Breaking it down

You're absolutely right, Elle. That's why to imagine that an intruder would covertly enter, hang out, writing a ransom note--coincidentally matching Patsy's linguistics, handwriting style, and with direct knowledge of the Ramsey's personal information--to cure his boredom while awaiting the family's return, hide while they were active for an hour or more, not even knowing when the family might go to bed on a holiday week, but betting they would retire and he'd get his chance while the three other family members were asleep to take a child out of bed without waking anyone and get her downstairs/wherever...and to give himself an advantage--HE STUN GUNS HER?

It's so absurd, it only shows the RST's desperation in looking for evidence an intruder did this.

Anyone with a little objectivity can think it through. Let's say an intruder was planning all of this, executing all of this: why would he RISK causing the child to scream out in pain from a stun gun? She weighed 45 lbs. She was six years old. Even if some people want to argue (incorrectly) it would knock her out or make her immobile long enough for him to get her downstairs, it's worth considering that ANYONE with experience with a stun gun would KNOW that it was at least POSSIBLE she would scream out? So WHY wouldn't he apply the duct tape FIRST? The body is proof that didn't happen. The duct tape came last. The proof: blood tinged saliva on her upper right shirt sleeve that got there while she was lying in the basement with her head turned to the right and her arms raised so that the saliva drooled down her face and dripped onto her upper sleeve.

That's the whole reason I started this thread. The sequence of events speaks to a killer who did not sneak in, stun the child twice, carry her to the basement and molest and garrote her, bash her head, and THEN WIPE HER DOWN, REDRESS HER, TIE UP HER WRISTS, DUCT TAPE HER MOUTH, AND LAY HER OUT IN THE CELLAR ROOM ON HER NICE BLANKET FOLDED PAPOOSE STYLE AROUND HER.

The evidence is proof that the molestation and head blow came before death. The strangulation was the actual cause of death, even though I agree absolutely the head blow would have finished her off if she hadn't been strangled before it could. The evidence in the bed is that in some way, the fibers from the cord used on JonBenet got into her bed at some time since the sheets were last changed. That same cord ended up on her neck and wrists, put there by the killer. The activities involving the molestation with the paintbrush can be traced to the paint tray, where the the brush end of the paintbrush was left, after it was broken there, which the shards around the tray prove. The evidence is that JonBenet was laid in that area, on her face, where a carpet fiber and green paint chip matched to green paint in the tray stuck to her chin. We have heard, though I don't know if it has been confirmed by anyone but jams, so who knows if it is true, that JB's urine is also present outside the cellar room door on the carpet. But that would be consistent with what we do know of the evidence in that area that night related to the murder. Her body was then found in the cellar room the next afternoon. The duct tape was found lying atop the blanket after John brought the body upstairs. John described some of the scene he found, but we have to temper our judgment of what he says by the fact that he and Patsy then proceded to act guilty as hell for the next nine years.

But under no circumstances have I ever seen or heard anyone who thinks JonBenet was stunned by this "intruder" argue about HOW COULD HE HAVE POSSIBLY KNOWN that she wouldn't SCREAM BLOODY MURDER UPON BEING STUNNED? Just WHO did he practice on that he then concluded, oh, she'll simply become unconscious/paralyzed long enough for me to get her QUIETLY to the basement? How could he think that? If there is one person who was stunned by a stun gun and has reacted that way, other than people who are in bad health or heavily drugged and either almost died or died from the added stress, which happened during a police fight/chase/incident, I haven't seen or heard of him/her. If this "intruder" actually USED his stun gun on ANYONE before that night, what are the odds that ONE PERSON PASSED OUT rather than dropped, convulsing, and screaming bloody murder, as we have seen? Even more to the point, if he actually used it on a CHILD to find out the results, what are the odds that someone who knew about this...like a PARENT...wouldn't have turned him in for that million dollar reward in a heartbeat?

There was no stun gun that night. But if a person really wants to argue there was, why not CONSIDER the obvious in that scenario: JB did scream bloody murder, jerked and fell, or was hit on the head TO STOP HER SCREAMS, and that's how the head injury happened. If she screamed, then John, Patsy or Burke would have POSSIBLY heard it, so the intruder/killer would have gotten out of that house pronto. But no...he stuck around and staged her body for the next half hour, at least, because HE KNEW that the Rams couldn't hear that scream all the way upstairs, only the neighbors! Right. Not. How could an intruder know that? If someone stun gunned JonBenet, it was a Ramsey, and the rest of the evidence is, again, cover up for the head blow and prior molestation, IMO. But no one on the RST has EVER said one whisper about how THAT might have played out with the Rams, have they? Nope. It's ALL about MAKING IT AN INTRUDER. No stun gun was found, no roll of duct tape, no extra cord! Intruder! And lord knows, the Ramseys couldn't possibly have gotten a little cord, duct tape roll, and a stun gun out of the house some way that night! An intruder can creep around their house for hours without EVER being detected, even 9 years later, BUT NOT THE RAMS IN THEIR OWN HOME AND NEIGHBORHOOD! Nope! That's just not possible! Because they SAY SO!

It's so absurd, only Smit could possibly come up with this illogical crap and find a few publicity seeking shills to go along with it, knowing they'd get their mugs on TV yet again with the infamous child murder case, and being too ego-driven to consider that they might be helping a child killer get away with murder.

Oh, it's like WY said, what's the use. Blahblahblah. The Rams are in this up to their ears and all the wiki web spin in the world will never change that, IMO.

 

EW, I'm sorry if I haven't been able to explain myself more clearly. I've done my best. I have twice linked the clear picture of the wrist knot, taken while it was still on the wrist, and I've seen that knot in every book of knots I've looked in, and so identified it as a simple hitch knot when I looked at it again during this discussion. I'm sure you can find a picture of it online, as well, with instructions about how to tie it if you can't do so from looking at the picture. I'd tell you how if I could, but I'm not good with the language of knots so it would be better if you found a site using the language you know. It is commonly used in many activities, as well as outdoor sports, sailing, etc. It's very easy to tie, which I did from just looking at the picture. It slips easily to enlarge or close the wrist loop. It holds fast when the tension on the cord is released, requiring two hands to loosen it again by working it down the cord section it's tied around. (I know I confused you on what loop was tied around what and how, so that's why perhaps an online guide will help. I'll see if I can find one and post it.)

Why the killer didn't make the loops smaller and tighter on JB's wrists, I have no idea. Looking at the autopsy photo, I can't see the other wrist knot, the one that was no longer on JB's wrist at autopsy, well enough to begin to figure out how it was tied. It could be the same knot or a different one that you describe; I just can't see how it's tied at all, just a small knot connecting two loops, which I can't figure out at all why that is, either, unless John pulled somehow on it when he "found" the body and created the second, smaller loop trying to get it off. Maybe you have figured out that knot. I know you wrote about it, and I tried to follow you, but again, I need visuals; words about this loop over that hand...Greek to me. Sorry. If you can name the type of knot you believe this was, maybe I can find a picture and that will help.

To the point about the size of the loop around the wrist: since I believe JonBenet was already dead when the knot was tied on the wrist, I don't think how tight it was or wasn't much mattered to the killer at that point. It wasn't working as a restraint, as we all know, with the length of cord between the wrists and the lack of bruises indicating the killer didn't think that through, either. I do agree with you on this: pure staging.

As for the "access" sources, I didn't quote Thomas from his book, but I have many times. I guess I thought you have read his book. Maybe not. Sorry.

As for Van Tassle: you're right, no one has reported to the public what he found regarding the knots. A lot hasn't been revealed to the public, so I have to take what we have, evaluate the source and information, and use common sense: I'm simply deducing that if Van Tassle's analysis was that the knot in the garrote was somehow prohibitive of any strangulation with the cord, that would have been considered by Thomas and those who worked the case and therefore HAD ACCESS to the files, the evidence itself, and the reports and analysis done by those who have some experience in their fields of investigation, all or some of which we do not have. If this led those investigating the case to the conclusion that the garrote did not strangle JonBenet, why would Thomas lie about that? Why would Schiller lie about that in his book? Why would good journalists lie about what they'd been told by sources? We in the public have many sources, some which turn out to be wrong in time, it's true, but not one has ever said the garrote didn't strangle JonBenet. The sources we do have that are legal, factual, and pictoral documentation are overwhelmingly convincing: strangulation occurred. It's worth considering, IMO.

I know what Meyer wrote as COD. I know it was not that she died solely by strangulation, but he included it as fact after a complete autopsy and several consultations with other pediatric doctors. We've discussed this for years on the forums, I've researched dozens of books on the subject myself, and we've had doctors and nurses on the forums many times discuss the autopsy findings. Not one has said Meyers was wrong, but have agreed using his findings from the autopsy, an indisputable record we have in its entirety. The timing of the head injury has been a topic of controversy. But to my knowledge no medical professional has ever said the head blow came after death. The injuries to the brain are clear indications that it had to come while the heart was still pumping, I believe.

The evidence of the body is consistent with strangulation, causing identifiable injuries that happened during the strangulation and before death, and as I've stated every way I know how, these are facts which cannot be dismissed or relegated to secondary importance when the medical examiner clearly stated them as COD, WITH the head injuries contributing. The garrote was indisputably found on JonBenet's neck, furrowed into the skin, indisputable. There was extensive bruising of the neck consistent with the garrote found on her neck rolling up the neck as it was tightened. And so on....

So, whether someone thought JonBenet was dead and so didn't "intentionally" strangle her, or whether the knots were tied expertly or incompetently, the fact remains: she was strangled to asphyxiation.

 

Okay, the knot in question which was still tied on the wrist at autopsy is a double half hitch, I think. This is as good a picture/description as I'm going to find tonight on how the knot on the wrist that was intact at time of autopsy was tied:

http://www.tutorials.com/05/0540/05402.asp

I'm not sure if the direction of the loops made here is the exactly the same, if that matters. But it's the basic way the knot is tied, and how I tied it.

Here is another site with a half hitch illustration. It also mentions uses for this knot: " This is the all purpose outdoor knot. Use it to tie nylon cord to a tarp, to secure a load to a pack, to tie a load on a boat, to tie your dog to a tree, etc."

http://www.isu.edu/outdoor/knots.htm

Hope this helps.

 

I have a question: is that 'double half hitch' knot the same knot which EW called a 'double loop' slip knot?

 

This is the best picture I've ever seen describing a knot tie, KK. Thank you. This is the type of instruction, I would personally like to see of "any kind of knot" tied. Very descriptive.

edited to add, whatever the hell the knot is, the illustration looks good to me

 

When you think on it KK, who would need to stun a little helpless six year old girl in the first place? I have never heard of any children being stun gunned. I would think anyone kidnapping a young child would just gag and tie them up.

I can feel your frustration. You have company. We all feel the same.

 

You know, EW, I think you've gotten a bit personal here. I'm not copping out just because I don't agree with you.

I guess it comes down to who do I believe, you or my lying eyes? I can see the knot on the wrist in the autopsy picture, from which I duplicated it. It works to create a loop that can be tightened around the wrist. Period. You seem to be determined to convince me that my own experiment didn't produce the results I am telling you it did. I do not understand that. I'm not mentally impaired and I don't hallucinate. While it might not hold up a tent, it certainly worked as constructed on the wrist. Since I believe it was only for staging, as well, as I have already said, I don't think its pedigree mattered to the killer.

As for the illustration, I found it after some hours looking. I tried to find one that duplicated the wrist knot as closely as possible. I looked at scores. That one was the best I could come up with. I'm sorry it didn't meet with your approval.

Again, the fact is JonBenet died from strangulation. That's what stopped her breath. If the head injury was bringing her brain function to a halt simultaneously, so be it. If you believe the killer accidently strangled her to death during the staging of the crime, you may be right. I personally don't know how anyone but the killer can ever know that, and he/she ain't talking.

It was my understanding from reading some of your posts on the threads that you believed the garrote did not strangle the child. I even believed that other posters had read your ideas and agreed with your conclusions. I apparently have misunderstood pretty much everything, it would seem. I apologize for that. Perhaps it's just best that I bow out of the discussion of knots.

At any rate, thanks again.

 

I know, Elle, and thanks for sharing misery with me. It's good to be in the guttah! :borg:

 

I'm with you, KoldKase.

 

Koldkase, are you referring to the bigger loop (which had already come off JB's wrist)? I'd be interested in what happened after you tied it: could you loosen it again easily?

 

Perhaps I didn't link properly to this page of autopsy pictures earlier in this thread discussion. Here is a link which has the picture of the wrist tied with the loop still on it, taken at autopsy. The one I created came from this picture--about half way down the page. CAUTION: If you're queasy or don't want to see the other autopsy pictures, you may not want to open this page, as you can't avoid pictures of the neck and face injuries.

http://zyberzoom.com/JonBenet.html

The loop I am referring to tying is the one still on the wrist at autopsy, not the other end, with the double loops, which had either been removed by John Ramsey when he "found" the body or fell off, I don't know which.

After tying the wrist loop as I see it in the picture, I pulled on the long end of the cord, which ran to the other end where the double loops were found. Yes, the loop found still on the wrist which I duplicated from this picture could be loosened again, but it took two hands, as the knot/hitch used to make the loop does grab the cord and keep the large wrist loop firmly secured after you release the pull on the long end of the cord, upon which the knot/hitch has been tied/encircled.

If you notice, the two "hitches", which make up the "knot", which then creates the loop, do in fact "loop" around the same cord from which they are made, rather than another fixed object or JB's wrist. So you have to loop the cord around itself to create the final loop like the one that was still on the wrist. That "looping" is what enables the larger loop around JonBenet's wrist to tighten and loosen, as it simply creates a sliding effect of the knot over the cord. A crude example of that "sliding" effect would be if you take a ring and slip it over a cord--like that kind of sliding effect, because the double hitches basically encircle/loop the cord like that.

What surprised me is how the knot/hitch grabs and keeps the loop secured so tightly. I guess it's the friction of the cords against each other, because they held fast either pulled so tight they cut into my flesh, or not that tight around a channel changer. I did have to use two hands to slide the cord back to enlarge the "wrist" loop again, and I even pulled the short end remaining dangling from the double half hitches/knot after making it, to see if that would lock it up. It certainly got it very tight, but I could still move the knot up and down the cord with a little effort.

In the autopsy pictures of the other loops on the wrist cord, loose and no longer on the wrist, I can't see the knot well enough to have a clue as to how that is tied. Others may, but I'm a visual person and I really have to be able to see something like this to understand it. It's the same with the garrote. All I see is a knot of cord. Sorry. JMO