"Stun Gun" marks

[Jayelles]

How would the rings make two marks in two different places with identical spacing in between?

There is only one PAIR of marks. The other "stungun mark" is a single. This is one of the weaknesses of the stungun theory. One pair does not make a pattern. Had there been several pairs of identical marks it would have been a whole different ballgame.

Over the years, I have seen the RST come up with a variety of explanations as to why there is only one mark on her face, but none of them stand up.

e.g. - the second prong landed on the duct tape

Had this happened, it's possible that the stungun wouldn't have worked because duct tape has insultating properties. I am not claiming this as a fact because I don't know for certain whether the insulating properties would be sufficient to prevent the stungun from working but it's a possibility according to two physicists I asked.

there is also a photo where there is a little white mark on her face and jameson claimed this was (white) adhesive from the (black) duct tape which had melted onto her face as a result of the second prong landing on the duct tape. However, this only raises more questions..... if there was one teensy spot of adhesive on her face which was exactly 3.4cm from the other "stungun" mark wouldn't Lou Smit have been shouting it from the rooftops as further proof of his stungun theory? But no - Lou has been silent. Also, the white mark on that particular photo isn't evident in the other photos and might well be a blemish in the photo (or someone's attempt to make people think the adhesive theory was plausible).

Another problem with the "stungun landed on the duct tape" theory is that Jonbenet was already unconscious or dead when the duct tape was applied. This is known because a perfect lip print was found on the sticky side of the duct tape - i.e. she didn't struggle or try to scream when the duct tape was across her mouth. So why stungun a dead or unconscious child? The same people who agreed with this possibility are the very people who think a stungun was used to torture her. Can't have it both ways.

Then some pople claim there IS a corresponding mark - it's just a very tiny faint one though. The problem with this is that it isn't mentioned in the autopsy and the mark in question looks more like a skin blemish than a burn.

Finally, the leading expert on stunungs - Robert Stratbucker - says the marks are not stungun marks and he should know. He has conducted extensive experiments on pigs and more importantly on humans. He then took photos of the marks at regular intervals until they disappeared.

 

[Jayelles]

Also - regarding the rings. There is another photo of Patsy wearing her rings with stones to the inside. I tried to find this second photo without success but I remember that Patsy was wearing a light coloured suit and was taken as she was just leaving or just about to get into a car. I think it may have been when the Ramseys spoke briefly to the press on leaving their Atlanta interviews in 2000. I'm sure a copy of this photo will be around somewhere.

 

[BlueCrab]

There is only one PAIR of marks. The other "stungun mark" is a single. This is one of the weaknesses of the stungun theory. One pair does not make a pattern. Had there been several pairs of identical marks it would have been a whole different ballgame.

Over the years, I have seen the RST come up with a variety of explanations as to why there is only one mark on her face, but none of them stand up.

e.g. - the second prong landed on the duct tape

Had this happened, it's possible that the stungun wouldn't have worked because duct tape has insultating properties. I am not claiming this as a fact because I don't know for certain whether the insulating properties would be sufficient to prevent the stungun from working but it's a possibility according to two physicists I asked.

there is also a photo where there is a little white mark on her face and jameson claimed this was (white) adhesive from the (black) duct tape which had melted onto her face as a result of the second prong landing on the duct tape. However, this only raises more questions..... if there was one teensy spot of adhesive on her face which was exactly 3.4cm from the other "stungun" mark wouldn't Lou Smit have been shouting it from the rooftops as further proof of his stungun theory? But no - Lou has been silent. Also, the white mark on that particular photo isn't evident in the other photos and might well be a blemish in the photo (or someone's attempt to make people think the adhesive theory was plausible).

Another problem with the "stungun landed on the duct tape" theory is that Jonbenet was already unconscious or dead when the duct tape was applied. This is known because a perfect lip print was found on the sticky side of the duct tape - i.e. she didn't struggle or try to scream when the duct tape was across her mouth. So why stungun a dead or unconscious child? The same people who agreed with this possibility are the very people who think a stungun was used to torture her. Can't have it both ways.

Then some pople claim there IS a corresponding mark - it's just a very tiny faint one though. The problem with this is that it isn't mentioned in the autopsy and the mark in question looks more like a skin blemish than a burn.

