Page 4 of 33 FirstFirst 1234567814 ... LastLast
Results 37 to 48 of 395
  1. #37
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    1,000 miles from nowhere
    Posts
    165

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by otg View Post
    I can't dispute that as a possibility. But I do find it hard to believe that the repeated striking of her head against some object while holding her by her blouse would result in a blow delivered to the same exact spot each time causing an almost perfect, oval-shaped depressed fracture with no other depressed fractures anywhere else on her skull.

    But again, I suppose it is within the realm of possibility.
    Once the depression is there, it's there. Pushing the head against the same object a second or third time, could, but not necessarily would, make a new injury.

    There are all kinds of possible scenarios but without access to all the information there's no way to come to a logical conclusion. I just happen to think the injury is more consistent with her head striking something more so than something striking her head. I could be wrong.

  2. #38
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    8,381

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by heymom View Post
    My son was not an adult either, he was 13. Granted, older than 6, but that slamming scenario is just not realistic.
    I disagree with you hm. Surely with your work you have seen children badly injured by bad tempered mothers and fathers according to what you have already stated when you were working with children.
    Last edited by Elle_1; December 28, 2012, 10:22 pm at Fri Dec 28 22:22:32 UTC 2012.
    elle: The RST can't handle the truth!
    Just my opinion.

  3. #39

    Default

    I think the theory of Jonbenet being pushed into an object is possible, however I don't see Patsy as being the pusher. It just doesn't seem like something she would do, IMO.

    The thing I have pretty much made up my mind about is that the flashlight is not the weapon that was used. I can't make any sense out of that.
    If it were not turned around and used as a baton then I think it would have broken. In a fit of anger who is going to think that through? Also, keep in mind the flashlight wasn't stored on the kitchen counter where it was found. Someone had to deliberately walk across the room and retrieve it out of the drawer.That's not the definition of someone hitting her on a whim or in a fit of anger. That flashlight wasn't a handy thing to grab at that second.
    Why would they deliberately leave the flashlight sitting out on the counter where it would surely be found when they went to the trouble of getting rid of possibly duct tape, cord, panties...all the things that are missing. Why would they leave the head bash weapon, the thing that could have possibly started the whole ball rolling that night, out in the open sitting on a counter and then get rid of all the other obvious evidence connected to the crime? It doesn't make sense that they may have thought since all the fingerprints were wiped clean it wouldn't trace back to the crime.
    I think the flashlight was retrieved from the drawer during the cover up phase and used at that time only. The fact that it was wiped clean of fingerprints is probably just an anomaly. Not something deliberately done or even known about by the Ramseys.
    That's the only thing that makes sense to me about that flashlight. Unless I'm forgetting something major about it of course.
    I think the object that caused Jonbenets skull fracture has gone the way of the duct tape, cord, and panties.
    I may start a thread to try and figure out what is missing. The blue cloth used to wipe her down with, (if it's not JR's robe) the size 6 panties she was undoubtedly wearing...all the things that are missing that we know of in this crime. I'd like to have it all together because maybe there would be some glaring obvious item that has been overlooked.
    The flashlight is not missing, in fact was sitting right out there in plain view. I don't think it was an element in her actual death because that stuff is long gone and that flashlight's still here.
    Makes me wonder if it wasn't actually set out in the open to mislead police away from what did actually cause the head injury.

  4. #40
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    8,381

    Default

    Didn't you see Patsy Ramsey losing it when she was being questioned by one of the Detectives, Karen? She was slapping her thigh good style! I, personally see Patsy Ramsey losing it by being tired of cleaning up JonBenét
    day after day, and especially when they were leaving early the next morning. Yes I can see Patsy Ramsey being in an angry rage and throwing JonBenét around. The housekeeper said JB's bedsheets were in the dryer many mornings when she arrived. I think she was exhausted and lost it that morning! jmo, of course.
    elle: The RST can't handle the truth!
    Just my opinion.

  5. #41
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    8,381

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by otg View Post
    I can't dispute that as a possibility. But I do find it hard to believe that the repeated striking of her head against some object while holding her by her blouse would result in a blow delivered to the same exact spot each time causing an almost perfect, oval-shaped depressed fracture with no other depressed fractures anywhere else on her skull.

    But again, I suppose it is within the realm of possibility.

