The Ligatures

[Mama2JML]

The op said that PR posed the body for her own viewing and then unposed her. How would this be essential to her freedom? I'll admit, I'm completely lost here. I'm not inclined to think the ligatures were for staging, and I do believe they served a purpose, but I just don't think posing was the purpose. all moo

Ditto to the words BBM.

 

[Mama2JML]

Forensic evidence found on the cord has not been released if any was found.

My guess is the wrist cord was placed over the protruding end of the stick when it was placed into a hole.

IMO.

Well, according to Kolar, DNA was obtained from the garrote & wrist ligatures. ...belonging to a male, non-Ramsey.

 

[Tawny]

Blue Bottle certainly has an interesting theory regarding the ligatures.

What does the tip mean: "watch out for small observant rodents"?

1. Watch out for small alert rodents.
2. Watch out for little diligent rodents.
3. Watch out for tiny perceptive mice.
4. Beware of limited discerning mammals.
5. Beware of young intelligent beavers.
6. Beware of immature attentive rats.

Who is the observant rat?

.

I had a signature graphic of a hamster creeping behind a Coke bottle.

 

[DeDee]

Well, according to Kolar, DNA was obtained from the garrote & wrist ligatures. ...belonging to a male, non-Ramsey.

More specifically, Kolar explained the DNA on the garrote and wrist bindings to be tDNA, correct? And this tDNA, which can be as few as 5 cells, from the items did not match; thus, the tDNA found on the garrote and wrist ligatures belonged to two separate unidentified male contributors.

The broken paintbrush transforms the nylon cord tied around it into a garrote, immho.

However, since the paintbrush was used prior to Dec. 26 for the purpose for which it was sold, can we logically expect that the tDNA on the garrote was possibly once touched by an unidentified male during art classes that Patsy took at the University? Or maybe one of Burke's friends picked it up when it was stored in the Butler's kitchen in the home.

Further, can we logically expect that the nylon cord was once touched by or coughed on by an unidentified male who stocked the shelves at the store where it was purchased?

IOW, since DNA cannot be time stamped, the tDNA does not necessarily belong to an intruder from the night of Dec. 26.

http://www.bodetech.com/forensic-solutions/dna-technologies/touch-dna/


A bit off topic but an interesting comment is made by Patsy during her 1997 interview:

Patsy was questioned about, Brian Perry, the maintenance custodian at their church who had an art studio under the church sanctuary. She was asked if she ever took paint or art classes from him. She said, "No".

"And he also has a
14 painting studio space in the basement of the
15 church, under the sanctuary.
16 So and they are just kind of, I was
17 given to understand, sort of wards of the
18 church, because I had questioned -- I said, you
19 know, that space where the little house is could
20 be a new Sunday school and offices and you know.
21 And it was really strange. I mean kind of like
22 mostly told don't go there, you know. "

.

 

[UKGuy]

More specifically, Kolar explained the DNA on the garrote and wrist bindings to be tDNA, correct? And this tDNA, which can be as few as 5 cells, from the items did not match; thus, the tDNA found on the garrote and wrist ligatures belonged to two separate unidentified male contributors.

The broken paintbrush transforms the nylon cord tied around it into a garrote, immho.

However, since the paintbrush was used prior to Dec. 26 for the purpose for which it was sold, can we logically expect that the tDNA on the garrote was possibly once touched by an unidentified male during art classes that Patsy took at the University? Or maybe one of Burke's friends picked it up when it was stored in the Butler's kitchen in the home.

Further, can we logically expect that the nylon cord was once touched by or coughed on by an unidentified male who stocked the shelves at the store where it was purchased?

IOW, since DNA cannot be time stamped, the tDNA does not necessarily belong to an intruder from the night of Dec. 26.

http://www.bodetech.com/forensic-solutions/dna-technologies/touch-dna/


A bit off topic but an interesting comment is made by Patsy during her 1997 interview:

Patsy was questioned about, Brian Perry, the maintenance custodian at their church who had an art studio under the church sanctuary. She was asked if she ever took paint or art classes from him. She said, "No".

"And he also has a
14 painting studio space in the basement of the
15 church, under the sanctuary.
16 So and they are just kind of, I was
17 given to understand, sort of wards of the
18 church, because I had questioned -- I said, you
19 know, that space where the little house is could
20 be a new Sunday school and offices and you know.
21 And it was really strange. I mean kind of like
22 mostly told don't go there, you know. "

.

DeDee,
Good points about the TDNA. Demonstrates how PR can skew a case.


.

 

[Anti-K]

More specifically, Kolar explained the DNA on the garrote and wrist bindings to be tDNA, correct? And this tDNA, which can be as few as 5 cells, from the items did not match; thus, the tDNA found on the garrote and wrist ligatures belonged to two separate unidentified male contributors.

