1. rashomon

    rashomon Member

    Does anyone know who exactly was the first to come up with the 'erotic asphyxiation' stuff when trying to explain the garrote contraption? Wasn't this Lou Smit? Or even JohnRamsey?
     
  2. sboyd

    sboyd Member

    I thought it was Cyril Wecht. He goes on and on about it in his book?
     
  3. Amber

    Amber Member

    I thought it was Singular....but then again most of these details are new to me.
     
  4. rashomon

    rashomon Member

    Many posters here have a lot of legal knowledge, and I'd appreciate your help with this question:

    Do suspects have the right to be shown the evidentiary record, like e. g. lab findings when they have not yet been charged with a crime?

    For in many discussions about the fiber evidence, die-hard IDIs try to dilute this damaging fiber evidence against the Ramseys by alleging that since lawyer Levin (who confronted them with this evidence) did not show the Ramseys the CBI lab findings, there is no proof that the fibers were actually found there.
    But I suppose Levin had no legal obligation to show the Ramseys anything.
     
  5. BluesStrat

    BluesStrat BANNED !!!!!

    No they don't. Hunter and his morons gave the evidence away to Team Ramsey by using the excuse that they would see it anyway if there was a trial. The Ramseys refused to cooperate and submit to interviews unless they saw the evidence against them.
     
  6. rashomon

    rashomon Member

    We're having quite a vivid discussion with IDIs over at Courttv re John's fibers in the crotch area of JB's underpants. Knowing how damaging this evidence is, they
    fight tooth and nail by claiming that Levin lied to the Ramseys about the evidence.
    When I pointed out to them that unlike the police, a lawyer is not allowed to lie in such a situation, I got the
    answer that since this was no deposition, "only" an interview where no one was sworn in, Levin, although a lawyer, was not obliged to tell the truth.
    I suppose that this is just another attempt by IDIs to throw sand in people's eyes, but since I do not have much legal knowledge, could you legally well-informed people help me here?
    Was Levin obliged to tell the truth in this interview? TIA for replying.

    Another poster tried to ridicule the whole matter, asking me if I lived on the moon to be so naive to believe that "lawyers don't lie" .

    Of course I know that lawyers can lie (just look at Lin Wood, lol), but Levin here was not acting as someone's defense lawyer whose duty was to his client only, and not necessarily to the truth.
    For Levin was acting here on behalf of the United States, which is a totally different situation.


    VIDEOTAPED INTERVIEW OF JOHN RAMSEY
    August 29, 2000:

    So these IDIs think that lawyer Levin, acting on behalf of the United States, was instructed to tell John Ramsey this lie?

    Why was it lawyer Levin who told JR about the fibers, and not for example, Mark Beckner, who was from the police?
    Why would Levin risk getting disbarred by lying to John Ramsey?

    Another thing to consider: suppose it had come to trial. If it then was revealed that this fiber evidence never existed, the defense would have a field day with that. For they could then prove to the jury that the prosecution had tried to frame John Ramsey.
    Do these IDIs really think the prosecution would have put themselves in such a situation where everything could have backfired? No way imo.
     
  7. heymom

    heymom Member

    As much as I despise defense lawyers, I still understand and recognize that they are bound by specific laws when it comes to the information they have from their clients. They have very careful ways to present things, which are technically not lies. So no, lawyers do not technically lie.

    These are people who would believe that lawyers on behalf of the United States would lie to incriminate the Ramseys. Yes, absolutely.
     
  8. The Punisher

    The Punisher Member

    Help is on the way!

     
  9. rashomon

    rashomon Member

    The Punisher: your info was of great help.
    None of the IDIs over there could refute it, and it sure brought an end to their nonsenical allegation that lawyer Levin 'lied' to John Ramsey about the fiber evidence. Thanks a bunch!
     
    Last edited: Dec 17, 2006
  10. The Punisher

    The Punisher Member

    (as John Wayne): Plenty glad to be of service!
     
  11. rashomon

    rashomon Member

    I have read somewhere (but don't recall where) that coroner Dr. Meyer said JonBenet obviously had been digitally penetrated.
    Since this is not in Meyer's autopsy report - does anyone remember when and where he said that and could direct me to the source?
    For even if he said this e. g. during the autopsy to Linda Arndt, shouldn't such crucial info have shown up in his autopsy report too?

    Or was this a later statement of Dr. Meyer's - could it be that he changed his mind?

    TIA to anyone who could help clear this up.
     
  12. Elle

    Elle Member

    Thanks to Alex Hunter, Blue, they could change their own testimony and rehearse what they were going to say the next time around.
     
  13. tylin

    tylin Banned

    If I'm not mistaken, this is mentioned in the Vanity Fair article from 1997...but I don't remember if the author personally talked to Dr. Meyer's or not. http://thewebsafe.tripod.com/09161997vanityfair.htm
    Hope this helps. Oh and one more place we can check--wasn't this mentioned during the Ram's Atlanta depositions? I'll have to dig around and see if I saved those on my computer. (Although I bet the depositions are here at FFJ somewhere.) :beats:
     
  14. Elle

    Elle Member

  15. rashomon

    rashomon Member

    A poster on WS wrote that in an interview with Lisa Levitt Ryckman of the Denver Rocky Mountain News in March of 2000 John Ramsey himself said about the intruder "He is a pedophile with a preference for little girls. He is a sociopath experienced with autoerotic asphyxiation, the use of garrotes to enhance sex".

    Was it John Ramsey or Cyril Wecht who first brought up the (idiotic imo) EA theory?
     
  16. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member

  17. rashomon

    rashomon Member

    Thanks KK. So John Ramsey obviously picked this up from Cyril Wecht.
    I haven't read Wecht's book, but vaguely recall from forum posts that he thinks John Ramsey killed JB in some kinky sex game.
    So Wecht does not recognize the 'garrote' contraption as being part of a staged scene? (correct me if I'm wrong).
     
  18. Tril

    Tril Member

    http://www.joshua-7.com/jonbenet/03_23_99.htm

    (snip)

     
  19. rashomon

    rashomon Member

    It has been theorized that the deep indentation of the ligature around JB's neck was caused by post-mortem swelling.

    But a poster on another forum wrote that so-called post-mortem "swelling" which is actually the formation of gases in the body doesn't usually start until 36-72 hours after death, unless the body was riddled with infection or found somewhere unusually hot such as in a desert.

    Is this poster right?
     
  20. Elle

    Elle Member

    rashomon,

    That was quite a statement for Dr. Cyril Wecht to have made, accusing John Ramsey, but before he said it, did he himself examine the actual garrote, to see if it was properly constructed? According to Delmar England it was not. I wonder if Dr. Wecht was ever asked this question (?).
     
  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