Where's The Mystery?

Discussion in 'Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum' started by EasyWriter, Jun 24, 2004.

  1. EasyWriter

    EasyWriter FFJ Senior Member

    It has been nearly seven and a half years since the death of
    JonBenet Ramsey. The question of intruder vs no intruder has been
    the main topic of debate for all this time. Who knows how many
    law enforcement personnel were and are directly and indirectly
    involved and at what expense in terms of MWH and monetary cost;
    not to mention many lives in disarray by the fallout.

    How many thousands of pages of documents have accumulated in the
    process? How many lawsuits filed? How many books have been
    written? How many newspaper and magazine articles? How many tv
    programs of interviews and documentaries? The vastness of it all
    staggers the imagination.

    What is even more staggering is that in less than fifteen minutes
    of competent investigation, this would not have happened and
    still be happening. There is enough evidence in one document,
    that settles the question, intruder vs non intruder. That
    document is the autopsy report by Dr. Meyer. The information
    within this document alone leaves no evidentiary doubt as to the
    truth without any support from any other evidence. Other evidence
    simply confirms.

    Were this not such tragic situation, seeing all the scurrying
    about and all the “expertise†on display, all the media hoopla,
    and the whole bizarre scene would be amusing even if a bit scary.
    Can you imagine over seven years of chaos and absurdity looking
    for an intruder, a doomed-to-fail venture which would have never
    began IF the evidence via the autopsy report had been understood
    and heeded?

    Fifteen minutes is all the time needed to refute over seven year
    of intruder fallacies? Yes, that is exactly what I’m saying.
    Furthermore, I shall prove it with such thoroughness that none
    will dare to challenge. I say this hoping some will, but know
    they won’t. To be sure, proof will by ignored by the many fools
    who have invested much in pursuit of ridiculous theories and
    ghost chase, but challenge will not happen. Oh how embarrassing
    it would be for them to recognize truth at this late date and
    admit to the folly. This will not happen. They will burrow deeper
    and deeper into a quagmire of voluntary ignorance and self
    deception trying to escape the fact they have been duped by the
    Ramseys.

    In examining the autopsy report, I do not propose to contradict
    Dr. Meyer in his field of expertise, but I will challenge his
    observations and conclusions in areas apart from his profession.

    Upon initially looking into the case in 2000, the very first
    thing I read was the autopsy report. The framework and basic
    truths were laid out crystal clear. To understand the whys and
    hows of this fifteen minute investigation, I will simply set
    forth my general recollections of thoughts as I first read the
    autopsy report. Even though I have some advantage because of
    experience in certain areas, I think if you will look closely,
    you will see that nearly everyone has sufficient background
    knowledge to reach the same irrefutable conclusion: IT WAS A
    STAGED CRIME SCENE.

    “JONBENET RAMSEY AUTOPSY REPORT

    FINAL DIAGNOSIS:

    I. Ligature strangulation

    A. Circumferential ligature with associated ligature furrow of
    neckâ€

    This is the report summary set forth at the beginning of the
    document. It infers strangulation by circumferential compression
    of the throat by a ligature. By “associated ligature furrowâ€, it
    is implied sufficient circumferential compression to embed the
    ligature. Upon initial reading, I had no information by which to
    question Dr. Meyer’s conclusion.

    “VII. Ligature of right wristâ€

    One wrist?

    “CLINICOPATHLOGIC CORRELATION: Cause of death of this six year
    old female is asphyxia by strangulation associated with
    craniocerebral trauma.â€

    Evidently, Dr. Meyer could not isolate either as singular cause.

    “John E. Meyer M.D.

    Pathologist

    jn/12/27/96

    The body of this six year old female was first seen by me after I
    was called to an address identified as 755 - 15th street in
    Boulder, Colorado, on 12/26/96.....

    “....A brief examination of the body disclosed a ligature around
    the neck and a ligature around the right wrist.â€

    Ligature around neck goes along with the above, but why would
    anyone choose a cord to use as a strangling tool; not well suited
    for many reasons; can work, but poor choice. Ligature around
    right wrist is repeated, but no explanation of why just the right
    wrist.

    “EXTERNAL EXAM:
    The decedent is clothed in a long sleeved whit knit collarless
    shirt, the mid anterior chest area of which contains an
    embroidered silver star decorate with silver sequins. Tied
    loosely around the right wrist, overlying the sleeve of the shirt
    is a white cord.â€

    Loose tie, just right wrist, over sleeve. Doesn’t compute. Very
    strange. How is this to be explained?

    “At the knot there is one tail end which measures 5.5 inches in
    length with a frayed end. The other tail of the knot measures
    15.5 inches in length and ends in a double loop knot.â€

    The vague image is cord around right wrist with double loop over
    15" away. Loop for what? Was it around the other wrist? If so
    why? Why the loose tie of wrists fifteen inches apart. If it was
    around the other wrist, how and why did it come off? Makes no
    sense. What’s going on?

    “In the lateral aspect of the left lower eyelid on the inner
    conjunctival surface is a 1mminmaximum dimension petechial
    hemorrhage.â€

    OK, goes along with asphyxia via strangulationâ€, but
    strangulation is not the only means, so this question of oxygen
    deprivation is still open.

