"Stun Gun" marks

[UKGuy]

The marks on Boggs were raised with red edges. The marks on JB were reddish-brown and smooth, relatively.

imo those marks on JonBenet are postmortem injuries, either caused by part of another assault intended as staging, or by moving her body.

The coloring you describe are of those particular to postmortem contusions.


.

 

[Jayelles]

imo those marks on JonBenet are postmortem injuries, either caused by part of another assault intended as staging, or by moving her body.

The coloring you describe are of those particular to postmortem contusions.


.

I think the marks on Jonbenet look like bruises caused by her being jabbed with a pointed implement like a stick.

 

[UKGuy]

I think the marks on Jonbenet look like bruises caused by her being jabbed with a pointed implement like a stick.

Jayelles,

Yes it could result from being jabbed with a stick or with a paintbrush handle, but it does demonstrate that her injuries originate from more than one source, which reduces the claims of an accident further.


Also why use such a hi-tec device as a stun-gun, but then employ blunt force to kill JonBenet?


imo someone killed JonBenet to silence her, this is why her injuries are so violent, they wanted to make sure she was dead.

Some of her injuries may be postmortem, caused possibly by a misguided attempt to stage a homicide, some may have been caused prior to her death and be defensive injuries without high quality photographs of her injuries its not possible to be certain.


.

 

[Jayelles]

What gets me are claims like this one from jameson:-

The white debris on her face is believed to have been from the adhesive on the duct tape - the stun gun injuries - - - one prong touched bare skin, the other the duct tape.

Believed by whom? jameson? The FACT is, that the debris on her face is described in the autopsy report as

On the right cheek is a pattern of dried saliva
and mucous material which does not appear to be hemorrhaic

no mention of any adhesive-like artefacts which were removed for testing. Her right cheek was swabbed though.

There are two autopsy photos which show the mark on her face. Only one shows the (rather "flat" looking) white mark:-

http://denver.rockymountainnews.com/art/extra/ramsey/thm/img036.html

The other does not have the white mark on it:-

http://www.jameson245.com/faceright.jpg

In this second photo, there is a mark in approximately the same position as the white blob in the former photo. This is a good quality photo and on enlargement, the mark resembles other marks which are described as petechial haemorrhages.

I have tried enlarging the photo with the white mark on it to get a better look, but I wouldn't like to say for sure that it's a mark on the photo rather than something on Jonbenet. When I enlarge it, it becomes too blurred to tell.

However - we can apply some common sense to this. A lump of glue on a murder victim's jawline would be a clue and one which would surely be mentioned in the autopsy report in the same way as the other stains, mucous, dried blood,

1. The autopsy report is online and it doesn't mention any artefacts stuck to her face. It also only described ONE rust coloured abrasion on her cheek plus petechial haemorrhages.

2. Meyer meticulously describes dried mucous and other stains and markings that he found - nothing whatsoever about a blob of adhesive. If you look at the first photo with the white blob, it's a fairly remarkable size -i.e. it wouldn't go overlooked or uncommented on.

3. If there WAS adhesive on her cheek - a single stungun prong sized blob of melted adhesive - Lou Smit would be SCREAMING it from the rooftops. It would be very STRONG evidence of an electrical device having been used. Lou isn't screaming any such thing - in fact, Lou has never even mentioned it - not in any interview or on any other occasion when he has been trying to justify the stungun theory. The ONLY person suggesting it is ...jameson.

4. If you look at the second photo, you get a better perspective of where that white mark was located (the first photo is cropped). It's on her jawline. Think about it. If she had duct tape over her mouth, where would it lie? Better still - get a piece of sticky tape and apply it to your own mouth and see where it lies.. If it's across your lips, unless if it very wide tape which would cover your chin, it doesn't lie on your jawline. Now I admit that a) we don't know the exact size of the duct tape that was across her mouth (I can't find that anyway) and there are no photos of JonBenet with the duct tape in situ so I could be wrong on this but looking at this photo which shows the tape:-

http://www.jameson245.com/csblanket.jpg

it seems to be perhaps a couple of inches wide.

 

[UKGuy]

Jayelles,

I agree with with much of what you say, imo the rust colored mark in your first photograph strongly resembles a postmortem injury, consider when you use a hammer to hit a nail, miss and hit your fingernail, days later the injury can become rust colored.

Postmortem contusions take on this coloring due to the blood not having been re-oxygenated, contusions on or close to death, move through a cycle of changes as the blood breaks down internally inside the contusion.


The white mark could be anything from duct-tape debri to something that was deposited after her body was discovered.

Until the white mark impacts on any theory I think its safe to disregard it.