    One bad tempered throw of a small child of six into a solid object like a toilet or a tub is enough to kill them. jmo
    elle: The RST can't handle the truth!
    Just my opinion.

  6. #42

    Default

    (bbm)
    Quote Originally Posted by BOESP View Post
    I'm not saying anyone's hypothesis is wrong because I don't have enough information to come to a conclusion but grabbing a child and repeatedly and forcefully slamming their head against a hard surface certainly can cause damage similar to that seen on JonBenet's skull.

    I see Patsy being capable of doing that.
    Quote Originally Posted by otg View Post
    I can't dispute that as a possibility. But I do find it hard to believe that the repeated striking of her head against some object while holding her by her blouse would result in a blow delivered to the same exact spot each time causing an almost perfect, oval-shaped depressed fracture with no other depressed fractures anywhere else on her skull.

    But again, I suppose it is within the realm of possibility.
    Quote Originally Posted by BOESP View Post
    Once the depression is there, it's there. Pushing the head against the same object a second or third time, could, but not necessarily would, make a new injury.

    There are all kinds of possible scenarios but without access to all the information there's no way to come to a logical conclusion. I just happen to think the injury is more consistent with her head striking something more so than something striking her head. I could be wrong.
    Then what we are speaking about is one single push that is enough to cause the depressed fracture in itself -- not repeated in the same spot? If that is the case, then the other pushes caused no other fractures?

    I'm truly not trying to be a nuisance, BOESP -- I just want to understand exactly what you mean. (As I said before, I'm a stickler for detail.)
    .
    All views expressed in my posts are my opinion and are protected under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution as “freedom of speech”.

  7. #43
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    1,000 miles from nowhere
    Posts
    165

    Default

    otg, I don't know what else to say. I can't write an explanation for every possible variable. The wound seems more consistent with a low velocity-high pressure wound based on what I have seen and read.

  8. #44

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by otg View Post
    (bbm)




    Then what we are speaking about is one single push that is enough to cause the depressed fracture in itself -- not repeated in the same spot? If that is the case, then the other pushes caused no other fractures?

    I'm truly not trying to be a nuisance, BOESP -- I just want to understand exactly what you mean. (As I said before, I'm a stickler for detail.)
    OTG, I understand your struggle with the concept BOESP presents. It's a tough problem. I know Learnin did some experiments with a toilet seat he was very excited about--did he include photos of that? (Sorry, old brain only works half the time now.)

    The thing is, I hope we don't get sidetracked too much from your original experiment for which you started this thread, because I want to see how you finish your work on that. (This doesn't mean I think I'm right and others are wrong, or that we can't or shouldn't discuss other ideas, so please don't take offense, anyone.)

    I am in agreement with your amazing breakdown of the neck bruise, as well--there are some similar pictures in the case library here, if that helps. You did a very thorough job with this, and thank you so much!

    To continue with your original topic, I think it's prudent to take the turtleneck-and-knuckle source for that injury off the table for now so we don't lose your purpose.

    So in your hypothesis, the original physical attack was a blow to the head with something being wielded, a reasonable course of speculation as there are no other significant bruises or injuries to the body indicating any other violent interactions before that, discounting the bruise on the neck in question.

    If you can, please continue, because I think you're onto something here, OTG. I look forward to seeing your "big reveal," as well.

    "University of Colorado Law Professor Paul Campos declared the letter a 'reckless exoneration.' He went on to state, 'Everyone knows that relative immunity from criminal conviction is something money can buy.
    Apparently another thing it can buy is an apology for even being suspected of a crime you probably already would have been convicted of committing if you happened to be poor.'"
    FF: WRKJB?

    ~~~~~~~
    Bloomies underwear model:
    3 Dimensional

    ~~~~~~
    My opinions, nothing more.

  9. #45
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    1,000 miles from nowhere
    Posts
    165

    Default

    Being struck by an object is a relatively high velocity-low pressure action. It could cause a fracture but in JonBenet's case the length of the fracture and width of the fracture, running left and right from the point of impact, suggests relatively high pressure. It isn't just a "crack" but a relatively wide split running in two directions.

    I don't believe she was repeatedly thrown into anything but I think the damage is consistent with Steve Thomas's version of events as told in his book.
    Last edited by BOESP; December 29, 2012, 11:14 pm at Sat Dec 29 23:14:17 UTC 2012.