    “Wrapped around the neck with a double knot in the midline of the
    posterior neck is a length of white cord similar to that
    described as being tied around the right wrist.â€

    Hold the phone! Big red flag. This is not going to work. Double
    knot? A double knot, or more accurately a double throw with hand
    over hand is a lock down is what he appears to be describing. No
    way in hell can this account for “ Circumferential ligature with
    associated ligature furrow of neck†Once that knot is locked, the
    loop is not going to get an smaller.

    As an analogy, take your shoelaces one end in each hand; go right
    over left, pull; do it again or go left over right, pull. You
    have a double throw knot, a lock down. No matter how hard you
    pull, the energy goes into the knot and will not tighten the
    laces across your instep. As long as this knot is intact, the
    only way the laces across your instep are going to tighten is
    your foot swelling to take up the space and slack.

    Also, when tying such a knot, circumferential pressure is
    literally impossible. As the ends of the cord are pulled toward
    self and across in an effort to tie tightly, the most pressure
    will be exerted one eighty degrees from the position of knot
    tying. There will be very little pressure coming around the
    throat with cord tending to lift away entirely at tying point.
    There is also a friction factor working against circumferential
    compression as well. Dr. Meyer has something very wrong here.
    Double knot and circumferential compression are diametrically
    opposed. It didn’t happen. What did?

    “This ligature cord is cut on the right side of the neck and
    removed. A single black ink mark is placed on the left side of
    the cut and a double black ink mark on the right side of the cut.
    The posterior knot is left intact. Extending from the knot on the
    posterior aspect of the neck are two tails of the knot, one
    measuring 4 inches in length and having a frayed end, and the
    other measuring 17 inches in length with the end tied in multiple
    loops around a lenght of a round tan-brown wooden stick which
    measures 4.5 inches in length.â€

    Why 17" when efficiency is close to object? Why multiple loops
    around a stick. Off the top of my head, I can think of four way
    to attach a cord to a stick. Any of them can be done in five
    seconds or less. I get the impression that Dr. Meyer is talking
    about many turns around the stick as opposed to many separate
    loops. Anyway, using his terminology, many loops takes much time.
    Many loops still leaves single cord, therefore, no strengthening,
    no gain. Many turns makes for bad hand fit. There are negatives
    for the many turns, so why? It serves to use up the cord and not
    have to put the rest away. Other than that, it makes no sense.

    “This wooden stick is irregularly broken at both ends and there
    are several colors of paint and apparent glistening varnish on
    the surface. Printed in gold letters on one end of the wooden
    stick is the word "Korea".â€

    Paint brush handle? Usually not well suited for working handle.
    Why this selection? Convenience? I see no other reason.

    At this point in the autopsy report, Dr. Meyer has described a
    cord tied around the neck with a non slip knot. To one end of the
    cord is a mummy wrapped handle. This apparatus will work for
    dragging the body, but is literally impossible to utilize for
    circumferential strangulation. Where then did Dr. Meyer get the
    idea:

    “I. Ligature strangulation

    A. Circumferential ligature with associated ligature furrow of
    neck†?

    Obviously, he observed the ligature embedded in the flesh.
    Obviously, he didn’t understand how it got that way. The
    apparatus is precluded as cause contrary to what Dr. Meyer
    imagines. There has to be some other explanation consistent with
    known facts.

    If tied around the neck as Dr. Meyer describes, upon ending the
    operation of tying and letting go of the cord, the
    circumferential pressure tends to equalize. With knot fixed and
    no slip, after death swelling creates the embedding. To be sure,
    Dr. Meyer knows about after death swelling, but for whatever
    reason did not include it in his report and false assumption of
    embedding by circumferential strangulation.

    “The tail end of another word extends from beneath the loops of
    the cord tied around the stick and is not able to be interpreted.
    Blonde hair is entwined in the knot on the posterior aspect of
    the neck as well as in the cord wrapped around the wooden stick.â€

    Hair entwined with the knot confirms the cord being tied around
    the neck as opposed to a noose being made, put over the head,
    then compressed around the neck. The hair entwined in the cord
    around the stick reveal transfer, hence, the cord wrapped around
    the stick came after the tie was made about the neck.

    What was the point? What was supposed to be the function of the
    handle attached after the tie? There is no point in pulling it
    because the tie has already set the circumference of the cord
    around the neck. Drag the body, yes, change circumference and
    strangle, no way. The handle has no practical function in the set
    up; so, why is it there?


    “REMAINDER OF EXTERNAL EXAMINATION:... No scalp trauma is
    identified.â€

    Consistent with death by strangulation, but the evidence is not
    consistent with death by strangulation. Something missing.

    “Skull and Brain: Upon reflection of the scalp there is found to
    be an extensive area of scalp hemorrhage along the right
    temporoparietal area extending from the orbital ridge,
    posteriorly all the way to the occipital area. This encompasses
    an area measuring approximately 7x4 inches. This grossly appears
    to be fresh hemorrhage with no evidence of organization. At the
    superior extension of the is area of hemorrhage is a linear to
    comminuted skull fracture which extends from the right occipital
    to posteroparietal area forward tot he right frontal area across
    the parietal skull. In the posteroparietal area of this fracture
    is a roughly rectangular shaped displaced fragment of skull
    measuring one and three-quarters by one-half inch. The hemorrhage
    and the fracture extend posteriorly just past the midline of the
    occipital area of the skull. This fracture measures approximately
    8.5 inches in length.â€

    A skull fracture 8.5" in length and so severe that a fragment is
    displaced reads fatal while the cord and handle scene does not.
    When the two are put together, a logical relationship emerges.
    Things are falling into place with no rough edges.

    “Neck: Dissection of the neck is performed after removal of the
    throacoabdominal organs and the brain. The anterior strap
    musculature of the neck is serially dissected. Multiple sections
    of the sternocleidomastoid muscle disclose no hemorrhages.
    Sections of the remainder of the strap musculature of the neck
    disclose no evidence of hemorrhage. Examination of the thyroid
    cartilage, cricoid cartilage and hyoid bone disclose no evidence
    of fracture or hemorrhage. Multiple cross sections of the tongue
    disclose no hemorrhage or traumatic injury. The thyroid gland
    weights 2 gm and is normal in appearance. Cut sections are finely
    lobular and red-tan. The trachea and larynx are lined by smooth
    pink-tan mucosa without intrinsic abnormalities.â€

    “no hemorrhagesâ€, “no evidence of hemorrhageâ€,â€no evidence of
    fracture or hemorrhageâ€, “no hemorrhage or traumatic injury,â€
    “normal in appearanceâ€, “without intrinsic abnormalities.â€
    This part of the autopsy report revealing total absence of damage
    to internal throat does not jibe with

    “I. Ligature strangulation

    A. Circumferential ligature with associated ligature furrow of
    neckâ€

    How is it possible to strangle with sufficient pressure to embed
    a cord creating a ligature furrow, yet not even slightly damage
    any part of the inside of the throat? How is this to be
    explained? By reading the evidence that refutes the strangulation
    claim.

    Recall and remember, the cord was tied around the neck precluding
    circumferential compression. The circumference was fixed by the
    tie. The embedding pressure did not come from outward to inward,
    but the opposite. The cord\flesh contact pressure came from
    inward to outward via post mortem swelling, hence, no internal
    throat injuries.

    The conclusion drawn from the evidence is that although there was
    some pressure around the throat as the cord was being tied, even
    if JonBenet were still barely alive at the time, there is nothing
    to even remotely suggest sufficient pressure to strangle. As the
    absence of internal throat damage logically implies, there was
    nothing fatal about the cord setup. Ergo, cause of death was the
    skull fracture. All else is incidental.

    The obvious intent of the amateurish, non working, cord\handle
    stuff was to make it look like death by strangulation. Evidently,
    it worked; at least, on Dr. Meyer. He may know the anatomy of a
    human body, but is woefully ignorant of “knot physicsâ€, etc. It
    is his horrendous error in the official report that lent
    psychological credibility to many false notions, including the
    question of which came first, the strangling or the head trauma.
    The evidence answers the question: Head trauma first and fatal;
    the phony strangling scene followed.

    All of the foregoing establishes that the crime scene was staged.
    The only question remaining is who did the staging and why. I see
    several potentials: Intruder with attempt to frame someone else
    for the crime. Intruder commission with no attempt to frame
    anyone. No intruder. Deliberate murder by non intruder.
    Accidently fatal skull fracture connected to non intruder.

    All elements of the staging revealing amateur construction with
    materials at hand does not fit a plan to frame someone else.
    Also, if A wished to frame B with the set up, A would have to
    have had adequate “knot knowledge†and deliberately dumb down on
    the assumption that B was ignorant of the knots, handles and
    strangling devices. This would also raise the question as to why
    B would select a means of murder he knew nothing about. A would
    also have to calculate time with ability and opportunity. I think
    we can rule out intruder with intent to frame.

    An intruder committing the crime with no intent to frame doesn’t
    work either. The penalty is the same for murder whether by gun,
    knife, wire, cord, or whatever. So, no reason to try to make
    death by skull fracture look like death by strangulation. Nothing
    about the scene logically relates to a long gone intruder.

    When it comes down to protect or gain, the only person with
    motivation is the person associated with the fatal skull fracture
    in a way that said person does not wish known. The intended
    deception is not needed and has no use unless this person is
    highly visible to those inquiring about the death of JonBenet.

    Properly observed and properly read, the evidence set out in the
    autopsy report is more than adequate to conclude with certainty
    that no intruder was involved in the death of JonBenet. The
    evidence further reveals not deliberate murder with planning, but
    a desperate attempt to cover up the truth about a fatal accident
    with culpability.

    Evidence is fact. Fact is what connects to reality and limits
    conclusion and theories. When evidence is not recognized and
    heeded, thinking is cut loose from reality, therefore, has no
    limit. I cite the seven plus years of chaos surrounding the
    Ramsey case as prime and classic example. Fifteen minutes of
    viewing and evaluating the evidence in the autopsy report is all
    it would have taken to avoid everything generated from the false
    notion of an intruder.
     
  2. Elle

    Elle Member


    EW: I used a shoe lace above my right knee, and for sure, this double throw knot does cause a locking action and stops the lace from tightening up.

    I have always believed JonBenet was already dead, when this garotte was placed around her neck. I think a confrontation between Patsy and JonBenét took place in the kitchen over JonBenét eating pineapple before she went to bed. I think Patsy Ramsey was worn out at the end of this very tiring day, and couldn’t stand the backchat coming from her six year old. There was a flashlight on the counter which the Ramseys denied was theirs; hoping the cops would probably think it came with an intruder. A swipe on the head with this flashlight has been talked about before. With Patsy in a rage, she could have reached for it and without thinking swung it at her and knocked JonBenét unconscious.

    Strangulation pales in comparison to this skull fracture.

    This explanation has made me understand what actually happened. The embedding pressure came from the opposite direction from inside JonBenét’s neck to the outside From the swelling which happens after death. One would have expected internal throat injuries if the strangulation had been
    attempted while she was still alive.

    I am more convinced than ever that Patsy Ramsey was in a rage when she lashed out at JonBenét on Christmas night. Then she had to confess to John Ramsey what she had done, and between them, they covered it up. No need to go into all of it again here. We’ve all been through it many times.

    Edited to add, that it's just too bad Dr. Meyers didn't give we "laymen" a more thorough explanation like EasyWriter has here, of what really caused this furrow in the neck, the swelling of the neck and body after death. Not all of us out here are in tune with medical terminology. Had Myers explained this so much clearer than he did, I'm sure the police would have arrested both Ramseys in a flash. He should be hauled over the coals for his incompetence.
     
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 24, 2004
  3. Nikeo

    Nikeo Member

    Easywriter

    It is a shame that BPD did not ask you to do the autopsy. I am sure Dr. Myers is very competent, but you sound like the better pathologist/doctor to me, made it easier to understand the autopsy.
     
  4. EasyWriter

    EasyWriter FFJ Senior Member


    Doing autopsies is not my thing. Observing and analyzing my
    environment is. Dr. Meyer’s lack of both practices is hard to
    believe, but there it is.

    The investigative blunders in the Ramsey case are encyclopedic.
    None from the long list are as devastating as the one made by Dr.
    Meyer. This is “expertiseâ€, i.e., “official evidence.â€

    FINAL DIAGNOSIS:

    I. Ligature strangulation

    A. Circumferential ligature with associated ligature furrow of
    neck (From autopsy report)

    From what evidence did Dr. Meyer reach this conclusion? “ligature
    furrow� Dr. Meyer is an MD and coroner for goodness sake.
    Surely, he knew about post mortem swelling? He described a fixed
    knot and cut the cord from around the throat. How could he not
    know the cord embedding by post mortem swelling was certainly
    part if not all of the “ligature furrow?â€

    What’s his other “evidence†of strangulation?

    “C. Petechial hemorrhages, conjunctival surfaces of eyes and skin
    of face†?(ibid)

    Medical news flash. Strangulation is not the only way to account
    for this: Chest Compression, Postural/ Positional Asphyxia
    Airway Obstruction, Exhaustion or Displacement of Environmental
    Oxygen. One that come to mind is unconscious and face down with
    nose and mouth against carpet, or flooring, preventing air
    intake.

    According to Richard Jones forensicmed.co.uk, petechial
    hemmorrahges can show up even without asphyxia of any sort:

    “Unfortunately the presence of petechial hemorrhages does not
    automatically point to asphyxia as a cause of death. They are
    fairly non-specific in that they can be produced whenever there
    is a marked or sudden increase in vascular congestion of the head
    that causes rupture of capillaries.†( www.forensicmed.co.uk.}

    Neither the cord embedding, nor the petechial hemmorrahges are
    evidence of death by strangulation. Indeed, Dr. Meyer’s own
    observations counters the idea when he found no internal throat
    damage.

    “A deep ligature furrow encircles the entire neck. “ (ibid)

    Even if Dr. Meyer did not know this silly, amateurish cord and
    stick scene could not have possibly created “A deep ligature
    furrow encircles the entire neckâ€, to ignore post mortem swelling
    and ignore a throat internally perfectly intact without a trace
    of damage and diagnose strangulation as possible cause or co
    cause of death was gross negligence and gross incompetence. All
    this while being aware of a certainly fatal skull fracture.

    To emphasize, may I suggest a simple experiment to validate or
    invalidate my analysis? Take a newly deceased body, tie a cord
    just snugly around the neck. After 10 or 12 hours, observe the
    cord embedded in the flesh. Is this evidence of death by
    strangulation? Apparently, Dr. Meyer thought so.

    Remove the cord and measure the dept of the embedding. Take this
    cord, or similar, find a live subject; preferably some member of
    the RST and perform circumferential strangling with force
    sufficient to embed the cord to the same dept as that of the
    deceased. Perform internal examination of the throat? Was this
    strangling done without any internal throat damage.

    Had Meyer concluded as the evidence dictated, the cord and stick
    irrelevant with declaration of skull fracture as the certain
    cause of death, the whole investigative scene would have been
    much different from the seven year plus insanity we have seen,
    and which is still going on.

    Are you more than a bit annoyed at John Ramsey running for
    office. If you are, you may well be annoyed with Dr. Meyer as
    well. He has probably done more (by default) for John Ramsey’s
    political campaign than any other one person. Indeed, had it not
    been for Dr. Meyer’s horrendous blunders, chances are the only
    place John Ramsey would be running would be between cell blocks.
     
  5. Little

    Little Member

    Well, I have to drop my nickel in too :)
    Sometimes things just jump at you and this one leaped for me.

    If this was the vicious "strangulation" it has been hyped to be then shouldn't there be internal damage? I seem to remember in the Chandra Levy case they were searching for a tiny neck bone that might have proven whether or not she was strangled. If JonBenet was strangled then shouldn't there have been some evidence of this from the autopsy, irregardless of what the cursory external observation was?

    To me this answers the age-old question of which came first, the head injury or the ligature, or at least which one was the major contributor to the cause of death.
     
  6. EasyWriter

    EasyWriter FFJ Senior Member

    ADDENDUM TO WHERE’S THE MYSTERY POST

    Due to some static from certain quarters, and perhaps some
    misunderstanding, I decided to do a bit of editing via an
    addendum.

    Since I did not keep my research on strangulation notes from over
    four years ago, I did a bit of new to find my recollections were
    correct as is shown by a few short quotes from autopsy reports on
    actual cases.

    “larynx and neck were bruised and a cartilage in his voice box
    fracturedâ€

    “There is no evidence supporting death by strangulation--
    although there is evidence of abrasions caused by the ligature,
    that Karla said was tied to the hope chest to French's neck.â€

    “she was fully clothed, but her hyoid bone was broken, indicating
    death by strangulation.â€

    “In cases of strangulation, the hyoid bone is usually broken, and
    there is normally bruising if the victim was manually strangled
    and ligature marks if some kind of device, such as a cord, rope
    or belt were used. Because the hyoid bone was intact, and
    because there were no bruises or ligature marks present in the
    neck area, Simms could safely rule out strangulation as a cause
    of death.â€

    “HEAD--CENTRAL NERVOUS SYSTEM: Subsequent autopsy shows a broken
    hyoid bone. Hemorrhaging from Ligature B penetrates the skin and
    subdermal tissues of the neck.â€

    “SKELETAL SYSTEM: The hyoid bone is fractured.â€

    I trust it is noted that death by strangulation without internal
    throat damage is not exactly the norm.

    Although I have personally seen the onset of post mortem
    swelling, bloat, distension, or whatever you wish to call it in
    10 to 12 hours in certain circumstances, it is not necessary to
    draw such a fine line in the case of JonBenet Ramsey.

    While doing research, I also went looking for something I didn’t
    find: A dated autopsy photo of the ligature around JonBenet’s
    neck. However, I did find a date and time of the autopsy as
    recorded by Dr. Meyer.

    AUTOPSY NO: 96A-155

    AUTOPSY D/T: 12/27/96 @ 0815

    8:15 AM on the 27th is 19 hours and 15 minutes after the body was
    “discovered†at 1:00 PM on the 26th. If we roughly assume that
    JonBenet died around 10 PM on the 25th, this put us in the ball
    park of 34 hours from the time JonBenet died until Dr. Meyer
    observed the embedded cord around the neck.

    I stand by my original statement that the nonfunctional device
    could not and did not cause circumferential strangulation; that
    the circumferential embedding was caused by post mortem swelling
    with pressure from inward toward outward, hence, no internal
    throat damage as was stated in the autopsy report.

    I do not think I would have any trouble at all convincing a jury
    of this.
     
  7. Elle

    Elle Member

    I don't think you would either! Thank you for taking the extra time to add this.
     
  8. BobC

    BobC Poster of the EON - Fabulous Inimitable Transcript

    Easywriter I think you are absolutely right about the garrote.
     
  9. Texan

    Texan FFJ Senior Member

    Ew

    I have read that it is manual strangulation that usually causes the hyoid bone to fracture and also the thyroid cartilage. Ligature strangulation doesn't work by closing off the trachea as manual srangulation does, it works by compression of the carotid and vagus nerve. I think Cyril Wecht explains that in his book. The throat would swell post mortem as you have described. Would the rest of her body also swell at the same rate? I do believe some form of strangulation occured because of the triangular abrasion and also the petechial hemorhaging, especially above the ligature. Maybe the cord was first simply put around the neck and crossed tightly and then later fashioned in an amateurish attempt to stage a garotte.

    I really don't have a source for any of this and I most certainly could be wrong about any of it. I am a surgical first assistant and assist on carotid endarterectomies so I have actually seen the portion of the vagus nerve that runs along the carotid artery and I know that messing with it can cause a vasovagal response that lowers the heart rate and blood pressure significantly.
     
  10. EasyWriter

    EasyWriter FFJ Senior Member

    BobC, I know I am. When I say that I have tied up and tied down
    everything from a small Setter pup to a five pole (metal, 30'
    long, app. 1' diameter) circus tent, that’s exactly what I mean.
    Ropes, cords, knots, handles, etc, were part of my early
    upbringing and a daily part of my life for decades. I can’t give
    the names of but a few knots, but I don’t need names to know and
    apply the physics, or observe the physics in a given setup. When
    someone tries to tell me the “garrote scene†is a “professional
    strangling toolâ€, they tell me of their ignorance and\or
    deliberately lying.

    I laid out the details of the flaws in my original analysis with
    instructions of how to test to see for one’s self. The only
    person who really examined my analysis was “Hobey 86", who
    obviously by experience, understood and confirmed every point I
    made, then named more flaws I left out for sake of brevity.

    Have you seen John Ramsey, Lou Smit try to refute? Have you seen
    LE or any of the media ask John or Lou to explain the
    “professional†claim? Have you seen any member of the RST
    accept my invitation to meet me online and answer questions about
    the alleged evidence of an alleged intruder? Of course not. They
    maintain a safe distance away from questions, fire blanks and
    imagine they have won the war; a pitiful lot one and all.
     
  11. EasyWriter

    EasyWriter FFJ Senior Member

    Texan:
    Ew
    “I have read that it is manual strangulation that usually causes
    the hyoid bone to fracture and also the thyroid cartilage.â€

    “usually causes†? I’ll buy that. There are numerous variables.
    The examples I gave were not meant to be exhaustive in voluminous
    detail. Notice that I said that it is not the “usual†to have
    death by strangulation without ANY internal injury. I did not
    say it was impossible. The point I was making is that IF the cord
    was embedded that deeply from external pressure, its hard to
    imagine NO internal throat injury.

    “The throat would swell post mortem as you have described. Would
    the rest of her body also swell at the same rate?â€

    I can’t say about the same rate with certainty. However, if it
    does, or even close, if part of the body is restricted from
    movement by rope, chain, or cord, it will try to push it away and
    if the binding is fixed will embed evidenced by the flesh
    extended beyond the restriction. If the restriction is really
    tied tightly, this is the first place that post mortem swelling
    is quickly visible. (Yes, I have observed this in animals, though
    not the human variety.)

    “I do believe some form of strangulation occurred because of the
    triangular abrasion and also the petechial hemorrhaging,
    especially above the ligature.â€

    From the outset, I have conceded that some strangulation make
    have taken place during the tying of the knot. However, research
    revealed that petechial hemorrhaging can come about without
    strangulation and without asphyxiation, so really don’t know if
    any strangulation happened at all. (I will look up this reference
    if you want. It’s somewhere in my files) Although I still make
    the concession, in estimating what I believe to be the time of
    the skull fracture until the staging, I seriously doubt she was
    alive when the cord was tied around here neck. (But don’t say
    it’s impossible)

    “Maybe the cord was first simply put around the neck and crossed
    tightly and then later fashioned in an amateurish attempt to
    stage a garotte.â€

    You will find this possibility mentioned in my original analysis.
    “Hobey 86" brings it up as well. Although it is a possibility,
    it’s highly unlikely. In any event, to do this, release, then tie
    the cord around the neck will not jell with circumferential
    strangulation and “associated†circumferential furrow.

    I have examined this from every angle I can think of. I am unable
    to escape the conclusion that such circumferential embedding
    could have happened only by post mortem swelling. When the tie
    was completed and hands taken away, the pressure sought and found
    equilibrium. In base equilibrium around the entire throat, post
    mortem swelling created the circumferential embedding. For sure,
    it didn’t happen with that silly “garroteâ€, mummy wrapped handle
    and a locked down knot.

    The “garrote scene†is the CORE EVIDENCE of the case. Not only
    does the truth about it reveal amateurish staging as the key to
    understanding the case, it is absolutely critical if the case
    ever gets to court. You can bet there will be “experts†from both
    sides swearing that Patsy did\did\not write the note. There will
    be competing psychologists and psychiatrist with opposing
    viewpoints as to “capability.†What they can’t confound and
    confuse with “experts†is the truth about the “garrote scene.â€
    This evidence is subject to swift and clear demonstration before
    the jury. Let an “expert†try to refute it and he\she will play
    the part of the fool and wind up confirming exactly what he\she
    tried to deny.

    Given it’s importance, a bit more to aid in understanding won’t
    hurt. Suggested experiment:

    Find a length of cord of same type and size as that found around
    JonBenet’s neck. Stand before a set post approximating the
    diameter of JonBenet’s neck (or general; size not critical).
    While holding the cord in the left hand, run one end around the
    post and back toward you and create a junction like that found at
    the crime scene, a junction pulled down tightly compressing the
    cord and restricting slip.

    Also, as indicated by and in the crime scene, try to tie close
    and tight. This means simultaneously pulling the short lead and
    long lead as described in the autopsy report. Once this junction
    is tightened down by pulling, attach a wood handle to the long
    lead. Pull the handle. What happens? Circumferential strangling
    pressure, or something completely different?

