You, the jury

[Tadpole12]

"Sure you can..."

I know you wouldn't bring that up unless you had proof, right? Where is the identical hole, and what does it look like? Where is the fragment and what does it look like? Source requested please.

Remember the autopsy report refers to a 'roughly rectangular fragment' that is 1 3/4" x 1/2" in size.

For those of us struggling with the actual facts, it seems that this flashlight could produce a crescent or elliptical shape, based on the cross-section of the flashlight at the impact angle.

There is no 'roughly rectangular' cross-section for this flashlight.

Hi hotyh.

The rim of the bulb end of the flash light, on oblique cross-section is loaf shaped,

 

[Tadpole12]

Sinking the head of a flashlight into a hole doesn't mean anything. The challenge is to replicate the fragment. Has this been replicated or not? I believe the autopsy report refers to the size of the fragment as 1 3/4" x 1/2".

What was the size of the fragment that Spitz replicated? Were the sides of the fragment perpendicular to the skull surface? Because that would just be astonishing given the cylindrical/spherical flashlight shape.

Good link on BFT:

http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q...Hgo6kB&sig=AHIEtbTN6E43SrHvkySs8NzhTgyMxAyFsg

 

[MurriFlower]

However I said a person with a military background, not necessarily a 'military'. This is your spin.

Ok then. What about a Vietnam Veteran - delusional, substance abuse, psychotic? BIG chip on shoulder. Hates the government. Hates big business. Hates rich folks. Hates Navy Offices, especially pen pushers (fat cats?).

Short of cash. Hunts in the mountains. Watches too much TV. Owns a hand gun.

Close relationship to someone with access to the home.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Hi hotyh.

The rim of the bulb end of the flash light, on oblique cross-section is loaf shaped,

Yeah, but that cross-section changes rapidly with depth. There is only a line of contact initially, then it changes to a small loaf that gradually becomes larger. This should preclude the formation of a single fragment, in most materials.

In the gun magazine scenario, the cross-section doesn't change with depth, and would more easily produce a single fragment.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Ok then. What about a Vietnam Veteran - delusional, substance abuse, psychotic? BIG chip on shoulder. Hates the government. Hates big business. Hates rich folks. Hates Navy Offices, especially pen pushers (fat cats?).

Short of cash. Hunts in the mountains. Watches too much TV. Owns a hand gun.

Close relationship to someone with access to the home.

I was thinking more along the lines of a military ranking person in a foreign country. Also delusional, substance abuse, psychotic, big chip, hates US, sometimes respects businesses, wants to kill fat cats, will discuss beheading execution of small children, likes crime movies, likes victory, and likes to instill fear.

 

[MurriFlower]

I was thinking more along the lines of a military ranking person in a foreign country. Also delusional, substance abuse, psychotic, big chip, hates US, sometimes respects businesses, wants to kill fat cats, will discuss beheading execution of small children, likes crime movies, likes victory, and likes to instill fear.

Man!! You know what this means?? Except for military ranking person in a foreign country we 'almost' agree. Whhooooohooooooo!!!

 

[madeleine]

How do you explain JB's DNA under her fingernails (both hands)?
And this is interesting,I never heard it before,from L.Smit's depo:

Dr. Doberson and I both agree that these marks that are above the garotte are fingernail marks made by JonBenet as she was struggling to get that garotte off of her neck. They are half moon in shape. JonBenet also, under her fingernails, the primary source of DNA, is JonBenet's.

Q. On both hands?

A. On both hands.


I never saw those photos but I guess he's not lying,right.Half moon shaped marks indicate to ME that she scratched herself(fingernails)

 

[MurriFlower]

How do you explain JB's DNA under her fingernails (both hands)?
And this is interesting,I never heard it before,from L.Smit's depo:

Dr. Doberson and I both agree that these marks that are above the garotte are fingernail marks made by JonBenet as she was struggling to get that garotte off of her neck. They are half moon in shape. JonBenet also, under her fingernails, the primary source of DNA, is JonBenet's.

Q. On both hands?

A. On both hands.


I never saw those photos but I guess he's not lying,right.Half moon shaped marks indicate to ME that she scratched herself(fingernails)

I've not seen a photo with those marks either. Wonder where it might be?

Wouldn't everyone have their own DNA under their own fingernails?

 

[madeleine]

I never paid attention to this.tiny details,tiny details,raising BIG questions.....

pmpt,page 22

Moments later,Ramsey told Mason that he,his wife,and his son would be flying to Atlanta that evening.He said he had something really important to attend to.


