Jonbenet blow to the head happened almost simultaneously with the strangulation according to Dr Myer. could this indicated pre-meditated murder?

[Deleted member 187229]

Dr Myer implied that the injuries to jonbenet’s brain were so limited that he couldn’t determine if the blow to the head came before during or after the neck ligatures.
He said the blow to the head and the strangulation happened almost simultaneously. Could this indicate a planned pre meditated murder? Dr myers findings don’t corroborate the police theory of an accidental blow to the head and later followed by a murder and cover up.

 

[Deleted member 187229]

I understand other experts have stated the blow to the head happened 40 minutes to two hours before the strangulation, unless those doctors personally viewed jonbenets body or brain and unless they have published forensic evidence based on a true inspection of jonbenets brain I don’t think their opinions hold any validity.

 

[CloudedTruth]

The claim of what Dr. Meyer said comes from Paula Woodward, not Dr. Meyer himself. She claims he told her that. Her claim is not proof.

That is not stated in the autopsy report. His notes with detail of his specific conclusions have remained confidential. He has kept it that way with the specific purpose of only divulging his complete findings and conclusions in a legal proceeding such as GJ or trial. He has not given media interviews or spoken publicly about the confidential details of the case. It’s simply not believable that he would break his own protocol to tell Paula Woodward anything confidential about the case so she could report it. And she has provided no proof that he told her that, her story has not been corroborated by anyone.

 

[CloudedTruth]

I understand other experts have stated the blow to the head happened 40 minutes to two hours before the strangulation, unless those doctors personally viewed jonbenets body or brain and unless they have published forensic evidence based on a true inspection of jonbenets brain I don’t think their opinions hold any validity.

Expert opinions and consultations are sought all the time after an autopsy has been performed. It is common practice. It’s logistically infeasible to expect that everyone consulted in an official capacity has to be present at the autopsy. They are supplied with all the materials needed in order to determine their professional opinion. They do it all the time, it’s accepted practice. To say that no one’s opinion is valid because they did not personally examine a body is just not true. And experts testify under those circumstances all the time. If it weren’t valid, it wouldn’t be allowed.

I broke my ankle. They took X-rays. The radiologist never examined my ankle personally, he determined it was broken by reading the X-ray. That was then passed to the surgeon. It’s the same concept. X-rays, pictures, ME notes, forensic samples and materials taken for further examination. The process is valid.

 

[Deleted member 187229]

its a huge discrepancy of opinion then. For the coroner to say the brains overall architecture was normal to others saying it was swollen and protruding from the base.

 

[Deleted member 187229]

Expert opinions and consultations are sought all the time after an autopsy has been performed. It is common practice. It’s logistically infeasible to expect that everyone consulted in an official capacity has to be present at the autopsy. They are supplied with all the materials needed in order to determine their professional opinion. They do it all the time, it’s accepted practice. To say that no one’s opinion is valid because they did not personally examine a body is just not true. And experts testify under those circumstances all the time. If it weren’t valid, it wouldn’t be allowed.

I broke my ankle. They took X-rays. The radiologist never examined my ankle personally, he determined it was broken by reading the X-ray. That was then passed to the surgeon. It’s the same concept. X-rays, pictures, ME notes, forensic samples and materials taken for further examination. The process is valid.

You’re actually correct. No wonder why this is such a hard case to solve. So many obstacles. The pineapple is a big clue in my opinion. Realistically an intruder isn’t going to serve pineapple or make cups of tea. If the Ramsey’s are involved, what was the motive? I’m interested in any evidence besides fibres that throw doubt on the ramseys. What evidence is there? And where did the foreign dna come from?

 

[Ponytale]

You’re actually correct. No wonder why this is such a hard case to solve. So many obstacles. The pineapple is a big clue in my opinion. Realistically an intruder isn’t going to serve pineapple or make cups of tea. If the Ramsey’s are involved, what was the motive? I’m interested in any evidence besides fibres that throw doubt on the ramseys. What evidence is there? And where did the foreign dna come from?

If it was an accident no motive is needed. If Ramsey's are involved, there could have been many reasons why they chose to cover it up. We most probably will never know the answer for that question.

 

[Deleted member 187229]

If it was an accident no motive is needed. If Ramsey's are involved, there could have been many reasons why they chose to cover it up. We most probably will never know the answer for that question.

Do her injuries coincide with an accident though? She had bruises and abrasions on her body indicating either a struggle or an assault.

 

[GRT]

Dr Myer implied that the injuries to jonbenet’s brain were so limited that he couldn’t determine if the blow to the head came before during or after the neck ligatures.
He said the blow to the head and the strangulation happened almost simultaneously. Could this indicate a planned pre meditated murder? Dr myers findings don’t corroborate the police theory of an accidental blow to the head and later followed by a murder and cover up.

Meyer indicates death from strangulation and the blow to the head. He also notes limited brain bleed. While he doesn't come right out and say he thinks they happened simultaneously, I got the impression that's what he was pondering.

In 2002, Dr Michael Doberson was asked to look at Meyer's autopsy report and offer his opinion. He pretty much says he agrees with Meyer and that the hit to the head happened during the "perimortem period" which is right at the time of death. So, yes, I think "simultaneously" or at least "almost simultaneously" fits the narrative.

Look down toward the end of Page 2 of Doberson's report--Items C and D:

Here are all four pages of his official report: 1 2 3 4

 

[I am not Sherlock H.]

Please consider me uniformed and confused. IIRC, the topic of possible manner of death was under debate at this thread.

See post #8…..

Post in thread 'Father says DNA could solve one of country’s biggest murder mysteries: Who killed JonBenét Ramsey #2'
Father says DNA could solve one of country’s biggest murder mysteries: Who killed JonBenét Ramsey #2

Can the JBR and Ramsey threads be consolidated and combined? As now stands, there seem to be at least 4 or 5 threads and it is difficult or even impossible to follow.

Unless that is by design? MOO

 

[GRT]

If it was an accident no motive is needed. If Ramsey's are involved, there could have been many reasons why they chose to cover it up. We most probably will never know the answer for that question.

I'm hopeful the new DNA testing will point to someone. They now have the technology to separate the composite DNA they could not separate before. If it works, we may finally find the perp.

I have to wonder if John Ramsey, who has been pushing so hard for the new DNA testing is truly hoping the results clear Patsy once and for all. He stood by her but maybe, in the dark recesses of his mind, he wondered. Just a tiny bit. I know he's also wondered publicly if the killer was one of his "inner circle" of friends.

 

[GRT]

Please consider me uniformed and confused. IIRC, the topic of possible manner of death was under debate at this thread.

See post #8…..

Post in thread 'Father says DNA could solve one of country’s biggest murder mysteries: Who killed JonBenét Ramsey #2'
Father says DNA could solve one of country’s biggest murder mysteries: Who killed JonBenét Ramsey #2

Can the JBR and Ramsey threads be consolidated and combined? As now stands, there seem to be at least 4 or 5 threads and it is difficult or even impossible to follow.

Unless that is by design? MOO

I think this thread is slightly different because it focuses on the timing of the head injury vs strangulation and posits a theory based on that.

We did discuss it on the other thread, but it kind of got lost in all the other stuff.

 

[Deleted member 187229]

Meyer indicates death from strangulation and the blow to the head. He also notes limited brain bleed. While he doesn't come right out and say he thinks they happened simultaneously, I got the impression that's what he was pondering.

In 2002, Dr Michael Doberson was asked to look at Meyer's autopsy report and offer his opinion. He pretty much says he agrees with Meyer and that the hit to the head happened during the "perimortem period" which is right at the time of death. So, yes, I think "simultaneously" or at least "almost simultaneously" fits the narrative.