The broken paintbrush transforms the nylon cord tied around it into a garrote, immho.

However, since the paintbrush was used prior to Dec. 26 for the purpose for which it was sold, can we logically expect that the tDNA on the garrote was possibly once touched by an unidentified male during art classes that Patsy took at the University? Or maybe one of Burke's friends picked it up when it was stored in the Butler's kitchen in the home.

Further, can we logically expect that the nylon cord was once touched by or coughed on by an unidentified male who stocked the shelves at the store where it was purchased?

IOW, since DNA cannot be time stamped, the tDNA does not necessarily belong to an intruder from the night of Dec. 26.

http://www.bodetech.com/forensic-solutions/dna-technologies/touch-dna/


A bit off topic but an interesting comment is made by Patsy during her 1997 interview:

Patsy was questioned about, Brian Perry, the maintenance custodian at their church who had an art studio under the church sanctuary. She was asked if she ever took paint or art classes from him. She said, "No".

"And he also has a
14 painting studio space in the basement of the
15 church, under the sanctuary.
16 So and they are just kind of, I was
17 given to understand, sort of wards of the
18 church, because I had questioned -- I said, you
19 know, that space where the little house is could
20 be a new Sunday school and offices and you know.
21 And it was really strange. I mean kind of like
22 mostly told don't go there, you know. "

.

I think the tDNA found on the garrote came from the cord and not the paintbrush. Kolar; P. 426: “...the DNA on the two pieces of cord...”

If the cord was new, as it seems to have been, then it was probably recently on public display (unlike the victim’s leggings and panties) which makes the prospect of innocent transfer worthy of some consideration.
...

AK

 

[Blue Bottle 01]

The neck ligature used to raise and hold the torso upright by putting the brush handle in a holder and the wrist ligatures used to raise the arms by placing the cord over the same holder places the body in the same position it was described to be in when found and brought upstairs.

The ligatures were used to pose the body upright with arms raised. IMO.

 

[DeeDee249]

The neck ligature used to raise and hold the torso upright by putting the brush handle in a holder and the wrist ligatures used to raise the arms by placing the cord over the same holder places the body in the same position it was described to be in when found and brought upstairs.

The ligatures were used to pose the body upright with arms raised. IMO.

I disagree. The body could not have been in that position. Livor mortis indicates that her body was flat on her back, head cocked to the right, legs out straight. Arms bent at the elbow (likely by rigor). They were not raised straight over her head when she was brought up. There is a photo of her lying on the living room carpet, with her hands in brown paper evidence bags. The arms can clearly be seen as being bent at the elbow in front of her and not up straight over her head. Detective Arndt gives the wrong impression in her description (among many disservices she did to the case) when she described knowing that JB was dead when JR brought her up because her arms were up with no support. That, added to the mistaken DRAWING of JB as she lay in the winecellar, gives the impression her arms were straight up over her head. But we have photographic proof with the crime photo showing her with her elbows bent. BTW, that drawing was made by someone who never saw the body in the wine cellar and also omitted the white blanket that had been pulled up over her torso. The blanket was taken off when she was carried up, but lying on the floor, it was there.

 

[Anti-K]

I suppose the body could have been in that position in the time leading up to death, and perhaps for a few minutes after, but there is no evidence to suggest that this was the case.

I know that there are some who think that the victim may have been posed, or restrained, or suspended, etc in some manner different from which that in which she was discovered. I don’t think the evidence bears any of this out, but I’ve always wondered – if it were true – than why would the killer bother to un-pose, un-restrain, un-suspend, un-etc her?
...

AK

 

[Blue Bottle 01]

As I have pointed out before the body was posed with the ligatures well before rigor and then placed in the small room well before rigor where mortis later set in. IMO.

And this is from the autopsy report:

The decedent was laying on her back on the floor; covered by a blanket and a Colorado Avalanche sweatshirt. On removing these two iems from the top of the body the decedent was found to be lying on her back with her arms extended up over her head.

The artist's rendition is most likely correct. IMO.

And as I have pointed out before there were two aspects to what was done to the body, two "scenes" as it were: the posing of the body/torso upright with arms raised and then the wrapping/tape on the mouth/placement in the room.

The first scene in my opinion was to create an image of voluntary participation in the sacrifice and the second to erase that from memory and create the kidnapping in Patsy's mind. IMO.

 

[otg]

(bbm)

I suppose the body could have been in that position in the time leading up to death, and perhaps for a few minutes after, but there is no evidence to suggest that this was the case.

I know that there are some who think that the victim may have been posed, or restrained, or suspended, etc in some manner different from which that in which she was discovered. I don’t think the evidence bears any of this out, but I’ve always wondered – if it were true – than why would the killer bother to un-pose, un-restrain, un-suspend, un-etc her?
...

