The Best Untainted Evidence-The Ransom Letter

[Toltec]

You are absolutely right UK...she was manually strangled and then the garrote was placed to hide that fact.

Notice the abrasions above and below the furrows....also the triangular abrasion suggests to me someone's knuckle/ring.

The garrote was placed while JonBenet was either unconcious or dead. The perfect circumference of the furrow around the neck suggests to me that JB was placed on her stomach, and the cord was placed and knotted with lots of hair entangled in both knots....enough to make a child scream bloody murder if she were awake.

Some people ask this question...how could a loving mother or father place a cord around their daughters neck? I say...she is dead already and if we don't stage a kidnapping/murder....someone's going to prison for the rest of their lives.

 

[LI_Mom]

No, I get you.

Do you think me foolish to forgive Patsy?

I think the only ones who are ever in a position to forgive a person are those who are personally 'victimized' by the person.

Above all else, the actual victim & to a lesser extent the surviving family members if the victim is no longer alive.

 

[KoldKase]

I see nothing to indicate that anyone's hands were used to strangle JonBenet. If you look at autopsy photos of other strangulation victims, the bruise in the front of the neck is similar and results from the drag of the cord over the skin. There are comparison pictures on one of the JB sites, I'm sure you all have seen.

If you believe the turtleneck was used to strangle her, then how do you explain the petechiae above and below the garrote found on the neck? That could only happen if she were still alive when the garrote was placed on her and pulled to obstruct the flow of blood and oxygen.

I know it has been argued that the nerve...vagus?...could have been compressed and caused death accidently, and Dr. Wecht discusses that, as well in his theory. But the same problem arises unless you consider the "garrote" as causing the vagus nerve compression.

From the Encyclopedia Britannica:

Damage to one vagus nerve results in hoarseness and difficulty in swallowing or speaking. Injury to both nerves results in increased heart rate, paralysis of pharyngeal and laryngeal musculature, atonia of the esophagus and intestinal musculature, vomiting, and loss of visceral reflexes. Such a lesion is usually life-threatening, as paralysis of laryngeal muscles may result in asphyxiation.

But there are simply no injuries to the tongue, the delicate neck bones, nor any other bruising in the underlying muscles to support a violent event resulting in strangulation which took place during a fight, as I see it described in the autopsy.

Neck: Dissection of the neck is performed after removal of the thoracoabdominal organs and the brain. The anterior strap musculature of the neck is serially dissected. Multiple sections of the sternocleidomastoid muscle disclose no hemorrhages. Sections of the remainder of the strap musculature of the neck disclose no evidence of hemorrhage. Examination of the thyroid cartilage, cricoid cartilage and hyoid bone disclose not evidence of fracture of hemorrhage. Multiple cross sections of the tongue disclose no hemorrhage or traumatic injury. The thyroid gland weights 2 gm and is normal in appearance. Cut sections are finely lobular and red-tan. The trachea and larynx are lined by smooth pink-tan mucosa without intrinsic abnormalities.

I see the point about the garrote not functioning as an erotic device (only one, sorry for typo adding an "s"). I believe that Dr. Wecht's theory is that it was "a sex game gone wrong" and that it wasn't meant to be a fixed knot.

Again, I don't necessarily agree with him. I would discount this theory altogether but for one thing: the arguments about the time between the head blow and the strangulation with the garrote. Dr. Wecht believes it was only a matter of minutes, due to the autopsy results describing the swelling of the brain, etc. That would preclude someone cracking her skull and then coming up with the garrote as a "cover-up". Unless, of course, they can think faster under pressure than I can imagine.

However, there are forensic medical experts who say the blow could have happened an hour or more before the stranglation. Head injuries, I believe anyone would agree, are unpredictable.

So as I've said many times, without those arguments and counter-arguments being made under oath, with intense questioning from both sides of the issue, I can't come to an immovable conclusion.

