Do you think a Stungun was used?

[BBB167893]

Thanks SD - so, it's okay to assume that if one was used inside the Ramsey's house, it would be heard by everyone in the home that night. I don't think I've seen any testimony that either parent heard the sound of a taser in the still of the night. JMO

Most likely someone would have heard it. More importantly, even if they didn't, someone who was not intimately familiar with the acoustics of the house would have DARN good reason to think they did. It's not practical for this kind of crime: it's noisy, it doesn't render the person unconscious, etc.

 

[Chrishope]

Here are some taser videos from Youtube

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7Qog10mZ5Q&NR=1

The first one, you can hear the taser gun go off. It's loud enough to hear, so immagine the same amount of noise at night in a quiet home with everyone asleep.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FkfkQcb45Lo

In the second video, you hear how much the woman screams. You also notice how quickly she recovers. Had JBR been tasered, she'd have screamed, and when the shock stopped, she'd have yelled for her parents.

I think we can dismiss the idea that a stun gun was used.

 

[BBB167893]

Here are some taser videos from Youtube

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M7Qog10mZ5Q&NR=1

The first one, you can hear the taser gun go off. It's loud enough to hear, so immagine the same amount of noise at night in a quiet home with everyone asleep.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FkfkQcb45Lo

In the second video, you hear how much the woman screams. You also notice how quickly she recovers. Had JBR been tasered, she'd have screamed, and when the shock stopped, she'd have yelled for her parents.

I think we can dismiss the idea that a stun gun was used.

Ain't the Internet wonderful?

 

[LI_Mom]

My child is brutally murdered....

My husband & I are suspects.....

some detective tells me he thinks a stun gun was used....

That could PROVE an intruder theory & it could be the evidence that one day helps convict her killer.... but the body has to be exhumed.


I say, 'Oh forget it.... it's just not that important to find out for sure.... if it's a false lead & LE wastes time pursuing this avenue.... oh well, that's the way the cookie crumbles.'

 

[Ames]

My child is brutally murdered....

My husband & I are suspects.....

some detective tells me he thinks a stun gun was used....

That could PROVE an intruder theory & it could be the evidence that one day helps convict her killer.... but the body has to be exhumed.


I say, 'Oh forget it.... it's just not that important to find out for sure.... if it's a false lead & LE wastes time pursuing this avenue.... oh well, that's the way the cookie crumbles.'

Right. Only the Ramsey's would not allow their child to be exhumed, even if they thought that it may help catch her killer. Why? Because they know who the killer is. Only a fruitcake (or the Ramseys...need I say more?) would not allow their child to be exhumed for that purpose. John says...that she is at rest now, or something like that...and that they didn't want her body disturbed. If that were my child, and the killer was still on the loose...I would say...disturb away. My aunt and uncle were going to allow their child's body to be exhumed, when the person that killed her, tried to say that she had committed suicide. This person also tried to make the prison officials think that he was crazy, (and let him out early)....by picking up rocks. DUHHHH....

 

[sandraladeda]

People of deep faith do not regard a dead body to be that person anymore. if the Rs are so deep in their faith, they would consider the soul of JBR to be moved on to a better place, and the body to be simply the former shell that housed her earthly being. So to speak.

She is at rest? don't disturb her? She's not there anymore, if you are a Christian believing in eternal life after death.

 

[DeeDee249]

People of deep faith do not regard a dead body to be that person anymore. if the Rs are so deep in their faith, they would consider the soul of JBR to be moved on to a better place, and the body to be simply the former shell that housed her earthly being. So to speak.

She is at rest? don't disturb her? She's not there anymore, if you are a Christian believing in eternal life after death.

Certainly, you are correct. The soul lives on eternally, leaving behind the body it used last. Christians are not the only ones to believe that. It's why I never visit my relatives in a cemetery. But there are some (Christians among them) who believe the body is sacrosanct, even in death, as a creation made in God's image and which once housed the soul and don't wish to defile it. But I do not think the Rs fall into this category. They fall into the "let the EVIDENCE rest in peace" category.

 

[JMO8778]

Certainly, you are correct. The soul lives on eternally, leaving behind the body it used last. Christians are not the only ones to believe that. It's why I never visit my relatives in a cemetery. But there are some (Christians among them) who believe the body is sacrosanct, even in death, as a creation made in God's image and which once housed the soul and don't wish to defile it. But I do not think the Rs fall into this category. They fall into the "let the EVIDENCE rest in peace" category.

ain't that the truth!
reminds me of the poem that starts..'do not stand at my grave and weep,I am not there,I do not sleep.

 

[Anniegirl]

I can answer it, because I own one. It makes a he** of a lot of noise! Not to mention the screaming.

( guessing SD likes to shoot paint balls too:crazy:? )

Sorry if i spaced this and its already been discussed-- i wonder why PR would need to use the SG? Those marks look like stungun marks to me-- although, i havent had one used on me or seen one used-- they are def marks of some kind that looks like what i have researched of stun gun marks---

 

[Tadpole12]

http://hellpainter.tripod.com/jbr/2ndlooktranscript.htm


LOU SMIT - Suddenly it became apparent that the marks themselves, both on the back and on the face, were the same distance apart. Suddenly a little light went on and it was just like, wait a minute, and we both hit on it at the same time, that it was a stun gun.

NARRATOR - Smit looked for other murder cases where a stun gun had been used and found Gerald Boggs. These photos show the injuries made by the weapon in the Boggs case.

LOU SMIT - They compared very closely with the same marks on JonBenét. In fact the marks were on the same side of the face and it was a large mark and a small mark. The reason that happens that way is because if contact of the stun gun is placed directly against the skin, it leaves a smaller mark But if the other contact is left off the skin just a little bit, the arc of electricity dances around on the skin causing the larger mark.

NARRATOR - Smit also identified the particular weapon which he believed caused these injuries.

LOU - The stun gun that we came up with is this one and its the Air Taser stun gun. If a stun gun is used on a little girl I'm sure it would have knocked her flat and it would have allowed the killer to take her from her bed without her struggling

NARRATOR - The Boulder police rejected Smit's evidence about a stun gun. They spoke to Colorado's leading expert, pathologist Mike Dobersen, and claimed he discounted the possibilty.

MIKE DOBERSEN - That's right - and that was something of a misstatement since my real conclusion was that I couldn't, at that time, say whether this was a stun gun injury or not because we had to have a weapon to compare it to.

NARRATOR - When Smit showed him the Air Tazer stun gun, Doberson took a different position.

MIKE DOBERSEN - Lou had found a weapon with characteristics which fit as exactly as you could expect, the injuries on JonBenét's body.

NARRATOR - Since then, Mike Dobersen has conducted experiments on anaesthetized pigs. The Tazer stun gun exactly replicated the injuries on JonBenét and the distance, 3.5 centimeters, between those injuries.

MIKE DOBERSEN - My experiments, and the observations that we made and all the work that's been done, I feel that I can testify to a reasonably degree of medical certainty that these are stun gun injuries.

LOU - If a stun gun is used, it is an incredible clue left behind by the killer. It's not often that he leaves a good clue like this, but just to disregard it, would be incredibly foolish. Because if a stun gun is used on JonBenét, it points directly at an intruder. It does not point at a parent.

 

[DeeDee249]

I have always felt that use of a stun gun on JBR and the parents involvement in her murder/coverup were not mutually exclusive.
A video or manual (I forget which) on stun gun use was found in the R home. Although JR gave the feeble excuse that it was in Spanish, so they couldn't have used it. No reasonable explanation was ever given, IMHO, for it's presence in the home.

 

[Chrishope]

I have always felt that use of a stun gun on JBR and the parents involvement in her murder/coverup were not mutually exclusive.
A video or manual (I forget which) on stun gun use was found in the R home. Although JR gave the feeble excuse that it was in Spanish, so they couldn't have used it. No reasonable explanation was ever given, IMHO, for it's presence in the home.

IMO, if a SG was used, it was used by the Rs, maybe as part of the staging?

An intruder could only use a SG if he took steps to make it unnecessary in the first place -e.g. shoot JBR with the SG then immediately put his hand over her mouth to prevent her from screaming. Why bother with it then? And there is still the noise factor. No way did an intruder use a stun gun.

 

[DeeDee249]

IMO, if a SG was used, it was used by the Rs, maybe as part of the staging?

An intruder could only use a SG if he took steps to make it unnecessary in the first place -e.g. shoot JBR with the SG then immediately put his hand over her mouth to prevent her from screaming. Why bother with it then? And there is still the noise factor. No way did an intruder use a stun gun.

Many posters feel that if a stun gun was used, that it had to have been an intruder. That's what I disagree on. It might not have been a parent, but I can't rule out stun gun use by another family member (especially as there seems to be evidence that one was purchased by the Rs).
Again- there WAS a scream heard, even if the person later recanted (under pressure from Rs lawyers and the DA, probably). She "recanted" so much she moved away! Later she recanted the recanting, admitting that she did hear what sounded like a horrible child's scream.
Whoever used it (if that's the case) it was meant to subdue her; there was no evidence that she struggled during the strangulation, so it must have been for the sexual assault.
Don't get me wrong, I am not stating that I feel unequivocally that a stun gun was used, but I can't rule it out as long as the coroner never established what actually made those unusual round, parallel marks.

 

[UKGuy]

Many posters feel that if a stun gun was used, that it had to have been an intruder. That's what I disagree on. It might not have been a parent, but I can't rule out stun gun use by another family member (especially as there seems to be evidence that one was purchased by the Rs).
Again- there WAS a scream heard, even if the person later recanted (under pressure from Rs lawyers and the DA, probably). She "recanted" so much she moved away! Later she recanted the recanting, admitting that she did hear what sounded like a horrible child's scream.
Whoever used it (if that's the case) it was meant to subdue her; there was no evidence that she struggled during the strangulation, so it must have been for the sexual assault.
Don't get me wrong, I am not stating that I feel unequivocally that a stun gun was used, but I can't rule it out as long as the coroner never established what actually made those unusual round, parallel marks.

DeeDee249,
Why does any parent need to use a stun gun? There are no stun gun marks on JonBenet's genital area, so its difficult to link it to any sexual assault.

It might be part of some prior staging, or it may represent a bizarre attempt to revive or make sure JonBenet was dead?

The marks may represent pressure points from where she lay, either from her clothing or the object she is lying on?

The stun gun is another Lou Smit contribution to the evidence poor Intruder Theory, even his assumption is blatantly invalid e.g.

LOU - If a stun gun is used, it is an incredible clue left behind by the killer. It's not often that he leaves a good clue like this, but just to disregard it, would be incredibly foolish. Because if a stun gun is used on JonBenét, it points directly at an intruder. It does not point at a parent.

Note Lou Smit's bias towards an intruder, his hypothetical reverses nicely into if not an intruder then a parent, curiously leaving Burke out.

So if a stun gun was used where did it go? And why would any intruder want to redress JonBenet and hide her sexual assault?


.

 

[DeeDee249]

An intruder wouldn't redress her. That much is a given, IMHO. The only reasons for a parent to use a stun gun would be (and this is pretty sinister) to force her to submit to sexual assault or to try to revive her, as you mentioned. Calling 911 AT THAT TIME would have brought a portable defibrillator, true, but would also have necessitated the clean up, complete with wiping the genital area and thighs of blood and changing the clothes. So if it were ever to be proved that those marks were from a stun gun- I'd have to say that the parent(s) attempted a revival so as not to have to call an ambulance. Maybe they cleaned her up intending to call for help, but decided to try to revive her themselves. Moot point now.

 

[BBB167893]

( guessing SD likes to shoot paint balls too:crazy:? )

Sorry if i spaced this and its already been discussed-- i wonder why PR would need to use the SG? Those marks look like stungun marks to me-- although, i havent had one used on me or seen one used-- they are def marks of some kind that looks like what i have researched of stun gun marks---

I done some paintball shootin' in my day.

But there's no solid evidence that a stun gun was used at any point. Werner Spitz thinks the marks were left by clothing snaps. And there just happened to be a shirt with silver snaps on JB's bed.

Tadpole makes a good presentation, but what isn't mentioned there is that Smit decided out of thin air that a stun gun was used and shopped around until he found someone who agreed with him.

Check out Cutter's website.

 

[DeeDee249]

I have to give some thought to how the snaps made the marks. They look almost like burns in the autopsy photos. So if she laid on them while alive, they'd make reddish marks, but not the purply abrasions; if she laid on the, after she died, they'd make white marks as the pressure pushed the blood (which is no longer circulating) away. They are in odd places- under her ear on the cheek (with the faintest -in some photos- hint of a second mark near her mouth on that same cheek, about the same distance apart as the 2 marks on her back. Most people just see the one mark on the cheek- I do see the hint of second mark on the face as well.
I believe Meyer mentioned that there seemed to be a tiny boat-shaped mark in the center of the one under her ear. I don't recall if he mentioned that all the abrasions had that same mark. If they did, obviously they were all made the same way. I suppose no one ever checked any clothing found in the home that could have had snaps or buttons matching those marks. Of course, this would have had to happen before Aunt P made her evidence raid on the house; she would surely have removed any incriminating clothing.
The marks almost look like cigarette burns in the photo, but I would presume that any coroner has seen such burns on a corpse at least once in
his career, and would have been able to tell what they were. Meyer was also a Medical Examiner, which meant he was also a medical doctor. Not every coroner is actually an MD. Some are PhDs, and some have not gone through medical school.

 

[Ames]

I have to give some thought to how the snaps made the marks. They look almost like burns in the autopsy photos. So if she laid on them while alive, they'd make reddish marks, but not the purply abrasions; if she laid on the, after she died, they'd make white marks as the pressure pushed the blood (which is no longer circulating) away. They are in odd places- under her ear on the cheek (with the faintest -in some photos- hint of a second mark near her mouth on that same cheek, about the same distance apart as the 2 marks on her back. Most people just see the one mark on the cheek- I do see the hint of second mark on the face as well.
I believe Meyer mentioned that there seemed to be a tiny boat-shaped mark in the center of the one under her ear. I don't recall if he mentioned that all the abrasions had that same mark. If they did, obviously they were all made the same way. I suppose no one ever checked any clothing found in the home that could have had snaps or buttons matching those marks. Of course, this would have had to happen before Aunt P made her evidence raid on the house; she would surely have removed any incriminating clothing.
The marks almost look like cigarette burns in the photo, but I would presume that any coroner has seen such burns on a corpse at least once in
his career, and would have been able to tell what they were. Meyer was also a Medical Examiner, which meant he was also a medical doctor. Not every coroner is actually an MD. Some are PhDs, and some have not gone through medical school.

There is a poster somewhere...forgive me, but I can't remember where she posts, or what her hat is (its been awhile since I read her post), that thinks that the marks could have been made by Patsy's rings, if they had of been turned around. You know how rings turn...mine do it all the time.

 

[DeeDee249]

There is a poster somewhere...forgive me, but I can't remember where she posts, or what her hat is (its been awhile since I read her post), that thinks that the marks could have been made by Patsy's rings, if they had of been turned around. You know how rings turn...mine do it all the time.

I remember that poster, though I also forget the name. I even remember seeing photos of PR's ring, with clusters of stones that seemed to match the marks. I guess I can see her hand pressing the ring into JBR's cheek- but the 2 marks on her back are in an odd place, and parallel to each other- I can't imagine what she would have been doing to make those marks with her ring on JBR's back. I'll try to find it and if I do, I'll post a link.

 

[DeeDee249]

Got it. The poster was Wolfmarsgirl.

Here's the link:

http://www.geocities.com/wolfchick942003/photopage.html