DOUBLE LOOP KNOT: JonBenet was posed

[aussiesheila]

BlueCrab,

But what happens if it turns out that broken paintbrush handle, which was fashioned there in the wine-cellar, was applied after she was asphyxiated?

We know this because her hair is embedded in the knotting on the paintbrush handle, and her necklace is entangled in the ligature, and there appear to be no abrasions resulting from this entanglement!

So I reckon the garrote is staging, and using it to speculate about a pepretrators motives will simply lead nowhere.


.

UKGuy, I don't think you can tell from the photo whether her hair was embedded IN the knot on the paintbrush handle although it is definitely entangled OVER the knot on the paintbrush handle as well as IN the knot making the ligature.

What do you mean there appear to be no abrasions resulting from the necklace entanglement in the ligature? Her neck is completely encircled with an abrasion! And oozing blood!

I don't think you can correctly conclude that the ligature was applied after death from these observations.

 

[aussiesheila]

UKGuy,

I agree the hair and necklace entangled IN the ligature knot is perplexing -- and I have no credible answer for it. But if JonBenet wasn't strangled by the ligature around her neck, then how WAS she strangled? The ligature seems to be the only game in town.

BlueCrab

What have I missed? I didn't know the necklace was entangled in the ligature knot? Please can you tell me where you read/saw this BlueCrab. Thanks. I suppose it's in the autopsy report is it? I'm about to look it up again for the 500th time.

 

[rashomon]

aussiesheila,
If the slip knot that John was trying to untie on the wrist was under tension from the weight of JonBenet's body then it would have been very hard to untie. Once the tension was removed the knot would loosen and could be easily removed.
BlueCrab

But the knot of the bigger wrist loop doesn't look at all as if it could be loosened easily.

 

[rashomon]

rashomon,
We do not know with certainty that what asphyxiated her was the ligature!.

What do you think asphyxiated her?

Actually I think the garrote was applied as an afterthought, there was no masterplan, its purpose was to mask the real nature of JonBenet's death. In this it has been very very successful. Along with the Ramsey's promoting an intruder theory via media, Lou Smit, and all the internet forums theorizing over the typology and psychology of the sociopath who garroted JonBenet for his/her perverse sexual pleasure, the staging has worked, people have incorporated false, bogus forensic evidence into their theories, and guess what, to date, no one has been charged with her death.
Its likely the garrote was added as an adjustment to a prior staging to suggest JonBenet's death was a compulsive sexual homicide, and not some other kind of homicide.
So I think that the staging in the wine-cellar was undertaken to mask the true nature and circumstances surrounding her death.

My thoughts exactly!

This is why there is so little forensic evidence, multiple versions of events, that is it was all engineered away.

I think there was enough crucial forensic evidence: the ransome note, the garotte, the ligature, the paintbrush, Patsy's fibers etc., but the initial mishandling of the investigation (JB's body moved), many people over at the house, etc. destroyed much of the original crime scene.

 

[aussiesheila]

According to Delmar England, a slip knot is simply a knot tied from one end of a rope (as opposed to e. g. to a knot tied from both ends of a rope, shoelaces for example).
This is what he wrote on Forums For justice ("Lassoing the Truth" thread
The active phrase is “slipping knot” for slipping is exactly what
it does. The knot in focus is usually tied from one end of a
given length of cord or rope; one end as opposed to both ends
utilized in tying a shoelace. The slip knot is made by wrapping
cord around itself in a manner to create a knot.


I didn't say that this wasn't a slip knot; obviously it was. But slip knot in itself doesn't mean that it stays adjustable once it is pulled tight.

Thanks rashomon, but I'll have to go back and re-read your post, I've forgotten what the disagreement was.

 

[rashomon]

From Steve Thomas' book (p. 41): [autopsy of JB by coroner Dr. Meyer]

"A single loop of white cord was around the right wrist, tied on top of the sleeve but so loosely the doctor easily slid it free. There were 15 1/2 inches between that loop and a loop on the other end, which once apparently had bound the other wrist."

So one loop had already come off and the other was so loosely around the wrist that the doctor could easily remove it.
Even to laypeople this shows that those loops seem to have had no function at all in terms of restrainment: one was so big that it didn't fit around JB's left wrist, and the other was tied loosely around the right wrist.
I'm a layperson, but isn't tying a loop on top of the sleeve a very stupid thing to do?
For theoretically, the person only needs to tug at the sleeve with the other hand (fifteen and a half inches allowing free movement), and the sleeve can be removed from under the ligature, making room for the hand to free itself.

All this proves to me that the cord was tied on a person who was not conscious, i. e. who needn't have been restrained to keep her from moving or running away. But what's the point in tying up a dead person? None at all, unless the perp wanted to dump her in deep water, but then he would have tied up the whole body differently (after wrapping it in a bag for example).

I think the person who tied the ligature around JB's hands was nervous and panicky, rushed for time, and hastily trying to put some kind of ligature around a dead (or almost dead) child's wrists and neck.

