Autopsy questions

Discussion in 'Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum' started by rashomon, Jan 23, 2008.

  1. DeeDee

    DeeDee Member

    Wasn't JBR known to have said to one of her little friends that her trophies were in her mother's room because (They really should belong to her anyway"? Her words.
  2. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member

    I remember reading that, too, DeeDee, but can't remember the source.
  3. koldkase

    koldkase FFJ Senior Member

    I don't believe this was a "one time" thing, from what the former Mrs. Archuletta said. She says her husband would go off flying and leave her with the Ramseys...and that sounds like more than once to me.

    I have always thought that Archuletta was the suspicious one in some ways. It struck me as VERY strange that he would leave his family and go spend two days with the Ramsey family in Charlevoix the day after Christmas. Of course, if JR was paying Archuletta for two days, that's business. But the Archulettas were very close to the Ramseys, weren't they? They were prominent organizers in Burke's Boy Scout Troop parade activities for two or more years, weren't they? The last one was when JonBenet rode on the car in the parade, but the Ramseys were out of town with the Stines in NY. The Paughs were also in Boulder, said to have been taking care of Burke and JonBenet during that trip to NY. And shortly thereafter, depending on who is telling the story, Patsy made three phone calls to Dr. Beuf after hours. I've seen the date for that Dec. 7th, and here's how THAT would shake out: The Ramseys were in NY with the Stines for a few days, something like Dec. 3rd through the 7th; the 7th was a Saturday, and JR had a company party that night, if memory serves; the parade was on Friday, Dec. 6, with the Archuletts and the Paughs in charge of the kids and their involvement in the parade. Patsy and John and the Stines returned on Saturday, Dec. 7th, for the AG party. Patsy called Dr. Beuf's office three times between five and six o'clock, approx.

    But the "accepted" date for those calls to Dr. Beuf is DEC. 17TH. I noticed this discrepancy a few years ago, but couldn't track down which was actually true and so let it go for lack of information. I have always thought this was very suspicious, considering that jams had her infamous "timeline" up for a few years and then took it down. That was before I came online in 2000, so I never saw it. She stated a few times at her forum that she took it down because she "found out" there was an error in it, and she was "told" about this "in confidence", so she couldn't change her timeline without some kind of "confidentiality" problem in her mind, so she just took it down. Yeah, right. I have always felt that whatever that "conflict" was, it was incriminating for the Ramseys. Maybe this is it, because this is still not resolved for me. With Pam Archuletta's "divorce" confession, I find all this even MORE suspicious. For example, where was the Stine's son during that trip? Did he stay with JonBenet and Burke? What about his "manny" they were said to have employed for him?

    Also remember, JR depended on Archuletta to "help him" pilot the plane, JR claimed, because of eye problems. What I don't understand is how JR kept his pilot's license if he couldn't see well enough to fly alone. Don't they test for those things?

    And isn't JR flying still? Does he NOW pay for a CO-PILOT? I thought he is "broke"? (HAHAHAHA Yeah, we all know the Ramsey definition of "broke": owning only ONE airplane.)

    So you see, I simply can't BELIEVE LE didn't investigate all these issues, when it's a FACT that JonBenet had prior vaginal injuries and was molested and murdered so horribly. Is it POSSIBLE for there to be ANOTHER DA who obstructed a murder investigation for a child in this country, one SO COMPLETELY PUBLIC, that he/she wouldn't be investigated and DISBARRED at the very least? I doubt it. But in this case, there is so much covering up going on, I swear I will always believe the Ramseys were allowed to walk from this murder, and continue to be protected, because of corruption. Until EVERYONE tells the truth in this, I have seen too much UNEXPLAINED, CONTRARY ACTION BY LE, TOO MANY LIES and TOO MUCH DISINFORMATION coming from the very people who should have been ALL OVER this case, doing the BEST investigation possible, to ever believe this wasn't a cover up. Why did the FBI IMMEDIATELY abdicate their jurisidiction, long before the body was found, when a ransom note from a TERRORIST GROUP showed up in the home of a MISSING CHILD? WHY did Lockheed Martin's own EMPLOYED security experts, highly trained for JUST THIS KIND OF KIDNAPPING, never get one phone call when one of their CEOs had a child "kidnapped by A SMALL FOREIGN FACTION"? HAS THERE EVER BEEN A MORE EFFECTIVE AND UNENDING PR CAMPAIGN FOR PRIME SUSPECTS WHO WERE UNCOOPERATIVE WITH LE, ACTED SO GUILTY, AND HAD SO MUCH EVIDENCE AGAINST THEM?

