Info on garrote knot from PMPT

Thought I would try and put them together, turning the illustrated knot in the same direction as the wrist knot.

As I looked at the cuff of JonBenét's white sweater, I was wondering if that was blood on the edge of the cuff (?). It looks red. This was the white one worn to the White's party, according to Patsy after she changed her story, of course.



Have clicked "upload" but they didn't transfer photos (?).

 

Thank you for your help,Moab. I turned the second one upside down to make it go the same way as the knot around her wrist in the photo. Could you do this for me, please.

I'm sure I had the upside down one inserted.

Here it is again. Oh, this time it worked! Hope you didn't mind me doing this KK. Hope you know what I'm trying to do?

 

Hahahaha! I thought this might have happened, Moab. So it just accepts one at a time. Thank you for telling me this. I thought it would be good to see both of the knots like twins. I'm sure KK will understand that I'm trying to follow what she is saying. She has worked very hard on this, and must have spent hours going over these knots.

KK, I have just tied the double half hitch knot as demonstrated in the illustration, and it does not look the same as the wrist photo, BUT I also do have two loops side by side and the cord slips through very easily, by pushing the lower loop on the left, with my thumbnail, closer to the loop on the right.

Depending on the angle you look at. Looking down on top of it I can see twin loops. Turning this to the other side and looking down, you can see very clearly there is only one larger loop.

When pulling the right hand cord the whole noose is pulled up from my thigh, but when holding the actual knot and pulling the other part up the noose can be tightened.

Is this what you are seeing? Have I got it right?

 

I'm back working on this reef (square) knot KK. using black and white cord laces. It does collapse when you pull the two ends of the same colour. Saves confusion using two colours as in the demo.

I think a migraine is coming. I doubt that I can give it the same time you have, KK but I do understand these knots better. So you feel it was a capsized square knot at the back of her neck.

Of course I still believe she was dead when this ligature was placed around her neck.

Thanks for making me try it again. I'll probably have another bash later.

 

Wow, great idea, Elle, to put the picture upside down!

Oh, never think I am someone who wants proprietary rights to something I don't own. hahaha You have to go "elsewhere" to find that nut job.

Yeah, I do think the knot on the wrist is a capsized square knot. If Schiller had access to enough LE reports to write his book, which has some errors, obviously, but is full of a great deal of the case evidence and info that has proven to be accurate even 9 years later, then perhaps his identification of the knot as a capsized square knot is from the case files, and possibly was from the knot expert brought in from Canada, Van Tassel.

Still, when the square knot is collapsed, the remaining knot is remarkably similar to the double half hitch. The problem comes in a simple move of taking the cord over with one loop and under with the other. The knot you posted the picture of upside down shows one tail end of the cord coming out of the knot at a slightly different variation, having to do with pulling it one cord over and one under...or something like that. Hard to write in words, you have to just see the picture and then tie the knots and you can see how one version of the double half hitch creates a very close but slight variation on the capsized square knot, though it actually slips and holds as well as the capsized square knot.

But you see...and here is where it took me hours to figure this out...the double half hitch has a variation of its own. The 2 tails of the cord can come out side by side, rather than going in opposite directions, with a slight difference in tying the knot. Let me go find you an example I found at the swamp last night and post it here. The thing that makes this important is that this way of tying it results in the exact same knot as the capsized square knot...so now you see my confusion. Three knots, very close in configuration, all made a bit different, all capable of sliding and grabbing on the cord.

Maybe Moab can post the picture from this url here and we'll see that the difference is very small. And in the big picture, I'm not sure it matters, but just trying to be clear and square up with Schiller's description of the garrote knot in his book.


brb

 

OK, I think I have figured out the problem with the double half hitch: one is a double half hitch, and the other that is exactly like the capsized square knot is a REVERSED double half hitch.

Perhaps I can illustrate what I'm talking about with the these pictures of the two hitch knots, which we can then compare with the capsized square knot.

You have to go to swampland to see this, but it's a very good drawing that shows the exacty same knot as the capsized square knot...but is labeled a double half hitch. (I'd post the url to the pic, but the poster has it in her private cache of pictures online, rather than posting from an online site illustrating knots, so I don't know where she got it and don't want to link to her picture cache. Thus...put on your waders.)

Go to post number 64 and you'll see the double half hitch that is identical to the capsized square knot:

http://www.webbsleuths.org/dcforum/DCForumID61/1691.html

Now go to this website and look at the double half hitch, and you'll see the ends of the cord come out like the ones on the picture we have posted here upside down of the double half hitch--the cord ends are going in different directions from each other, rather than side by side, unlike in the above picture or the capsized square knot:

http://www.realknots.com/knots/hitches.htm#revhh

Now look on the same REALKNOTS website above and go further down the page and look at the REVERSED DOUBLE HALF HITCH...and you'll see the exact same knot as the one in the swampster's picture, and also identical to the capsized square knot.