HUH?
I am confused here.
Something to attend to?
WTH happened there.
I hope that it was just a misunderstanding and Mason got it wrong (dunno... cause Mason is one of the detectives who didn't seem to screw up in this case).Or Schiller got it wrong.
Or JR knew exactly/suspected who killed JB and wanted to talk/find that person.
OR it's the most stupid excuse I've ever heard coming out of a killer's mouth!

WTH
I need some time to think..........

 

[Tadpole12]

Hi Hotyh.

Yeah, but that cross-section changes rapidly with depth. There is only a line of contact initially, then it changes to a small loaf that gradually becomes larger. This should preclude the formation of a single fragment, in most materials.

Forensic materials and physics indicate otherwise:

Good link on BFT:

http://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&q=...8NzhTgyMxAyFsg

In the gun magazine scenario, the cross-section doesn't change with depth, and would more easily produce a single fragment.

Sure, equally valid direction to persue. I've been searching through images of comminuted fractues.
Searched through images of gloch clips, have yet to find detailed dimensions.

 

[BBB167893]

How do you explain JB's DNA under her fingernails (both hands)?
And this is interesting,I never heard it before,from L.Smit's depo:

Dr. Doberson and I both agree that these marks that are above the garotte are fingernail marks made by JonBenet as she was struggling to get that garotte off of her neck. They are half moon in shape.

Well, then they're the only two. I don't mean to come off as dismissive or condescending, but there are some pretty big credibility problems here. Those marks were established as being petechial hemorrhages a long time ago. Sadly, this is another instance where Smit made up "evidence" out of thin air, then found someone to go along with it. And Doberson has pretty much gone along with all of Lou Smit's ideas.

JonBenet also, under her fingernails, the primary source of DNA, is JonBenet's.

Q. On both hands?

A. On both hands.

I agree with MurriFlower (don't everyone gasp at once!): everyone would have their own DNA under their nails. There's nothing to explain.

Moreover, the implication here is that there was a lot of JB's own skin under her nails, as if she had clawed herself. But there wasn't. And it would have been pretty easy to spot if there had been.

I never saw those photos but I guess he's not lying,right.

Lying? Probably not. I'm sure he does believe that. Mistaken? I'd say yes. The photos I've seen of JB's neck show nothing of the kind.

Furthermore, he can't even keep his own story straight. First he says that the wrist ligatures were legit and she couldn't fight; practically the next breath, he's describing her as scratching the he** out of her own neck.

Half moon shaped marks indicate to ME that she scratched herself(fingernails)

They would indicate it to me, too...if they WERE half-moon shaped marks.

Anybody else see the problems here, or is it just me?

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Hi Hotyh.



Forensic materials and physics indicate otherwise:

I never knew you to be so high-handed...plus there's no support for your claim at your website.

Anyway, the forensic examples that you seem to want to quote actually demonstrate the principal: the hexagonal hammer leaving a hexagonal impression. Other hammers leave holes the same as their cross-section. This concept isn't difficult to understand for most people anyway. Imagine a cookie cutter, or a punch and die. These tools will easily create shapes of their own cross-section. A flashlight cylindrical/spheroidal shape will not.

Its interesting that the opinions are high about the flashlight when all you have is a photo of some dude holding a flashlight. No replication of hole or fragment is presented, therefore suggesting a weak or incomplete argument.

I suggest going by the fragment described in the autopsy report: roughly rectangular (not loaf or flashlight-shaped) approx. 1 3/4" x 1/2". The rectangular cross-section describes many objects, including common weapons, besides the flashlight. The flashlight demonstration is wanting photos, exhibits, or other proof that it replicated her injury in any way shape or form. Right now it seems to be an empty claim.

 

[DeeDee249]

I see the problems, too. There has NEVER been a forensic analysis of the marks on her neck that describes them as fingernail marks, claw marks or scratches. The coroner stated they were petechiae, he had no reason to lie, and this is such a basic observation that no coroner would make a mistake.
NO blood or bloody tissue was found under JB's fingernails, and because there was a procedural error with use of the clippers used on JB, all findings of DNA under her nails must be discounted. NO match has ever been verified of any fingernail DNA to anything else- these are simply more of Smit's fantasies that unfortunately exist in perpetuity on the Web.

 

[Tadpole12]

I never knew you to be so high-handed...plus there's no support for your claim at your website.

Anyway, the forensic examples that you seem to want to quote actually demonstrate the principal: the hexagonal hammer leaving a hexagonal impression. Other hammers leave holes the same as their cross-section. This concept isn't difficult to understand for most people anyway. Imagine a cookie cutter, or a punch and die. These tools will easily create shapes of their own cross-section. A flashlight cylindrical/spheroidal shape will not.

Its interesting that the opinions are high about the flashlight when all you have is a photo of some dude holding a flashlight. No replication of hole or fragment is presented, therefore suggesting a weak or incomplete argument.

I suggest going by the fragment described in the autopsy report: roughly rectangular (not loaf or flashlight-shaped) approx. 1 3/4" x 1/2". The rectangular cross-section describes many objects, including common weapons, besides the flashlight. The flashlight demonstration is wanting photos, exhibits, or other proof that it replicated her injury in any way shape or form. Right now it seems to be an empty claim.

Hey hotyh.

Sure, the flashlight demonstration photo is wanting, but that the flashlight remains a possibility is a reality. The link was for your consideration.
I leave you to your expertise.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Hey hotyh.

Sure, the flashlight demonstration photo is wanting, but that the flashlight can and was considered is not. The link was for your consideration.
I leave you to your expertise.

Unintelligible.

 

[Tadpole12]

Unintelligible.

Hey hotyh.

I've made corrections to my statement.

 

[Roy23]

Aww don't do that.
I don't need any favors.
Fine,I understand,the fact that there are other suspects who can't be eliminated is NOT important to you.I am not surprised,you already know who killed JB.Why are you here then,to fight with people like me who have no idea who it was but would like to find out?That's why I am here.

Maddy,

You make me proud. Looking at the results of this poll makes me want to vomit.

 

[madeleine]

I see the problems, too. There has NEVER been a forensic analysis of the marks on her neck that describes them as fingernail marks, claw marks or scratches. The coroner stated they were petechiae, he had no reason to lie, and this is such a basic observation that no coroner would make a mistake.
NO blood or bloody tissue was found under JB's fingernails, and because there was a procedural error with use of the clippers used on JB, all findings of DNA under her nails must be discounted. NO match has ever been verified of any fingernail DNA to anything else- these are simply more of Smit's fantasies that unfortunately exist in perpetuity on the Web.

If it was degraded/contaminated that doesn't mean it doesn't exist and couldn't mean something.Maybe there were just not enough markers for a match.

Beckner admits there was foreign DNA under her fingernails.

22 A Well, back up a minute. There is more

23 than one sample of DNA. So specifically what are you

24 referring to?

25 Q Well, as I understand it, there is DNA and




121



1 I don't want to get technical here, but I understand

2 there was DNA found, foreign DNA, found under the

3 fingernails on JonBent's left and right hands; am I

4 right?

5 A Okay. Yes.
6 Q As I understand it, there was foreign DNA

7 found either on -- I'll just say on her underwear?

8 A Yes.

9 Q Now, I'm not aware as I sit here of any

10 other DNA. Was there any other?

11 A Yes.
12 Q Where was it?

13 A Well --

14 MR. MILLER: Just a minute.

15 THE DEPONENT: Yeah. We're getting into

16 evidence here.



So we have DNA somewhere else but where.

 

[MurriFlower]

If it was degraded/contaminated that doesn't mean it doesn't exist and couldn't mean something.Maybe there were just not enough markers for a match.

Beckner admits there was foreign DNA under her fingernails.

22 A Well, back up a minute. There is more

23 than one sample of DNA. So specifically what are you

24 referring to?

25 Q Well, as I understand it, there is DNA and




121



1 I don't want to get technical here, but I understand

2 there was DNA found, foreign DNA, found under the

3 fingernails on JonBent's left and right hands; am I

4 right?

5 A Okay. Yes.
6 Q As I understand it, there was foreign DNA

7 found either on -- I'll just say on her underwear?

8 A Yes.

9 Q Now, I'm not aware as I sit here of any

10 other DNA. Was there any other?

11 A Yes.
12 Q Where was it?

13 A Well --

14 MR. MILLER: Just a minute.

15 THE DEPONENT: Yeah. We're getting into

16 evidence here.



So we have DNA somewhere else but where.

Oh, a guess?? Pubic and legs (where she was wiped) - otherwise why wipe?

 

[BBB167893]

It's not surprising to find foreign DNA under one's nails, either.