I do believe the garrote was tied on her when she was already incapacitated, because of the green paint chip on her chin possibly from the brush being broken, and lack of defensive injuries. Since the paintbrush was inserted into the child and then broken to use for the handle (which I believe because it's not logical to break it first, and splinters from a broken wooden paintbrush would have caused more vaginal damage, etc.), the handle would have been added after the sexual assault with the paintbrush. Again, no defensive wounds tells me that she was unconscious during the sexual assault. So by definition, that is not erotic asphxiation.

And if that is the sequence of events, then Dr. Wecht hasn't explained how that figures into his "sex game" theory, either.

I believe there are "experts" who formed opinions early on that are simply not based in all the evidence we know today.

My best theory--and I'm no expert--is that whatever transpired to bring on the head blow, the sexual assault with the paintbrush and strangulation by the garrote were done to cover up not simply the circumstances of the head blow, which could have been an accident and not criminal, but to cover up who was molesting her before that night. That is the crime that could have sent someone to prison and destroyed the family and the social and business success they worked so hard to build. Taking JonBenet to the emergency room would have revealed some dark secrets and brought in LE, taking all control from parents that were used to being the ones in control. The entire cover-up was staged to retain control of the situation, IMO.

Again, I am only speculating. But I did stay at a Holiday Inn last night.... :smiley4:

 

[BBB167893]

SD, What exactly did I miss here?

Not a thing, angelwngs. I just prefer not to waste my life in hatred.

 

[angelwngs]

Not a thing, angelwngs. I just prefer not to waste my life in hatred.

Oh, OK... I totally understand that line of thought. ( I guess I am just stuck in the place of the unknown because the case is unsolved/unprosecuted. I have never really reached the 'hatered' point except in the "IF" she did, indeed, do what I believe she did infact do then I "hate" what she did.

If I were the Almighty, I would declare that whoever did what was done to JBR should be eternally punished. I'm not, so I just vent a great deal on here....(Heck Fire, I'm not even a Great and Powerful, Infamous Super Hero! I'm just plain little old me...) hehehe...:crazy:

 

[BBB167893]

Oh, OK... I totally understand that line of thought. ( I guess I am just stuck in the place of the unknown because the case is unsolved/unprosecuted. I have never really reached the 'hatred' point except in the "IF" she did, indeed, do what I believe she did infact do then I "hate" what she did.

If I were the Almighty, I would declare that whoever did what was done to JBR should be eternally punished. I'm not, so I just vent a great deal on here....(Heck Fire, I'm not even a Great and Powerful, Infamous Super Hero! I'm just plain little old me...) hehehe...:crazy:

Make no mistake, angelwngs. I hated them both for a long time. But it wasn't worth it. One, I couldn't in good conscience hate her for something I myself am capable of. There, but for the grace of God go I, and all that. Yes, I hate the act, but the pain she suffered from that day on must have been crushing.

The gods will make their own judgment, of course.

 

[LI_Mom]

I do believe the garrote was tied on her when she was already incapacitated, because of the green paint chip on her chin possibly from the brush being broken, and lack of defensive injuries. Since the paintbrush was inserted into the child and then broken to use for the handle (which I believe because it's not logical to break it first, and splinters from a broken wooden paintbrush would have caused more vaginal damage, etc.), the handle would have been added after the sexual assault with the paintbrush. Again, no defensive wounds tells me that she was unconscious during the sexual assault. So by definition, that is not erotic asphxiation.

From the JB Wiki:

Wooden Shards Found in Vagina. "Her hymen was torn and material consistent with wooden shards from the paintbrush used to make the garrote were found in her vagina. (SMF P 48-49; PMSF P 48-49.)" (Carnes 2003:Note 12).

 

[UKGuy]

I see nothing to indicate that anyone's hands were used to strangle JonBenet. If you look at autopsy photos of other strangulation victims, the bruise in the front of the neck is similar and results from the drag of the cord over the skin. There are comparison pictures on one of the JB sites, I'm sure you all have seen.

If you believe the turtleneck was used to strangle her, then how do you explain the petechiae above and below the garrote found on the neck? That could only happen if she were still alive when the garrote was placed on her and pulled to obstruct the flow of blood and oxygen.