Finally, the leading expert on stunungs - Robert Stratbucker - says the marks are not stungun marks and he should know. He has conducted extensive experiments on pigs and more importantly on humans. He then took photos of the marks at regular intervals until they disappeared.

Jayelles,

No two stun gun injuries are alike. When the business end of a stun gun is pressed against the body of a squirming victim and the trigger pulled, the pressure, angle, and amount of electrical resistance encountered by each of the two prongs is different. One prong does not even have to touch the victim for the other prong to be effective. And the length of time the trigger is held will determine how severe each of the electrical burns will be.

Air Taser and Robert Stratbucker have a financial business relationship together. Air Taser does not want to publicly connect its stun gun with the death of JonBenet because of the resulting negative public relations, so Stratbucker's testimony on stun guns will always be somewhat biased.

There is no discrepancy in the measurements between the injuries on JonBenet and the distance between the prongs of an Air Taser stun gun. From the close-up autopsy photos the rectangular twin injuries on JonBenet's back measure 3.5 cm centerline to centerline. The distance between the twin prongs of the Air Taser stun gun measures 3.5 cm centerline to centerline.

This is much more than just a coincidence. JonBenet's injuries are from an Air Taser stun gun.

BlueCrab

 

[Jayelles]

Jayelles,

No two stun gun injuries are alike. When the business end of a stun gun is pressed against the body of a squirming victim and the trigger pulled, the pressure, angle, and amount of electrical resistance encountered by each of the two prongs is different. One prong does not even have to touch the victim for the other prong to be effective. And the length of time the trigger is held will determine how severe each of the electrical burns will be.

Air Taser and Robert Stratbucker have a financial business relationship together. Air Taser does not want to publicly connect its stun gun with the death of JonBenet because of the resulting negative public relations, so Stratbucker's testimony on stun guns will always be somewhat biased.

There is no discrepancy in the measurements between the injuries on JonBenet and the distance between the prongs of an Air Taser stun gun. From the close-up autopsy photos the rectangular twin injuries on JonBenet's back measure 3.5 cm centerline to centerline. The distance between the twin prongs of the Air Taser stun gun measures 3.5 cm centerline to centerline.

This is much more than just a coincidence. JonBenet's injuries are from an Air Taser stun gun.

BlueCrab

We have discussed this many times Bluecrab and we will not agree. Lin Wood tried to discredit Robert Stratbucker on the grounds of his business relationship with Air Taser but that is quite frankly nonsense because no-one is claiming that she was stungunned with an Air Taser - in fact Lou Smit is on record as saying that he is not claiming that it was an Air Taser - primarily because the Air Taser doesn't match the marks on Jonbenet. He says it is the "closest" only.

The reason Robert Stratbucker was hired by Taser is because of his expertise - not the other way around. Stratbucker's work with stunguns dates back to the 1980s - long before his association with Taser. At the end of the day, stunguns are weapons. They are sold as weapons. *IF* JonBenet was injured with a stungun, that is hardly Taser's fault and they have no reason to try and distance themselves from it. It's not as though she was injured through some negligence on the part of the company or because their product was faulty.

Robert Stratbucker and Wener Spitz both state that they do not believe the marks on JonBenet were caused by a stungun. They say that because they believe it - not because either of them has shares in the company.

 

[Solace]

Solace,

Kane is either deliberately lying or is a blooming idiot. Having headed up the grand jury, he should certainly know better, so I think he is deliberately lying.

John Meyer did originally describe the strange marks as abrasions and that's how they are described in the autopsy. But when later confronted with additional information he changed his opinion:

Pg 431, PMPT pb:

"After reviewing the photos and this new information, Meyer concluded that the injuries on JonBenet's face and back were, in fact, consistent with those produced by a stun gun."

On that same page of PMPT Dr. Robert Deters, the pathologist in a murder case where a stun gun was used on a very young girl, was shown the autopsy photos of JonBenet's injuries. Deters agreed with Meyer that the marks were consistent with a stun gun injury.

It's obvious that Mike Kane deliberately lied. Why? I can tell you why; but why can't you and others figure out why? It's as plain as the noses on your faces -- but IMO it's so incredulous that you are afraid to admit it.

BlueCrab

Blue Crab,

You can't have it both ways. Either Meyer is changing his story or PM/PT is reporting bogus information. There is definitely some sloppy reporting in PM/PT because Schiller did not always do the best research. Kane has no reason to lie. This is not the first time you accuse someone of lying when it does not fit your theory. As far as posting Dr. Deter's theory, we could go back and forth with doctors for and against. The fact is Meyer in his autopsy report said they were "abrasions". That is what we are working with here Blue Crab, not a book. We are working with what would be admissable in Court. They are listed as abrasions. Also, the parameters between the "marks" do NOT match that of a stun gun.

Also, do you want to comment on what Lou Smit said on LKL or are you just ignoring that?

No stun gun was used that night or early morning. It was rage, full out rage, by Patsy Ramsey. Berke was asleep and knew nothing of what was going on and he proves that by asking what was found. There were NO OTHER CHILDREN in the house that night. Two adults, two children and one was found dead. Try to deal with the facts Blue Crab.

 

[coloradokares]

Jayelles,

No two stun gun injuries are alike. When the business end of a stun gun is pressed against the body of a squirming victim and the trigger pulled, the pressure, angle, and amount of electrical resistance encountered by each of the two prongs is different. One prong does not even have to touch the victim for the other prong to be effective. And the length of time the trigger is held will determine how severe each of the electrical burns will be.

Air Taser and Robert Stratbucker have a financial business relationship together. Air Taser does not want to publicly connect its stun gun with the death of JonBenet because of the resulting negative public relations, so Stratbucker's testimony on stun guns will always be somewhat biased.

There is no discrepancy in the measurements between the injuries on JonBenet and the distance between the prongs of an Air Taser stun gun. From the close-up autopsy photos the rectangular twin injuries on JonBenet's back measure 3.5 cm centerline to centerline. The distance between the twin prongs of the Air Taser stun gun measures 3.5 cm centerline to centerline.

This is much more than just a coincidence. JonBenet's injuries are from an Air Taser stun gun.

BlueCrab

Lets go with that assumption a moment for the sake of discourse. I believe like Jayelles it was the rings, but I want to just take a natural progression here. Your theory includes a couple children age 9 ish or so. Correct? What in the world are they doing with stunguns in the middle of the night? All parts of the theory have to work in order for the theory to be totally plausible and likely. I am just thinking IF I had a stun gun .....it'd not be where the kids could get it....

 

[Solace]

Lets go with that assumption a moment for the sake of discourse. I believe like Jayelles it was the rings, but I want to just take a natural progression here. Your theory includes a couple children age 9 ish or so. Correct? What in the world are they doing with stunguns in the middle of the night? All parts of the theory have to work in order for the theory to be totally plausible and likely. I am just thinking IF I had a stun gun .....it'd not be where the kids could get it....

There is no stun gun and there are no kids playing sex games in the middle of the night except in BlueCrab's mind. Period.

 

[coloradokares]

There is no stun gun and there are no kids playing sex games in the middle of the night except in BlueCrab's mind. Period.

Yes that works for me Solace.

 

[Jayelles]

Lets go with that assumption a moment for the sake of discourse. I believe like Jayelles it was the rings, but I want to just take a natural progression here. Your theory includes a couple children age 9 ish or so. Correct? What in the world are they doing with stunguns in the middle of the night? All parts of the theory have to work in order for the theory to be totally plausible and likely. I am just thinking IF I had a stun gun .....it'd not be where the kids could get it....

I didn't say I thought it was rings. I haven't a clue what caused the marks, but I'm not convinced that it was a stungun - on the evidence as it stands. There is a tissue test they can do which would prove stungun or no stungun. The electrical charge alters the tissue. However, an exhumation wold have been necessary - and it's too late now.

I saw a tv programme last year which showed crime photos of a woman's face and the marks looked exactly like those marks on JBR. I had the sound muted at the time and quickly put the sound on to listen to the commentary. I posted about it at the time and now I can't remember the name of the person who was convicted of assaulting this woman (it will be in the archives I'm sure). However, the marks were caused by her getting beaten up - not by a stungun.

 

[coloradokares]

I didn't say I thought it was rings. I haven't a clue what caused the marks, but I'm not convinced that it was a stungun - on the evidence as it stands. There is a tissue test they can do which would prove stungun or no stungun. The electrical charge alters the tissue. However, an exhumation wold have been necessary - and it's too late now.

I saw a tv programme last year which showed crime photos of a woman's face and the marks looked exactly like those marks on JBR. I had the sound muted at the time and quickly put the sound on to listen to the commentary. I posted about it at the time and now I can't remember the name of the person who was convicted of assaulting this woman (it will be in the archives I'm sure). However, the marks were caused by her getting beaten up - not by a stungun.

Sorry about that Jayelles. Your right . You mentioned the rings, rather photo of the rings which I have seen on FFJ if my memory serves me correctly. And since that is what I think most likely made the marks I did a very bad thing. I made an assumption. Glad you caught me on that one. I'll try much harder in the future to stop where another posters own words stop. thanks :doh:
I'll try to be more careful from here on out ok.

 

[Solace]

Sorry about that Jayelles. Your right . You mentioned the rings, rather photo of the rings which I have seen on FFJ if my memory serves me correctly. And since that is what I think most likely made the marks I did a very bad thing. I made an assumption. Glad you caught me on that one. I'll try much harder in the future to stop where another posters own words stop. thanks :doh:
I'll try to be more careful from here on out ok.

You are sweet Colorado.

 

[coloradokares]

You are sweet Colorado.

As long as you don't add Sweet as honeysuckle right off the vine I am ok with that

 

[Ames]

Sorry about that Jayelles. Your right . You mentioned the rings, rather photo of the rings which I have seen on FFJ if my memory serves me correctly. And since that is what I think most likely made the marks I did a very bad thing. I made an assumption. Glad you caught me on that one. I'll try much harder in the future to stop where another posters own words stop. thanks :doh:
I'll try to be more careful from here on out ok.

I believe that the rings made the marks also....there was no stun gun involved..IMO

 

[Nuisanceposter]

I don't believe a stun gun was used, either. I have no idea what made those marks on JonBenet, but I consider the ring theory to be as plausible as the stun gun theory. Those marks on JB and the set of the stones in the rings seem to line right up, and we've seen Patsy with her rings turned in towards her palms more than once on television. KingCoyote over at the board I dare not mention speculated recently that perhaps the marks had been made by one of JonBenet's crowns. I think that's also plausible and worth checking out in better detail.

The thing that gets me is, Meyer didn't call them burns in his autopsy. Even if he later said while viewing a picture that the marks could have been consistent with stun gun marks, he still called them abrasions and not burns in the autopsy, and if that was his first impression, then it's probably right. If those marks had looked like electrical burns, he'd have described them that way in his report. Apparently he did not think they looked like burns when he had her body lying on the table in front of him.

I really wish he had kept JonBenet's body for more testing when BPD asked him to, and I also wish someone had placed justice for a murdered child above the so-called sanctity of a grave and exhumed her to get some more definite tests and results.

 

[Solace]

As long as you don't add Sweet as honeysuckle right off the vine I am ok with that

I stand by my post.:snooty:

 

[coloradokares]

I stand by my post.:snooty:

What a hoot!!

 

[Ames]

What a hoot!!

LOL .... Yes, CK....Solace is standing firm on this, she is NOT GOING TO BUDGE... Reminds me of Patsy, when her butt didn't leave the couch..and she had to be PULLED down the hall. She didn't BUDGE EITHER!!! I second that though....you ARE SWEET.

 

[coloradokares]

LOL .... Yes, CK....Solace is standing firm on this, she is NOT GOING TO BUDGE... Reminds me of Patsy, when her butt didn't leave the couch..and she had to be PULLED down the hall. She didn't BUDGE EITHER!!! I second that though....you ARE SWEET.

Well..... sometimes.....HA!!

 

[Solace]

LOL .... Yes, CK....Solace is standing firm on this, she is NOT GOING TO BUDGE... Reminds me of Patsy, when her butt didn't leave the couch..and she had to be PULLED down the hall. She didn't BUDGE EITHER!!! I second that though....you ARE SWEET.

She had to be pulled down the hall but she really loved that child.

 

[Nuisanceposter]

She had to be pulled down the hall but she really loved that child.

Loved her to death.