digit then wipe a corpse down genitally if it is wrapped papoose style in a blanket? And obviously the blanket covers some of the abrasions on her body.

So if you explore the crime-scene in some depth it should become apparent that it is staged, e.g. a fake crime scene, its meant to deceive and color any investigators perspective.

And it has been so successful many people have proposed, such as Lou Smit, that the garrote and ligature along with her sexual asssault are indicative of a sexual sadist experienced in Erotic Asphyxiation. I would contend my remarks regarding the staged elements show that to be false.

To use the staged evidence to construct theories as to who killed JonBenet will not advance anyone very far, and this is the main reason why this case has see no major developements.


.

 

[aussiesheila]

UKGuy,
You brought up a good point. Something I haven't yet really looked into. Why the redressing? This could be a clue as to the identity of the perp. If it was an intruder, what would make them do that?

The "Wednesday" panties were too big for JonBenet and I recall were meant as a gift for some daughter of a friend of Patsy.

If it was like the Steve Thomas theory, then maybe the original panties were soiled and that's why they were changed.

Also, why is the white blanket a "big clue" to you?

Rupert

Rupert, you ask why the redressing? My answer is that she was naked or near naked when killed by a group of approximately five pedophiles and they redressed the body to make it look less likely that she had been killed as she had been, during a session of sexual abuse, and more likely to have been killed by a kidnapper, as they were planning their coverup to look like.

I think the Wednesday panties are a red herring. I think JonBenet put them on herself as she was getting ready for the White's party and she wore them to the party and then to bed. I think they became urine-stained some time around midnight, were then removed for the sexual abuse that I think took place before the killing.

I think the original panties that you refer to were soiled as you suggest and that JonBenet herself changed them before she went to the White's party. "So why did she change into an oversize pair of panties?" I hear you ask. Well my theory is that this was immediately after she had that "little tiff" with Patsy about the red sweater in her bathroom. My guess is that JonBenet retreated to her bedroom to avoid her mother's fury and to dress in the clothes she wanted to wear. I think it was at this point that she discovered that the panties she had on were stained, and rather than go back to the bathroom where her correct-size clean panties were stored but her mother was still raging and fuming, JonBenet went to the cupboard in her bedroom and decided to make do with a pair of slightly-too-large clean panties. The panties would not fall down as she was going to wear a pair of tight slacks over the top of them.

 

[aussiesheila]

Rupert.

Exactly, why the redressing, why a white blanket or two? Do intruders stage homicides, well occassionally, over 90% are hanging style asphyxiations designed to appear as suicides. You get the occassional homicide occurring in a car, then the victim plus the car is rolled into a river or down a ravine to suggest a vehicle accident. There are others, so staging is not that uncommon in homicides.

The redressing is a complex issue, which some people deny occurred, but JonBenet's final appearance was not uniform, she had day clothes on above the waist and night clothes on below the waist, assuming she wore underwear to bed, an important point since the Ramsey's say she was put to bed sleeping.

So you can view this as either ignorance on the stagers part e.g. an indication of their relationship to the R's, or the R's attempting to make the staging look authentic!

Staging will reflect the perpetrators identity, since they always add some personal element to the staging.

Yes her panties may have been soiled, or contaminated with forensic evidence from the perpetrator, thus requiring their removal, they may also have been removed as a trophy, sexual sociopaths display traits such as this during the commission of crimes.

We have explored the Wednesday panty issue in another thread, suffice to say without some of the information that the BPD hold on her clothing, we cannot come to many firm conclusions. But it should be possible to demonstrate if she wore the size-12 underwear to the White's, since there will be forensic underwear fibers on the inside of her black satin pants. Removed when she went to bed!

The redressing which I would suggest were multiple redressing events, undertaken by different people at different points in time. The non-uniform manner in which she is dressed and her hair styled, no socks, yet her jewellry is all there, albeit some is entangled in the ligature knotting, has the fingerprints and fashion perspective of different people.

But her favorite barbie nightgown is lying close by readied to be placed on her to conclude her bedside abduction scenario, but this never occurred, and the patently unfinished aspects of her staging along with the other elements e.g. paintbrush handle employed in the garrote, the tape, even the cord may have all been lying around, as part of the domestic Christmas clutter.

