Patsy Ramsey

[ScarlettScarpetta]

She would have never survived the head blow.

Yes she would have and she did. There is no need to strangle someone who is dead.

 

[pukasonqo2]

That's not really possible though - breathing is not non-detectable ever. It may become harder to detect, but you don't need equipment. A pulse you might need equipment, but given how long she supposedly lived I don't know if it would have gotten that bad. Her heart didn't stop - it was a head injury. I'm just not sure. I know if you become super hypothermic it could be really, really hard to tell whether you are alive, but in an injury like this I don't think it could be undetectable. When people think someone is dead and they are wrong, they usually didn't check very carefully - the person didn't respond and went limp and they panicked.

well, i have to count manually how many breaths per minute a patient has for those not hooked to machines and is very difficult. in some patients you can see the chest moving quite obviously, in others you cannot see the chest raising at all, and they are happily chatting away, no signs of distress.

if her chest going up and down wasn't that clear she could have appeared dead. pulse you can check manually but do bear in mind that radial pulse can be hard to find, especially in a wounded person as the systems are starting to shut down. did the Rs check her jugular for pulse? we don't know

in nursing there are different parameters for what is considered within the norm in paediatrics. healthy kids' hearts beat faster than adults but each heart beats in a different manner, some are regular, some irregular so there is no standard textbook heartbeat. JB could have an irregular heartbeat (this does not mean she had any heart problems) with its own rhythm which could have lead the Rs to assume she was dying.


lupus est homini , non , non quom qualis sit novit

 

[pukasonqo2]

Sorry, this is ridiculous. You know if someone is alive or dead. All you have to do is put your head to their chest. You don't need fancy equipment just an ear..



If this was the case there would be a lot of people murdered to cover up knocks on the head..

no is not. i work as a RN here in oz, some patients hearts beat strong and regularly, others are irregular and not strong. if you only need an ear to listen to a patient's heart why stethoscopes are always used in hospitals?

and please, do not insult my professionalism when dealing w patients. if would never based a judgement on only what i can hear, why do you think he find the pulse and count the beats to double check, for the fun of it?

i respect your post even if i don't agree w them, so do not call my opinion ridiculous because is different to yours


lupus est homini , non , non quom qualis sit novit

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

no is not. i work as a RN here in oz, some patients hearts beat strong and regularly, others are irregular and not strong. if you only need an ear to listen to a patient's heart why stethoscopes are always used in hospitals?

and please, do not insult my professionalism when dealing w patients. if would never based a judgement on only what i can hear, why do you think he find the pulse and count the beats to double check, for the fun of it?

i respect your post even if i don't agree w them, so do not call my opinion ridiculous because is different to yours


lupus est homini , non , non quom qualis sit novit

Also have a medical background. My family has a history of heart conditions.. I have often put my head to a chest to check a beat. Just like they did it before fancy stethoscopes.

This has nothing to do with you and your patients. This has to do with the reasonability of a parent finding their child knocked out and assuming they are dead. That is just not how it works. Not even close.

This is not science fiction. Knocked out or not, She would have have just said.. Okay .. well lets just then strangle her..

It defies logic in any regard.

 

[BBB167893]

Sorry, this is ridiculous. You know if someone is alive or dead. All you have to do is put your head to their chest. You don't need fancy equipment just an ear..

If this was the case there would be a lot of people murdered to cover up knocks on the head..

But if the person is in deep shock, and their heartbeat has slowed to a crawl, it would be difficult to detect.

 

[BBB167893]

Yes she would have and she did. There is no need to strangle someone who is dead.

That's not what bettybaby means. The pathologist said that the headblow would have killed her anyway if she hadn't been strangled.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

But if the person is in deep shock, and their heartbeat has slowed to a crawl, it would be difficult to detect.

Since none of us where there that is interesting. Interesting opinion or speculation but not fact. Her head wound being a closed head wound would not automatically slow her heart.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

That's not what bettybaby means. The pathologist said that the headblow would have killed her anyway if she hadn't been strangled.

However she was strangled.. Something there would be no need of if someone thought she was dead.

 

[BBB167893]

However she was strangled.. Something there would be no need of if someone thought she was dead.

UNLESS...they needed an obvious means of death.