I had intended to look over the stuff on her face but have not had time yet, but speculating, it appears the fluid or mucous is a postmortem release from either her mouth or nasal passages as a response to her skull fracture, this occurs in severe head injuries.


All the current forensic evidence, particularly the autopsy details, suggest JonBenet died a violent death, all the indications are not those of an accidental death.


.

 

[BlueCrab]

Jayelles,

Yes it could result from being jabbed with a stick or with a paintbrush handle, but it does demonstrate that her injuries originate from more than one source, which reduces the claims of an accident further.


Also why use such a hi-tec device as a stun-gun, but then employ blunt force to kill JonBenet?


imo someone killed JonBenet to silence her, this is why her injuries are so violent, they wanted to make sure she was dead.

Some of her injuries may be postmortem, caused possibly by a misguided attempt to stage a homicide, some may have been caused prior to her death and be defensive injuries without high quality photographs of her injuries its not possible to be certain.


.

UKGuy,

Please. The facts are in plain sight; the marks on JonBenet match the twin electrodes of a hand-held Taser stun gun. Because these facts don't fit the theories of some posters on this forum does not warrant ignoring information that has been reported by experts, nor forgetting how to properly scale from a photograph and measure between two points with a ruler.

I for one firmly believe the board certified forensic pathologists who have studied the marks on JonBenet and concluded they are consistent with stun gun injuries. These experts include Dr. John Meyer, the only expert who examined and measured JonBenet's injuries in person; and Drs. Michael Dobersen and Robert Deters, who have experience in personally examining stun gun injuries on murder victims.

BlueCrab

 

[Jayelles]

Jayelles,

I agree with with much of what you say, imo the rust colored mark in your first photograph strongly resembles a postmortem injury, consider when you use a hammer to hit a nail, miss and hit your fingernail, days later the injury can become rust colored.

Postmortem contusions take on this coloring due to the blood not having been re-oxygenated, contusions on or close to death, move through a cycle of changes as the blood breaks down internally inside the contusion.


The white mark could be anything from duct-tape debri to something that was deposited after her body was discovered.

Until the white mark impacts on any theory I think its safe to disregard it.

I had intended to look over the stuff on her face but have not had time yet, but speculating, it appears the fluid or mucous is a postmortem release from either her mouth or nasal passages as a response to her skull fracture, this occurs in severe head injuries.


All the current forensic evidence, particularly the autopsy details, suggest JonBenet died a violent death, all the indications are not those of an accidental death.


.

Looking at the larger (second) photo above, there appears to be white mucousy material all over her little cheek and extending right down to her hairline in front of her right ear (you can see it through her hair). To me, this suggests that she was crying before she died. Your nose runs when you cry hard. JonBenet had a cold when she died so the mucous from her nose would be thicker than normal and likely to dry as white/yellow or green debris.

Under normal circumstances, even a child with a heavy cold wouldn't waken up with mucous all over their face and cheeks and into their hairline because it doesn't usually tend to run that freely - even if it did, it would tend to be rubbed off on a pillowslip or sheets.

If there is evidence that Jonbenet was crying hard - making her little nose run to the extent that her face was wet and covered in mucousy tears..... That makes it more likely that she experienced a period of terror before her death (awful to think about).

Look at this photo to see the white dried mucous extending to her ears and hairline:-

http://www.jameson245.com/face2marks.jpg

 

[icedtea4me]

The injury on Boggs's face has a bit of flesh showing through in the middle, whereas JonBenet's does not.


-Tea

 

[Tober]

I for one firmly believe the board certified forensic pathologists who have studied the marks on JonBenet and concluded they are consistent with stun gun injuries.

Those who contend that a stun gun was used on JonBenet, do so based on conjecture and anecdotal experience rather than on actually being able to demonstrate such to a reasonable degree of scientific certainty in this particular case. They fall short of the accepted forensic method. Based on that, among other things, I think we can safely conclude that a stun gun was not used on JonBenet.

 

[BlueCrab]

Those who contend that a stun gun was used on JonBenet, do so based on conjecture and anecdotal experience rather than on actually being able to demonstrate such to a reasonable degree of scientific certainty in this particular case. They fall short of the accepted forensic method. Based on that, among other things, I think we can safely conclude that a stun gun was not used on JonBenet.

Tober,

Please explain to us what your "accepted forensic method" is that the forensic pathologists in the JonBenet case have not followed in regard to identifying stun gun injuries. Thanks.

BlueCrab

 

[UKGuy]

UKGuy,

Please. The facts are in plain sight; the marks on JonBenet match the twin electrodes of a hand-held Taser stun gun. Because these facts don't fit the theories of some posters on this forum does not warrant ignoring information that has been reported by experts, nor forgetting how to properly scale from a photograph and measure between two points with a ruler.

