The Forensics is what gives the JIDI his power

[BBB167893]

Why couldn't the strangulation be part of a sex game? Not all strangulation sex games are meant to end in death. How about JR strangling her and getting off watching her struggle a bit, then when he lets up she screams, he picks up something and bashes her head to shut her up, then goes ahead and kills her by strangling her to ensure she never could tell anybody about their games. Nobody would have to stop to stage anything about the death, they just would have to stage the coverup.

Well, there are people who have outlined that theory.

 

[DeeDee249]

Why couldn't the strangulation be part of a sex game? Not all strangulation sex games are meant to end in death. How about JR strangling her and getting off watching her struggle a bit, then when he lets up she screams, he picks up something and bashes her head to shut her up, then goes ahead and kills her by strangling her to ensure she never could tell anybody about thier games. Nobody would have to stop to stage anything about the death, they just would have to stage the coverup.

Certainly a possible scenario. But there were no marks on her neck to indicate she struggled. The much-mentioned and totally false reports of "scratch marks" were not scratches at all, but petechiae- expected in a strangulation. The coroner noted no scratch marks and no movement of the ligature.

 

[madeleine]

Why couldn't the strangulation be part of a sex game? Not all strangulation sex games are meant to end in death. How about JR strangling her and getting off watching her struggle a bit, then when he lets up she screams, he picks up something and bashes her head to shut her up, then goes ahead and kills her by strangling her to ensure she never could tell anybody about thier games. Nobody would have to stop to stage anything about the death, they just would have to stage the coverup.

I definitely include a sex game gone wrong in my list of teories.This reminds me of the"what's more likely"-line someone loves so much around here.Having to deal with prior abuse,assault,strangulation, head bash (accident or not)and possible cover-up , what's more likely,a kidnapping gone wrong or something related to abuse that went wrong,IMO it's the last one.

 

[anne11]

I voted less than 10 minutes, just wanted to ask if anyone thought there may have also been manual strangulation( re; abrasion on the neck )and in children the hyoid bone is more supple and does not always fracture, as petechial hemehorrages were present in the lungs and heart i am wondering if the cause was partial strangulation then head blow (i don't believe the lips, ears or fingertips were cyanosed as they are in victims of strangulation). Other abrasions on her body seem to point to being dragged.

 

[BBB167893]

I voted less than 10 minutes, just wanted to ask if anyone thought there may have also been manual strangulation( re; abrasion on the neck )and in children the hyoid bone is more supple and does not always fracture, as petechial hemehorrages were present in the lungs and heart i am wondering if the cause was partial strangulation then head blow (i don't believe the lips, ears or fingertips were cyanosed as they are in victims of strangulation). Other abrasions on her body seem to point to being dragged.

My brother seems to adhere to this theory.

 

[voynich]

The forensic evidence is consistent with JB receiving both a head bash and strangulation within 10 minutes, and that this scenarios favors IDI, in that an intruder could work immediately on strangulation after silencing JB with a head blow, and difficult to reconcile with more common RDI spin that PR accidentally hit JB in a rage, took time to realize JB would not wake up, more time to discuss it w/JR, then decided to put together materials needed to strangulate, and more time to decide how they would stage the cs.

 

[BBB167893]

The forensic evidence is consistent with JB receiving both a head bash and strangulation within 10 minutes,

I don't know, voynich. It would take quite a while for the brain to swell like that.

 

[anne11]

I've got some doubt on how effective the Boulder coroner was, not taking body temp, the level of potassium in the eye, deciding wether the urine/blood stains were from a standing or a prone position, re-using tools to take nail scrapings, the list goes on. I wonder if he was not used to dealing with homicide victims, or dealing murdered children.

 

[madeleine]

The forensic evidence is consistent with JB receiving both a head bash and strangulation within 10 minutes, and that this scenarios favors IDI, in that an intruder could work immediately on strangulation after silencing JB with a head blow, and difficult to reconcile with more common RDI spin that PR accidentally hit JB in a rage, took time to realize JB would not wake up, more time to discuss it w/JR, then decided to put together materials needed to strangulate, and more time to decide how they would stage the cs.

@bold
not necessarily
It could be RDI as well and you know it.