AK

AK, even though we disagree on much, I recognize that you try to consider different views even if you don't necessarily agree with them. So consider this about your above bolded question:

Why assume that the the person responsible for her death is the same person who "un-posed, un-restrained, un-suspended, un-etc'ed her"? Consider the question posed in [ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?t=23827"]this thread[/ame].

 

[DeeDee249]

Rigor has not as much to do with posing the body at that point. Livor mortis has everything to do with it. Long before rigor sets in, livor mortis patterns begin to set. There was ONE livor pattern on her body. She was not posed upright. Nor were her arms suspended. She was placed on her back within a few moments of her death. Science trumps opinions and theories every time.

 

[Anti-K]

(bbm)AK, even though we disagree on much, I recognize that you try to consider different views even if you don't necessarily agree with them. So consider this about your above bolded question:

Why assume that the the person responsible for her death is the same person who "un-posed, un-restrained, un-suspended, un-etc'ed her"? Consider the question posed in this thread.

I followed the link, but, I’m not sure what you wanted me to see.
.

If she had been un-posed, etc. then this had to have happened very quickly after her death. And, it isn’t just that she would have to have been un-posed, etc, but that she would also have to have been subsequently moved and re-posed in the position and conditions in which she was later found. This remains true regardless of how many persons were involved.

The evidence, as we know it, strongly suggests that within minutes of death the victim was laid to rest as she was found. Theories of suspension and prior posing and such are speculative and they lack substantive evidentiary support. Speculation is fine, and I do a lot of it myself, but I’m really fond of the evidence and I prefer speculation that is informed by the evidence.
…

AK

 

[Blue Bottle 01]

Rigor has not as much to do with posing the body at that point. Livor mortis has everything to do with it. Long before rigor sets in, livor mortis patterns begin to set. There was ONE livor pattern on her body. She was not posed upright. Nor were her arms suspended. She was placed on her back within a few moments of her death. Science trumps opinions and theories every time.

IMO, she was posed upright and taken down well before liver mortis would have set in.

 

[bettybaby00]

I followed the link, but, I’m not sure what you wanted me to see.
.

If she had been un-posed, etc. then this had to have happened very quickly after her death. And, it isn’t just that she would have to have been un-posed, etc, but that she would also have to have been subsequently moved and re-posed in the position and conditions in which she was later found. This remains true regardless of how many persons were involved.

The evidence, as we know it, strongly suggests that within minutes of death the victim was laid to rest as she was found. Theories of suspension and prior posing and such are speculative and they lack substantive evidentiary support. Speculation is fine, and I do a lot of it myself, but I’m really fond of the evidence and I prefer speculation that is informed by the evidence.
…

AK

I think the reason for the link was a means to offer the suggestion that whoever placed her the position she was found was not necessarily done by the same person.

Why assume that the the person responsible for her death is the same person who "un-posed, un-restrained, un-suspended, un-etc'ed her"? Consider the question posed in this thread .

That's how I read it anyway.

IA that the evidence in no way suggests she was ever suspended. Her wrists have no marks to indicate this, nor does her neck. Why she was laid down with her arms over her head is something we'll likely never understand, barring a detailed confession.

 

[Meara]

In this photo a line is visible below the sleeve, running the full width of JBR's hand and appearing to wrap around it. Has this ever been accounted for satisfactorily, does anyone know?

 

[Mama2JML]

In this photo a line is visible below the sleeve, running the full width of JBR's hand and appearing to wrap around it. Has this ever been accounted for satisfactorily, does anyone know?

I know of no official source that's acknowledged the mark. Some forum posters have claimed the mark is from JonBenet's bracelet. ...as if it (cord v. bracelet) matters. The bracelet obviously wasn't 'resting' in that location after death. The other wrist appears to have bruise-like discolorations too, IMO.

 

[bettybaby00]

In this photo a line is visible below the sleeve, running the full width of JBR's hand and appearing to wrap around it. Has this ever been accounted for satisfactorily, does anyone know?

Wasn't there mention of a bracelet? That doesn't seem indicative of what one would expect by being suspended??

 

[Meara]

I know of no official source that's acknowledged the mark. Some forum posters have claimed the mark is from JonBenet's bracelet. ...as if it (cord v. bracelet) matters. The bracelet obviously wasn't 'resting' in that location after death. The other wrist appears to have bruise-like discolorations too, IMO.

Interesting about discolorations on the other wrist. I hadn't noticed that and will go look again.

 

[Meara]

Wasn't there mention of a bracelet? That doesn't seem indicative of what one would expect by being suspended??

I don't know, bb. It's not the clearest of photos; and it would depend on how much pressure was exerted on the skin, and for how long. What I'm wondering is whether anyone knows what discussion about this mark has taken place in the past and what conclusions, if any, were drawn. I can review the threads here and at FFJ but not right now or any time soon.