I for one firmly believe the board certified forensic pathologists who have studied the marks on JonBenet and concluded they are consistent with stun gun injuries. These experts include Dr. John Meyer, the only expert who examined and measured JonBenet's injuries in person; and Drs. Michael Dobersen and Robert Deters, who have experience in personally examining stun gun injuries on murder victims.

BlueCrab

BlueCrab,

Please. The facts are in plain sight;

In front of my eyes it is her injuries that are in plain sight, if the facts were patently transparent then JonBenet's homicide may have reached a resolution a long time ago.

I dont disagree with you or your experts, who, as you state concluded they are consistent with stun gun injuries.

The marks may also be consistent with other interpretations of the evidence, and when making assumptions or speculating I prefer to work from the simplest to the complex.

That is unless a pathologist or expert states otherwise those marks are also consistent with those of a postmortem injury.

Your theory may be correct a stun-gun may have been employed, but imo the use of a stun-gun along with the blunt force used to kill JonBenet appear incongruous, not improbable, they just dont seem to fit.

Also why not just kill JonBenet with the stun-gun, why are there so few stun-gun marks on her body, her assailant must have thought they will have experts who will identify her marks, so four marks or forty, why so few?


.

 

[UKGuy]

Looking at the larger (second) photo above, there appears to be white mucousy material all over her little cheek and extending right down to her hairline in front of her right ear (you can see it through her hair). To me, this suggests that she was crying before she died. Your nose runs when you cry hard. JonBenet had a cold when she died so the mucous from her nose would be thicker than normal and likely to dry as white/yellow or green debris.

Under normal circumstances, even a child with a heavy cold wouldn't waken up with mucous all over their face and cheeks and into their hairline because it doesn't usually tend to run that freely - even if it did, it would tend to be rubbed off on a pillowslip or sheets.

If there is evidence that Jonbenet was crying hard - making her little nose run to the extent that her face was wet and covered in mucousy tears..... That makes it more likely that she experienced a period of terror before her death (awful to think about).

Look at this photo to see the white dried mucous extending to her ears and hairline:-

http://www.jameson245.com/face2marks.jpg

Jayelles,

Yes JonBenet may have been crying, the mucous may result from the release of pressure initiated by her head injury via her nasal passages and mouth, or a combination of both i.e. crying and pressure release?

Also if those marks are not postmortem then they are most likely defensive injuries, I suspect JonBenet was actively fighting with her assailant, until she was pinned down, possibly by the neck, and a fatal blow was delivered to her head?

I will magnify that picture at some point over the weekend, I have software that supposedly magnifies with little distortion, although the file size increses.


.

 

[BlueCrab]

Also why not just kill JonBenet with the stun-gun, why are there so few stun-gun marks on her body,


UKGuy,

I'm glad you mentioned that. I have always theorized that the 50,000 volt stun gun burst on JonBenet's right cheek may have asphyxiated her by paralyzing the muscles in her respiratory system and/or in her heart.

That large ugly burn mark left on the cheek suggests the trigger was held down by the assailant for an extraordinary length of time -- perhaps as long as one minute. The average length of time the trigger is held down by a police officer when trying to subdue an adult is about 2 or 3 seconds.

When Dr. Robert Stratbucker experimented with an anaesthetized pig in 1996, he documented in his report to Air Taser that during a series of 5-second stun gun discharges, "Respiration was briefly arrested during the application of some of the chest discharges, but returned spontaneously upon cessation of stimulation."

Stratbucker also said in the same report that, "... electrical emissions from stun type pulse generators, delivered to the body surface in the recommened manner, do not cause serious cardiac rythym abnormalities in the otherwise healthy adult heart."

Please note that Stratbucker admitted the pig's breathing was temporarily stopped by some of the 5-second bursts from the stun gun. But what would happen to the respiratory system of a 6-year-old 45-pound little girl if shocked longer than 5 seconds?

And note that Stratbucker admitted that stun gun hits "if delivered in the recommended manner" do not cause "serious" injuries to a healthy "adult" heart. But what would it do to a small child?

BlueCrab

 

[Tober]

Tober,

Please explain to us what your "accepted forensic method" is that the forensic pathologists in the JonBenet case have not followed in regard to identifying stun gun injuries. Thanks.

BlueCrab

Lou Smit's theory (that a stun gun was used on JonBenet) is not accurately represented by the outcome of data achieved through testing by Dr. Doberson and Lou Smit.

