The Shoe Lace Bindings

[kyleb]

So, when those photos are discussed, one should either accept the stated information

I've no compulsion to take conclusions based on photos I've no seen on faith, in this case or any other. I'm not implying anyone being intentionally deceptive by asking for evidence to substantiate such claims either, as I don't rule out more begin reasons for the claims being inaccurate.

That said, since you refuse to provide the evidence on which the claims regarding the shoelaces you've presented are based on the grounds that doing so would be inappropriate, while taking no issue with what was shown in the PL movies, I suppose we're left to work with that evidence instead. So, here's a still from the opening of the first PL which gives some understanding of the length of the laces binding Christopher and Stevie:



And a closeup which gives a better understanding of the length of the black and white laces used to bind both of them:



But then here's the laces which bound Michael which shows his ankles far closer to his wrists than Stevie's are:



So, if there are autopsy photos which prove the laces which bound Michael to were too long to have been one lace from this high top cut in two as has been insisted, surely the clinical setting of those photos would make them less personal that the images branded about in the PL movies which so many praise, and surely such evidence should be presented to substantiate these claims of fact.

 

[UdbCrzy2]

I've heard some say that they were tied like that so it would be easier to 'transport' the bodies if you were to believe the so-called ManHole Theory. It doesn't look like it would be very easy to me.

The way those boys were bound does not look 'hog-tied' to me and I know the ME described it that way. To me 'hog-tied' would be all 3 or 4 limbs tied together.

Those bindings remind me of a form of kinky sexual bondage.

 

[kyleb]

Here's links to the three stills from PL showing the shoelaces which were edited out of my previous post due to their graphic nature:

*GRAPHIC WARNING*
http://i.imgur.com/PaIMUNH.jpg
http://i.imgur.com/4auEhos.png
http://i.imgur.com/tOEAR6y.jpg

And yeah UdbCrzy, the way the boys were tied is similar to what's shown in this BDSM instruction video:

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xPjrX5O2ByA"]Wrist to ankle tie - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Ausgirl]

Udb, I agree there's a possibility for the bindings to have another significance. But what stymies that idea somewhat is that there was apparently no evidence of struggle in two of the victims, IIRC. So why bind them like that, if they are unconscious and not going anywhere anyways? Visual effect? Possible.. but in my mind, a little bit unlikely. Unless it was more about -how- they'd be found, by others. Which would be a whole nother level of cruelty and quite sophisticated so to speak.

Now, this is something I won't ever ask to be verified for.. but I -am- something of an 'expert' when it comes to BDSM and bondage in particular. (No, I am not into the 'scene'. Just FYI.) And I've seen that type of binding employed many times, just not with those materials. I would consider that knowledge a tad irrelevant here, as consensual bondage and what happened there are two very different things - safety and health issues are out the window, for a start. It's a cruel type of ligature, nothing anyone who wasn't a sadist of the first order would use, and it's something a sadist would use it on a victim whose welfare they cared little for. But being that the victims were children and horribly murdered, that hardly needs saying. Though I've just said it, heh.

And actually, no - it's nothing like the video you posted, kyle. Not that I watched - just from the cover pic I can see that circulation and limb tension aren't so cruel as what someone tied in the same position as the boys would experience.

My issue with the 'carrying' or 'dragging' theory is -- well, it seems an unnecessary act to me, to tie the boys in that particular way, when to actually pick them up and carry them,. bound or not, would require close contact with the perp's body. The 'safest' way to move them a short distance would seem to me to simply drag by the feet.

My current theory is that the bindings were primarily for preventing the limbs floating up in the water, and ease of handling in the water for the purpose of hiding, rather than transport.

However, this is with my current knowledge. I must really go re-look at everything again, before I settle on that in any solid way.

If I -am- right -- I seriously doubt this was the first time the killer had done this act.

 

[UdbCrzy2]

And yeah UdbCrzy, the way the boys were tied is similar to what's shown in this BDSM instruction video:

<<snipped for space>>

I've been thinking about the way they were tied and it really does seem to point toward some sort of sexual bondage. I don't know if that was ever considered when the investigation was active or not. I also think it's weird that the description of the bindings are called 'hog-tied'.

Ausgirl: I'm not sure why they were bound like that. Could have been part of their 'murder thing' like with posing. Never thought about it preventing the limbs from floating though.

 

[Ausgirl]

Udb - the point of all my blah up there is that -that particular- style of binding (especially with such thin material) is actually quite painful, and I would expect victims who were fully conscious to be struggling or at least have more signs of strain on the limbs, bruising (due to tension/limb weight). That there wasn't more evidence of that (that I can see) implies the victims were not all conscious.

So that changes the whole BDSM thing, in my eyes. The whole point of binding with that level of sadism is to observe others' suffering. And people don't suffer, per se, when unconscious or dead. The motive doesn't match the means, for that theory, as I see it. (of course, I'm not accounting for somebody sick enough to enjoy it anyway.. and it gets into mind bleach country, there..)

On the other hand, someone familiar with BDSM would be likely very comfortable with a particular style of binding, so it -might- be relevant.

What grabs my attention most here is how ALL the boys were tied almost the exact same way, it makes me suspect this wasn't their first time at doing this particular act. eta: IOW, I think they'd likely have employed it before, not necessarily in a murder situation.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

I've provided the link before from Cally's where the poster "imout2sea" demonstrated how the method of binding did nothing to restrain movement but did provide "handles" for carrying the bodies.

 

[Ausgirl]

My issues with the 'suitcase' theory (as I call it, in my head) are this:

- with the length of the limbs extending via gravity/body weight when lifted, plus length of cordage, those are some pretty long 'handles'. Carrying them thus seems very awkward.

- I would expect to see torn cartilage in shoulders, at least some damage present indicating their arms were bent backward forcefully (by the action of gravity, while the killer is grabbing the laces and lifting) - I am not aware of any?

It just seems a -very- awkward way to carry somebody. And the boys weren't featherweights, at eight years old and healthy.

 

[UdbCrzy2]

Tied the same way with right-arm to right-leg, left-arm to left-leg, but different knots.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

IIRC from autopsy documents, the boys weighed between 55 and 65 pounds. The video I referenced earlier is of a grown woman (over 100 pounds, IIRC) who was carried by her husband by the "handles" for an appropriate distance and who suffered none of the injuries described. It may seem impossible, but the video proves that it is possible.

 

[primitivefuture]

I've provided the link before from Cally's where the poster "imout2sea" demonstrated how the method of binding did nothing to restrain movement but did provide "handles" for carrying the bodies.

Where is the link? I must have missed it or it is not showing up because I'm on my phone? Thank you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[reedus23]

Throw me in the group who can't quite get their head around the reason for binding them the way he did as well. For me, the simplest answer is the perp beat the boys to unconsciousness but was not sure that they were dead at that point and bound them as he did in case any one of them regained consciousness. It also insured that once thrown in the water they would drown and would not be able to regain consciousness and get away to later ID the perp. In the meantime, they may very well have been used to carry the bodies but personally, I don't know if they were bound as they were solely for the purpose of transport. That is a lot of time at the crime scene taking laces out and tying them up one lace at a time just to move the bodies when he could have just picked them up fairly easily.

 

[Userid]

Udb - the point of all my blah up there is that -that particular- style of binding (especially with such thin material) is actually quite painful, and I would expect victims who were fully conscious to be struggling or at least have more signs of strain on the limbs, bruising (due to tension/limb weight). That there wasn't more evidence of that (that I can see) implies the victims were not all conscious.

So that changes the whole BDSM thing, in my eyes. The whole point of binding with that level of sadism is to observe others' suffering. And people don't suffer, per se, when unconscious or dead. The motive doesn't match the means, for that theory, as I see it. (of course, I'm not accounting for somebody sick enough to enjoy it anyway.. and it gets into mind bleach country, there..)

On the other hand, someone familiar with BDSM would be likely very comfortable with a particular style of binding, so it -might- be relevant.

What grabs my attention most here is how ALL the boys were tied almost the exact same way, it makes me suspect this wasn't their first time at doing this particular act. eta: IOW, I think they'd likely have employed it before, not necessarily in a murder situation.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't (in West of Memphis, perhaps) they state that the evidence (or lack thereof, from the examination of the ligatures and limbs) points to the ligatures being tied after death?

I'm not trying to dismiss that they were tied beforehand, but how do you (the general "you") explain that finding?

 

[Compassionate Reader]

Throw me in the group who can't quite get their head around the reason for binding them the way he did as well. For me, the simplest answer is the perp beat the boys to unconsciousness but was not sure that they were dead at that point and bound them as he did in case any one of them regained consciousness. It also insured that once thrown in the water they would drown and would not be able to regain consciousness and get away to later ID the perp. In the meantime, they may very well have been used to carry the bodies but personally, I don't know if they were bound as they were solely for the purpose of transport. That is a lot of time at the crime scene taking laces out and tying them up one lace at a time just to move the bodies when he could have just picked them up fairly easily.

IMO, when the bodies were hog-tied, they were dead, and the killer was confident at the time of binding that he would not be interrupted. As I said before, the video (I always have trouble finding the link, but I have posted it elsewhere on this board) shows that a conscious person would have no trouble releasing him/herself from the bindings found on Christopher, Michael and Steven. That means that the binding was not done for restraint.

So, why were the bodies bound? As Ausgirl pointed out, there is little or no evidence that the boys struggled after they were bound which, IMO, means that they were either unconscious or dead when bound. I think Christopher was already dead. They other two could have been unconscious. Again, IMO, since I've ruled out binding for torture or restraint, the only reason left is transport. If TH is the killer, then, as a video posted earlier by another poster showed, the method is at least reminiscent of the binding of hogs in a slaughter house, and TH worked in a slaughter house in his youth.

Why would the killer tie the bodies for transport? IMO, it was to provide the "handles" I mentioned earlier. The "handles" allowed him to carry the bodies without risking getting any blood or other bodily fluids (or other "evidence") on him or his clothes. Again, I don't think he initially intended to move the bodies. He thought that he could pass it all off as an accident when the bodies were found. However, when he returned to the murder scene and saw the condition of the bodies (mainly, the animal predation, including the degloving of Christopher), he realized that he had to come up with another story. So, he moved the bodies and decided to play "dumb" as to what happened.

 

[UdbCrzy2]

IMO, when the bodies were hog-tied, they were dead, and the killer was confident at the time of binding that he would not be interrupted. As I said before, the video (I always have trouble finding the link, but I have posted it elsewhere on this board) shows that a conscious person would have no trouble releasing him/herself from the bindings found on Christopher, Michael and Steven. That means that the binding was not done for restraint.

So, why were the bodies bound? As Ausgirl pointed out, there is little or no evidence that the boys struggled after they were bound which, IMO, means that they were either unconscious or dead when bound. I think Christopher was already dead. They other two could have been unconscious. Again, IMO, since I've ruled out binding for torture or restraint, the only reason left is transport. If TH is the killer, then, as a video posted earlier by another poster showed, the method is at least reminiscent of the binding of hogs in a slaughter house, and TH worked in a slaughter house in his youth.

Why would the killer tie the bodies for transport? IMO, it was to provide the "handles" I mentioned earlier. The "handles" allowed him to carry the bodies without risking getting any blood or other bodily fluids (or other "evidence") on him or his clothes. Again, I don't think he initially intended to move the bodies. He thought that he could pass it all off as an accident when the bodies were found. However, when he returned to the murder scene and saw the condition of the bodies (mainly, the animal predation, including the degloving of Christopher), he realized that he had to come up with another story. So, he moved the bodies and decided to play "dumb" as to what happened.

So you're saying that they were not tied well enough to restrain them, but were tied well enough to carry their weight of approximately 50-lbs? That seems to contradict one another.

 

[Compassionate Reader]

So you're saying that they were not tied well enough to restrain them, but were tied well enough to carry their weight of approximately 50-lbs? That seems to contradict one another.

What I'm saying is that the video "imout2sea" made shows that they could be carried by the bindings and that, had they been conscious and alone, they could move around despite the bindings, which, IMO, means that the bindings weren't too effective for restraint. I'm sorry that it seems contradictory, but the video shows the truth.

 

[primitivefuture]

What I'm saying is that the video "imout2sea" made shows that they could be carried by the bindings and that, had they been conscious and alone, they could move around despite the bindings, which, IMO, means that the bindings weren't too effective for restraint. I'm sorry that it seems contradictory, but the video shows the truth.

If you do happen to come across a link for that video, can you please share it again? I've still not seen it. And if anyone else knows the link, if appreciate it. Thank you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Compassionate Reader]

If you do happen to come across a link for that video, can you please share it again? I've still not seen it. And if anyone else knows the link, if appreciate it. Thank you.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Finally found it! Here it is. Also, some people might be interested in reading the analysis that "imout2sea" did when she did her experiment. It's here. It starts on about page 4 of the thread. The discussion is about 30 pages long, and some of it has now been discarded, based on new information. However, it might help some people understand that the bindings were not for restraint and could have been used for transportation.

One word of warning: the video is a series of short clips. Originally, there was one continuous video, but on Cally's we ended up with a series of clips. Just be patient and watch them sequentially! They're not listed sequentially, so watch the part numbers.

 

[Cappuccino]

Unless my memory is playing tricks on me I'm pretty sure Christopher's sneakers were bought only two days before the murder. I'll ask on the BB later when I'm over there.

Re: the photos of the sneakers - there are three sneakers posted on the Callahans site, I assume one from each boy. The one with the shoe lace left in is Christopher's, the white tennis shoe is Michael's, so logically the high top sneaker must be Stevie's. I'll double check that later too, but afaik that's the case.

With apologies to Userid - I'm afraid I won't be able to make good on the above promises because it seems that the BB has closed down and their contents haven't been archived.

 

[UdbCrzy2]

Finally found it! Here it is. Also, some people might be interested in reading the analysis that "imout2sea" did when she did her experiment. It's here. It starts on about page 4 of the thread. The discussion is about 30 pages long, and some of it has now been discarded, based on new information. However, it might help some people understand that the bindings were not for restraint and could have been used for transportation.

One word of warning: the video is a series of short clips. Originally, there was one continuous video, but on Cally's we ended up with a series of clips. Just be patient and watch them sequentially! They're not listed sequentially, so watch the part numbers.

Where was these series of videos used at? I don't remember this happening during any hearing or were they just used for the supporter's website?

When I go to Callahans link above it's an indexed listing and seems rather odd that it's not included in the normal website.

Does anyone know why?