 

[bettybaby00]

Call me crazy, again. LOOK AT THE PICTURE!

best case scenario they would have had to pull the plug.

The ME described it as a "lethal blow," but then again I'm getting this info from a book, so yea, it's questionable.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

UNLESS...they needed an obvious means of death.

There was an obvious cause of death if she was dead. Strangling her would not change that. It just proves again that this was not someone interested in covering anything up but someone who wanted to kill this child and had no qualms about strangling the life out of her.

 

[Venom]

Yes she would have and she did. There is no need to strangle someone who is dead.

How do you know she would have survived it?
That is just pure speculation.

 

[BOESP]

That's not really possible though - breathing is not non-detectable ever. It may become harder to detect, but you don't need equipment. A pulse you might need equipment, but given how long she supposedly lived I don't know if it would have gotten that bad. Her heart didn't stop - it was a head injury. I'm just not sure. I know if you become super hypothermic it could be really, really hard to tell whether you are alive, but in an injury like this I don't think it could be undetectable. When people think someone is dead and they are wrong, they usually didn't check very carefully - the person didn't respond and went limp and they panicked.

When respiration is slow and shallow and the killer is a lay person in a panic, it is my opinion the respiration may not be recognized especially if the subject is unconscious. JonBenet was unconscious and close to death shortly after the head trauma occurred, imo.

BBM. Sounds like you agree so I don't know what point you are trying to make.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

How do you know she would have survived it?
That is just pure speculation.

She did survive the blow. Maybe she would not have in 48 hours but she did that night because she had to be strangled to die. That is just fact.

 

[BBB167893]

Since none of us where there that is interesting. Interesting opinion or speculation but not fact.

Perhaps.

Her head wound being a closed head wound would not automatically slow her heart.

I think a lot of it has to do with pressure on the brain, as well.

 

[Detective Pinkie]

It is interesting that people that were not there keep telling people that were also not there that they can't possibly know what happened because they were not there. Then tell them that they know it is impossible even though they were not there. You really shouldn't criticise people for making assumptions and then make assumptions yourself.

Some of the RDI theories have elements that are based on things that (to them) do/do not make sense or judgments are made on "common sense". They are often criticised for that by people saying "but you don't know". The same critics then often use the argument of "common sense" or "that's not likely" to criticise other elements of RDI theories.

Personally I can't say if JB was thought to be dead at some point when she wasn't, I don't have enough medical knowledge to say either way. I do think that there was a lot of staging (as do some experts) and some of that staging was to draw attention away from the house and family. Fatal accident equals investigation of people close to child - failed kidnapping/sexual assault means possible outside involvement.

 

[bettybaby00]

Hello rabbit hole!

She did survive the blow. Maybe she would not have in 48 hours but she did that night because she had to be strangled to die. That is just fact.

The original question was.....

was it ever made public if JB could have survived w medical attention? would she be back to herself or disabled somehow?

 

[bettybaby00]

It is interesting that people that were not there keep telling people that were also not there that they can't possibly know what happened because they were not there. Then tell them that they know it is impossible even though they were not there. You really shouldn't criticise people for making assumptions and then make assumptions yourself.

Some of the RDI theories have elements that are based on things that (to them) do/do not make sense or judgments are made on "common sense". They are often criticised for that by people saying "but you don't know". The same critics then often use the argument of "common sense" or "that's not likely" to criticise other elements of RDI theories.

Personally I can't say if JB was thought to be dead at some point when she wasn't, I don't have enough medical knowledge to say either way. I do think that there was a lot of staging (as do some experts) and some of that staging was to draw attention away from the house and family. Fatal accident equals investigation of people close to child - failed kidnapping/sexual assault means possible outside involvement.

Standing ovation!

 

[BBB167893]

There was an obvious cause of death if she was dead. Strangling her would not change that.

How was it obvious? The head wound couldn't be seen! The cops didn't know about it until the autopsy.

 

[ScarlettScarpetta]

How was it obvious? The head wound couldn't be seen! The cops didn't know about it until the autopsy.

Exactly.. so there is no need to try and strangle her. At best she was knocked out. There was no blood. So they would not know what kind of damage was done so there is no need to cover up.

They would have just called 911 and got her help.