 

[UKGuy]

Also why not just kill JonBenet with the stun-gun, why are there so few stun-gun marks on her body,


UKGuy,

I'm glad you mentioned that. I have always theorized that the 50,000 volt stun gun burst on JonBenet's right cheek may have asphyxiated her by paralyzing the muscles in her respiratory system and/or in her heart.

That large ugly burn mark left on the cheek suggests the trigger was held down by the assailant for an extraordinary length of time -- perhaps as long as one minute. The average length of time the trigger is held down by a police officer when trying to subdue an adult is about 2 or 3 seconds.

When Dr. Robert Stratbucker experimented with an anaesthetized pig in 1996, he documented in his report to Air Taser that during a series of 5-second stun gun discharges, "Respiration was briefly arrested during the application of some of the chest discharges, but returned spontaneously upon cessation of stimulation."

Stratbucker also said in the same report that, "... electrical emissions from stun type pulse generators, delivered to the body surface in the recommened manner, do not cause serious cardiac rythym abnormalities in the otherwise healthy adult heart."

Please note that Stratbucker admitted the pig's breathing was temporarily stopped by some of the 5-second bursts from the stun gun. But what would happen to the respiratory system of a 6-year-old 45-pound little girl if shocked longer than 5 seconds?

And note that Stratbucker admitted that stun gun hits "if delivered in the recommended manner" do not cause "serious" injuries to a healthy "adult" heart. But what would it do to a small child?

BlueCrab

BlueCrab,

I have always theorized that the 50,000 volt stun gun burst on JonBenet's right cheek may have asphyxiated her by paralyzing the muscles in her respiratory system and/or in her heart.

You may be correct, not being medically qualified I cannot judge.

Coroner Meyer's report regarding her lungs and heart do not appear remarkable:

Lungs: The 200 gm right lung and 175 gm left lung have a normal
lobar configuration. An occassional scattered subpleural
petechial hemorrhage is seen on the surface of each lung. The cut
sections of the lungs disclose and intact alveolar architecture
with a small amount of watery fluid exuding from the cut surfaces
with mild pressure. The intrapulmonary bronchi and vasculature
are unremarkable No evidence of consolidation is seen.

Heart: The 100 gm heart has a normal external configuration.
There are scattered subepicardial petechial hemorrhages over the
anterior surface of the heart. The coronary arteries are normal
in their distribution and contain no evidence of atherosclerosis.
The tan-pink myocardium is homogeneous and contains no areas of
fibrosis or infarction. The endocarium is unremarkable. The valve
cusps are thin, delicate and pliable and contain no vegetation or
thrombosis. The major vessels enter and leave the heart in the
normal fashion. The foramen ovale is closed.

Aorta and Vena Cava: The aorta is patent throughout its course as
are its major branches. No atherosclerosis is seen. The vena cava
is unremarkable.

Considering Coroner Meyer's comments on JonBenet being sexually assaulted its possible stun-gun injuries were not to the front of his mind.


.

 

[Eagle1]

...............................
If there is evidence that Jonbenet was crying hard - making her little nose run to the extent that her face was wet and covered in mucousy tears..... That makes it more likely that she experienced a period of terror before her death (awful to think about).

I'm not scientific, but have a strong "gut" feeling that she really was terrorized, stungunned, and beaten with some metal object that Melody Stanton's husband heard, metal hitting on concrete. I wish he had ventured an opinion on approximately how heavy the metal object would have been.

A flashlight, even the largest, probably would have some plastic at the end which maybe possibly extended far enough beyond her body to strike the floor. Maybe there are flashlights that big.

A shovel could easily make such a huge crack in her skull, usually wouldn't be found in a basement, but I think there was premeditation here, and maybe even a car, with its lights off, in the Rs' attached garage quite a while after they went to bed. A shovel could have been brought in the car or could have been in the garage, not a snow shovel but a heavier one, and could have been taken away in a car. Just hunches.

 

[BlueCrab]

BlueCrab,


You may be correct, not being medically qualified I cannot judge.

Coroner Meyer's report regarding her lungs and heart do not appear remarkable:


Considering Coroner Meyer's comments on JonBenet being sexually assaulted its possible stun-gun injuries were not to the front of his mind.


.

UKGuy,

With a nylon cord imbedded deeply into her neck, her skull split in half, and evidence of acute and chronic sexual abuse in the vagina, I agree with you that Coroner John Meyer's thoughts were not likely about stun gun injuries as he performed the autopsy and documented his findings.

But at least Meyer later admitted that the "abrasions" did indeed have the characteristics of stun gun injuries. If a stun gun killed JonBenet there is no way, 10 years later, to go back and check the respiratory system and the heart to look for specific abnormalities that could be traced back to jolts from a stun gun.

However, IMO there is clear and convincing evidence documented in the autopsy report to strongly suggest that JonBenet had been assaulted with a stun gun. Therefore, the pig experiments, which affected the pig's respiratory system and its heart, support the hypothesis that little JonBenet could have died from asphyxia or heart failure as a result of 50,000 volt stun gun bursts.

BlueCrab

 

[BBB167893]

Please explain to us what your "accepted forensic method" is that the forensic pathologists in the JonBenet case have not followed in regard to identifying stun gun injuries. Thanks.

To wit:

Lou Smit's theory (that a stun gun was used on JonBenet) is not accurately represented by the outcome of data achieved through testing by Dr. Doberson and Lou Smit.

There is another aspect to this. One that no one has yet seen fit to address. Namely that the stun gun conclusion was not arrived at scientifically. Smit just whipped it out of thin air and went shopping until he found someone who agreed with him. He does that a lot in this case. That's one reason why I couldn't be an IDI anymore. If someone like the coroner had come to him first and said, "Lou, I think such-and-such, but the cops won't listen to me. Maybe you will," it would be a completely different story.

Still not convinced of that? Okay. Let me post something I came across. from Robert Stratbucker from Jan., 2001:

He said he informed Smit that a stun gun would not have rendered JonBenet unconscious. "I told that to the investigator, but it wasn't what he wanted to hear. I guess that's why I never heard back from him."

Maybe there are flashlights that big.

I've seen Maglite's the size of broadswords.

But at least Meyer later admitted that the "abrasions" did indeed have the characteristics of stun gun injuries.

And apparently changed his mind again.

 

[Camper]

SD, just jumping in here with one of my thoughts after reading this in your post, QUOTE:"Still not convinced of that? Okay. Let me post something I came across. from Robert Stratbucker from Jan., 2001:
Quote:
He said he informed Smit that a stun gun would not have rendered JonBenet unconscious. "I told that to the investigator, but it wasn't what he wanted to hear. I
guess that's why I never heard back from him."


Quote:
Maybe there are flashlights that big.


I've seen Maglite's the size of broadswords.
Quote:
But at least Meyer later admitted that the "abrasions" did indeed have the characteristics of stun gun injuries.


And apparently changed his mind again.
__________________

SDave, my thought concerns your 2 quotes from Robert Stratbucker. "I've seen Maglite's the size of broadswords. and "Maybe there are flashlights that big".

This was out of context obviously, but what led into those comments?

My mind has wandered into new territory on the head injury, after reading these quotes. In the realm of unknown things about this case, with the missing Christmas video, and the possibility of a Ramsey receiving a ?broadsword? Maglite as a gift. My further thought that IF IF IF someone were carelessly swinging with great violence a Maglite of this size, it might explain a hit to the head that was more universal and a smooth area of the Maglite hitting the head, therefore crushing, but not breaking the skin, since there was no blood present.

What would be the special circumstance that would cause a person to WANT or NEED such a Maglite?

All are nebulous and go nowhere thoughts on my part, still, hmmm.

.
.

 

[Camper]

UKGuy,

With a nylon cord imbedded deeply into her neck, her skull split in half, and evidence of acute and chronic sexual abuse in the vagina, I agree with you that Coroner John Meyer's thoughts were not likely about stun gun injuries as he performed the autopsy and documented his findings.

But at least Meyer later admitted that the "abrasions" did indeed have the characteristics of stun gun injuries. If a stun gun killed JonBenet there is no way, 10 years later, to go back and check the respiratory system and the heart to look for specific abnormalities that could be traced back to jolts from a stun gun.

However, IMO there is clear and convincing evidence documented in the autopsy report to strongly suggest that JonBenet had been assaulted with a stun gun. Therefore, the pig experiments, which affected the pig's respiratory system and its heart, support the hypothesis that little JonBenet could have died from asphyxia or heart failure as a result of 50,000 volt stun gun bursts.

BlueCrab

--->>>Your post has great significance to the whole case of course. The bigger question is WHO owned or had a stun gun, since the Ramseys continued to suffer from Ramnesia.

I assume that many CEO's worldwide and America own them, given the danger to wealthy individuals. IF IF one was never charged out to Access Graphics as an executive expense, then WE could then guess that it could have been purchased privately.

Anyone remember what JR received from PR for Christmas? Certainly they would not admit to a stun gun gift, and the missing 'traditional' Christmas video is nowhere to be found. Hmmm.

Picture one of those BIG HANDS pointing a finger at an intruder, and three more fingers pointing at the person doing the pointing.

.