These ligatures scream staging, and they scream poor staging.

 

[aussiesheila]

The other problem here is that the garrote could've been assembled after the ligature was applied to JBR, to complete a strangulation device of some sort. The device may have included the second ligature. This is how the garrote could include JBR's hair, and not be staging.

Holdontoyourhat, by 'garrote', do you mean the paintbrush handle? What do you mean 'the second ligature'. And when do you mean they were used? I'm sorry I'm having difficulty understanding what you mean.

 

[aussiesheila]

Thanks for your concern, Aussieheila, but I can assure you that I'm not a gullible person at all.
Which is why I'm very well aware that posers can be found on internet forums because basically, anyone can claim to be anything on the internet.
But what invariably happens to posers if they show up on a good discussion board? They are unmasked very quickly by the knowledgeable posters on the forum, and quickly flee from the board, lol!
Now Forums For Justice is an excellent discussion board, and there are incredibly knowledgeable posters over there. I just discovered it some days ago because a moderator of the message board Crime and Justice (where there is also a JB board) told me about it. This moderator BTW has written an excellent book about the JB case ("Journey Beyond Reason"), which also contains a chapter about D. England's work. Believe me, this moderator would not let herself be fooled by any imposer.
Nor would the posters at Forums for Justice or the moderators over there let themselves be fooled.
Delmar England is a regular poster on the board, and answers every single question asked of him in great detail. Answering in great detail btw, is also something posers don't do because they don't like specific questions at all.

The ligature and the garrote are crucial pieces of evidence.
We all have our theories as to what the ligature or the garrote was used for, and if you look around on this board, the motley gamut ranges from 'EA breath control device' to 'hogtied' to 'kidnapping' to 'staging'.

OK rashomon, I read his analysis of the garrote. To me he came across as a total fraud. But whose to say I am right. Not very many people agree with me about anything. So I'll understand if you go with the majority.

 

[aussiesheila]

Aussiesheila
Yes I am old enough to know about Lindy and Michael and the whole Chamberlain case.
However, I don't see the parallel's you do between the two cases.
The only similiarities that I can see is how the press persecuted both families, citing them muderers without any conclusive proof and how it was thought that the parent's were covering up for their son.
Lindy Chamberlain was innocent yes but that doesn't automatically give Patsy Ramsey a pass too...
Patsy Ramsey is a million miles away from the person Lindy Chamberlain is.
I know quite a bit about Lindy actually, a friend of a friend shared a cell with her.
Her first name was Erica if you wanted to follow that up, if you didn't believe me.
I always believed the Chamberlain's were innocent and that justice would prevail.

Agreed the two cases are quite different but the parallels of the police being biased against them, the press vilifying them and the public hatred directed at them are stunningly similar as was the strange behaviour of both couples following the tragic deaths of their daughters.

Good on you for believing they were innocent, I did too.

But who says I give Patsy a pass? I most definitely do not. IMO she wrote the ransom note and she knows who murdered her daughter and she has lied all her way through every police interview.

Of course I believe you about knowing Lindy. Why would I have any reason to disbelieve anything you say?

 

[aussiesheila]

I'm not at all convinced of the Chamberlains' innocence. What was the exculpatory piece of evidence? The baby's blood-soaked jacket found in a Dingo's cave? So theoretically, if they had wanted to 'sacrifice their daughter in the desert' (The baby's name "Azaria" meant just that), they themselves could have put the baby outside the tent and waited for some animal to snatch her.

oh please rashomon no, spare me, I'm going crazy enough with this JonBenet case, I don't want to go into the Azaria one as well. Maybe if this case gets solved I might but not now.

 

[aussiesheila]

I also read this in wikipedia:Based on ultraviolet investigations of the jumpsuit that Azaria had been wearing on the night she disappeared by Dr James Cameron of the London Hospital Medical College, the new finding was made that Azaria had been killed with a pair of scissors and held by a small adult hand until she stopped bleeding.

I hope Wikipedia went on to tell the full story. Dr James Cameron of the London Hospital Medical College turned out to be one of the most monumental posers of all time and has been thoroughly discredited. There have even been retrials I believe or pardons or some such for people who were convicted of crimes, based on forensic evidence he gave at their trials.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Holdontoyourhat, by 'garrote', do you mean the paintbrush handle? What do you mean 'the second ligature'. And when do you mean they were used? I'm sorry I'm having difficulty understanding what you mean.

What I mean is, there's no connection between 'hair in the garrote' and 'staging'. IOW, hair caught up in the garrote doesn't support an argument for 'staging' at all. In fact, hair entwined in the garrote instead supports the opposite argument, that the garrote was involved in a violent attack on JBR.

The second ligature is the one with the large functioning slip knot at one end and the smaller functioning double slip-knot at the other. The one that could have been used in combination with the first ligature (the one with the paintbrush handle, AKA garrote).

 

[rashomon]

oh please rashomon no, spare me, I'm going crazy enough with this JonBenet case, I don't want to go into the Azaria one as well. Maybe if this case gets solved I might but not now.

Calm down, aussiesheila, lol: I have no intention of running off topic here myself. I received some very precise info from narlacat and tipper about the Azaria case and that will do for me.
As for the JonBenet case, no doubt that it can drive one crazy. But this is almost always so with cases based entirely upon circumstantial evidence, because the suspects or defendants will continue to protest their inocence.

But the circumstantial evidence in the JB case was so incriminating to the Ramseys that it drives me crazy that they are still out there free.
And as some poster put it cynically: the best lawyers for the Ramseys were the members of the Boulder DA office, giving them kid-glove treatment right from the start.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Calm down, aussiesheila, lol: I have no intention of running off topic here myself. I received some very precise info from narlacat and tipper about the Azaria case and that will do for me.
As for the JonBenet case, no doubt that it can drive one crazy. But this is almost always so with cases based entirely upon circumstantial evidence, because the suspects or defendants will continue to protest their inocence.

But the circumstantial evidence in the JB case was so incriminating to the Ramseys that it drives me crazy that they are still out there free.
And as some poster put it cynically: the best lawyers for the Ramseys were the members of the Boulder DA office, giving them kid-glove treatment right from the start.

The handwriting of a ransom note points away from the R's. The lack of a child-murdering personality type points away from the R's. The garrote/second ligature 'device' points away from the R's. The lack of elements that are present in 90% of filicide cases points away from the R's.

IOW, I'm not sure what circumstantial evidence you're referring to, since most evidence clearly directs away from the R's.

 

[rashomon]

The handwriting of a ransom note points away from the R's. The lack of a child-murdering personality type points away from the R's. The garrote/second ligature 'device' points away from the R's. The lack of elements that are present in 90% of filicide cases points away from the R's.
IOW, I'm not sure what circumstantial evidence you're referring to, since most evidence clearly directs away from the R's.

Has it ever ocurred to you that all this staging was done with the full intention of directing away from the Ramseys?

 

[UKGuy]

For those that might consider some scenarios can never occur, here is a case with some analysis of the autopsy.

There are many similarities with JonBenet's homicide:

The police were notified at approx 6am, that little Audra Matheny, had been found by her father dead in bed, she had been asphyxiated and sexually assaulted.

Some staging of the crime scene was attempted and later forensic evidence removal was undertaken (washing bed-sheets).

What some may find of interest are the correspondences of injuries, abrasions, and discharge from her nose and mouth, and blood from her vagina.

There are obviously differences in age and circumstance, and you cannot generalise from this case, but it may help shed some light (by analogy) on JonBenet's case.

http://www.tuttletimes.com/viewarticle.php?id=961
.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

The handwriting of a ransom note points away from the R's. The lack of a child-murdering personality type points away from the R's. The garrote/second ligature 'device' points away from the R's. The lack of elements that are present in 90% of filicide cases points away from the R's.

IOW, I'm not sure what circumstantial evidence you're referring to, since most evidence clearly directs away from the R's.

Has it ever ocurred to you that all this staging was done with the full intention of directing away from the Ramseys?

The fact that none of the R's are fitting the standard 'child-murderer' stereotype, or the 'filicidal parent' stereotype, has nothing to do with staging.

Unless you're thinking that the R's hid their 'child-murderer personality' or their 'filicidal elements' ahead of time, as part of an elaborate staging scheme.

 

[Brefie]

Not all stereotypes are true.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

For those that might consider some scenarios can never occur, here is a case with some analysis of the autopsy.

There are many similarities with JonBenet's homicide:

The police were notified at approx 6am, that little Audra Matheny, had been found by her father dead in bed, she had been asphyxiated and sexually assaulted.

Some staging of the crime scene was attempted and later forensic evidence removal was undertaken (washing bed-sheets).

What some may find of interest are the correspondences of injuries, abrasions, and discharge from her nose and mouth, and blood from her vagina.

There are obviously differences in age and circumstance, and you cannot generalise from this case, but it may help shed some light (by analogy) on JonBenet's case.

http://www.tuttletimes.com/viewarticle.php?id=961
.

You can be assured that whoever killed JBR was even nuttier than this guy.

 

[rashomon]

For those that might consider some scenarios can never occur, here is a case with some analysis of the autopsy.

There are many similarities with JonBenet's homicide:

The police were notified at approx 6am, that little Audra Matheny, had been found by her father dead in bed, she had been asphyxiated and sexually assaulted.

Some staging of the crime scene was attempted and later forensic evidence removal was undertaken (washing bed-sheets).

What some may find of interest are the correspondences of injuries, abrasions, and discharge from her nose and mouth, and blood from her vagina.

There are obviously differences in age and circumstance, and you cannot generalise from this case, but it may help shed some light (by analogy) on JonBenet's case.

http://www.tuttletimes.com/viewarticle.php?id=961

You must consider the head bash and the ransom note in the JB case, which point to a whole different scenario.