Lawrence's Smith's book

[Fides]

Also otg, it would appear Dr Rorke was not consulted by Meyer or that she had ever spoken with Kolar - I'm quoting a March 31 2013 post here by Brothermoon, which I hope is OK


"I sent a letter to Dr. Rorke asking for a comment on the disrepancy in Kolar's book pertaining to his quote of her contribution to the post mortem exam. She replied:

Good morning, Mr. Sxxxxx,
I have no idea who James Kolar is nor have I seen his book in which he mentions my involvement in the Jan Benet Ramsey postmortem examination. Hence I cannot answer your question re brain swelling and herniation as it did/did not apply to that case.
Sincerely,
Lucy B Rorke-Adams, MD

I sent this e-mail:

Pardom me, but I would also like to know if it was observed by you or any other pathologist that JonBenet's brain had swollen through the foramen magnum and do I have permission to post these e-mails on the Ramsey case forums and discuss them on talk radio? Thanks, Mark S.

She replied by e-mail:

I do not wish to discuss the Jon Benet Ramsey case with you. Please do not contact me further.
Lucy B Rorke-Adams, MD"




I don't know about you otg, but her reply to Brothermoon kind of suggests to me that she saw no evidence of 'brain swelling or herniation'

Sorry to jump into this conversation, but aussiesheila could you explain more about how the emails above from Dr. Rorke suggest a medical opinion on the Jonbenet Ramsey case? I am missing it.

 

[questfortrue]

I know this was not addressed to me, and I'm sorry for interjecting, but here it is (BBM):

Thanks for looking this up, Olivia; sorry, I’ve been out of the area.
Guess at this stage, the sense of Rorke is whatever anyone chooses to believe but I’ve a couple of additional thoughts to add.

Rorke -
I also have delved into Rorke’s background, and, as with all experts, she wasn’t correct all the time, though it seems to me she was usually more right than wrong in the majority of the cases in which she testified, at least according to the courts. She did once before this retirement interview mention the JB case; and it appeared to me as though it was a source of satisfaction to her to reveal she worked on the medical aspect of this case.

Kolar and his writing -
Imo, Kolar wrote his book for the average reader, not for websleuthers interested in medical specifics such as how Rorke could have determined whether “JonBenet's brain had swollen through the foramen magnum.” We will never know for sure because it hasn’t been shared whether Rorke only saw photos and histology slides, or if she performed an actual brain autopsy. I happen to believe that at a minimum she did view photos and slides because of the reference to cellular necrosis. (I do know through otg and elsewhere that fixative technique is critical, and I’ve no idea who dissected the brain in specific areas and performed the application of fixative to the brain tissue.)

There is no reason for Rorke to have known Kolar. Kolar came on the case after Tom Bennett’s exit in 2005. Rorke provided her testimony during the GJ of 98/99.

Leaks and confidentiality agreements –
Long way around the barn in explanation, but let me first mention that PMPT reveals the names of the sexual abuse experts and nowhere else is the information more detailed than in the Bonita Papers in which McCann specifies the details of prior abuse. The Bonita Papers were a major reveal and unfortunately discredited by many because of the manner in which the information was stolen. This leads me to mention BrotherMoon’s emails because, imo, it illustrates something else.

Rorke’s reply to BrotherMoon was: I have no idea who James Kolar is nor have I seen his book in which he mentions my involvement in the Jan Benet Ramsey postmortem examination. Hence I cannot answer your question re brain swelling and herniation as it did/did not apply to that case. As far as her statement of “as it did/did not apply to that case,” the slash is most commonly used as the word substitute for "or" which indicates a choice (often mutually-exclusive) is present. (Examples: Male/Female, Y/N, He/She, etc.) The slash means it did OR did not apply.

I read that email transmission as unequivocal in her firm statement that she is not going to reveal any information, not that she doesn’t have information. She is not going to respond. There is another explanation for why she replied in that manner, beyond GJ secrecy, and that is that confidentiality agreements had been signed between the authorities and some of the experts. (If you read Dr. Lee’s book Cracking More Cases, you’ll note he uses fictitious names for everyone he mentions. Without a doubt they had him sign a confidentiality agreement.)

