JonBenét Ramsey Case: My Theory & Key Questions

[australianwebsleuth]

The simplicity of this explanation is appealing. The evidence I can't get around is the discovery during autopsy that JBR had blood on her thighs that had been wiped off. Since corpses don't bleed, the blood would have been on her thighs prior to the head blow. This prompts the questions of how it got there, when it was cleaned up, by whom, and so on. Similarly, JBR wouldn't have bled from a paintbrush injury post mortem, although her body might have oozed blood from an earlier injury. The blood found and the blood wiped away are better accounted for by SA prior to the head blow.

I can't make out what you're suggesting about the discovery of the body. The person who turned the body over didn't know JBR was dead until that moment but then applied the garrote and the ligatures? Hunh. That doesn't make sense to me.

I will just add. The vaginal abrasion contained no inflammatory cells. This indicates post mortem wounds. Again suggests staging.

 

[Meara]

Have you heard of staging a corpse? Why do you stage a corpse? Think about it. It makes perfect sense.

I've got the concept of staging. What I'm still wondering is where, in your theory, the (wiped away) blood on JBR's thighs came from. Can you help me understand your thinking on this?

 

[australianwebsleuth]

Not sure how you tell blood had been wiped away tbh. Was it there or was it wiped away? Have you got a photo.

 

[CloudedTruth]

I am trying to tell you the report is actually wrong. His interpretation lacks the required evidence to make his conclusion. As I have said the pattern he describes in the report would no longer be considered adequate for the cause of death being garrotte.

I have looked at the autopsy photos online. I don’t know whether they are real. What he describes as petechiae are not petechiae. They are in the wrong distribution and are almost certainly post mortem abrasions in someone who had livor mortis develop while face down.

In terms of the petechiae on her eye lids. It has been shown these can occur from coughing or even being struck in the head. Was JBR struck in the head?

The case is very simple and requires modern review of the autopsy. It is easily solvable.

I understand you believe the autopsy report is wrong. Are there any qualified forensic pathologists whom you can source who have said the same after examining the evidence?

Your comment about petechia possibly being caused by coughing or a blow to the head followed by the question was JB struck on the head is confusing.

 

[Meara]

Not sure how you tell blood had been wiped away tbh. Was it there or was it wiped away? Have you got a photo.

First, let me make a correction. The traces of wiped away blood were found on one thigh, not on both.

During the autopsy, the ultraviolet light scan revealed traces of a bodily fluid on the upper portion of one thigh. A sample was taken and sent to the CBI lab for testing. The testing identified the fluid as blood.

 

[australianwebsleuth]

First, let me make a correction. The traces of wiped away blood were found on one thigh, not on both.

During the autopsy, the ultraviolet light scan revealed traces of a bodily fluid on the upper portion of one thigh. A sample was taken and sent to the CBI lab for testing. The testing identified the fluid as blood.

So it was not visible with the naked eye. It possibly leaked from a small abrasion. I don’t think it’s important.

I thought about this more. As JBR was face down initially, there is evidence of Livor mortis occurring in this position at the sight of an abrasion.

If you are interested, it’s worth understanding what the features of strangulation look like in the neck. There is usually petechiae above but not below the rope mark. There photos are showing purpuric blobs on both sides of the ligature mark. This is not post strangulation petechiae.

They do NOT show a typical pattern. They are more in keeping with a post mortem rope burn or abrasion, in an area in which livor mortis has begun.

The posterior skin of the neck has no changes at all, the knot shows no bruising. This is where it is most expected. As I have said there is no deep tissue bruising or Haemorrhage. Her conjunctivor do not look like someone who has been strangled. There is evidence of livor spots, again because she was face down.

This is why I think she was dead when garotted as part of staging.

I don’t know whether these photos have been faked by someone. They certainly look real, but there are some real cuckoos on the internet.

 

[CloudedTruth]

The simplicity of this explanation is appealing. The evidence I can't get around is the discovery during autopsy that JBR had blood on her thighs that had been wiped off. Since corpses don't bleed, the blood would have been on her thighs prior to the head blow. This prompts the questions of how it got there, when it was cleaned up, by whom, and so on. Similarly, JBR wouldn't have bled from a paintbrush injury post mortem, although her body might have oozed blood from an earlier injury. The blood found and the blood wiped away are better accounted for by SA prior to the head blow.

I can't make out what you're suggesting about the discovery of the body. The person who turned the body over didn't know JBR was dead until that moment but then applied the garrote and the ligatures? Hunh. That doesn't make sense to me.

IMO, what makes the most sense is what several of the experts indicated, most notably Dr. Lucy Rorke who concluded that the head blow knocked her into a deep unconsciousness. She noted that she may have appeared dead to those without medical knowledge. Her brain and body were in the process of dying, organs would be starting to shut down. The assault with the paint brush happened during this period, so as she was technically still alive, she bled. The garrote came after, and applied while she was lying on her stomach. Given the extremely compromised condition of her body by that point, it would not have taken much for the strangulation to be effective, done from behind as she lay on her stomach. We know that her body voided at the point of death, evidenced by the urine stains on the front of the clothing.

I think it’s also worth noting that the majority of the experts who advised on this case (17 out of 20 IIRC) were in agreement with the conclusion that the head blow came first as put forth by Dr. Rorke, followed by the garroting for which she was still alive, barely, but alive. There have been more than a few forensic pathologists / MEs who have weighed in on the autopsy findings over the years and to my knowledge none have challenged Dr. Meyer’s conclusions. He performed with due diligence by consulting various notable experts in the areas in which his background had not been a focus in his medical education.

 

[australianwebsleuth]

Lucy Rorke has to go through mental gymnastics of her “body shutting down” to explain the lack of expected findings for the garrotte. Basically she recognises there is a problem with the evidence for her to even say this. A simpler explanation is that she was already dead.

Please show one article or reference for petechiae below the ligature in a case of strangulation as the pathologist describes. I will be waiting a long time. This is another red flag.

You keep defending the pathologist and his findings. You ignore the elephant in the room, despite his inexperience, he releases the body too early and fails to take the necessary specimen to conclude that she was alive while garrotted. That is a fact. No amount of expert opinion can compensate for that Snafu. That biopsy is considered the only reliable way to determine whether a garrotte is applied pre or post mortem. The only way.

A more important question is why did he release the body so quickly?

Was pressure brought to bear by an external individual? Was it just incompetence? The answer to this question will explain why there has been no justice for JBR. It becomes a really simple case with the correct autopsy findings.

 

[CloudedTruth]

In the interest of maintaining respectful conversation, a line which you have already crossed, I do not wish to continue this pointless back and forth with you. We have different opinions on this subject, let’s just leave it there, shall we?

My comment was directed to Meara’s post.

 

[australianwebsleuth]

In the interest of maintaining respectful conversation, a line which you have already crossed, I do not wish to continue this pointless back and forth with you. We have different opinions on this subject, let’s just leave it there, shall we?

My comment was directed to Meara’s post.

I will not be silenced on a topic that I know a lot about.

 

[CloudedTruth]

I will not be silenced on a topic that I know a lot about

You can share your opinion as much as you like, no one is silencing you. I simply said I no longer wish to discuss it with you.