    Nope, something is VERY wrong here, and it has been FROM DAY ONE.
    Last edited: Jan 28, 2009
  4. Texan

    Texan FFJ Senior Member


    It would have had to happen more than once to break up a marriage but the Rams got out of Boulder as quick as they could and probably didn't go back often. The story that Pam tells sounds like it was the first time she had to sneak them around, it doesn't sound like it was a routine thing.

    I don't know about their marriage but my spouse and I try not to let temporary situations dictate what happens for the long haul. It sounds to me like an excuse and a try for sympathy - maybe she thought if JR felt his situation had caused an end to her marriage he would step in and fill the void. What a suspicious mind I have. :devil:
  5. DeeDee

    DeeDee Member

    I am trying to sort this out about Mike. Let's suppose for a moment that he was the one doing the molesting. Let's suppose also that instead of meeting the Rs at the airport he was actually staying overnight at the R home because the flight was so early. Now suppose he was the one who inflicted the death blow (because she screamed - the one heard by neighbor Stanton- when he was molesting her). So you have a "good friend" who during an overnight stay in your home molests and then kills (though possibly accidentally) your 6-year-old daughter. WHY on earth would you help to stage a cover-up? Because JR's shirt fibers and PR's jacket fibers ON The body in places where they would not be unless they had handled the BODY (not the child- the BODY) definitely place both of them there staging the body (no matter WHO the killer was).
    Then we have the PINEAPPLE. His prints were NOWHERE on the bowl/spoon. But PR's were. If Mike had fed her the pineapple and then wiped the bowl, there's be NO prints on it. Just as there were NO prints on a flashlight belonging to the house. And why would an intruder wipe off the flashlight (and BATTERIES) anyway? They'd WANT the family's prints on it, and the family prints would BELONG on the batteries- they'd be expected to be there. It is their absence that is suspicious.
    And then there is the NOTE. I wouldn't do this for my pilot/friend, would you?
    I just can't see ANY parent doing that for ANYONE- no matter how good a friend. Anyone. Except another family member. If MA is involved- then a family member is too. This had to involve one of the Rs. There simply is no other way.
  6. rashomon

    rashomon Member

    It is somewhere in the back of my mind that Judith Phillips mentioned this, but I'm not quite sure. In the interview with Mary Suma maybe?
  7. DeeDee

    DeeDee Member

    Now that you mention it, I think it WAS Judith Phillips. It was her daughter JBR was speaking to about the trophies.
  8. Texan

    Texan FFJ Senior Member


    This is in reply to your earlier post regarding the neck injuries or lack of them.
    The large abrasion on the side of the neck showing where the knot was, which you pointed out, is a stumbling block for DE theory that the rope was only tied tightly around her neck. I think most people believe that large triangular abrasion represents where the knot must have moved to cause it. Also, I think if you look closely at the neck wound you can see a couple of lines where the rope was and there is also the petechiae(sp) around the rope.
    Do you think that if someone simply tied the rope as tight as they could around her throat it would leave that large abrasion?
    I have read that there is not always underlying damage to the throat in some cases. I believe these involve a vagal response which I have talked about til I'm blue in the face and no one believes me. That is ok. I know it exists. I also know it usually occurs with a quick crossing and tightening of the ligature rather than being tied on. Can't it have happened both ways? A quick tightening of the ligature causing the heart rate to slow way down and then the rope being tied tightly. I don't know but maybe even with her heart rate slowed way down the petechaie would still happen and it would be supported by the second line around her neck.
  9. Texan

    Texan FFJ Senior Member

  10. DeeDee

    DeeDee Member

    Texan, the vagus nerve has been discussed here, and many do understand that compression of this nerve can cause cardiac arrest.
    I have read the article you posted. There are some valid points. For one, the blood-tinged fluids that had leaked from her nose and mouth could have been caused by the strangulation, and not just the head blow. The article does say that in a child, breakage of the hyoid bone is not usually seen because this bone in young children is cartilage, not ossified bone.
    And it mentions the things we are all familiar with, such as the petechiae. There are photos still posted on Ruthee's old site that show autopsy photos of the neck area of strangulation victims (specifically, someone who was strangled with a scarf) next to the photo of JBR's neck showing the "triangular abrasion". They are eerily identical marks.
    We will never know which came first, but we do know she was alive for each. They likely occurred very close together. So her heart was still pumping, thought she was probably unconscious, maybe even comatose. There does not seem to be any evidence of a struggle as far as the strangulation, and though we see only a partial view of her face (mostly mouth, tongue, cheek and chin) there does not seem to be a grotesquely swollen face and tongue that comes with strangulation that leads to death. Detective Arndt did not describe JBR's face/head as looking swollen or her having a protruding tongue.
    In the autopsy photos, her mouth is open due to rigor mortis, and her tongue, partially visible, does not look swollen, nor does her face.
    I feel that the head blow had to have come first, because while it can be shown that the strangulation was done to provide a visible cause of death and stage the crime, I cannot see a reason to bash her head AFTER she was rendered unconscious from the strangulation. The two cause of death work one way, but not the other, IMHO.
  11. Voyager