  10. #46
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Somewhere over the rainbow
    Posts
    3,481

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Elle_1 View Post
    I disagree with you hm. Surely with your work you have seen children badly injured by bad tempered mothers and fathers according to what you have already stated when you were working with children.
    I didn't have access to their medical records, but many of them had been shaken as infants. Thus, the serious brain injuries and other handicaps such as blindness.
    "We're not necessarily doubting that God will do the best for us; we are wondering how painful the best will turn out to be." - C.S. Lewis

    MY OPINIONS - DO NOT COPY THEM ANYWHERE ELSE ON THE INTERNET!

  11. #47
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Somewhere over the rainbow
    Posts
    3,481

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Karen View Post
    I think the theory of Jonbenet being pushed into an object is possible, however I don't see Patsy as being the pusher. It just doesn't seem like something she would do, IMO.

    The thing I have pretty much made up my mind about is that the flashlight is not the weapon that was used. I can't make any sense out of that.
    If it were not turned around and used as a baton then I think it would have broken. In a fit of anger who is going to think that through? Also, keep in mind the flashlight wasn't stored on the kitchen counter where it was found. Someone had to deliberately walk across the room and retrieve it out of the drawer.That's not the definition of someone hitting her on a whim or in a fit of anger. That flashlight wasn't a handy thing to grab at that second.
    Why would they deliberately leave the flashlight sitting out on the counter where it would surely be found when they went to the trouble of getting rid of possibly duct tape, cord, panties...all the things that are missing. Why would they leave the head bash weapon, the thing that could have possibly started the whole ball rolling that night, out in the open sitting on a counter and then get rid of all the other obvious evidence connected to the crime? It doesn't make sense that they may have thought since all the fingerprints were wiped clean it wouldn't trace back to the crime.
    I think the flashlight was retrieved from the drawer during the cover up phase and used at that time only. The fact that it was wiped clean of fingerprints is probably just an anomaly. Not something deliberately done or even known about by the Ramseys.
    That's the only thing that makes sense to me about that flashlight. Unless I'm forgetting something major about it of course.
    I think the object that caused Jonbenets skull fracture has gone the way of the duct tape, cord, and panties.
    I may start a thread to try and figure out what is missing. The blue cloth used to wipe her down with, (if it's not JR's robe) the size 6 panties she was undoubtedly wearing...all the things that are missing that we know of in this crime. I'd like to have it all together because maybe there would be some glaring obvious item that has been overlooked.
    The flashlight is not missing, in fact was sitting right out there in plain view. I don't think it was an element in her actual death because that stuff is long gone and that flashlight's still here.
    Makes me wonder if it wasn't actually set out in the open to mislead police away from what did actually cause the head injury.
    I think that would be a really helpful thread.

    and, I think the flashlight may have been left out to point to the "kidnapper," since the Ramseys weren't sure it was their flashlight but hedged when the police asked them about it. Red herring. I think that's why it was wiped down, so that their fingerprints weren't on it.
    "We're not necessarily doubting that God will do the best for us; we are wondering how painful the best will turn out to be." - C.S. Lewis

    MY OPINIONS - DO NOT COPY THEM ANYWHERE ELSE ON THE INTERNET!

  12. #48

    Default Part-5: Finding the right model... and demonstrations.

    Apologies also to my fellow posters who might think I had abandoned the work I was doing on this. I hope you won't be disappointed in what I've been busy working on (besides the RL stuff that always comes up). This goes for you especially, koldkase (you impatient pirate)!

    Because it’s been a while (12-19-2012) since my last post in this series, I probably should review the main point I was trying to make which led me to where I am.

    Parts-1 through -4 are all earlier in this thread. But basically, despite the coroner’s reference to the depressed fracture as being a “roughly rectangular shaped displaced fragment of skull”, I believe it is in fact oval shaped. I feel knowing this is essential to knowing what weapon was used to cause the head wound.

    I became pretty convinced about all this back around August/September (2012). So in the back of my mind, I had this idea that I needed some way of demonstrating it. Then when I saw the Halloween decorations going up in the stores, it dawned on me what to use. I found just the right one, bought some modeling clay, and here is the result:

    The cheap plastic skull I bought has a flattened backside (I’m thinking the reason for this is to keep it from rolling around when put on a table as a Halloween decoration), which allows me to add a layer of modeling clay which will show how various sized and shaped objects cause pressure. Since it is smaller than a real skull, I measured it to get an approximate scale size. (Paying attention to the calculations is not necessary for the post -- they're just here for anyone who likes to know the details.)