I know it has been argued that the nerve...vagus?...could have been compressed and caused death accidently, and Dr. Wecht discusses that, as well in his theory. But the same problem arises unless you consider the "garrote" as causing the vagus nerve compression.

From the Encyclopedia Britannica:



But there are simply no injuries to the tongue, the delicate neck bones, nor any other bruising in the underlying muscles to support a violent event resulting in strangulation which took place during a fight, as I see it described in the autopsy.




I see the point about the garrote not functioning as an erotic device (only one, sorry for typo adding an "s"). I believe that Dr. Wecht's theory is that it was "a sex game gone wrong" and that it wasn't meant to be a fixed knot.

Again, I don't necessarily agree with him. I would discount this theory altogether but for one thing: the arguments about the time between the head blow and the strangulation with the garrote. Dr. Wecht believes it was only a matter of minutes, due to the autopsy results describing the swelling of the brain, etc. That would preclude someone cracking her skull and then coming up with the garrote as a "cover-up". Unless, of course, they can think faster under pressure than I can imagine.

However, there are forensic medical experts who say the blow could have happened an hour or more before the stranglation. Head injuries, I believe anyone would agree, are unpredictable.

So as I've said many times, without those arguments and counter-arguments being made under oath, with intense questioning from both sides of the issue, I can't come to an immovable conclusion.

I do believe the garrote was tied on her when she was already incapacitated, because of the green paint chip on her chin possibly from the brush being broken, and lack of defensive injuries. Since the paintbrush was inserted into the child and then broken to use for the handle (which I believe because it's not logical to break it first, and splinters from a broken wooden paintbrush would have caused more vaginal damage, etc.), the handle would have been added after the sexual assault with the paintbrush. Again, no defensive wounds tells me that she was unconscious during the sexual assault. So by definition, that is not erotic asphxiation.

And if that is the sequence of events, then Dr. Wecht hasn't explained how that figures into his "sex game" theory, either.

I believe there are "experts" who formed opinions early on that are simply not based in all the evidence we know today.

My best theory--and I'm no expert--is that whatever transpired to bring on the head blow, the sexual assault with the paintbrush and strangulation by the garrote were done to cover up not simply the circumstances of the head blow, which could have been an accident and not criminal, but to cover up who was molesting her before that night. That is the crime that could have sent someone to prison and destroyed the family and the social and business success they worked so hard to build. Taking JonBenet to the emergency room would have revealed some dark secrets and brought in LE, taking all control from parents that were used to being the ones in control. The entire cover-up was staged to retain control of the situation, IMO.

Again, I am only speculating. But I did stay at a Holiday Inn last night.... :smiley4:

KoldKase,

If you believe the turtleneck was used to strangle her ...

Some remarks may be helpful here. Most people think of a restraint as something like handcuffs or rope. So handcuffs will leave a circular abraded and contused pattern, and a ligature will leave an abraded and contused ligature furrow. Clothing can also play the part of a restraint and with many offenders this is part of their MO e.g Jeans pulled down, to prevent escape etc. Also a shirt collar pulled up around a victim's neck to control their movement which leaves a material or fabric compression abrasion.

The more compliant the victim, say due to being dead, unconcious etc, then a smooth transfer impression is left, whereas if the victim is noncompliant or combative then this will cause abrading and contusing of the tissues beneath the restraint.

I reckon initially the lower abrasions on JonBenet's neck were caused by fabric compression, they exhibit the characteristics of a transfer impression resulting from a struggling or combative victim. The upper ligature furrow offers no evidence of noncompliance etc, it is a circumferential furrow, indicating Jonbenet was unconcious when it was applied, also it lacks the upward V impression left when someone is strangled whilst vertical.

So it is possible that the turtleneck was used as described e.g. initially as a restraint, then acting as an asphyxiation device, probably resulting in JonBenet becoming unconcious. This might explain why it was balled up on the counter in the bathroom, as it was removed to make way for the white gap top. Alternately the turtleneck is a red-herring and the same argument applies to the white gap-top?

If you believe the turtleneck was used to strangle her, then how do you explain the petechiae above and below the garrote found on the neck? That could only happen if she were still alive when the garrote was placed on her and pulled to obstruct the flow of blood and oxygen.

I agree which suggests either the person applying the garrote did not realize JonBenet was alive, or that they did and continued asphyxiating JonBenet.

But there are simply no injuries to the tongue, the delicate neck bones, nor any other bruising in the underlying muscles to support a violent event resulting in strangulation which took place during a fight, as I see it described in the autopsy.

This may be because as Coroner Meyer states in the autopsy:

CLINICOPATHLOGIC CORRELATION: Cause of death of this six year old
female is asphyxia by strangulation associated with craniocerebral
trauma.

It may actually be that it was the craniocerebral trauma which tipped JonBenet from being unconcious to a coma like state of appearing dead. The craniocerebral trauma would severely reduce the passage of oxygen via the brain and thus her body, resulting in asphyxia as opined by Coroner Meyer.

So a rough outline may be Manual Restraint and Strangulation, followed by craniocerebral trauma or head bash, and latterly the staging phase including vaginal trauma and the application of the garrote.

My best theory--and I'm no expert--is that whatever transpired to bring on the head blow, the sexual assault with the paintbrush and strangulation by the garrote were done to cover up not simply the circumstances of the head blow, which could have been an accident and not criminal, but to cover up who was molesting her before that night. That is the crime that could have sent someone to prison and destroyed the family and the social and business success they worked so hard to build. Taking JonBenet to the emergency room would have revealed some dark secrets and brought in LE, taking all control from parents that were used to being the ones in control. The entire cover-up was staged to retain control of the situation, IMO.

Yes I agree with you. JonBenet was killed to prevent her talking. The crime-scene in the wine-cellar is wholly staged to match the parents contrived version of events. With the blankets, longjohns and size-12's hiding prior and acute molestation, no intruder is concerned about JonBenet's appearance, that is only of import to a stager. The 911 call is an interesting breakpoint in the timeline, since the staging is carried forward with Patsy dramatically talking with the 911 dispatcher. Later John is described as reading the ransom note wearing only his underwear, he does not touch the ransom note, yet later, on discovering JonBenet, adroitly touches her immediately, removing the duct-tape etc. Also with his intention to fly by private plane interstate, thus effectively fleeing a crime-scene, underlines his fore-knowledge that the ransom note is fake, a device to purchase time.

JonBenet's white gap-top is the only piece of clothing that offers continuity with the night before, the rest, I would contend is staging. So why did they not just redress JonBenet in her pajamas, and say she went to bed and was not seen until the following morning?

 

[UKGuy]

You are absolutely right UK...she was manually strangled and then the garrote was placed to hide that fact.

Notice the abrasions above and below the furrows....also the triangular abrasion suggests to me someone's knuckle/ring.

The garrote was placed while JonBenet was either unconcious or dead. The perfect circumference of the furrow around the neck suggests to me that JB was placed on her stomach, and the cord was placed and knotted with lots of hair entangled in both knots....enough to make a child scream bloody murder if she were awake.

Some people ask this question...how could a loving mother or father place a cord around their daughters neck? I say...she is dead already and if we don't stage a kidnapping/murder....someone's going to prison for the rest of their lives.

Toltec,
Yes unless there is another explanation for Patsy's fibers appearing in the knotting and and on the underside of the duct-tape, it appears she was the one who applied the garrote staging and restraints.

Looks to me as if John panicked wiped JonBenet down, thus transferring his fibers, then he redressed JonBenet in the size-12's and longjohns. Patsy possibly adds the blankets and the the garrote etc, suggesting that the staging was a form of stepwise refinement?

 

[icedtea4me]

JonBenet's white gap-top is the only piece of clothing that offers continuity with the night before, the rest, I would contend is staging. So why did they not just redress JonBenet in her pajamas, and say she went to bed and was not seen until the following morning?

Is it possible JonBenet was wearing the nightgown found in the wine cellar that night and then was changed back into the white sequined top? I ask this because there are said to be in this screen capture two drops of blood on the nightgown and two drops of blood on the white top.


-Tea

 

[KoldKase]

From the JB Wiki:

Wooden Shards Found in Vagina. "Her hymen was torn and material consistent with wooden shards from the paintbrush used to make the garrote were found in her vagina. (SMF P 48-49; PMSF P 48-49.)" (Carnes 2003:Note 12).

There was "birefringent" material found in the vagina. It is said by most to have been from the paintbrush. In fact, it has been speculated that it was powder from a latex glove. Another part of the puzzle we only have questions about.

From the autopsy:

Vaginal Mucosa: All of the sections contain vascular congestion and focal interstitial chronic inflammation. The smallest piece of tissue, from the 7:00 position of the vaginal wall/hymen, contains epithelial erosion with underlying capillary congestion. A small number of red blood cells is present on the eroded surface, as is birefringent foreign material. Acute inflammatory infiltrate is not seen.

As you can see at this link, "birefringent" merely means refracting light, as in calcite materials, crystals, etc. From what we have, it could be many things. The paintbrush is the best guess because of the nature of the injuries sustained from it. But the birefringent material could have been paint, as far as I can tell.

http://www.answers.com/topic/birefringence

Follow the "boron nitride" link and you get to it's usage in these products:

Fine-grained h-BN is used in some cosmetics, paints, dental cements, pencil leads, etc.

Again, until someone goes under oath or leaks the lab reports, we really can only speculate. It is most likely it was from the paintbrush, but I don't know how "birefringent" material is wood. But I am no scientist.

 

[KoldKase]

KoldKase,


Yes I agree with you. JonBenet was killed to prevent her talking. The crime-scene in the wine-cellar is wholly staged to match the parents contrived version of events. With the blankets, longjohns and size-12's hiding prior and acute molestation, no intruder is concerned about JonBenet's appearance, that is only of import to a stager. The 911 call is an interesting breakpoint in the timeline, since the staging is carried forward with Patsy dramatically talking with the 911 dispatcher. Later John is described as reading the ransom note wearing only his underwear, he does not touch the ransom note, yet later, on discovering JonBenet, adroitly touches her immediately, removing the duct-tape etc. Also with his intention to fly by private plane interstate, thus effectively fleeing a crime-scene, underlines his fore-knowledge that the ransom note is fake, a device to purchase time.

JonBenet's white gap-top is the only piece of clothing that offers continuity with the night before, the rest, I would contend is staging. So why did they not just redress JonBenet in her pajamas, and say she went to bed and was not seen until the following morning?

Well done.

As for the turtleneck or "star" top being the means of strangulation, indicated by what you describe as "patterns" on the lower neck, I guess I can't visualize this. It's just not in my realm of experience, sorry. But I am sure you have considered the roll of the garrote cord up the neck, as much as you detail. The necklace is rolled into the cord, as well.

About your last question: are you asking why she wasn't dressed in the PAJAMAS from Christmas Eve? The pink ones? I have asked and I don't remember anyone pointing out to me: did they ever FIND the bottoms that matched the pink pajama top on the bed, the ones JonBenet was wearing in the Christmas morning pictures?

 

[KoldKase]

Is it possible JonBenet was wearing the nightgown found in the wine cellar that night and then was changed back into the white sequined top? I ask this because there are said to be in this screen capture two drops of blood on the nightgown and two drops of blood on the white top.


-Tea

Is there a "screen capture" link missing here? I never heard nor saw this, but I know Mark Beckner spoke of DNA matched to "someone" he wouldn't name, when questioned under oath by Lin Wood.

 

[UKGuy]

There was "birefringent" material found in the vagina. It is said by most to have been from the paintbrush. In fact, it has been speculated that it was powder from a latex glove. Another part of the puzzle we only have questions about.

From the autopsy:


As you can see at this link, "birefringent" merely means refracting light, as in calcite materials, crystals, etc. From what we have, it could be many things. The paintbrush is the best guess because of the nature of the injuries sustained from it. But the birefringent material could have been paint, as far as I can tell.

http://www.answers.com/topic/birefringence

Follow the "boron nitride" link and you get to it's usage in these products:



Again, until someone goes under oath or leaks the lab reports, we really can only speculate. It is most likely it was from the paintbrush, but I don't know how "birefringent" material is wood. But I am no scientist.

KoldKase,
There is no need to speculate on what was found in JonBenet's vagina, Steve Thomas himself explains all in his book at the start of chap. 24:

The cellulose splinter was believed to have come from the same paintbrush that had been used to make the garrote. Although the source of the splinter was definitely never proved, I considered it highly unlikely that it originated anywhere else.

JonBenet Ramsey Autopsy Report

Vaginal Mucosa: ...

The smallest piece of tissue, from the 7:00 position of the vaginal wall/hymen, contains epithelial erosion with underlying capillary congestion. A small number of red blood cells is present on the eroded surface, as is birefringent foreign material.

The important fact is that Coroner Meyer describes the then unknown material as birefringent this can only be stated if the requisite lab tests have been done.

Coroner Meyer declines to tell us the presumed source of the material, but obviously shared his opinion with Steve Thomas.

When light travels through almost any object the angle it enters at is usually different from the angle it leaves at. An example of this is a spoon in a glass of water, it can appear bent or slightly buckled, another example is an object lying at the bottom of a swimming pool, it can appear closer than it physically really is. This effect, a bending of light, is termed refraction and uses Snell's law to do the maths.

Birefringence, or double refraction, is simply the splitting of a ray of light into two rays, when it passes through certain types of material. So Birefringence is just a special case of refraction which is common to us all in our daily life. Birefringence is normally tested for using a laser, and not plain daylight.

So Coroner Meyer having had the material tested knew it was birefringent, so all he had to do was look up the corresponding material in some book that itemized the values to match the refractive indices discovered in the test. Its safe to assume that the paintbrush handle would have been tested for similarly matching refractive indices.

With Steve Thomas referring to the birefringent foreign material as cellulose, which is wood by another name, this I assume will be what the lab results returned?

.

 

[UKGuy]

Well done.

As for the turtleneck or "star" top being the means of strangulation, indicated by what you describe as "patterns" on the lower neck, I guess I can't visualize this. It's just not in my realm of experience, sorry. But I am sure you have considered the roll of the garrote cord up the neck, as much as you detail. The necklace is rolled into the cord, as well.

About your last question: are you asking why she wasn't dressed in the PAJAMAS from Christmas Eve? The pink ones? I have asked and I don't remember anyone pointing out to me: did they ever FIND the bottoms that matched the pink pajama top on the bed, the ones JonBenet was wearing in the Christmas morning pictures?

KoldKase,

As for the turtleneck or "star" top being the means of strangulation, indicated by what you describe as "patterns" on the lower neck, I guess I can't visualize this. It's just not in my realm of experience, sorry.

Have you never grabbed someone by their collar to restrain them, never seen it in a movie, or in real life? Collared or collar can also mean to arrest or charge a perpetrator with a crime. A variant is white-collar crime. In the emergency services the phrase Restraint Asphyxia is used to describe the unintentional death of someone as they are being attended to.

The important aspect to JonBenet's abrasions is that they are different the reddened lower abrasions resulting from a struggle and the ligature furrow abrasions appearing almost non-existent, almost hidden by the ligature.

But I am sure you have considered the roll of the garrote cord up the neck, as much as you detail. The necklace is rolled into the cord, as well.

mmm, well you make my point for me, presumably JonBenet's necklace moved as did her hair when the garrote was applied. If the lower abrasions were the result of the garrote sliding upwards then you should expect to see some contused pattern left as the result of JonBenet's necklace being compressed against her skin as it moves upwards, similarly with her hair.

Compare my Restraint Asphyxia theory with the standard stages in asphyxia:
http://www.dundee.ac.uk/forensicmedicine/notes/asphyxia.pdf#Stages

STAGES OF ASPHYXIA
1. Struggle - forceful breathing
2. Quiescence - unconscious, lifeless
3. Convulsions - disturbs scene, incontinence
4. Apnea - lifeless, weak pulse.

About your last question: are you asking why she wasn't dressed in the PAJAMAS from Christmas Eve? The pink ones? I have asked and I don't remember anyone pointing out to me: did they ever FIND the bottoms that matched the pink pajama top on the bed, the ones JonBenet was wearing in the Christmas morning pictures?

I've never seen any mention of pajama bottoms either, did they go the same way as JonBenet's size-6 underwear? Why did the staging mandate her wearing her White Gap-Top, and not any pajamas, which would remove the Ramsey's from being the last to touch and see JonBenet?


.

 

[UKGuy]

Is it possible JonBenet was wearing the nightgown found in the wine cellar that night and then was changed back into the white sequined top? I ask this because there are said to be in this screen capture two drops of blood on the nightgown and two drops of blood on the white top.


-Tea

icedtea4me,
Yes its possible, but leaving it behind is a major mistake on the part of the stager?

Do you have a source for this screen capture?

Its more likely that JonBenet was to be redressed in the barbie nitegown so to conform with her being abducted sleeping from her bed.


.

 

[LI_Mom]

There was "birefringent" material found in the vagina. It is said by most to have been from the paintbrush. In fact, it has been speculated that it was powder from a latex glove. Another part of the puzzle we only have questions about.

From the autopsy:


As you can see at this link, "birefringent" merely means refracting light, as in calcite materials, crystals, etc. From what we have, it could be many things. The paintbrush is the best guess because of the nature of the injuries sustained from it. But the birefringent material could have been paint, as far as I can tell.

http://www.answers.com/topic/birefringence

Follow the "boron nitride" link and you get to it's usage in these products:



Again, until someone goes under oath or leaks the lab reports, we really can only speculate. It is most likely it was from the paintbrush, but I don't know how "birefringent" material is wood. But I am no scientist.

IMO, the key word was "shards".... that points to splinters from the paintbrush handle.

Still, there would probably be separate forensic evidence from the handle itself, from what was ON the handle (paint, turpentine, foreign material from the paint tote, etc) and also from any physical contact before &/or after the paintbrush was inserted.

 

[LI_Mom]

icedtea4me,
Yes its possible, but leaving it behind is a major mistake on the part of the stager?

Do you have a source for this screen capture?

Its more likely that JonBenet was to be redressed in the barbie nitegown so to conform with her being abducted sleeping from her bed.


.

I don't follow you.... why would a change of her outfit confirm she was abducted from her bed?

If the clothes she was wearing (according to the parents) were left behind ON HER bed, that would make sense.



Is it possible the original idea was to dispose of ALL the clothes she wore to bed.... the size 6's, the shirt & longjohns & leave her in the new underwear & Barbie nightgown BUT.....

the restraints & tape were already on her & it was impossible to remove her shirt so it becomes easier & quicker to just yank up the longjohns & leave her in the same outfit afterall?

 

[DeeDee249]

Hi, Koldkase- glad to see you here!

Like you, I have a hard time seeing evidence of manual strangulation or even strangulation with a scarf. To me, the autopsy photos indicate the strangulation was done with the ligature only, and the petechiae indicate she was still alive. The lack of much movement in the ligature as it went around her neck indicate to me that she was not conscious and was probably lying down. (as opposed to being propped up or strangled while standing).
These things also make me feel that the head bash came first, then as the horror of realizing that irreversible mortal damage had been done to JBR, a kidnapping/murder scene was enacted. The garrote was hastily made and pulled, tangling her hair as it tightened.

 

[JMO8778]

i cant answer it, i think people can be forgiven, certainly but i think they need to ask for it, and then they have to change their ways.

..that's the problem w the R's....they didn't change their ways.
no confession,JB continues to be betrayed...they also threw a lot of innocent ppl under the bus,inc. former friends...I think they would even let someone else go to the death for this crime,or at least..life in prison.
even so,betrayal may seem minor in comparison,but it is a very negative thing,and I believe they will indeed pay for it all someday in the afterlife,first and foremost for causing the death of their own daughter of course,and secondly,for betraying her.