JonBenet hanging????

Um, might need to read again...

WY, that's not what I get from the picture description. It says there was some surface bleeding at the rope site...where the rope actually cut into the skin, I think. There was an injury to the forehead that bled less than the rope burn, due to the something or other he explained. (I'm good, I know I'm good )

Then he says that the facial congestion (redness) is due to the arteries carrying blood to the head being more open than the veins carrying the blood from the head, for some reason, during strangulation. So the blood already IN THE HEAD pooled up in the face and upper neck area--what it appears they call "congestion."

Hey. One thing that I remember being commented on somewhere was that JB had little congestion in her face. OK. Is it usual for strangulation victims to have this congestion? Or not? Lord, I'm confused. But it seems to me, to answer your question, WY, that we sure as heck CAN KNOW exactly how she died that night. The coroner has all he needs to make those determinations. But remember, he left his notes OUT of the autopsy report we have. And also remember that HE NEVER MENTIONED THE LOWER LIGATURE LINE that we first saw when Smit released those autopsy photos a year ago. I'd bet MONEY that they know exactly how she died and in what order.

Back to the picture and caption: then the pathologist says that the blood on the back of the neck is from THE BODY LYING DOWN on the back after strangulation? IS THAT RIGHT? Cause I don't remember seeing any such redness on the back of JB's neck in those autopsy pictures. Well, that could be because she'd been dead so long when they took them, I guess.

Then he says something about if the rope burn had been a staged hanging to cover a murder, there would NOT have been such bleeding at the strangulation site post-mortem.

I think.

OK, had to edit this morning because I got my veins and arteries backward....

 

a couple of questions for the group......

and i am embarrassed to say my questions will
show that i am not "up" on all the details in the case....

i know that in DOI john said he found jonbenet
on the floor of the cellar room covered by her blanket?

did fleet ever get questioned to say exactly what
he saw when he entered that room?
what did fleet see?
was jonbenet on the floor covered with a blanket
just like john said....or did fleet see her hanging?

did this "rumor" of jonbenet "hanging" in the cellar room
start after john walsh was on LKL...or did this
"rumor" ruminate before john walsh said that?

was a knife found in that cellar room......
a knife to cut her down?

does the autopsy show beyond proof.....that
there was no way jonbenet was hanging
because of her "rigor mortis"?
(i apologize if that is misspelled or the wrong term.)

if jonbenet was found hanging........do you think
that is the reason that john carried jonbenet up
the stairs.......the way he did.....with his arms out
holding her away from his body?

or did he hold her away from his body....because the whole night he had been aware...as to not contaminate the scene
with his fingerprints.....etc???

i know lots of questions.

mjenn....you know that pic of that guy who had
hung himself in the link you posted.........
......does it look like he has a triangle mark
on his neck.....
like jonbenet has a triangle mark on her neck to you?
to me it does look like he has the same kind of triangle mark on his neck.

 

Purr

I just have a minute this morning, so I'm only going to answer quickly at this time. Maybe some others can be more thorough later.

Yes, Fleet was asked what he saw that morning in the celler when John found the body. It's in both PMPT and Thomas' books, I believe.

About the "rumor" of JB's hanging: I don't think I ever heard anyone mention that possibility until John Walsh said what he did--besides me. I started considering this as a possibility when Smit published the autopsy pictures last year in May and stated that the "abrasions" above and below the ligature were made by her own fingernails. That is arguable, since no one BESIDES SMIT has ever said that before, but IF TRUE, then I simply was looking for reasons she wouldn't have been more bruised on her extremities if she was conscious and lying against a hard surface while being strangled, as I think she would also be kicking and thrashing about, causing more bruising. But some have said she could have been in her bed, and that wouldn't have caused bruising. That sounds reasonable, except for one thing: how did the killer hold her down, even in a bed, to create enough tension on the cord to strangle her, and still not bruise her him/herself? It takes a lot of pull on that cord to embed it that deep in her neck. What would provide the opposite force necessary to create that much consistent tension without bruising her? A knee holding her down would cause a large bruise. A hand holding her down would cause a large bruise. An elbow, arm, etc. I guess lying on top of her might work, but how would the killer have enough arm length to lie on top of her, using his/her weight to hold her down, and pull back on that cord--what was it, 17"? I mean, it's not that natural to pull back from your shoulder and hold that position, even if his/her arms were long enough, is it? It's not a position of strength, is it? Well, maybe if you twist your body and straighten your arm completely.... I don't know, just looking for answers here.

Anyhow, that's what got me onto the idea of wonder if she was hanged. But there was one other thing that came before Smit's presentation on The Today Show that had me wondering about this: at some point in my research, I realized the handle to the garrote was possibly something a person might devise to use in autoerotic strangulation, a safety feature. When practicing this strange form of self-stimulation, the danger is that one will DIE from passing out and being strangled for real. So a handle like this would be a measure of protection: the person passes out, the hand relaxes, and the handle is released, easing the pressure on the cord, keeping the person from dying. But I'm just guessing, except that in the book and movie "Hannibal," this very idea is written about as used by a character. That shocked me and made me wish I knew someone who did the S&M stuff to ask if this is well-known in that community. I'd take even odds...it is.

Anynow, one thing I can tell you, it's hard to even get people to discuss this. I understand why. It's horrific to imagine, and it's not an idea that has much evidence to back it. One thing I do believe: the medical examiner KNOWS if those are JonBenet's fingernail marks. Others close to the investigation know, also. They may NOT be. I surely HOPE she was already unconscious when she was strangled. But until someone with the actual inside knowledge of the evidence says precisely, someone with the CREDENTIALS to back up that conclusion, I still wonder....

Now, one last question that you raised is quite interesting: the knife in the basement TO CUT HER DOWN. I know that Burke's knife was found in the basement near the celler room, which no one has explained to this day how it got there that I know of. I always thought of it in relation to CUTTING THE CORD TO MAKE THE GARROTE. But your question jogged me into the other possibility raised by John Walsh's statement: was it used to CUT HER DOWN? That's something I never thought of. That knife was put in a cabinet over the second floor washing machine/dryer, I believe, by LHP. That's the last any person I know of admits to seeing it. She was hiding it from Burke. Thomas points out that there were those overnight huggies hanging out of that cabinet that morning when the police got there. So...you, purr, have given me something to ponder. Raises more questions...just what we need!

OK, hope that answers some of your questions. Unfortunately, it doesn't answer the one we all want to have answered....

 

are you a fan of the tv show .........

"crossing jordan"??

if not, you should consider watching that show.

the lead character, a female forensics specialist, uses
the same method you do.....to figure out a solution
of a crime.

she "lives" the crime with the help of her father
who roleplays the crime with her.

and maybe you are the person who had posted before
making comments about that show.
i know we talked about it before on this forum.

anyway........i really like this "brainstorming" method.
to be open to anything...and everything...and then
"cutting" down to the truth......no pun intended.

so thanks mjenn, for your answers...and then again
for more questions.

the truth is out there somewhere.

so who has the info on what fleet said he saw that
morning when he followed john into the cellar room?

would fleet lie for john?

also.......i saw a pic of the cellar room.
is there really no other way in and out of that room?
i thought i saw a small basement window into that room?
isnt that a small window in the upper left hand corner on that
back wall?

 

Purr, sorry....

I didn't realize you're not familiar with the many resources available online and in the books.

Here's a great place to go:

http://www.acandyrose.com/index.htm

Another site used by many for years:

http://www.kenpolzin.com/jbr/jbrindex.html

Also, there are some archives here at FFJ; if you'll scroll down on the True Crimes page of forum listings here you'll see several resources.

That should answer some of your questions and keep you busy for about 2 years....

 

thanks mjenn

i do know about those places.....but
like you said....you can get lost in those for years.

and on here.....the forum, you can throw out a question....
and it is answered instantly.

i guess i will stop being lazy and go look myself.

sorry,
purr

 

No problem, Purr

It's just that even Ask Jeeves sometimes takes awhile to get to your questions. LOL

There are some quick resources on these sites, if you look. And the interesting thing is that you run into things while researching that you haven't seen before and which will fascinate you.

You can probably find the pictures of the basement you want pretty fast, at any rate.

 

no evidence

What evidence is there that JBR was ever hung and later cut down? None, IMO.

The ligature mark was described as horizontal (although some deviation was evident, based on the measurements), which is not consistent with her being hung by the neck.

There was no livor mortis pattern fitting a hanging scenario. The livor mortis pattern is consistent with her being on her back from a point shortly after death. If she was ever suspended, she was certainly not left that way for any significant period.

There is no indication she was suspended by her arms, either. The wrist ligature did not leave any markings, as would definitely occur had she been suspended that way.

And where is the evidence that she was cut down? As I recall, the wrist ligature was in one continuous piece. No signs of having been cut, unless at the free end. And if cut there, where's the piece that was cut off? Same thing for the neck ligature.

How many times must we revisit an idea for which there is not only an absence of supporting evidence, but also evidence that directly opposes it?

 

MJenn,

Thanks for posting the URL to the pictures of hanging/strangulations.

Something that has always bothered me is the fact that JonBenet's tongue and eyes, (in the picture that I've seen), are not typical of a strangulation.

Having worked in the EMS field for 15+ years, one of the first observations of a strangulation and/or hanging is the tongue is swollen, protruding and blue. I noticed in one picture on the URL you posted, you can see the victim's tongue swollen and protruding which is typical of blood being forced into the area as the carotids are pinched closed. Same goes for the eyes.

My guess would be that JB was hit on the head and very shortly (minutes) after, the cord was tightened around her neck.

 

Fly, I've already addressed every issue you raised. If you didn't understand what I said, then I guess there's no point in my repeating it.

And FOR THE RECORD: I'm not saying SHE WAS HANGED. I'm just saying that because of the nature of the garrote and the handle on it, when Lou Smit posted pictures of the autopsy and stated that the crescent "abrasions" above and below the garrote were where JonBenet scratched at it while being strangled, it occured to me that WOULD MEAN (subjunctive tense indicating a hypothetical, thank you) she was conscious during that strangulation. That led me to wonder HOW IT WAS SHE WASN'T KICKING AND FLAILING HER ARMS, ELBOWS, ETC., AND GETTING BRUISES ON HER EXTREMITIES? Now, could be she was on the bed, though the evidence of the green paint chip found on her chin and some evidence alluded to by some sources that JB's urine was on the carpet near the paint tray, along with the paint brush handle used on the garrote, indicate TO ME the possibility that is where she was killed. So the question naturally occurred to me...how was it she didn't get at least some bruising on her knees, elbows, etc., if she was conscious? I'm not saying any of these are CONCLUSIONS on my part. I don't have the expertise to conclude anything. But I don't think that considering evidence presented by a detective who did work on the case with the BPD and DA is out of line, do you? If I don't come up with questions that everyone likes, then guess what? Maybe I'm just not as smart as others. Thank heavens they don't arrest people for being dumb.

But I have never said I am absolutely sure JonBenet was hanged and I am ready to go to trial with it. How absurd. Last time I looked, though, there are a lot of questions in this case that are NOT ANSWERED. In fact, they never seem to get answered. Poop!

Ayjey, you may be absolutely right. I mentioned in a post above that congestion of the face is also not present to any degree, nor the livor mortis on the back of the neck present in the pictures of the victim at that pathologists website. All I really need to completely drop the hanging question is one official expert, who knows what Meyer's concluded, to say those ARE NOT JonBenet's fingernail marks on her neck. I'd like to hear someone explain this who actually knows the expert conclusions--what Meyer and the CBI and FBI had to say about when JonBenet recieved the head blow in relation to the strangulation. But I think I'll be very, very old before that happens, unfortunately. That would clear up a lot, wouldn't it? Like so much in this case,

 

Yes, unfortunately JB keeps getting further and further away from the public eye and we may never know what really happened.

I have seen marks on a suicide hanging that resembles the marks on JB's neck. Per the coroner, in our case, it was caused by the skin stretching from the rope being tightened around our victim's neck.

I just wish that someday we will be able to see and hear ALL the evidence that came out of what little bit of investigation went on!

 

HORIZONTAL BRUISE LINE

Here is a pretty good source for me on how the HORIZONTAL LIGATURE BRUISE COULD BE PRESENT ON A HANGING VICTIM. Since I have no idea who the forum people are behind their hats, nor what their professional credentials are, I like to find a source that I can identify and accept as credible when it comes to arguing the fine points:

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I posted this at WS in March of this year:

(ME ...material from a death investigation book that says the horizontal ligature line and bruising happens IN HANGING when the knot in the ligature is a slip knot. The slanted ligature line happens when the knot is a fixed knot, according to this source.

"Hidden Evidence," by David Owen:

(Owen"The most obvious external evidence found on the body of a hanging victim is usually caused by the rope itself. The marks made on the victim differ according to the type of noose used. If the rope is tied as a running noose, the weight of the body tightens the rope to the extent that it presses an almost horizontal groove around the neck. With a fixed noose, on the other hand, there is enough slack for the rope from which the victim is hanging to distort the noose by pulling it upward at an angle, making a mark like an inverted V on the victim's neck. Because a fixed noose pulls to the side, the victim's head often tilts away from the vertical part of the rope, so the rope mark may not run right around the neck." p. 92

(MEI also have a picture in a well-known book by Hazelwood ("The Evil That Men Do") where a woman is shown hanging from a door with a horizontal ligature line around her neck: died during autoerotic asphxyiation.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

FYI. I don't make things up out of the air. I do research. I listen to sources and look at the evidence. I am thinking. I am using sources. I am using logic, however flawed it may be. When someone credible WHO KNOWS can tell me exactly what happened to JonBenet that night, I'll be happy to put my questions to rest forevermore.

 

MJenn

MJenn - Let me untwist your panties for you. I am mostly addressing the idea that JBR was hung and left there, then later cut down. As I noted, a momentary suspension is not contradicted by anything other than, possibly, the horizontal ligature. There is another reason to seriously question that occurred (see below), however.

The horizontal ligature mark fits hanging if the knot is a slip knot. Do we really know that is what the knot at JBR's neck was? Unless ST specified that, we don't. It is described as a "double knot" in the autopsy. Perhaps a slip knot would be described that way, but so could other knots, I'll suggest.

What doesn't fit a hanging are the petechial hemorrhages of the eyes, however, - at least if I'm not misinterpretting one of your sources. Your source indicated no petechia of the eyes/conjuctiva if hung, but petechia if strangled. JBR had conjuctival petechia.

Your argument is also based on the assumption that JBR would have more significant bruising/abrasions if she'd been on the ground when strangled - partly because you can't see her being totally restrained by her killer. There are possible signs she was held down strongly: there are several linear groupings of petechia on her right shoulder. Some have suggested those might have resulted from fingers. Certainly not the only possibility, of course, but some potential evidence of significant restraint. And given that the area near the room was carpeted, there would be some cushioning effect that might reduce any significant bruising from any remaining thrashing. Bruises are fairly unpredictable, too. My son recently was hit on the wrist by a baseball hard enough to bruise the bone badly, but he didn't have any bruising of the skin.

For argument's sake, I'll give you the slip knot (which probably is the most likely knot) and horizontal ligature equalling hanging, and I'll ignore the conjuctival petechia's potential importance. Just how was she hung? The tail/stick end of the neck ligature was what, 17 inches long? Kind of tough to imagine that cord being hung over a pipe (as some have suggested). Afterall, you'd have to lift JBR up high enough to get that fairly short cord high enough to put over a pipe, or whatever object high enough to suspend her. I'll suggest it would be a whole lot more difficult to control her with one arm under those circumstances than on the ground.

BTW, I do my research, too. My comments have been based on what I've read on forensics sites and what the various authorities have said.

 

Thanks, fly

I appreciate your untwisting my panties. That was so uncomfortable.

Yeah, Thomas said it was a slip knot, unless my powers of recollection have hit a new low. I have quoted sources on this topic many times, so I'll just try to find my old posts and see if I can come up with that quote.

I have considered that the killer could have restrained JonBenet with his/her body weight, but then how would she get her hands up to her throat if she was on her stomach while being strangled and sat upon or lain upon? If her hands/arms were folded so that she could still reach her throat, wouldn't that mean the weight of her own body and the killer's body would be on her arms? Or could she move her upper body and not her lower? Or could she move her lower and not her upper? Were her arms out to the side? With the long length of cord between wrists, this seems possible. She had to have been on her stomach at any rate because the garrote is pulled from the rear. But if she was somehow sideways over the bed with her arms extended over the edge, that might work.

The blow to the head is also from the rear/side, almost on top of her head, if I remember correctly. I am quite fuzzy about this, though. What I have wondered is if the killer struck this blow to put her out of her misery, IF SHE WAS CONSCIOUS during the time of she was being strangled. I wonder this no matter whether she was hanged or just straight out strangled.

And it always goes back to whether she was consious or not. When was the blow struck? Are those HER fingernail marks or not? Wouldn't tissue present under her fingernails at autopsy tell that? I've read she did have her own skin tissue under her fingernails, but the source is questionable, so I do not know.

As to how the killer could have raised JonBenet up to a beam/pipe to allow the cord to be pulled over it without a big fight, I think that's not impossible, if she didn't know what was coming. The basement does not have tall ceilings, after all, though I don't know the actual height of any of the piping, etc. But see, that's a great question. If that was in fact what happened, it would tell something about the killer...like height, possibly. I guess I've always had this idea in the back of my mind that the pipes/ceiling are low, but now that you mention it, I really have no idea what the height was. Perhaps it wouldn't have been feasible over a pipe. I have wondered if there was a bathroom shower with a shower curtain rod in that basement bathroom. I know the police took a lot of stuff out of that basement bathroom.

As for the petechial/conjunctival stuff, I've read so many sources and opinions on that I can't even discuss it without going back and rereading my notes again, comparing, etc. I do know that this is a prickly point that I've searched out before, but not being a medical person, it leaves me pretty soon after I move on to the next thread. Like the protruding tongue usually present and the facial congestion, this is what I most specifically would like to hear Meyer's/CBI/FBI conclusions on. Could she have been hanged after the head blow...for staging...or ease of strangulation, as her body weight would have provided the tension to tighten the cord around her neck? See, this could be totally impossible. I don't know. I just want someone who DOES know to tell...because THAT'S HOW THE KILLER WILL BE CAUGHT.

I know you know your stuff, fly. You taught me plenty when I first came to the forums, and I thank you for your patience with a newbie then and now.

All I really get my panties wadded up about is when people say why are we here anymore, why are we discussing this or that. Maybe I'm just interpreting that wrong, but when I think that's what I'm hearing, I do get grumpy.

I know some topics have been very destructive in this case. I'd have to be in a coma not to know that. And I try very hard not to make absolute statements when discussing things some people don't like for me to discuss, for whatever reason. If I'm researching and discussing some facet of this case, I always say I'm JUST WORKING IT, which is ALL I can do. Speculation is all any of us have here. I try to say that clearly. Those who do know are not telling.

So the fact remains that we still have lots of unanswered questions in this case, and there are plenty of contradictory sources. I guess it's all been discussed to death, but not everyone has been around for all of it since the beginning. Sometimes I almost fade away, thinking I'm tired of rehashing, debating things that will never be resolved anyway. I know at some point, it will happen, for most of us. At that point, the killer gets the FREE PASS FOR ONE CHILD MURDER.

The one thing that keeps me going is that new information keeps coming...even at a trickle. It brings into focus some old stuff and gives it a new angle, a new revelation, sometimes a question is answered that's been troublesome, sometimes just adding to the mystery.

So for now, I'm still asking questions. I'm still looking for answers. And I'll try to find the time to hunt up that info soon.

Right now I'm going to read some info sent by a most generous Mr. Englund before he deems me a complete idiot. (Thanks, elle.)So much to learn, so few little brain cells....

 

MJenn

No need to try to drag up sources on the slipknot. I'll believe you that ST said it was one. I am essentially certain that it was never described as one in any of the newspaper articles, however. There's a small chance it might have been noted in the RMNews presentation of Smit's dog and pony show, but I missed it if it was.

Although it wouldn't really bring us closer to knowing for sure who did this, the one bit of information I'd like to know for certain is whether the "unpatterned abrasions" on her throat are coupled with matching tissue under her nails. That would pretty clearly tell us one thing (and at this point, having one thing certain, besides her death, would be a treat): whether the head blow came first or last. Unless ST stated such, we don't have a definitive statement about it. Clearly, if she clawed at her throat, the strangulation began before the blow to the head. I don't think there's any way she would have remained conscious after such a blow - even though head injuries are awfully tricky sometimes.

I'll say again that the nature of the garrotte makes it highly unlikely IMO that she was hung at all. Just can't see doing so with that short a cord. Not impossible, but very, very unlikely, IMO.

 

How can that be answered, Fly?

First of all, mame is the ONLY one I have seen report that there was flesh under JB's fingernails. At the time, I asked the obvious question - if there were fresh flesh under her nails, why did they have such a difficult time coming up with an entire strand of DNA from that site? Steve Thomas said in his book that the material under JB's fingernails was old - IOW, no flesh, no blood. I would expect them to find her own DNA under her nails, or enough of her own DNA to determine it was hers, even if it was old. The DNA under her nails was ambiguous - it could be interpreted different ways - I believe ST said that if the foreign DNA belonged to more than one person, then NO MALE (including John Ramsey) could be ruled out. What that told me is they didn't have complete strands, and the DNA was very weak and degraded. If JB had clawed at her own neck (why can't we believe Meyers when he reports those marks were petechia?), there would have been good, fresh DNA there - not old material as has been reported by a detective on the case.

But, let me go a little further, here. When the above-named stated there was flesh under JB's fingernails, if I recall correctly, she also stated it was the killer's flesh, and that is why I pointed out to her that if they had had that much DNA to work with, it would definitely be a DNA case, and they wouldn't be in this predicament.

All I can say for sure is, don't base anything on the fiction that one reported. I don't even know where she got that information (although I would guess she got it from Lou Smit who was in the Ramsey camp), and it wasn't the only bad information she put out there. No one else has ever said there was flesh under JB's fingernails. The ones who were there and who would know said there was nothing to indicate that JB fought her attacker - no flesh, no blood under her fingernails, no bruises on her hands.

 

WY

WY - That corresponds to my memory of things, too. Carol McKinley once stated that there were fingernail marks on her neck, but she was the only person to report that - until Smit went public. Like you, I've never understood how JBR could have clawed at her throat and the description of the stuff under her nails be what we've heard.

BTW, this isn't a case of not believing Meyers. He reported "abrasions" in the area around the ligature, in addition to petechia. Something damaged the skin there, but whether it was her nails, the ligature, or even her assailant is what is unknown.

 

WY, here's why....

Re. "believing" Meyer's petechia: You know, I missed this fine distinction for years, but when Smit said those are fingernail marks from JonBenet's own hands, I immediately ran to the autopsy report and there it was...how did I miss it?

""The remainder of the ABRASIONS and petechial hemorrhages of the skin ABOVE AND BELOW THE ANTERIOR PROJECTION OF THE LIGATURE FURROW are nonpatterned, purple to rust colored, and present in the midline, right and left areas of the anterior neck."

It's the ABRASIONS part that I believe could be the fingernail marks, as well as just the cord scrapping the skin as it tightened and rolled. But maybe it wasn't fingernail marks. All I'm saying is this issue has been raised by a case detective and it has made me wonder, considering that more people than I look at the autoerotic/erotic asphyxiation angle and the handle on the garrote.

This aside...Meyer's did not include AT ALL, that I can find, the strangulation bruise line on the lower neck area seen in the same group of autopsy pictures Smit released.

I agree, Fly, that this is just ONE MORE thing that won't quit bugging me. But like Meyer's autopsy, Thomas' book also didn't reveal much more about the evidence than we already knew. He mostly wrote information about HOW the investigation was carried out and about people's behaviors, professional and personal. Same with many other sources. There is plenty we don't know, I believe.

Oh, and WY, I did say that "flesh under the nails" source was questionable, therefore I just want to know what the official determination was. Why won't the CBI, THE FBI, OR DR. MEYER CALL AND TELL ME?!

 

scratch marks?

I also reread the autopsy looking for info regarding those marks. The term abrasion could refer to nail marks or marks made by the rope but my question would be - If someone being strangled reached up and tried to pull away a rope, wouldn't the marks be longer as in scratch marks instead of just the sort of half-moon shaped marks that appear on the neck?

When I think about what would happen if someone had a rope around my neck and I desperately reached up and pulled at the rope, I think the marks would resemble claw marks or longer scratches. What do you think about it?

 

Which brings me to....

Something else that I have always felt Meyers deliberately misled the public about...and maybe rightly so, since this IS a murder investigation....

(Those of you who are already know all the autopsy stuff and medical stuff may want to scroll. This is a sort of "autopsies for dummies" post--dummies like me, I mean.

Reading the Furhman book about the Moxley murder, he explains that rigor mortis can help determine the time of death because the body starts to stiffen...oh, shoot, let me just quote it or I will never get it right:

"Murder in Greenwich," p. 102 (paperback):

"Rigor mortis is the contraction of the body muscles due to chemical changes occurring after death. This process begins two to four hours after death. Once rigor mortis is complete, the body is "fixed" in the position in the position assumed at death....Simply moving the victim would provide information establishing which portions of the body were limp or stiff.

"Rigor mortis porgresses from head to toe. When it leaves, the body slowly becomes limp again in the same order, from head to toe. It begins to disappear about eighteen to thirty-six hours after death...."

Then he says this about lividity on p. 102-103:

"Postmortem lividity occurs when the heart ceases to pump and the blood pools toward the pull of gravity. It is important to establish not only time of death but also the position of the body at the time of death. Lividity begins about thirty minutes after death and becomes fixed in eight to ten hours. It is identified by a purplish discoloration in the parts of the body closest to the ground. If lividity is not consistent with the body position--for example, there is lividity on the victim's back, but she is found facedown--then it can be concluded that the body has been moved from its original position at death."

If you read the autopsy, there is a section in there that describes JonBenet's elbows and...oh, heck , here is what it says:

"Examination of the back is unremarkable. There is dorsal 3+ to 4+ livor mortis which is nonblanching. Livor mortis is also present on the right side of the face. At the time of the initiation of the autopsy there is mild 1 to 2+ rigot mortis of the elbows and shoulders with more advanced 2 to 3+ rigor mortis of the joints of the lower extremities."

Ok, when the autopsy commenced, the rigor was leaving her body, head to toe, so the elbows/shoulders were less rigid than the knees, etc. Right? The death date on the autopsy is 12/26/96 @ 1323 (1:23 pm) (missed that, I guess, John), and the autopsy date is recorded as 12/27/96 @ 0815 (8:15 am).

Now, this is probably not going to give me anything, or I'm sure someone in 5+ years would have established TOD before now that we would have heard of, but just thought while it was on my mind I'd put it out there for any guidance from all you medical whizzes.

But it does seem to establish that JonBenet was laid on her back with the right side of her face to the floor within 30 minutes of death. That would definitely rule out John finding her hanging unless he did so shortly after she died and laid her down himself and left her there until that afternoon. Wouldn't it?

In the meantime, I gotta' go ponder for awhile and do some math. While I do real life. Darn real life.

Should this be a new thread on new topic? Or should I just go get a life?