    After this, remove the noose by slipping it over the post end.
    With left hand holding the cord near the junction, probably thumb
    and finger due to the small size of the cord, try pulling the
    handle with the right hand while holding and\or pushing with the
    left hand on the cord close to the junction. By this method, see
    if you can get the cord to slip, thereby, reducing the size of
    the noose. (Didn’t work, did it?)

    Let’s really give it a test. Grip the (noose) cord on each side
    of the junction and pull as hard as you can. This is the best
    shot you’re going to have at it, and chances are, it won’t even
    slip here. Circumferentially strangled with this apparatus? Not
    on this planet.

    The cord in focus is not only small and soft, it’s flat, or semi-
    round nylon which frays at ends when cut if not burned to weld.
    Being on the flat or semi-round order, tie compression tends to
    create flanges making the anti slip element worse than a round
    cord of the same size and material. The photo and autopsy report
    reveal two leads with “one measuring 4 inches in length and
    having a frayed end.†Getting a good grip on a four inch length
    of cord is a tough go under the best of circumstance. In the
    “garrote scene†circumstance of short lead, end frayed and trying
    to tie hard, close and tight with hair in the way, the difficulty
    factor goes way up.

    In fact, if there is hair mixed in with the cord, and the hand
    slips off on a hard pull, it’s a pretty good bet that some hair
    is going to go with the hand. If the hair sticks to the hand,
    there is a pretty good chance some of it will be transferred to
    another object; say like the mummy wrapped handle which also has
    hair entwined.

    This factor tells us that TYING the cord around the neck preceded
    the handle thing. There was no vicious noose action as Mr. Smit
    often talked about. My goodness, the tie was already made in
    lock down fashion. How do you get noose action from this? So,
    what was the handle all about, a handle that was never pulled?.
    Could it be that this confused amateur just put on the handle for
    decoration because he\she thought that’s what a “garrote†ought
    to look like? Let’s repeat with emphasis: Tie first equals unused
    and useless handle. Does this look like a “professional
    strangling tool?â€

    The long and short of the evidentiary truth is that there was no
    intent to strangle; only to make it look like it. Of course, many
    bought the myth, but to those of us in the know, it looks like
    exactly what it is: A fatally flawed amateurish attempt at
    staging. The staging was to give the impression of death by
    strangulation. Death by strangulation is a claim the Ramseys have
    made several times. When it is known that the scene is staging,
    it’s obvious purpose is to have others believe this was the means
    of death, not the skull fracture. Why would they want others to
    believe this?
     
  12. Texan

    Texan FFJ Senior Member

    I agree

    for the most part of what you are saying. However- the triangular abrasion on the neck is consistent with a rope or ligature being passed around the neck, overlapping at the point of the abrasion and the ends pulled. Perhaps petechial hemmorhaging can have other causes than strangulation but when you have the hemmorhaging plus the abrasion there is a possibility of some strangulation. Also, the so-called fingernail marks around the cord is probably also petechial hemmorhaging but similar to small bruises. In surgery, when I take an automatic blood pressure cuff off I often see these same type of marks and they are because of the cuff sqeezing the arm. Vasovagal response can cause immediate unconsciousness so the cord wouldn't even have to be applied for very long.

    Like you, I don't think the furrow around the neck was caused by the tightness of the so-called garrote. I can understand by your illustration that the knot doesn't slide and tighten.
     
  13. EasyWriter

    EasyWriter FFJ Senior Member

    Texan:

    “I agree
    for the most part of what you are saying. However- the triangular
    abrasion on the neck is consistent with a rope or ligature being
    passed around the neck, overlapping at the point of the abrasion
    and the ends pulled.â€

    Possible, but very unlikely. Cross pulling is a competent way of
    effecting strangulation with a cord. I know it. You know it. If
    you or I were going to stage a strangulation scene, would we not
    leave the cross pull to be evaluated as efficient and not arouse
    suspicion? Wouldn’t someone who knew what he\she were doing if
    cross pulling leave it at that rather the amateurish set up found
    at the crime scene? I think what happened is exactly what looks
    like happened: The full extent of it was the cord was tied around
    the neck, then the silly, useless handle attached.

    There are numerous abrasions unexplained. No doubt the body was
    handled in clean up and staging. Lots of chances here for all
    sorts of abrasions, including laying on something causing the
    “stun gun†marks.

    Whatever the unknowns, they will never contradict the known
    amateurish staging in a failing attempt to hide the truth about
    the skull fracture as the primary that motivated the attempt at
    deception.
     
  14. Elle

    Elle Member

    EasyWriter, this is the first time someone in the medical field like Texan has actually responded to any of your posts relating to the strangulation. Thank you, Texan! I have hoped someone like you would come along. You have a much better insight to all Delmar is saying here than the rest of us. How I envy you!

    Now just what will Rainsong do with these intelligent posts (?).
     
