Intruder theories only. No posts from rdi members allowed

[otg]

Thanks for that.. When I was looking last night they made it clear the small intestine was below the duodenum.. Why would the medical examiner not say into the duodenum then? Why the small intestine??

The duodenum is considered to be a part of the small intestine, as is the ileum on the opposite end (where the small intestine attaches to the large intestine). If you look at a diagram of the digestive tract, you can see how different the duodenum looks from the rest of the small intestine. Why Meyer chose to refer to it as the "proximal portion of the small intestine" instead of the simpler "duodenum" is anyone's guess. That would be conjecture, and I'll leave that for anyone else who wants it.

 

[Venom]

Totally confused. Were butts found the day of JBR crime? Were butts found the day of Amy's crime? if so, is SS saying the same brand was found at both crime scenes? 10 months later was when AMy was attacked right? SS isn't saying that after Amy's attack, LE went back to JBR home and found butts in Alley at that time?? :tantrum: Please help TIA

Same here.
Were the butts found in the alley behind the R house 10 months after the murder, when the Amy attack happened?
Or were the butts found in Dec. and those are the ones that match the ones found when Amy's attack occured?

???

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Umm a few psot back you just said so what if they lied?? Umm it's a big deal. Since they stated she was asleep when they got home. They couldn't budge from their story. THEY LIED!!!! Prove they didn't.

Sorry, I don't see it that way. I don't think they lied about the pineapple. I just don't.

Prove they lied. You don't prove the absence of an act.

 

[wonderllama]

That would not work with the time line. If as most people believe she was gone by 1 am or there abouts and stomach emptying takes about 4 -5 hours.. then she would have had to eat well before then.

The pineapple if that is indeed what it was was already in her small intestine.. passed the duodenum. It had been more than just a few hours.

It does not matter in the scheme of things whether she ate it or not. It proves nothing. It is not a lie. I believe that they had no idea when she ate it., if she did.

Okay, up until now I considered you to be playing fair, but now I see you are being selective.

It said stomach FULLY emptied takes 4-5 hours.
This is not for "snack". Less in the stomach, less to digest.

This is getting silly now.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Same here.
Were the butts found in the alley behind the R house 10 months after the murder, when the Amy attack happened?
Or were the butts found in Dec. and those are the ones that match the ones found when Amy's attack occured?

???

I did not find it confusing at all. To me the cigarettes found after Amy's attack matched the cigarettes found at the time of JBR murder.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Okay, up until now I considered you to be playing fair, but now I see you are being selective.

It said stomach FULLY emptied takes 4-5 hours.
This is not for "snack". Less in the stomach, less to digest.

This is getting silly now.

Im not being selective I am trying to be exact. We have no idea what else she ate and how full her stomach was so that would just be opinion.

 

[wonderllama]

Im not being selective I am trying to be exact. We have no idea what else she ate and how full her stomach was so that would just be opinion.

No, claiming that it would take 4-5 hours for her to digest pineapple is misleading.

We already know how long it takes to digest pineapple.
We know she was a small child.
We know it was found in the beginning of the small intestine.
We know that means it only just left the stomach.

That is not 4-5 hours.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

No, claiming that it would take 4-5 hours for her to digest pineapple is misleading.

We already know how long it takes to digest pineapple.
We know she was a small child.
We know it was found in the beginning of the small intestine.
We know that means it only just left the stomach.

That is not 4-5 hours.

No. That is what the medical information is. Stomach emptying.. The link is a few pages back.. But I looked again last night and that is the average.. we also know that women/females digest slower than males.

 

[wonderllama]

Page 6-7 of the autopsy report... http://hosted.ap.org/specials/interactives/_national/jonbenet_ramsey/jonbenet_ramsey_autopsy.pdf

CLEARLY states the following;

"The stomach contains a small amount of viscous to green to tan colored thick mucous material with particulate matter identified...the proximal portion of the small intestine contains fragmented pieced of yellow to light green-tan apparent vegetable or fruit material which may represent fragments of pineapple."

SO.....the stomach WASN'T completely empty.
4-5 hours is for COMPLETE emptying as per the previously linked page.
http://www.vivo.colostate.edu/hbooks/pathphys/digestion/basics/transit.html

So, it isn't 4-5 hours, because the stomach still contains material.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Page 6-7 of the autopsy report... http://hosted.ap.org/specials/interactives/_national/jonbenet_ramsey/jonbenet_ramsey_autopsy.pdf

CLEARLY states the following;

"The stomach contains a small amount of viscous to green to tan colored thick mucous material with particulate matter identified...the proximal portion of the small intestine contains fragmented pieced of yellow to light green-tan apparent vegetable or fruit material which may represent fragments of pineapple."

SO.....the stomach WASN'T completely empty.
4-5 hours is for COMPLETE emptying as per the previously linked page.
http://www.vivo.colostate.edu/hbooks/pathphys/digestion/basics/transit.html

So, it isn't 4-5 hours, because the stomach still contains material.

A small amount.. So most likely it was nearly empty since the majority of it had moved on..

 

[wonderllama]

You're making an assumption there.
She was a small girl with a small stomach.

Sometimes you have to concede the odd bit of information to remain credible.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

You're making an assumption there.
She was a small girl with a small stomach.

Sometimes you have to concede the odd bit of information to remain credible.

I don't know if that makes a difference. I don't know if the time it would take to break down food changes because it is a child. Food digestion should be pretty much consistent and we know males digest faster than females.

Maybe she would have had less to digest than an adult, But how long it takes the food to break down? I don't know how different that would be.

 

[wonderllama]

Didn't we post a link a few pages back that said pineapple takes 2 hours to digest?
The other quote said that what she had eaten, as in what they were looking at, had been consumed 1-2.25hrs earlier.

Slotting things into time frames isn't an exact science, we all admit that, but how does it benefit anyone to resist what is seen here?

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

That said that it takes 2 hours to digest pineapple that was not how long it take the stomach to empty. I see that as two different things.

 

[wonderllama]

Which is kind of meaningless given most digestion actually happens in the small intestine anyway.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

Which is kind of meaningless given most digestion actually happens in the small intestine anyway.

This is way off the track for me.

My only concerns with this is.. Is it actually pineapple? And then on top of that,If it is when did she eat it.

 

[wonderllama]

You can't limit the boundaries of information if you're trying to get 100% proof and fact surely?

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

You can't limit the boundaries of information if you're trying to get 100% proof and fact surely?

Im not limiting.. I am applying. Trying to see what fits and does not.

 

[wonderllama]

The reason it is relevant is that some medical examiners have said it looks like pineapple.

You either don't believe them or want more information.

The more information you want will require some level of knowledge of digestion, how it works, how it might be different in a 6 year old child, where the food was, what other food was found, what stage of the digestion process was other material found, what state this other material was found in.

You have answers to a lot of those already.

Combine medical evidence with crime scene evidence and you start to see a picture.

Except you're seeing a different picture, or at least not looking at the picture that is in front of you and waiting for a different one.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

The reason it is relevant is that some medical examiners have said it looks like pineapple.

You either don't believe them or want more information.

The more information you want will require some level of knowledge of digestion, how it works, how it might be different in a 6 year old child, where the food was, what other food was found, what stage of the digestion process was other material found, what state this other material was found in.

You have answers to a lot of those already.

Combine medical evidence with crime scene evidence and you start to see a picture.

Except you're seeing a different picture, or at least not looking at the picture that is in front of you and waiting for a different one.

I did not say that I did not believe the Medical Examiner. I said that he did not declare it for sure to be pineapple. Just that it may have been.

If I see a different picture that does not mean it is wrong. Just different. WE all find things our own way and process things in a way that works for us.