    I used the following dimensions for an average 6-year-old’s skull:
    1) skull perimeter = ~21”
    2) skull avg. diameter = 6.65”
    3) skull height = 7”

    Corresponding measurements on the toy skull are:
    1) 16
    2) 5
    3) 6

    Calculations:
    1) 16 / 21 = 0.7619
    2) 5 / 6.65 = 0.7519
    3) 6 / 7 = 0.8571

    So based on the above, when I get to where I’m using this model, I’ll use 3/4 (0.75) as the scale, which is pretty easy to use in calculations and reasonably close to what I measured. I think the third ratio (skull height) is off from the others because of a lack of correct perspective in the mandibular area depicted in the skull (not to mention the fact that after all -- it’s just a cheap-passed Halloween toy). I think if I had photo software that allowed me to overlay a picture of the toy with a photo of an actual human skull, the reason for this variance would be obvious. But for my purposes here, using three-quarters as the scale is sufficient. What I am hoping for anyway is to demonstrate what would cause the 1/2” x 1-3/4” oval-shaped hole.

    I mentioned earlier that in Geometry, an oval is the resulting intersection of a sphere and a cylinder. So I believe that it was some type of cylindrical object that caused the depressed fracture in JonBenet’s skull. Since we know approximately the dimensions of that area, we should be able to at least narrow down the possible diameter of the cylinder, and then perhaps decide what might have caused it.

    But before I try to find the correct size (diameter) of the cylinder, I should demonstrate the effect of a few other objects that have been considered as possible weapons so we can eliminate them from the discussion. Rather than have to form the clay over and over again on the skull (for which I have no mold), I used something I could easily and consistently shape the clay to in order to get a curvature approximately the same as a skull.

    Fortunately for me, Mrs. otg doesn’t read here. If she did, she’d see from what I’m about to show you that I used her stainless steel mixing bowls and other various kitchen devices, and I’d be in the dog house. (Shhhhhhhhhh..... Don’t anyone tell her -- I don’t need the grief.) This is one reason it’s taken me a while to get some of this done (Mrs. otg doesn’t leave the house much without me since she’s been ill.).

    I put together the following video showing how I did this and the impressions left in the compound curvature of the clay with various objects and speculated weapons. I know the people here are pretty smart, so it shouldn’t take too much to get the idea by watching this how different shapes leave different impressions, and the impressions of even other shapes can then be almost predicted.

    Here it is. If a picture is worth a thousand words, this should hopefully save me a lot of writing about what I found:


    Despite going through all the other reasonable possibilities I could think of and that other posters have suggested, the cylinder is the only thing that causes a depression in the clay in the same shape as the depressed fracture in JonBenet’s skull. So I feel comfortable in saying that I’ve confirmed the geometry and am confident that the weapon used was cylindrically shaped.

    One more little demo (and one that anyone can easily recreate) to show in small scale the effect of a cylinder hitting a spherical object:


    The purpose of the ice cream scoop was just to compare the effect of something spherical to a cylinder (in this case -- the handle of a wooden mixing spoon).

    The next thing will be to narrow down as much as I can the diameter of the object that might have caused the depressed fracture, and then show how it caused the linear fracture as well.
    Last edited by Cherokee; February 24, 2013, 2:58 pm at Sun Feb 24 14:58:27 UTC 2013. Reason: separation of threads
    .
    All views expressed in my posts are my opinion and are protected under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution as “freedom of speech”.



Similar Threads

  1. Weapon used on JonBenet's skull: golf club or flashlight?
    By cynic in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 80
    Last Post: March 20, 2013, 1:08 am, Wed Mar 20 1:08:17 UTC 2013
  2. The Alleged “Skull X-ray”
    By otg in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 41
    Last Post: September 9, 2012, 10:26 pm, Sun Sep 9 22:26:18 UTC 2012
  3. JonBenet's skull and the way her face was turned....
    By Golden_Rose in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: March 18, 2008, 7:26 pm, Tue Mar 18 19:26:53 UTC 2008
  4. skull fracture
    By Nickii in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: June 26, 2002, 3:41 pm, Wed Jun 26 15:41:02 UTC 2002

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •