Info on garrote knot from PMPT

Yes, Elle, we have a great group of thinkers here. Thanks to Texan and justchillun for their medical expertise. And thanks to wombat for his engineering skill. And Easy Writer for his knot experience and patience with those of us who have none. And on and on I could go.

And thank you, Elle, as you are like me, you look stuff up, remember stuff for us, and keep the discussion going when it would just as llikely disappear without all of us remaining stubborn die hards on the forums.

Wombat, the only thing important HERE about the knots/ties/garrote details is that it keeps us going to try to figure it out, and when you search for the truth, even with the seemingly inane stuff, you stumble upon things that you wouldn't otherwise have thought of. And occassionally, the misinformation linked to some spin effort dies, and the truth comes into focus a little clearer.

It's all we can do.

Now, to that end. here is what Elle posted for us [thanks Elle] that has me scratching my head:

See, that was what I mentioned in the midst of my marathon picture fit yesterday: the picture of JB "in the house" has her arms in a very different position than I'd imagined. I guess I had the image of the arms straight out, above the head, JB on her back, face turned to the side, all in rigor. But THIS picture TAKEN AROUND 8:30 PM (again, thanks for that info) is NOT like that at all:

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

See what I mean? The timeline for the rigor is off somehow. At least, it could be, unless THIS is how she was found. And I don't see the "hands behind the head" description at all. They don't even appear to be extended OVER the head. They seem bent at the elbows, don't they?

See, this is the picture I have imagined, and I guess I figured it was accurate because this tab had access to autopsy pictures early on, didn't they, when the photo lab guy sold them?

http://www.acandyrose.com/jonbenetbody1.jpg

Well, let me think, maybe I'm wrong.

 

In my Forensics For Dummies book (don't laugh, it's recommended by a professor online for his students in a list of books, I am not kidding), the section on rigor mortis is fairly cogent about the time sequence of that process.

I'll skip the info about WHY rigor sets in, and jump to this, on p. 163-4:

The book also says this process speeds up or slows down, or develops differently, according to some other factors:

-Intense physical activity prior to death or intense body heat; if a victim ran from assailant before death, the legs would show the first signs of rigor (has to do with chemical ATP levels in muscles that give them the ability to contract)

--Strychnine poisoning causes convulsions and muscle spasms, and that can mimic intense physical activity

--Elevated body temp, could be from a fever, heat stroke, etc., may cause rigor to set in quickly

--Heat quickens the process of rigor, and cold conditions SLOW the process and delay the onset of rigor

This book says rigor is one of the least reliable ways to determine TOD because of the variables. Size of the victim affects when rigor sets in, as obese people might not develop rigor at all, while in thin people it occurs rapidly.

Also, the book says rigor mortis can be "broken" by bending and stretching the corpse, and once this is done, rigor will not return. Now you see why I want to know about that picture labeled "at the house." The position of the arms might be affected if the medical examiner broke the rigor before this picture was taken, but I don't believe this applies IF the picture WAS taken at the home, which is why I was trying to identify what was behind the body here. You see, some of those tab pictures ARE mislabeled by the tab, as we can see here:

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

Again, I may just be confusing myself, so take me with a grain of salt. This picture just really surprised me, because of the above time factors.

We know JB only weighed 45 lbs., and that does affect rigor timing, as well. Plus she was on the cool cellar room floor, but it was said the basement got hot with the heating system down there.

When my poodle died, she weighed about 8 lbs, if that. Rigor set in maybe an hour later. Then I put her in my back car seat and drove her to the facility where she was cremated. We talked with the guy there about 30 minutes, during which she was in the car with no air conditioning. When we then took her out of the car she was limp again. That was less than a three hour process, so just saying, size matters, and heat.

I'm open for any ideas about this picture and the position of the arms. Maybe it's clear to some of you and I'm just not getting it.

 

Well Koldkase you are on another chase here. From the middle of page 5 of the autopsy report:

Does your book have these classifications of rigor moris and what they mean?

It does look like rigor was retreating at the time of autopsy.

PS I'm a girl.

 

OK, here is the stuff about the "brown sack" in Carnes' decision:

OK, first, the "brown sack" is a mystery item all the way now. Kane said he thought the rope was found in a DUFFLE TYPE BAG on Dan Abrams show a couple of years ago. We have a picture of that rope, and I swear I once thought I'd seen a picture of it IN A BAG years ago, but now, it's been discussed so many times and with all the spin, I can't say for sure anymore.

But this is just stupid here, and makes me really see how Carnes could be so easily led if she's this ignorant: "small pieces of the material ON this brown sack"? Is that just a typo? What material ON the sack was found in the bed?

The fibers vacuumed FROM the bed that were from the cord now gives me pause, as well. We first saw that in DOI's paperback edition when it came out, an addendum that seems to have disappeared in more recent printings. At least, the last ones I looked in at the book store don't have that info anymore. Made me wonder why they put it in...THEN took it out. But here it arises AGAIN, compliments of Smit, of course. ALONG with the info about the "SACK MATERIAL ON THIS BROWN SACK" allegedly found in the body bag and bed.

See how easily the RST can take what could be explained as minute fibers transferred in innocent ways, and make it seem like EVIDENCE OF AN INTRUDER?! But let anyone mention that Patsy's fibers are all over the body and garrote, and oh, THAT'S transference, no problem! Transference works both ways, especially when you have a very compromised crime scene.

For example, did the SACK MATERIAL ON THE BROWN SACK actually GET TESTED by the CBI? Was it in fact similar to the BROWN SACK from the guest room? Or was it simply noted in a lab report that sack material was found in the body bag, and SMIT came to the conclusion it was EVIDENCE OF THE INTRUDER?! That sounds so like him.

It easily could have gotten transferred in other ways into that vacuum bag as coming from the bed. Maybe none of that really did come from the bed. Maybe it did. Maybe it came from the bagged hands...that sure seems logical, in the body bag, anyway...or maybe it came from the rope bag.

We'll never know, I don't guess. All I know is that if Smit says it, if it's RST spin, show me the reports or I'm not taking it as fact. From stun gun marks with blue lines caused by them to "swear to god you didn't do it," that's all I need to know Smit can make up his own evidence when the truth won't do.

And it's clear Carnes was about as smart as Smit; she swallowed it all, hook, line and STINKER.

Really sad.

 

First, sorry about getting your gender wrong. For some reason, I thought you mentioned "hanging out with the guys" on a website. Could have been another poster, or maybe you just hang with the guys. But thanks for the correction.

Yeah, you're right, I am going here and there on this thread, guess I should have started another one for the rigor stuff. Sorry again. Maybe we can sort it out this weekend, if Moab will help me. [Moab just fell out. :yuck: ]

Next, thanks for the quote from the autopsy as I still haven't gotten to that yet. As for the book, guess they don't think we dummies can handle that kind of scale detail, but I can google, and here is a site with more detail and a mention of the scale, as well as a mention of children and rigor which might really explain...wait...no, the autopsy says she HAD rigor the next morning, the 27th, I believe was when the autopsy was done:

http://www.deathreference.com/Py-Se/Rigor-Mortis-and-Other-Postmortem-Changes.html

The fam is home and I have to run. I'll try to get back to this soon. Thanks to everyone for helping.

 

KK, Wombat is an engineer, and this was why I was teasing her about using the word nomenclature - a new one for me! My husband is a retired engineer, and I have never heard him use it. Just a joke. Maybe I misled you by talking about my Jim. and you may have taken it for granted Wombat was a male.

 

Thank you KK. I'll do my best to help you and anyone else with confirmation from a source, if it will help you to find what you're looking for. I personally like to see the source, then I can go there and read all I want to.

You really are a trooper in this case, and have an endless amount of energy.
Any secrets?

 

...and to think that I thought Wombat was a marsupial...

 

Hahahaha! You never know these days, she might be one of those?

 

Does anyone remember when exactly JB's dead body was removed from her home?

 

Steve Thomas PB page 39.


The search warrant for the Ramsey residence was authorized at eight o'clock that night, and twenty three minutes later, Dr. John Myer, the coroner, put on protective booties and latex gloves and entered to perform the job of officially pronouncing the child dead. ... ... ...


Myers stayed only seven minutes, not taking the time to perform two routine procedures that would have helped establish the time of death - taking vitreous fluid from the eye and obtaining the internal body temperature.
Determining the time frame in which death occurred is extraordinarily important in a murder investigation and would present a problem for months to come.

The body was taken to the coroner's facility to the basement of the Boulder Community Hospital and placed in a refrigerated drawer. The morgue log noted the arrival.

.........................................................................................................

The actual time was not noted , but it was probably approximately between 8:30 PM and 8:45 PM. Just a guess

 

Yeah, I do remember the picture of the body being removed from the house in a black body bag. It was dark outside. So sometime after 8:30 pm, but really, it could have been soon after Meyers left or an hour or many later. I don't think I've ever seen anyone say for sure.

You know, the way Thomas wrote about it, Meyers took too long to get to the scene, then he was negligent in the way he handled the body. Add to that the way Meyers acted when LE asked him to keep the body longer, which is SOP in murder cases with so many unanswered questions, like the NEVERENDING STUN GUN RUSE, and I have wondered if Meyers wasn't in on the DA fix all along, as well--"Take your time...know what I mean?"

So here's the thing about that "house" picture of the body: the arms are not over the head, behind the head, and I don't see how that fits with what I've pretty much thought all these years about the position of the arms.

To review:

It seems to me that JonBenet's body pretty much kept to that timeline, accounting for her small size.

According to the autopsy report, done at about 8-9 am on the morning of the 27th, some mild rigor is present in the elbow joints, advanced in the knee joints still, which would be the last place rigor would subside, according to the above info.

We have many sources, including John himself, reporting that JonBenet was at least in enough rigor that it was present down to her arms at 1 pm on the 26th.

I'm trying to think this through. If she was murdered around midnight, give or take an hour, as the pineapple in her system suggests, then had rigor at least down to her arms at 1 the next afternoon, that's 12 hours, more or less--so she probably was in "the rigid state" when John found her.

The rigid state lasts approx. 18 hours. Her small size might have reduced that time, though, so I'm going to reduce the time factors to the lower end of the scale. (PS I KNOW THIS IS NOT SCIENTIFIC, JUST A GUESS.)

So, doing the ARGUABLE math:

death--> appox. 12 midnight (25th/26th)

plus 1 to 2 hrs before rigor sets in--> rigor starts in eyelids/facial muscles @ 1-2 am

plus 8-12 hrs rigor advances to rigid stage of rigor--> 9 am to 2 pm full rigor/rigid stage begins

OK, here is where I'm going to have to do a lot of speculating, whereas a medical examiner would know:

If the average is 18 hrs in full rigor/rigid stage, this rigor was reversed to the elbows approx. at 9 am the morning of the 27th. So if rigor was in the rigid stage around 9 am on the 26th, that's 24 hours until the autopsy was performed, give or take. Moving the timeline to the other end of the scale, if the rigid state began at 2 pm, that's 19 hrs to autopsy. If reversing the rigor takes 8-12 of those hours, which I'm double speculating that mirrors the time it took to reach the rigid state...and the body is about halfway through the stage of reversal of rigor, that's four-eight hours earlier than 9 am when rigor began to reverse, or about 5 am-1 am on the 27th. Also, a big factor in the timeline of rigor would be that the body was in a cooler in the morgue from 9 pm or so until autopsy, which slows the processes. So, taking this ALL as HUGE speculation:

rigid state of rigor begins--> between 9 am/2 pm

rigid state ends/reversal of rigor begins--> approx. 1am/4 am (27th)

And if anyone is following this and I haven't gotten the numbers all screwed up trying to figure it out, here's what I'm after:

Even using the extremes of the scales, and considering that this could all be wrong, because of the variables mentioned in the texts, in particular, weight and temps involved:

It seems to me if the picture of JonBenet with her hands bagged is truly at the home, taken by the coroner/LE around 8:30 pm on the 26th, or taken anytime by LE between 1:30 pm, when the body was found, and sometime that night after 8:30 pm when the body was removed, this picture represents the true position of JonBenet's arms in rigor.

Why does this picture bother me? Could this picture have been taken at autopsy the next morning, and is simply mislabeled, as are other pictures from this tab? Then the shoulders were no longer stiff and the arms therefore easily moved from the original position of rigor, as she was found in the basement.

The thing is, thinking about this picture, it reminds me of a child sleeping on her side. And I just can't figure out how her arms would be frozen in this position if she were laid on her back shortly after death and left there. Children are supple. So...and here is where this ties back into...well...THE WRIST TIES. We're questioning the various accounts of the position of her arms/wrists/body, how they were actually tied when John "found" her, the mark on her hand we haven't noticed before which looks like ANOTHER bruise, or lividity, which I can't figure out, either.

So...help. Where were her hands/arms positioned in rigor when she was found? What position were they frozen in when John carried her up those stairs and laid her on the floor? This just isn't computing for me. Was she in the "glamorized" position of the drawing we're so used to seeing, arms stretched out above her head? Or were her arms in front, in a contracted position, like in this "at the house" picture?

What did John mean when he said her arms/hands were "behind" her when he tried to untie them?

I'm stymied here. If the picture is simply mislabeled, the hope I haven't wasted too much of anyone's time. Sure wish I could identify that carpet/rug under the body in this picture:

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

Anyone, please feel free to correct my numbers or theory, as I am just looking for a reasonable expectation of rigor in the arms at the time of the picture in question and know absolutely nada about such things.

 

This picture bothers me too for things don't seem to add up. If it was taken at the home, then why aren't the arms extended over her head?
The only written source I have is PMPT pb. p. 18, (if anyone has other sources, please post them here, TIA) :

"JonBenet was lying on the floor, partly wrapped in the blanket. Her hands were extended over her head and appeared to be tied together."

And on the same page, it says that rigor mortis had set in and her body was rigid.

"Holding her by the waist like a plank of wood, he raced down the short hallway and up the basement stairs"

I think that John when claiming that JB's hands were 'behind' her when he tried to untie them meant that JB's arms were 'behind' her head, i. e. extended over her head.

Does anyone know when exactly the drawing of JB's body was done where she is in the 'glamorized' position with her arms extended over her head?
Was this after the 1998 publication of PMPT or before?

Edited to add: I looked at the picture again (http://www.acandyrose.com/jonbenetfaceathouse.jpg), and am now convinced that this was taken at the autopsy (and not 'at house' as the label says). For there is also a rectangular ruler in the picture, and would Meyer have used such a ruler if he was only present in the Ramsey home for seven minutes? Very unlikely. This ruler apears to be a typical instrument used in autopsy pictures.
And I think Meyer in fact had to break rigor mortis in JB's arms because he had to look at her face from every possible angle. For example, had JB's hands remained extended over her head, Meyer could not have seen the mark on her face which is shown in the picture.

Maybe breaking rigor mortis in autopsies is so common that ME's don't even mention it in their reports? Any input from people with medical experience in that field will be much appreciated!

 

Well, you could be right, rashomon. I looked at as many autopsy photos online as I could find this afternoon to see if that "woven" beige, patterned background was in any other autopsy pictures. Didn't see any. I've been looking for pictures of the home living room, particularly where the Christmas tree was where the body ended up. Haven't found any good ones, as so many of the former websites that featured them in the past are now gone. ACR has some, but nothing so far is clear enough to compare. But the colors of the rug in that one picture I posted of Burke and JB when they were younger does have similar colors as that "at the house" picture.

As for the ruler, I have no idea. I know it's very common for LE/forensics to use rulers when taking crime scene pictures so that the evidence can be scaled easily later in the investigation. Would a coroner/medical examiner carry one around to do that? I have no idea. But LE does take pictures of the body at a crime scene, and so I think it is possible this picture is at the home.

One thing I did find out, and it just deepens my confusion: right at the beginning of the autopsy report, Meyers says straight out when he saw the body at the house, ONE wrist had a ligature on it. Not both. At least I'm not imagining that. But then HOW do both wrists have the ligature on them IN THE AUTOPSY PICTURES?

Please tell me that the medical examiner didn't put it BACK ON the wrist for comparison pictures. But that's all I can imagine. And when you consider that we have TWO pictures of the right wrist ligature on the wrist...one with the knot inside the arm and one with the knot on the outside...that seems to be about the only way that could happen. I guess it's not that big a deal, just something I never heard about or realized before in this case. It's confusing, that's for sure.

 

http://www.acandyrose.com/12271996jonbenet02.gif

Here is the second page of the autopsy which states that the decedent was "...on her back with her arms extended above her head."

Now, could that possibly mean that "above" her head, from the perspective of ON HER BACK, is in front and upward toward the ceiling, not like when you hold your hands up in the air while you're standing?

Meyers also notes "...a ligature around the right wrist." He describes it again in detail in the next paragraph. He states it's tied loosely around the RIGHT wrist with a 5.5 inch tail. Now, I know I'm starting to irritate, but I swear, THAT'S THE NEAT KNOT, not the double loop one. Meyers then says the "other tail" is 15.5 inches and ends with a DOUBLE LOOP. But THAT'S THE ON IN THE PICTURE that is the RIGHT WRIST!

Did Meyers get confused when writing up his report?

OK, I went back and found another picture and look at these, compare them: they're both knots from the wrist ligature, and both are photographed ON THE WRIST:

http://www.acandyrose.com/jonbenethandright.jpg
http://www.jonbenetindexguide.com/04302001today-045.jpg

Also, the last page of the report lists items turned over to LE. Listed are "paper bags from hands" and "paper bags from feet...." So the hands were BAGGED at the home.

http://www.acandyrose.com/12271996jonbenet09.gif

Oh, I see now I was mixing up the source of the photos. Looking AGAIN at the page, the "at the house" photo is from a Lou Smit presentation, not a tab.

But wait. When would Smit have shown THIS photo? Was it on one of the TV presentations? I taped all of those that Smit did, as far as I know. But I do not remember his showing this, unless it was in one of those montages that went clickclickclickclick for about 10 pictures at a time. Maybe I just missed it. I'll keep looking, because ACR has lots of screen captures from those shows at her site. Maybe that's where she got that one.

Hm. Does that make the picture in question officially a photo taken at the crime scene, then? Are the arms frozen in that position from rigor? Because this is really creeping me out:

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

 

OK, here is the web page with that "at the house" picture in a group shown at Smit's TV appearance on the Today Show, April 30-May 4, 2001.

http://www.jonbenetindexguide.com/04302001todayshow-pic4.htm

I'm noticing that the autopsy pictures from this group have a different measuring square than the one in the "at the house" picture. I haven't looked at all of them, though.

One thing I did notice is that there is a picture of a "stun gun" with the same type of measuring square as the one used at the autopsy, so my guess is that this must be a standard measuring square among medical examiners.

 

OK, I think I can see why that picture "at the house" looks strange.

She's on her stomach. Must be. I wasn't thinking about her face being turned to the right. So we're looking at the right side of her face, in rigor, so it's not moving. That means the right arm "raised over her head" is a short arm lyiing on the floor, her face turned toward it. Her face therefore could not be "viewed" without turning her over, could it? Freeze that image and then imagine picking up the body off its back and flipping it over onto the stomach so that you see that right side of the face. The arm is still extended, frozen, but now it's in the air.

Does that make sense?

But what throws me off is that we don't see the left shoulder or arm in this picture. It looks more like she's on her side, doesn't it? I guess that's just the peculiar way the picture angle looks.

I guess her arm was bent somewhat at the elbow, as well, so it doesn't look so much like it's "over" her head.

Well, that's all I've got for now. Except that I can't believe how much of this stuff I've forgotten. Probalby should have just left it forgotten. :lame:

 

I think that these pictures are both taken from the right hand, with one slightly more blown up.

http://www.acandyrose.com/crimescene-thebody.htm
It says 'crime scene pictures' for all the pictures shown there, but there is also that ruler again on the photos where the wrist ligatures have been taken off, so this had to have been at the autopsy. Also e. g. the photo of JB's skull could technically not have been a picture taken at the crime scene.

But that photo with her arms in this position is very odd indeed.(http://www.acandyrose.com/jonbenetfaceathouse.jpg).
For if JB's arms were frozen from rigor, the drawing of JB with her arms extended over her head would be wrong.
In PMPT is says JR carried his daughter's body like a plank of wood - this also evokes a picture like in the drawing.
But this does not look at all like the photo shown (where her arms are in a different position).

Interesting idea, KK. I think it is possible, and maybe what Dr. Meyer said has been interpreted wrongly. Does anyone know who did the drawing of JB's body?

There seem to exist two possible explanations:

a) this picture was taken at the crime scene - then JB would still have been in full rigor mortis and that is how the position of her hands actually was.

b) the picture was taken at the autopsy were the rigor mortis in JB's body was broken by the ME because he had to look at JB's body from every possible angle and all her wounds had to be photographed.

 

wondering

I was wondering if maybe some confusion of the hand pictures stem from pictures being a mirror image.
One thing I noticed was how big her shirt is - the shoulder seams are not where they should be and there seems to be quite a bit of extra fabric in the sleeves. No big mystery about it but it looks odd.