 

[Sophie]

I've got some doubt on how effective the Boulder coroner was, not taking body temp, the level of potassium in the eye, deciding wether the urine/blood stains were from a standing or a prone position, re-using tools to take nail scrapings, the list goes on. I wonder if he was not used to dealing with homicide victims, or dealing murdered children.

Anne, you'll find theories on the 'Net about it being part of a conspiracy (ie. the coroner had been directed to do a miserable job of the autopsy). I must say that I find this (and pretty much all conspiracy theories) unlikely and that he was possibly just rushing around on Boxing Day trying to get home and did the bare minimum. I guess you never know, though. I do worry, though, that the case became such a cause celebre that the 'garrote,' JBR's clothes etc may have been touched by friends of lab assistants etc. The ease with which the autopsy photos went global shows that the coroner saw no need for particular security in this case.

Didn't he say somewhere that he had been deliberately vague in the post mortem report because he knew he'd have to testify on it at some point?

 

[DeeDee249]

It was actually Dec. 26th that the coroner came to view JB's body in situ
under the Christmas tree.
But there was still no excuse for the sloppiness of his exam. I also wonder if he wasn't told to be less thorough than he should. That being said, I also believe he was not used to child murders. I bet JB was one of the first, if not the first, he dealt with.

 

[voynich]

@bold
not necessarily
It could be RDI as well and you know it.

WHy would the R's strangle and headbash their daughter within seconds of one another? If they are going to kill JB why not kill Burke while they're at it?

 

[madeleine]

WHy would the R's strangle and headbash their daughter within seconds of one another? If they are going to kill JB why not kill Burke while they're at it?

We've been through this before and I am tired.

 

[DeeDee249]

WHy would the R's strangle and headbash their daughter within seconds of one another? If they are going to kill JB why not kill Burke while they're at it?

I can't believe you're back to this...

There is so much here about why. Why would they kill their son? The murder of JB was one of 3 things...
An accidental rage killing OR head bash to silence her (possibly during a sexual assault).

The strangulation was probably intended to provide a cause of death because the head bash left no external evidence. Even the coroner did not know she had the head bash until he reflected (peeled back) the scalp to remove the skull cap (rountine in all autopsies). According to to those present at the autopsy, Mayer was surprised to find the subdural bleeding and skull fracture.
The parent(s) were left with a dying child who was rendered instantly unconscious and possibly comatose by a bash to the head so severe that her skull was nearly split in half. Yet, they really wouldn't have seen the damage- they just saw an unconscius child who they either thought was dead, dying, or who they were afraid to bring back at that point (either because they knew she'd tell what happened (this works for me) OR they knew she'd be permantly damaged. (she would have been).

 

[voynich]

I can't believe you're back to this...

There is so much here about why. Why would they kill their son? The murder of JB was one of 3 things...
An accidental rage killing OR head bash to silence her (possibly during a sexual assault).

The strangulation was probably intended to provide a cause of death because the head bash left no external evidence. Even the coroner did not know she had the head bash until he reflected (peeled back) the scalp to remove the skull cap (rountine in all autopsies). According to to those present at the autopsy, Mayer was surprised to find the subdural bleeding and skull fracture.
The parent(s) were left with a dying child who was rendered instantly unconscious and possibly comatose by a bash to the head so severe that her skull was nearly split in half. Yet, they really wouldn't have seen the damage- they just saw an unconscius child who they either thought was dead, dying, or who they were afraid to bring back at that point (either because they knew she'd tell what happened (this works for me) OR they knew she'd be permantly damaged. (she would have been).

Issue is timing, the relatively little amount of blood for ahead blow of this injury would expect a large amount of blood, easily visisble before examination.

WHy would the R's, seconds after headbashign her, immediately get to work on garrotting her? Did they pre-meditate oh as soon as her head is based we'lre gong to strangle her?

 

[DeeDee249]

Issue is timing, the relatively little amount of blood for ahead blow of this injury would expect a large amount of blood, easily visisble before examination.

WHy would the R's, seconds after headbashign her, immediately get to work on garrotting her? Did they pre-meditate oh as soon as her head is based we'lre gong to strangle her?

Forensics is a science, but the human body (and its responses) are not exact. There was a large amount of blood. But at that point it was not liquid, more like a gel. That's why it didn't seep out more as well as the fact that it was contained on the inside of the skull.
The fracture itself, as horrible as it looked, was not a puncture. the brain was not pierced.
The fact that there was not much swelling (mentioned in the autopsy as MILD flattening and swelling of the sulci and gyri) is what indicates that death came quickly after.