Similarly with the blanket(s) they may have been sourced down in the basement. What need does an intruder have of a blanket? If an intruder wrapped the blanket around her prior to reaching the basement, then the homicide occurs, we have a considerate intruder who then re-wraps her up again! That I would suggest is straining credulity to its limits.

As I questioned in the last post: "when was the garrote placed around her neck, was this prior to being wrapped in the blanket or after?" Since FW and JR state she was recovered wrapped pappoose style in the white blanket.

This tells you someone picked JonBenet up from another place in the house, already stiff, and relocated her, but we know the staging occurred in the wine-cellar since the remains of the paintbrush handle was recovered from the paint tote and shards of wood from the handle lay close by on the floor.

So the big clue in the white blanket is that it tells you it was placed around her body after the staging occurred, else there would be more forensic evidence on it, plus with it being papoose style and not simply draped over her corpse, confirms this.

Just to ask the rhetorical question before the point arises, how do you stage a sexual assault using the paintbrush handle or a digit then wipe a corpse down genitally if it is wrapped papoose style in a blanket? And obviously the blanket covers some of the abrasions on her body.

So if you explore the crime-scene in some depth it should become apparent that it is staged, e.g. a fake crime scene, its meant to deceive and color any investigators perspective.

And it has been so successful many people have proposed, such as Lou Smit, that the garrote and ligature along with her sexual asssault are indicative of a sexual sadist experienced in Erotic Asphyxiation. I would contend my remarks regarding the staged elements show that to be false.

To use the staged evidence to construct theories as to who killed JonBenet will not advance anyone very far, and this is the main reason why this case has see no major developements.


.

UKGuy, You make everything sound so amazingly complicated but it is really all very simple.

JonBenet was found dressed in the clothes she was wearing when she was put to bed half asleep by her parents. What is so strange about her being found dressed in these same clothes the following morning even if the top half were day clothes and the bottom half night clothes?

She was probably put to bed with her hair in one tie as the parents say it most usually was. The additional hair tie was probably put there by a pedophile who wanted to get the hair up from off her neck so he could tie the ligature around her neck and there would be no hair in the way to get tangled up in it as it was tightened and reducing its effectiveness.

After the sexual abuse that I think took place followed by the accidental killing, they simply redressed her in exactly the same clothes and didn’t bother to remove the second hair tie. I think the one who called her a little angel wrapped her in her white blanket.

As far as I can see the only bit of genuine staging besides the ransom note was the piece of duct tape over her mouth, probably found on the floor by one of them and put there after her death seemingly to look like a gag. It obviously wasn’t one as it was too small to act as an effective one on a live person

Her mother probably brought the favourite Barbie nightgown down to the basement after the killing intending to redress the body but was so shattered when she actually saw the body that she just dropped the nightgown on the cellar floor and fled back upstairs.


The other one or two blankets that were on the floor of the basement had probably been there for months and had nothing to do with the crime.


And why are you sure the body was wiped down? Isn’t it just as likely that the fibres on her body came from an abuser's clothing?

 

[BlueCrab]

And why are you sure the body was wiped down? Isn?t it just as likely that the fibres on her body came from an abuser's clothing?

aussiesheila,

The body was definitely wiped down. The autopsy revealed countless dark fibers on the body, including on the inner thighs and folds of the labia. What's interesting is the fact that the wipedown cloth that left the fibers on the body was never found. Nothing in the Ramsey house matched the fibers on the body.

Therefore, you are probably right. The fibers came from the abuser's clothing. For instance, if the fibers came from the killer's dark shirt, then when he dressed himself after the sexual assault and used his shirt to wipe away forensic evidence, he simply put the shirt back on and walked out of the house wearing it.

This is one of the reasons I'm convinced there was a fifth person in the house that night, invited in by a Ramsey family member. The killing involved these two individuals. The fifth person was not an intruder because the Ramseys wouldn't be carrying out their obvious coverup to protect the identity of an intruder. IMO the mysterious fifth person was another Ramsey family member not living in the house or a very close friend of the family.

BlueCrab

 

[UKGuy]

UKGuy, You make everything sound so amazingly complicated but it is really all very simple.

aussiesheila,

Really, before you announce who the perpetrator is then, you must communicate your evidence to the Boulder Police Department, and give the tabloids a phone call, they also will want to hear from you!