    Voyager Active Member


    As a long time observer of this case and it's forensic details, I completely agree with the observations in your last post. Thank your for your interest, study and review of so many of the Ramsey Case details...They are needed if this case is to continue being observed and kept before the internet public. So glad to have a relatively new and interested student of this case here with us when so many of us are at the point of burning out after twelve long years of advocacy for Jon Benet.

    Perhaps a new, intelligent mind like yours will be able to search out details and avenues that our exhausted ones have overlooked and can no longer see....Glad you and a few others are here to give new discussion and vision to this important case.

  12. DeeDee

    DeeDee Member

    Thank you very much.
  13. Texan

    Texan FFJ Senior Member


    The article answers why there isn't necessarily a swollen face - that happens from compression of the jugulars, when the blood supply - the carotids - are compressed also there is little or no flow to cause the swelling.
  14. Elle

    Elle Member

    Good sleuthing DeeDee!
  15. rashomon

    rashomon Member


    imo it is possible that the stager fumbled around quite a bit with the cord before it ended up in this final position on the neck.
    Maybe they even tried to use the hemp rope first, but as it was too coarse, looked for other material.
    Ths would also account for the hemp rope fibers which were allegedly found in JonBenet's bed.

    Very important in that context: the abrasion described as parchment-like in the autopsy report, which is characteristic of post-mortem abrasions.

    I think many JBR posters are aware of the vagal response issue because it is also Dr. Werner Spitz's theory. Only that Spitz thinks an initial twisting of the shirt collar caused the vagal response.
    Dr. Spitz' s time line:
    Manual strangulation during a rage attack - head blow - staging of the 'garrote' scene.

    As for the lack of underlying damage to the throat (especially in younger victims), it mostly refers to the absence of fractures (e. g. the hyoid bone), due to flexibility.
    This is also mentoned in the link you gave:

    But the red flag in the JBR autopsy report is the complete absence of bruising and bleeding in the inner neck.
    What was MISSING in JonBenet and points AWAY from violent strangulation was findings like we have in e. g. the Butts case:

    Strangulation victim Jessica Butts:

    3. Hemorrhage in the musculature and subcutaneous tissue in the front of the neck and in the thymus gland..
    5. Hemorrhage in anterior musculature of base of neck and upper chest around clavicles.
    6. Contusion of the tip of the tongue.

    From the autopsy report:

    There is subcutaneous hemorrhage in the anterior middle of the neck, bilateral sternocleidomastoid hemorrhage near the inferior ends of the muscle, bilateral sternohyoid muscle hemorrhage, and hemorrhage in the portion of the thymus gland extending up into the neck. There is hemorrhage bilaterally in the trapezius, deltoid, and pectoralis major muscles near the clavicles.

    Upon examination of the body, the tongue is between the decedent's teeth, with a 1/2 inch contusion of the tip.

    Strangulation victim (Jessica's 29-year-old mother):

    1. Abrasions, contusions, and petechial hemorrhages of anterior neck.
    2. Hemorrhage in the subcutaneous tissue and musculature of the right side and front of the neck.
    4. Contusions of posterior right and left lower lobes of the lungs

    The complete absence of any hemorrhage of that type in JonBenet confirms me even more that there was NO REAL attempt at violently strangling to death.

    Texan, I emailed the same link to D. England a few months ago but we discussed other chapters of it.
    On reading the excerpt you gave, it contains quite a bombshell info:

    "Post mortem petechial haemorrhages, seen associated with hypostasis, is also the result of over distension and rupture of the vessels containing the blood." (end quote)

    So petechial hemorrhages can develop post mortem too! DE has always been of the opinion that the neck cord was applied after death, and imo this would confirm his theory.
  16. Texan

    Texan FFJ Senior Member


    I read that there could be some hemorhages post mortem but there were some also found on her lungs so I don't know if that follows. Seems that would infer around the neck area and not in a distal part of the body. The article says that hemorhages could also be found on the heart and lungs with strangulation.

    I still believe the reddened area under the rope indicates she was alive but probably already severely wounded when the rope was applied. Imo the blood tinged mucous shows strangulation when she was alive. If the blood was from the head wound I don't think it would be mixed with tan stuff (mucous?)

    I don't know if you can compare the Butts case with this one as obviously the Butts one was very brutal - for there to be bleeding of the deltoid and trapezius muscles I think was extremely rough. JBR was probably very near death when the rope was applied. I do believe the rope was staging. I do also believe the rope contributed to her death but certainly wasn't the main cause because she would have died from the head wound anyway. I think we may be on the same page but saying it differently. To say that she wasn't strangled would be inaccurate imo but to say she wasn't intentionally strangled is probably true, especially because it was meant as staging therefore the one staging probably thought she was dead already.
    Last edited: Jan 30, 2009
  17. DeeDee

    DeeDee Member

    I agree. JBR had scattered petechiae in the lungs,which would be expected, showing she was alive when strangulation began.
    Certain petechia can form after death, but they are different- caused by different mechanisms. After death, things start to happen in an undisturbed body. Gases build up, causing grotesque swelling, and the start of decomposition causes the blood vessels themselves to begin to disintegrate, causing some kinds of petechial hemmorhage. JBR was found before these stages could begin, and the refrigeration at the morgue slows the process considerably, but will not halt it completely. The coroner should be able to tell when the body is dissected whether the petechia happened after death.
  18. rashomon

    rashomon Member

    I mentioned the Butts case precisely for that reason - because it was different: a genuine strangulation attempt with alive and conscious victims putting up a fight.
    It would be interesting to compare the amount of petechiae in the lungs of strangulation victims who had fought their attacker.
    The complete absence of defensive wounds on the victim, the perfect lip imprint on the duct tape, no tongue indentations etc. point to JonBenet already being in a coma when the cord was put around the neck.

    It is all about establishing a time line of events. The time line is so important here because the issue is manslaughter vs. murder
    IDIs believe that the strangulation came first because it suits their intruder theory.
    But even some RDIs on the forums believe that she was strangled first - those who think JonBenet was sexually abused and tortured by a family member and that the subseqent head blow was delivered to silence her for good. This would be first degree murder.
    But would someone intent on murdering the child through a blow to the head not have delivered more than one blow to make sure she was dead? Especially since the one blow left no outer signs of injury - how could the killer know it would be 'enough'?
    Last edited: Jan 31, 2009
  19. Texan

    Texan FFJ Senior Member


    I think we are on the same page here. I don't think the rope works as a sexual device - DE did some good work on that. Thanks deedee for the comments on the hemmorhages because to me they mean she was still alive and Rashomon hit the nail on the head with the difference it makes. The difference being murder.
    I think the head blow came first with the rope being added as staging and with JBR being close to death. That would explain the lack of underlying damage and the amount of swelling in her brain.
  20. Cherokee

    Cherokee FFJ Senior Member

    And I agree with all three of you. Excellent discussion.

    It's too bad the Boulder DA's Office has never had the same intellect, logic and critical thinking skills displayed here at FFJ. But then, if they had applied those components to the case evidence, they'd see the Ramseys were guilty, and they couldn't have THAT, could they?

    Hunter couldn't indict the Ramseys because of his own skeletons in the closet and the fact that the investigation was screwed up from the beginning. He didn't want to LOSE a case, and he especially didn't want to go up against Haddon and Company. Lacy made the mistake of believing the Ramseys were innocent based on her FEELINGS, not the evidence. She decided such nice people COULDN'T have killed their daughter, even accidentally, and then covered it up. Based on Lacy's FEELINGS, she began with a false supposition and made herself a world-wide laughing stock, then added insult to injury by issuing a worthless, unethical and possibly illegal "exhoneration."

    Anyone, who honestly looks at the evidence without letting their feelings about the Ramseys get in the way, will come away knowing the Ramseys were involved somehow. There is no other way to explain the evidence, the lies, the behavior, and the many lives ruined by the Ramsey's eagerness to point the finger of suspicion in any other direction than themselves.

    I might could forgive the accidental death of JonBenet (if that was what it was).

    I might could even forgive the staging of the crime scene in an effort to save a family member.

    But, I cannot forgive whoever was molesting JonBenet, and I cannot forgive the Ramseys for destroying so many people with their vicious lies and innuendos.

    Even if JonBenet's death was an accident, the Ramseys still have much to answer for, and even though Patsy is dead, John is not. He still knows the truth of what happened, and he walks around free, waving Lacy's worthless exhoneration as his "Get Out of Jail Free Card."

    I hope I live long enough to see the truth of this case published worldwide, and that smug grin wiped from John Ramsey's disgusting lizard lips.
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice