You, the jury

[WHITEFANG]

SuperDave
Yes, I said THAT. And I stand by it. I did NOT say, as you seem to suggest, that being a good parent makes you a child-killer automatically.

Oh, of course not and I never suggested you did.

You said, 'Oh, we're such loving parents. How could you think we could do this?' "They're not the first (the first what?) to ply that tack, and they won't be the last."

"My POINT is that just about EVERY killer parent uses that dodge, because people believe it. They want to believe it, nonsense or not. Being a loving parent doesn't make you incapable of killing. And it's not PROOF, either."

You haven't been around here long, Fang.

Well, I said splurge, so keep going.

 

[BBB167893]

Which facts?

What do you mean, "which facts?" I already listed them.

Oh, of course not and I never suggested you did.

Then let's move on.

Well, I said splurge, so keep going.

Well let's see: I joined up here just after Patsy's death, and I mentioned how I was glad that she and JB were together again. Also, if someone insults PR in a particularly grievous manner, I'm the first one to jump on it.

 

[WHITEFANG]

What do you mean, "which facts?" I already listed them.

These are the facts?

I counter by reminding the jury that the tape was not applied until after the deceased was already dead.

Taking these facts into account, it is clear that the duct tape was not practical for silencing the victim. Thus, it could only have been applied after death for purposes of staging, making it look like something it wasn't. We are inevitably left with the question: cui bono? Who would benefit from making it look like an outsider committed this crime? Sadly, we are left with only family as the answer.

Thus, it could not be used for any other purpose. It could not be used as a strip of tape, with more to follow, to cut off her air supply?

 

[BBB167893]

These are the facts?

As we know them.

 

[WHITEFANG]

Remember, you are arguing with someone who will not acknowledge "love" as a viable component in this debacle. It is a non-factor. Fang

That's not it. I acknolwedge it quite extensively. SD

FANG--You mean, "acknowledged quite extensively" in a single paragraph in an unpublished manuscript, and stating when you joined here and after Patsy died you were glad she and JonBenet were reunited? Plus, "Also, if someone insults PR in a particularly grievous manner, I'm the first one to jump on it."

 

[WHITEFANG]

As we know them.

the tape applied after death is a fact?

 

[KeyboardCat]

the tape applied after death is a fact?

There was a perfect imprint of her lips on the duct tape, according to Steve Thomas and Dr. Lee, if I recall correctly. There was mucous that ran from her nose that was also under the duct tape, in the way that it ran down her face. That is one reason why people say there was staging. The piece of duct tape was short enough that she could have removed it on her own, if she was able to raise her hands to do it. She could have lowered her jaw to remove it. She didn't even try to stick out her tongue under the tape to try to maneuver it. That is why the detectives and experts say that it was applied postmortem. When you duct tape a live victim, these things happen. They will try to open their mouths to loosen it, or use their tongues to try to create some slack.

I've heard people say she was rendered unconscious from the use of a stun gun, therefore couldn't fight back in anyway with her mouth against the tape. Except stun guns will sort of incapacitate you for a few minutes, due to the shock, quite literally. They do not make you pass out. You can move after being hit with a stun gun, just not with a whole lot of coordination, you can scream. It hurts like hell.

 

[MurriFlower]

There was a perfect imprint of her lips on the duct tape, according to Steve Thomas and Dr. Lee, if I recall correctly. There was mucous that ran from her nose that was also under the duct tape, in the way that it ran down her face. That is one reason why people say there was staging. The piece of duct tape was short enough that she could have removed it on her own, if she was able to raise her hands to do it. She could have lowered her jaw to remove it. She didn't even try to stick out her tongue under the tape to try to maneuver it. That is why the detectives and experts say that it was applied postmortem. When you duct tape a live victim, these things happen. They will try to open their mouths to loosen it, or use their tongues to try to create some slack.

I've heard people say she was rendered unconscious from the use of a stun gun, therefore couldn't fight back in anyway with her mouth against the tape. Except stun guns will sort of incapacitate you for a few minutes, due to the shock, quite literally. They do not make you pass out. You can move after being hit with a stun gun, just not with a whole lot of coordination, you can scream. It hurts like hell.

How long was the piece of tape?
Was the mucus on the sticky side or the non-sticky side of the tape?
Who said that the lip imprint was on the tape?
Who said she did not try to remove it?

Can I have credible sources for all this please? I do not consider excerpts from books written by third parties to be credible sources BTW.

Sorry to hear you were hit by a stun gun? Was this an accident or deliberate?

 

[KeyboardCat]

Oh yes, one more thing: If a stun gun was used which kept her silent until the shock/pain of it wore off, tape probably wasn't on her mouth while she was being transported to the basement. She wouldn't have been able to get the scream out that three neighbors while she was in the basement. (I think Lou Smit had determined the scream would have had to have happened there for the neighbors to hear it so yell, but not audible on the parent's side of the house due to the accoustics of the house.) So due to the scream, lack of fighting back, I think its probable that the tape was applied after the fact.

 

[MurriFlower]

Oh yes, one more thing: If a stun gun was used which kept her silent until the shock/pain of it wore off, tape probably wasn't on her mouth while she was being transported to the basement. She wouldn't have been able to get the scream out that three neighbors while she was in the basement. (I think Lou Smit had determined the scream would have had to have happened there for the neighbors to hear it so yell, but not audible on the parent's side of the house due to the accoustics of the house.) So due to the scream, lack of fighting back, I think its probable that the tape was applied after the fact.

Three people heard the scream?? I thought it was just one person, who later recanted? Who were these three neighbours pray tell?? Not the Santa family I hope!!

BTW, did you scream when you were hit by the stun gun?

 

[WHITEFANG]

So due to the scream, lack of fighting back, I think its probable that the tape was applied after the fact.

You're in agreement with this SD?

 

[MurriFlower]

I call rebuttal.
People maintain that there were not such strips.

"PEOPLE" - is this your evidence, "People maintain that there were no such strips". What people might these be and on what basis to they maintain the absence of such strips of tape?

The tape's adhesive quality has been called into question previously.

There was no question about the adhesive quality of the tape. It DEFINATELY WOULD HAVE evidence of a previous use had that occurred. If it had fibers adhered to it, then there would be other material as well, so it's adhesive qualities were not in question.

Question: was there not a doll which went missing and a replacement was delivered to John Ramsey's office?

This needs clarification. We have no evidence of any missing doll. Whose doll was it and from where was it missing? Who was supposed to have delivered it to JR's office and for what purpose?

I counter by reminding the jury that the tape was not applied until after the deceased was already dead.

1. There was a perfect, undistorted set of lip prints on the adhesive side of the tape, which could not have happened if the deceased were trying to resist it.

Please provide the report or the testimony of the person who provided this evidence.

2. No skin trauma was idenitfied around the mouth of the victim, a further indication of no resistance.

Please provide the report or the testimony of the person who provided this evidence. What trauma would have been incurred by the placement of tape with rubber adhesive around the mouth with or without resistence?

3. The size of the tape applied was fairly small, very impractical for silencing a person, even a small child.

Please provide the report or the testimony of the person who provided this evidence. Please include the size of "fairly small" and "very impractical" from the point of view of an expert in this field.

4. The tape had bloody mucous on the adhesive side, which furthers our argument that it was not applied until after death.

Please provide the report or the testimony of the person who provided this evidence, particularly as it applies to the mucous and upon which side of the tape it was found.

Taking these facts into account, it is clear that the duct tape was not practical for silencing the victim. Thus, it could only have been applied after death for purposes of staging, making it look like something it wasn't. We are inevitably left with the question: cui bono? Who would benefit from making it look like an outsider committed this crime? Sadly, we are left with only family as the answer.

Please provide the jury with these facts so they may assess the evidence for themselves.

Your assertion of cui bono ignores the obvious answer and that is that the family of the deceased have no potential benefit from the death of their relative. The only possible beneficiary is the person who was attempting to extort money from the parents of this child by simulating a kidnapping.

 

[DeeDee249]

The "missing doll" has been talked about at length here. JB owned an American Girl Samantha doll. I am NOT talking about the MyTwinn doll she received that morning for Christmas.
These American Girl dolls have vinyl heads and limbs on a stuffed cloth body. They are 18 inches tall, a fairly large doll.
The heads are fastened onto the bodies at the beck with a piece of white cord (similar to, but not identical to, the garrote. This cord is round, the garrote cord is flat) and the cord is knotted at the back of the dolls' neck. The dolls come from the factory with this cord.
The Pleasant Company (the dolls' manufacturer) recommends that parents place a piece of duct tape over the cord knot so the cord will not interfere with brushing the dolls' hair or the dolls' clothes.
JB's doll could not be found after the crime. Later, a "replacement" American Girl doll was mailed to the Access Graphics offices. None of the Rs or LE have spoken about this doll and why it was ordered after JB's death.

 

[WHITEFANG]

"PEOPLE" - is this your evidence, "People maintain that there were no such strips". What people might these be and on what basis to they maintain the absence of such strips of tape?

There was no question about the adhesive quality of the tape. It DEFINATELY WOULD HAVE evidence of a previous use had that occurred. If it had fibers adhered to it, then there would be other material as well, so it's adhesive qualities were not in question.

This needs clarification. We have no evidence of any missing doll. Whose doll was it and from where was it missing? Who was supposed to have delivered it to JR's office and for what purpose?


Please provide the report or the testimony of the person who provided this evidence.

Please provide the report or the testimony of the person who provided this evidence. What trauma would have been incurred by the placement of tape with rubber adhesive around the mouth with or without resistence?

Please provide the report or the testimony of the person who provided this evidence. Please include the size of "fairly small" and "very impractical" from the point of view of an expert in this field.

Please provide the report or the testimony of the person who provided this evidence, particularly as it applies to the mucous and upon which side of the tape it was found.

Please provide the jury with these facts so they may assess the evidence for themselves.

Your assertion of cui bono ignores the obvious answer and that is that the family of the deceased have no potential benefit from the death of their relative. The only possible beneficiary is the person who was attempting to extort money from the parents of this child by simulating a kidnapping.

Dear MurriFlower,
Go to the head of the class and keep going. You need to skip a couple grades. Proceed to "ADVANCED SLEUTHS MENSA CLUB" and stop humiliating the rest of us, (even some who used to like you!)

 

[WHITEFANG]

Remember, you are arguing with someone who will not acknowledge "love" as a viable component in this debacle. It is a non-factor.

FANG--You mean, "acknowledged quite extensively" in a single paragraph in an unpublished manuscript, and stating when you joined here and after Patsy died you were glad she and JonBenet were reunited? Plus, "Also, if someone insults PR in a particularly grievous manner, I'm the first one to jump on it."

"That's not it. I acknolwedge it quite extensively."

Try again. Emphasis on the word, "extensively."

 

[DeeDee249]

The family of the deceased child were not looking to benefit by her death. This was not a premeditated- for-profit murder. This was an unintended death.

 

[BBB167893]

FANG--You mean, "acknowledged quite extensively" in a single paragraph in an unpublished manuscript, and stating when you joined here and after Patsy died you were glad she and JonBenet were reunited?

Those were two examples off the top of my head.

Plus, "Also, if someone insults PR in a particularly grievous manner, I'm the first one to jump on it."

That's right. It was roughly a year ago when someone refered to her as a "cow." I condemned that very strongly and took a lot of heat for it, but I had to remain true to myself.

the tape applied after death is a fact?

Sure looks that way.

 

[BBB167893]

You're in agreement with this SD?

Most of it. I'm doubtful about the scream.

 

[MurriFlower]

The "missing doll" has been talked about at length here. JB owned an American Girl Samantha doll. I am NOT talking about the MyTwinn doll she received that morning for Christmas.
These American Girl dolls have vinyl heads and limbs on a stuffed cloth body. They are 18 inches tall, a fairly large doll.
The heads are fastened onto the bodies at the beck with a piece of white cord (similar to, but not identical to, the garrote. This cord is round, the garrote cord is flat) and the cord is knotted at the back of the dolls' neck. The dolls come from the factory with this cord.
The Pleasant Company (the dolls' manufacturer) recommends that parents place a piece of duct tape over the cord knot so the cord will not interfere with brushing the dolls' hair or the dolls' clothes.
JB's doll could not be found after the crime. Later, a "replacement" American Girl doll was mailed to the Access Graphics offices. None of the Rs or LE have spoken about this doll and why it was ordered after JB's death.

I haven't heard about it. Can you please provide a link to this information as I don't remember reading anything about it either. Is it a bona fide piece of evidence or just a tabloid idea or something read in a novel written about the crime?

 

[BBB167893]

"PEOPLE" - is this your evidence, "People maintain that there were no such strips". What people might these be and on what basis to they maintain the absence of such strips of tape?

Sorry, MurriFlower. I forgot you're not familiar with the US legal system. "People" refers to the prosecution, since they represent "the people." Thus, I meant that the prosecution maintains.

There was no question about the adhesive quality of the tape. It DEFINATELY WOULD HAVE evidence of a previous use had that occurred. If it had fibers adhered to it, then there would be other material as well, so it's adhesive qualities were not in question.

Agreed, with reservations.

This needs clarification. We have no evidence of any missing doll. Whose doll was it and from where was it missing? Who was supposed to have delivered it to JR's office and for what purpose?

One thing at a time. DD answered the question about what doll quite aptly. As for who delivered it, I can't say.

Please provide the report or the testimony of the person who provided this evidence.

KBC already did it.

Please provide the report or the testimony of the person who provided this evidence. What trauma would have been incurred by the placement of tape with rubber adhesive around the mouth with or without resistence?

Very well. The FBI mentioned this. PMPT, page 306:

Skin trauma would be evident if she had been alive. Coroner Meyer had not reported any trauma to the skin around JonBenet's mouth.

As for what trauma, from personal experience, it would have caused stretching of the skin from trying to fight against it.

Please provide the report or the testimony of the person who provided this evidence. Please include the size of "fairly small" and "very impractical" from the point of view of an expert in this field.

Well, the tape was a square piece, 2x2 inches roughly. And from what the FBI mentioned, it's typical for the kidnapper to wrap it all around the head.

Please provide the report or the testimony of the person who provided this evidence, particularly as it applies to the mucous and upon which side of the tape it was found.

ST, page 241:

Pictures showed that bloody mucus in the mouth area had been covered by the tape.

Your assertion of cui bono ignores the obvious answer and that is that the family of the deceased have no potential benefit from the death of their relative.

You misunderstand. The question was not whether or not the family would benefit from her death (which is a whole other keg of beer); rather, the question is, "who benefits from placing duct tape on a dead person?"