Necrotic cellular occurence –
Necrosis is a buzz word in TBI, kinda like “cholesterol” in heart disease. One of the words mentioned in FF regarding her injuries is “necrosis”, and I believe some/many people don’t consider what it means. I’m confident there are a number of us who already know about necrosis, but for anyone else I’ll mention that cellular necrosis is studied in all traumatic brain injuries if an autopsy is mandated, and the degree of necrosis is determined by a review of tissue slides.

TBI is a big research subject for medical scientists as it’s one of the biggest causes of death in young people. Of primary importance is learning how best to treat TBI, controlling the effects of the cascade of cellular events which lead to necrosis (causing brain damage and death.) Couple of articles on necrosis:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3311037/
http://bja.oxfordjournals.org/content/99/1/4.full

There are many questions one could raise about the head injury and the analysis of it. And it’s obviously of interest to wonder exactly when Rorke was hired to provide her analysis. Great question and I wish I knew the answer. I fully appreciate that whatever opinions we hold on the brain injury, we just arrive at the same train station of more questions than answers.

 

[UKGuy]

questfortrue,
Rorke’s reply to BrotherMoon tells you she knows all about James Kolar, because patently she will not allow any form of misrepresentation, reputational damage to fall by the wayside, etc.

More important is that she may have analyzed JonBenet's skull and arrived at important conclusions? This I think is what happened!

That there may have been a time gap between JonBenet being sexually assaulted and her head injury opens up a lacuna for those in the JonBenet theory department store, since many think its a done deal, i.e. she was whacked on the head first, then asphyxiated paintbrush style after?

mmm, so where does a sexual assault factor in to a head assault come to be a asphyxiation by paintbrush?

 

[Anti-K]

BBM

questfortrue,
Rorke’s reply to BrotherMoon tells you she knows all about James Kolar, because patently she will not allow any form of misrepresentation, reputational damage to fall by the wayside, etc.

More important is that she may have analyzed JonBenet's skull and arrived at important conclusions? This I think is what happened!

That there may have been a time gap between JonBenet being sexually assaulted and her head injury opens up a lacuna for those in the JonBenet theory department store, since many think its a done deal, i.e. she was whacked on the head first, then asphyxiated paintbrush style after?

mmm, so where does a sexual assault factor in to a head assault come to be a asphyxiation by paintbrush?

?? Rorke’s reply to BrotherMoon tells us that she doesn’t know Kolar and she doesn’t know anything about his book.
.

Rorke’s opinion as reported by Kolar doesn’t change anything about the sexual assault which is believed to have occurred at or near point of death.
...

AK

 

[aussiesheila2]

Sorry to jump into this conversation, but aussiesheila could you explain more about how the emails above from Dr. Rorke suggest a medical opinion on the Jonbenet Ramsey case? I am missing it.

Fides, I posted the emails mainly to alert otg to the fact that Dr Rorke says she has never met or spoken to James Kolar, which otg was wondering about in his post #59 that I was answering.

At first I did think the emails suggested that Dr Rorke saw no evidence of 'brain swelling or herniation' but since reading questfortrue's post #62 I've come around to her interpretation of the email meaning that Dr Rorke is just not going to comment one way or the other about what she did or did not say to the grand jury. Hope that answers your question.


If only they would release the entire grand jury records.

 

[UKGuy]

BBM


?? Rorke’s reply to BrotherMoon tells us that she doesn’t know Kolar and she doesn’t know anything about his book.
.

Rorke’s opinion as reported by Kolar doesn’t change anything about the sexual assault which is believed to have occurred at or near point of death.
...

AK

Anti-K,
Rorke knows all about Kolar now and at the time of BrotherMoon's email will have checked for factual misrepresentation by Kolar, otherwise what Kolar writes stands, only the details are left out.

If Rorke has suggested a lengthy time period between a sexual assault and head injury then this places any theory that relies on an absence of time between her sexual assault and her head injury on weaker ground.

Kolar is either deliberately muddying the waters or indicating why many theories are plain wrong!

.