Look down toward the end of Page 2 of Doberson's report--Items C and D:

Here are all four pages of his official report: 1 2 3 4

Thanks for posting this. It’s the first official report I’ve seen apart from Dr Meyer’s autopsy report. The strangulation first theory explains why there was no visible trauma on the outside of her scalp. Makes sense. So theoretically, she was stun gunned, sexually assaulted, strangled, bludgeoned. Are sexual assaults with objects like paint brushes sexually motivated do you know? It’s such a horrible thing to ask because she was a child and it’s so gruesome what happened to her. But how would a person get gratification from abusing someone with a broken paintbrush?

 

[GRT]

Thanks for posting this. It’s the first official report I’ve seen apart from Dr Meyer’s autopsy report. The strangulation first theory explains why there was no visible trauma on the outside of her scalp. Makes sense.

Yes, it's one of the more realistic theories, in my opinion. The autopsy supports it and Dr. Doberson's report further clarifies it.

So theoretically, she was stun gunned, sexually assaulted, strangled, bludgeoned. Are sexual assaults with objects like paint brushes sexually motivated do you know? It’s such a horrible thing to ask because she was a child and it’s so gruesome what happened to her. But how would a person get gratification from abusing someone with a broken paintbrush?

The paintbrush thing seems odd to me, too--like maybe an afterthought. But I'm glad there was no evidence of prior/ongoing SA.

 

[Ponytale]

Do her injuries coincide with an accident though? She had bruises and abrasions on her body indicating either a struggle or an assault.

I think that nothing can exclude that a part of this crime could have been and accident.

 

[CloudedTruth]

Craig Silverman interview with Mitch Morrisey:

Craig Silverman: I can send you the Megyn Kelly interview if you're interested, because John Ramsey said something a little startling. He said that [JonBenet] was strangled and then struck in the head. But it was always my understanding — and you just stated it the same way — that she was hit in the head, that maybe her breathing got shallow enough that somebody thought she was dead, and then she was actually killed by strangulation with the twisting of that garrote that was made out of equipment from that same art set. Am I right?

Mitch Morrissey: That's correct. You know when someone suffers a closed head injury what starts to happen. Their brain starts to swell. It's just like when you slam your thumb with a hammer. Your thumb starts to swell. Well, when you suffer the kind of head injury that this girl suffered — and her skull was cracked from front to back and there was a chunk of bone that was broken out from the crack in her head — your brain has nowhere to go. So what does it do? It swells, but it starts to swell down your spinal cord. And eventually it cuts off those things that allow your heart to beat and you to breath. But your brain is dying, and that can be measured. And that can be documented. And it was in this case.

It was very clear that the blow to the head happened anywhere from an hour and a half to five hours before she was strangled to death. And we had that documented by an incredible expert who had been dealing with trauma to children her entire career. And she was working at the Children's Hospital in Philadelphia. And I got to meet her and I got to talk to her about it, and it was so clear to me that she suffered that head injury. Medically, it was all documented. I mean, there's no question.

And I don't know what John Ramsey said. I've met John Ramsey, along with his lawyer. I understand they sue people that talk about this case. But he's just flat out wrong and is ignoring the facts. And those were facts that were disclosed in the autopsy. It was, the - you know, the mechanism of death that was occuring in that little girl was dying from that closed head injury before she got strangled.

[Source: The Craig Silverman Show - Episode 127 - 1:06:08]

 

[Deleted member 187229]

Craig Silverman interview with Mitch Morrisey:

Craig Silverman: I can send you the Megyn Kelly interview if you're interested, because John Ramsey said something a little startling. He said that [JonBenet] was strangled and then struck in the head. But it was always my understanding — and you just stated it the same way — that she was hit in the head, that maybe her breathing got shallow enough that somebody thought she was dead, and then she was actually killed by strangulation with the twisting of that garrote that was made out of equipment from that same art set. Am I right?

Mitch Morrissey: That's correct. You know when someone suffers a closed head injury what starts to happen. Their brain starts to swell. It's just like when you slam your thumb with a hammer. Your thumb starts to swell. Well, when you suffer the kind of head injury that this girl suffered — and her skull was cracked from front to back and there was a chunk of bone that was broken out from the crack in her head — your brain has nowhere to go. So what does it do? It swells, but it starts to swell down your spinal cord. And eventually it cuts off those things that allow your heart to beat and you to breath. But your brain is dying, and that can be measured. And that can be documented. And it was in this case.

It was very clear that the blow to the head happened anywhere from an hour and a half to five hours before she was strangled to death. And we had that documented by an incredible expert who had been dealing with trauma to children her entire career. And she was working at the Children's Hospital in Philadelphia. And I got to meet her and I got to talk to her about it, and it was so clear to me that she suffered that head injury. Medically, it was all documented. I mean, there's no question.

And I don't know what John Ramsey said. I've met John Ramsey, along with his lawyer. I understand they sue people that talk about this case. But he's just flat out wrong and is ignoring the facts. And those were facts that were disclosed in the autopsy. It was, the - you know, the mechanism of death that was occuring in that little girl was dying from that closed head injury before she got strangled.

[Source: The Craig Silverman Show - Episode 127 - 1:06:08]

He said those were the facts that were disclosed in the autopsy. But the autopsy says the brain has a normal architecture. The autopsy indicates there was no brain swelling.

 

[CloudedTruth]

He said those were the facts that were disclosed in the autopsy. But the autopsy says the brain has a normal architecture. The autopsy indicates there was no brain swelling.

The full autopsy includes Dr. Meyer's notes which have remained confidential.

I think it's very important to recognize the precise verbiage used by the coroner in his report. I have only included the parts that pertain to your points, the architecture of the brain and the swelling which it should be noted is your word, not his.

The precise wording from the portion of the autopsy made public with regard to his observations of the brain:
"The 1450 gm brain has a normal overall architecture". The key word here is "overall". That's a generalization of the brain functions as a whole. The definition of architecture of the brain is: Brain architecture is made up of billions of connections between individual neurons across different areas of the brain, enabling lightning-fast communication among neurons that specialize in various functions. It does not mean the outward physical appearance of the brain. He goes on to note some abnormalities, which are, "mild narrowing of the sulci and flattening of the gyri are seen". So here he is describing damage he sees to those areas, which are the raised and folded structures of the cerebral cortex. He also discusses the other injuries to the brain which I will not repeat here. He is not implying that the brain looked completely normal and was not severely injured.

"No inflammation is identified". That is not the same as "there was no brain swelling". The words "swelling" and "inflammation" are often thought of as synonyms, however they are not. In particular in medical terms they are two different issues with the body. And swelling can occur within the body without inflammation occurring. Inflammation is commonly known as the start of the healing process. JonBenet's brain was in the process of dying, not healing. Note he did not say "there was no swelling".

It's very clear what the consensus of experts determined. Dr. Meyer is not a neuropathologist, Dr. Rorke was which is why she was consulted. If you read the entire statement from Morrissey, he discusses swelling, he discusses the spinal cord, he discusses how clear Dr. Rorke was in her determination. "It was the mechanism of death that was occurring in that little girl was dying from that closed head injury before she got strangled".

This is what has been conveyed by both Michael Beckner and Mitch Morrissey as to what was testified to the Grand Jury. And they have also said that Dr. Meyer agreed.

I don't think it can be made any more clearly than this. They are the facts.

 

[snarast]

You’re actually correct. No wonder why this is such a hard case to solve. So many obstacles. The pineapple is a big clue in my opinion. Realistically an intruder isn’t going to serve pineapple or make cups of tea. If the Ramsey’s are involved, what was the motive? I’m interested in any evidence besides fibres that throw doubt on the ramseys. What evidence is there? And where did the foreign dna come from?

Whatever it is, it is not a ”normal” intruder looking for valuables, though. If it’s an intruder it’s one who knows the family and the house well.

 

[Deleted member 187229]

The intruder was probably someone John knew through his company. Someone who hated john and wanted to destroy him. I believe the murder was premeditated. I believe the murderer was someone John knew.