And here is the diagram again of the capsized square knot:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Capsizereefknot111.jpg

I think this solves the problem: the REVERSED double half hitch is identical to the capsized square knot. Isn't it? hahah I'm about cross-eyed at this point. Anyone else see this?

 

Forgetting about upside down, does anyone see anything wrong with the drawing of a "double half hitch?"

 

It helped me to put it upside down, Delmar, and see if it was anything like the one on JonBenét's wrist. Just to see if it resembled it at all.


I think it would be easier if you just explained what is wrong with it, since you're the knot expert here, Delmar. I have a big L on my forehead, so there is no point in me trying. I got back into the act because I have always wanted to clearly understand these knots, and I'm amazed at the time KK has taken to learn more about them, so she put me to shame, and here I am back to learn more.

You helped me way back to understand the garrote used in this case was a useless tool. I never knew that until I read your analysis, and will always be grateful to you for your patience with me. It comes easy to you having been brought up learning how to do all of these knots. I must admit I enjoyed my Macramé class because of all the fancy knotting involved, but I'm not a sailor and was never in the Girl Guides.

I was a bit bored this week, and I enjoyed reading KK's posts about the knots, and as I said, here I am back again for more punishment.

 

By any chance, Delmar, does it have anything to do with him holding the cord in his left hand. Is this guy a Leftie? Creating a leftie knot? HELP!

 

Is there a difference in the action created between a round rope vs. flat cord?

 

I probably have the biggest 'L' on my forehead of all because I don't even know what exactly a square knot is. I googled a picture of it but this wasn't too helpful either.

Dr. Meyer called the knot which was around JB's neck a 'double knot'. This sounded to me like it was tied from the two ends of the cord, resulting in a type of knot which was fixed and would not slip.

 

This (experience) is really the key. To come in cold with little
or no experience makes if most difficult to understand knotting,
hitches and the physics of same. If often takes a lot of effort
and concentration; and more often than not still winds up in
error and long-term chasing of fallacy. On the other hand, with a
background of much practical experience, flaws and misconceptions
are often visible at a glance; e.g., a “fifteen minute case.â€

I have used a double half hitch literally hundreds, if not
thousands of times in a long list of application. From this, I
know that the person who drew this illustration never used a
double half hitch even once. Its a self-contradictory, non-
working mess in the same manner of ignorance as the amateurishly
staged crime scene.

The rope routing is in part a double half hitch, BUT is absurdly
routed around itself. A functioning double half hitch is not
around itself. To function, it MUST be around a fixed object such
as a tent peg, truck standard, post, etc to insure the proper
direction of the force and object to utilize the force. It
involves the principle of load-related compression as opposed to
a knot. Otherwise, force on the main line will simply make the
whole thing fly apart. Still, this incompetent and false
illustration shows up online and many assume “expertise†and take
it seriously.

Illustration of working double half hitch:

Envision one end of a rope fastened to tent eyelet. Imagine
several feet away, you bring the other end of the rope over a
horizontal bar in front of you. Bring it under, then back to you
on the left side of the rope going to the tent. Hold this up with
thumb and finger. Bring it under and over again with the rope
now coming back toward you up on the right side of the rope going
to the tent. At this juncture, bring this end UNDER the turn
(thumb and finger) on the left side of the rope going to the
tent. Walla! A working half hitch. As you pull the rope going to
the tent to take out the slack, pull on the short end of the
hitch. This direction allows unidirectional slip to tighten the
anchor rope. However, the reverse force coming from the tent
compresses the rope and does not allows the slack to return. A
yank upward on the short end is a quick release.

This is the function of the knot you are talking about. One
operation will tighten, the other will release and it's the same
knot. Thus, this is not the type of knot relating to JonBenet.
Actually, it is a hitch as opposed to a knot although the two
terms are often used interchangeably.

The read I make on this flawed illustration is akin to the read I
make on the staged crime scene in total. Many ideas, theories and
claims have been offered about the knots; often claims of names
of known and functioning knots. ALL these claims are false,
hence, all conclusions derived from them are false as well.
Needless to say, there was no double half hitch at the crime
scene. There was no square knot either. What there was was an
inappropriate, self-defeating amateurish slip knot that does not
appear in any knot tying book because it is worse than useless -
which is why I have never used such a knot in my entire lifetime.
What grieves me about all the errors and misconceptions is that
they go away from the truth that points to the Ramseys as
culpable creators of the staged crime scene.

 

Yes, there is although this was not the point of my question.
When a tie is made around a flat cord, it creates flanges on
either side. This establishes a diameter wider than the portal
created by the tying compression; hence, tend to lock the cord
from further movement. This is exactly what happened in the
staged crime scene, so flat vs round does have some relevancy
here.

 

“Dr. Meyer called the knot which was around JB's neck a 'double
knot'. This sounded to me like it was tied from the two ends of
the cord, resulting in a type of knot which was fixed and would
not slip.â€

I believe he called it a “double loop knot†as opposed to double
knot (or double throw knot). This was the cord looped around
itself after being brought around the neck, then the knot made by
two more loops around the part going in the direction of back of
the neck.

As for square (reef) knot, this is pretty basic. In tying a
shoelace, right over left followed by left over right creates a
“balanceâ€, hence, square knot. If finished in a double bow, with
a square knot, the bow will line up across the foot. If a granny
knot, the bow with tend toward up and down. There was no square
knot (“capsized†or otherwise) anywhere in the staged crime
scene.

 

Well, you may be right about some things, EW, I don't know. But I disagree that anything we've discussed excludes the Ramseys as the person/s who tied the knot. I see nowhere that anyone comes to that conclusion. Since the Rams All SAILED, and since Burke and JAR and Melinda were all in Scouts, ans since John WAS in the navy and owned two sailboats, and since Patsy also sailed on those boats and may easily have learned the needed knots to keep them alive, should the weather or occasion arise as it sometimes does in sailing...I don't see where you come up with your conclusion. But you have said this more than once.

As for the wrist knot being incompetent/not anything you have used, I have never disputed that, have I? I simply have been trying to identify it as closely as possible going on what we can see and what Schiller said in his book. I'm sure you know more than anyone on God's earth about this topic, including Schiller, but I'm just obtuse like this. I work the problem in my own way, however stupid or evil that makes me. Sorry for living.

But we've got bigger problems.

I was looking at ACR's website (and I wish I was in charge of designating saints, because she would be a shoe in), and now I'm more confused than ever.

First, DO NOT CLICK ON THIS LINK IF YOU DON'T WANT TO SEE THE GRUESOME AUTOPSY PICTURES.

But there are pictures here, autopsy photos, that in fact show something that confuses me entirely. I sweat, it looks to me like, and is labeled as, THE RIGHT WRIST LIGATURE WITH THE AWKWARD DOUBLE LOOP AT THE KNOT IS STILL ON THE WRIST. And it's THE RIGHT WRIST. Not only that, but the knot is taken on the outer wrist in one photo, and then on the inner wrist in another. What? I thought the wrist ligature was one on and one off. Then I thought that the right ligature was the one we've pictured here, with the neat little knot, and the other wrist ligature wasn't even ON the wrist when the autopsy was done. Now I see I must have gotten this all mixed up.

http://www.acandyrose.com/crimescene-thebody.htm

Let's see if I can show what I mean.

 

OK, now looking at this photo, the one I was working from, it looks like...the LEFT WRIST? Am I just getting my left/right mixed up? sigh

http://zyberzoom.com/wristknot.jpg

Here is the one that got me confused from ACR's website/the tabs:

http://www.acandyrose.com/jonbenethandright.jpg

And then here is the same right hand/wrist, with the knot on the outside:

http://www.acandyrose.com/jonbenethandleft.jpg

And now let me see if I remember where I got the idea that one end of the ligatures was found removed from one of the wrists, the end with the clumsy double loops.

 

And while I'm getting myself confused, here is what I was looking for initially, relating to the autopsy photos of the garrote knot at the neck:

http://www.acandyrose.com/garrote4.jpg

http://www.acandyrose.com/garrote3.jpg

It looks to me like someone tried to make a loop on the noose. It's true I'm not experienced enough to say with any certainty one way or the other. I actually had forgotten we had these pictures to even look at, honestly. But my problem, EW, is that I do need an illustration involving pictures. Sorry, it's very hard for me to READ a description and make a knot. So that's my problem with your descriptions. I'm a very visually oriented person. I'll have to go back and try again.

 

So am I, KK. So much easier if there is an actual person demonstrating "whatever."

You gave it a good shot and worked hard on it. I enjoyed learning more this week about a few knots, thanks to you for hanging in there and doing your best. I should be on the golf course hitting that little white ball, but my husband's hip is still healing, and I am bored with everything else I'm doing, so we were both tying knots for a while yesterday, with Jim showing off.

On a more serious side, I would like to hog tie Tom Bennett into paying more attention to the garrotte and John Ramsey's lies relating to not knowing anything about knots.

 

Ah, heck, if I'm going to drive myself crazy with this, I'm taking you all with me.

Here's another tangent I'm now on. It's still the wrist ties, though this picture was mislabeled as a garrote photo. It's the entire wrist ligature, but that's not what caught my attention here.

LOOK AT THE ENDS OF THE CORD.

http://www.acandyrose.com/garrote5.jpg

This was not neatly cut. This was not cut with scissors. This was cut with A KNIFE, sawed in half, it looks like to me, by a DULL knife.

Remember the swiss knife? And remember the kitchen paring knife found on the washer upstairs outside JB's room?

That's strange, isn't it? Surely the Ramseys had scissors in the house. Who would use a dull knife, gotten from behind the diapers in the cabinet when...oh...wait a minute.

The kitchen knife was found on the washer, which was right there where the diapers in the cabinet were hanging out. Burke's swiss knife had been hidden in the cabinet behind the diapers and was photographed by LE in the basement the next morning outside the cellar room on a countertop.

Cord fibers were found in JB's bed where the cord had been cut, or tried to have been cut, at least at some point. But we have never heard that the cord fibers were found in the basement, have we?

OK, this answers some questions for me. I pretty much know the sequence of events once JonBenet was laid by the paint tray in the basement. But I haven't been able to figure out the sequence of events from the evidence upstairs. Now I think I have a few more pieces of the puzzle in place.

The cord was cut over JonBenet's bed/in JonBenet's bed at some point in this murder. It's logical that she was still in the bed, or had been put in the bed, for this. Otherwise, why would the cord fibers be in the bed, right?

We can see from the picture that the cord ends were badly frayed on the cut ends. They didn't get that way from being cut with scissors or from long wear, unless they were already cut and had been laying around or in use for some time. I don't see any indication they had been tied before at other places on the cords, so I'm assuming they hadn't been used before and were in fact still part of one cord when the events began to unfold that night.

So, the killer had JonBenet in her bed, and either she was already unconscious or she was awfully willing to have her wrists tied without fighting it. Or the neck loop could have been tied here, though I submit not the handle, as the paintbrush was still in the basement tray, as that is where the slivers from breaking it were found, and it was inserted into JonBenet before breaking it for the handle, so it's reasonable to me that was all done in the basement.

So, if you're following my logic: JonBenet is in the bed, either unconscious or cooperative to having herself tied with cord around the wrists and/or neck. The killer went to the kitchen and got the kitchen knife to cut the cord, unless the kitchen knife was already upstairs for some reason. So the kitchen knife won't work well. Killer saws and saws. Then the killer remembers the knife hidden in the pantry. Goes to get it, laying the kitchen knife on the washing machine. Leaves the diapers hanging out of the cabinet door. Does more cutting, ties one or the other on JonBenet, then takes her and the swiss knife downstairs.

Ok, what's wrong with this picture? Why not use scissors? There must have been more than one pair of scissors in the house, of course there were, for wrapping presents, doing crafts, general use, there should have been several pairs around the house.

You could say, an intruder wouldn't know where they were. He also had to get a knife out of the kitchen, so why not look in the drawers for scissors? Also, how would an intruder know that Burke's knife was in the cabinet hidden outside JonBenet's room?

That leaves this suspect list: LHP hid the swiss knife there; but Patsy admitted to LE she got some diapers out of that cabinet that very Christmas Day while packing to take on the Disney cruise; Burke could have watched and seen where LHP put the knife; someone else in the family who put pullups on JB at night could have noticed it. That makes LHP, Patsy, Burke; John/family/care givers close to the family. No intruder, however, could possibly have thought of looking for the swiss knife there. That swiss knife makes this almost certainly someone in the inner circle, IMO.

But again, why go for a knife instead of scissors? Patsy would know where the scissors were, as she'd been wrapping presents for a month, more than likely, and she had boxes of ribbons in the basement, which we can see in a see-through plastic storage container in a Ramsey basement picture that turned up in a tab last year. So, I HAVE TO ASK, why would she not just use scissors? Even if she started with a kitchen knife that didn't work?

OK, let's go back to the oversize panties. In the 2000 Atlanta interview, Patsy said JB put those panties on herself. Or something like that. She was ALWAYS VERY EVASIVE ABOUT THOSE PANTIES.

She admits, as does John, that Patsy and JB had an argument about getting dressed to go to the Whites'.

Jayelles bought a Bloomies panty pack and says they had a plastic tie locking them from being opened in store, you know how they do that.

So...and just SPECULATING HERE...what if JB opened those panties with a kitchen knife she got herself because she wanted to wear those panties? I can see a kid doing something like that. But the panties were FOR another child, a Christmas present. Patsy noticed and that was what the fight was about?

OK, let me think here.