 

[DeeDee249]

Issue is timing, the relatively little amount of blood for ahead blow of this injury would expect a large amount of blood, easily visisble before examination.

WHy would the R's, seconds after headbashign her, immediately get to work on garrotting her? Did they pre-meditate oh as soon as her head is based we'lre gong to strangle her?

I don't think so. I think they saw her collapse into a coma from the head bash and decided on the garrote to provide a visible cause of death because the head bash left no visible indications.
There was more blood than you realize. When she was bashed, she pretty much went into a coma and/or shock right after, which greatly slowed down her circulation, reducing her blood pressure dramatically. Body temp drops in shock also, so she may have felt cool to the touch. This may have led the perp(s) to think she was dead. Drop in blood pressure would have slowed swelling responses. The coroner saw gelled blood at this point, not liquid. The swelling was mild for such a severe bash, and this was noted in the autopsy as "mild narrowing and flattening of the sulci and gyri). But remember that her skull was fractured, but the brain was not punctured. The blood was subdural (UNDER the dura mater) and subarachnoid. It's not the same as blood right under the scalp, which would have been much more in evidence.

 

[BBB167893]

Forensics is a science, but the human body (and its responses) are not exact. There was a large amount of blood. But at that point it was not liquid, more like a gel. That's why it didn't seep out more as well as the fact that it was contained on the inside of the skull.

Head wounds are among the most quirky of all injuries.

The fact that there was not much swelling (mentioned in the autopsy as MILD flattening and swelling of the sulci and gyri) is what indicates that death came quickly after.

Not THAT quickly, if there was that much swelling.

I don't think so. I think they saw her collapse into a coma from the head bash and decided on the garrote to provide a visible cause of death because the head bash left no visible indications.

Not only that (agree wholeheartedly, BTW), but the method itself has a few advantages. I recent book I bought, This Will Kill You, mentions garrote as one of 76 methods of meeting death. The authors stress that it does not make a bloody mess, which I mentioned quite some time ago.

 

[voynich]

Head wounds are among the most quirky of all injuries.



Not THAT quickly, if there was that much swelling.



Not only that (agree wholeheartedly, BTW), but the method itself has a few advantages. I recent book I bought, This Will Kill You, mentions garrote as one of 76 methods of meeting death. The authors stress that it does not make a bloody mess, which I mentioned quite some time ago.

Sure it can be quirky but the simplest explanation is that one lethal injury was quickly in time followed by the other. While the amount of congealed blood sounds impressive, according to

Wecht View. Wecht's explanation is as follows: "If you inflict a blow like that on someone whose heart is beating," he asserts, "the heart doesn't stop, because the cardiac and respiratory centers are at the base of the brain. You're not damaging that with a blow to the top of the head. It'll become compromised as the brain swells, but initially there's no compromise. They control your heart and lungs. The heart continues to beat. The blood continues to flow. But in the Ramsey case, they got less than a teaspoon and a half of blood. If you have a beating heart and the carotid arteries are carrying blood, this person doesn't die right away. That means that blow was inflicted when she was already dead or dying."

 

[BBB167893]

Sure it can be quirky but the simplest explanation is that one lethal injury was quickly in time followed by the other.

It's a hard call. But not that hard.

While the amount of congealed blood sounds impressive,

You bet.

according to Wecht View. Wecht's explanation is as follows: "If you inflict a blow like that on someone whose heart is beating," he asserts, "the heart doesn't stop, because the cardiac and respiratory centers are at the base of the brain. You're not damaging that with a blow to the top of the head. It'll become compromised as the brain swells, but initially there's no compromise. They control your heart and lungs. The heart continues to beat. The blood continues to flow. But in the Ramsey case, they got less than a teaspoon and a half of blood. If you have a beating heart and the carotid arteries are carrying blood, this person doesn't die right away. That means that blow was inflicted when she was already dead or dying."

I have great respect for Cyril Wecht. But this is one area where I actually agree with HOTYH to a point. I think it was Deedee who pointed out that an injury like that would most likely cause shock, which puts the body in shut-down mode: the heart rate slows drastically and breathing becomes almost nonexistent.

(I notice there are other things that Wecht says that you're not too game to tackle, but in due time)