  15. EasyWriter

    EasyWriter FFJ Senior Member


    Elle, aren’t you stretching it a bit to use the word, Rainsong
    and intelligent in the same sentence. One with intelligence can
    read and comprehend what he\she reads. Let’s take this sentence
    for instance:

    “I trust it is noted that death by strangulation without internal
    throat damage is not exactly the norm.â€

    To set out to try to prove or disprove this statement is certain
    to fail. There is no objective criteria by which “norm†can be
    proven or disproved. It’s simply a connotative general assessment
    with definition of the word conveying precisely this and nothing
    else. Any attempt to prove or disprove the “norm†in this
    circumstance requires a bit of strawman invention and evasion.
    The singular purpose is to evade the unwanted, yet irrefutable
    truth.

    Norm is a generalization that internal injury usually accompanies
    death by strangulation. There is no declaration of any particular
    circumstance and\or particular injury. There is not even a
    declaration of “always†and “must be†internal injury. My
    position was and is that it is highly unlikely, if not
    impossible, to circumferentially embed to the depth found by
    external pressure without doing any internal throat damage. I
    have no doubt that the circumferential embedding came about via
    post mortem swelling; not “vicious strangulation.†Disproof
    requires either relevant contrary physics and\or demonstration.
    The RST offers neither.

    Another elementary item apparently buried in the swamp is the
    concept, credentials. Truth is NEVER a matter of credentials.
    It’s a matter of facts. Do you need a degree in physics to know
    that fire burns if you touch it? The truth feared by the Ramseys
    and the RST is that unwelcome facts cannot be brushed aside by
    words. All the song and dance evasion by whatever means will
    never make the truth of the phony strangulation scene go away.

    The point is, Elle, if someone doesn’t grasp the concepts
    evidence, challenge and credentials, plus, can’t even comprehend
    what is read, it’s rather a waste of time to pay any heed to the
    ensuing cacophony wouldn’t you say?
     
  16. Elle

    Elle Member

    Definitely s-t-r-e-t-c-h-e-d! Message "over and out!" Great post!
     
  17. Ginja

    Ginja Member

    My 2 cents

    I've been searching for the term "circumferential strangulation," Delmar, and can't find it. I believe what Meyer was describing here is that yes, the victim was strangled by ligature. But a subnote to that is that the ligature was circumferential; not that strangulation was circumferential.

    With that said, I have believed all along that JonBenet was not strangled at all, but as you say, she died as a result of swelling that occurred as a result of the headblow.

    I believe she was alive, but barely...perhaps the parents couldn't get her to respond in any manner and figured she was dead (or as good as dead). But early on, I believed the parents, especially John, were shocked to learn she'd died (according to Meyer) from strangulation. I think they thought she was already dead and the strangulation, as you noted, was simply staging to divert attention away from them.

    The autopsy report notes that there was a mucous run from her nose across her cheek and that the top of her shirt was stained. Her head was tilted to the side and rested against or near her shoulder. Her mouth was taped but her nose wasn't blocked and so the mucous ran. I believe this mucous run occurred after she was placed in her tomb for the night, evidencing the fact that she was still alive. (Also indicating her entomber didn't realize she was still alive).

    The autopsy report also notes certain weights and measurements, indicating there was some brain swelling. The force of the blow was horrific, knocking her unconcious, and eventually would have proved fatal on its own. But I think the cord cut off her breathing (as shallow as it was) because of the swelling, which is why there's minimal petechial hemorahging.

    I agree with Texan that the body was handled quite a bit that night and probably in various positions as she was cleaned up and redressed and then brought to the basement. There's also evidence that she was placed on the floor outside the wine cellar door while materials were gathered to fabricate the so-called garotte. The evidence also shows that this is where the body lay as the paintstick and cord were fabricated into the garotte and tied around her throat. In this respect, I think many of the abrasions and so-called stun gun marks are exactly what Wecht described...punctate wounds. The surface of the basement floor was crumbling and moldy...not smooth. Her body could have pressed against many a cement bit of debris as she was handled, leaving the "mysterious" abrasions. As noted, I believe she was very much still alive (although dying) during this period, which is why she could easily have bruised or incurred punctate wounds.

    Wecht noted right away that there had been no internal injury in the throat, which is how he came to his sex gone awry theory that many posters believe (the erotic asphyxiation theory). I prefer the theory that the parents unwittingly sealed her death with the ligature coverup and that swelling from the severe headblow caused the ligature to constrict and block the air flow. I think that's why, somwhere in the AR, Meyer refers to the association of the cranial injuries to the "strangulation".

    jmho
     
  18. JC

    JC Superior Cool Member

    EasyWriter

    Is it feasible that knots like unto those can be made by adolescent/s?
     
  19. Elle

    Elle Member

    This is exactly what I believe happened, Ginja! Someone once posted it would be a very sad thing if the last two people JonBenét saw were her parents. I think the last person JonBenét saw was her mother, Patsy Ramsey, and I think she was too unconscious to see both of them when the garrotte was being created.
     
  20. EasyWriter

    EasyWriter FFJ Senior Member

    They can be made by a four year old child by accident. They are what one might called intuitive. Nothing complex and "professional" here.
     
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice