JonBenet Ramsey Murder case

[Wickerman]

Dr Werner Spitz, forensic medical examiner for Wayne County, Michigan studied the wounds and injuries to JB's body and provides a sequence of events consistent with the wounds described in the autopsy findings.

The first injuries committed against JonBenet are seen on either side of her neck. To visualize this you need to picture a person standing in front of JB and grasping the top/front of her nightshirt with a clenched fist, grasping a fistful of shirt, and then twisting his hand - we see this in gangster movies when one man threatens another.

1 - JonBenet had constriction marks on the sides and front of her throat. Spitz believed the her assailant had grabbed her shirt from the front and twisted the collar in their fist. The cloth from the edge of the collar had created the discolored, striated bruising and abrasions on the sides of her neck, and the knuckles of the perpetrator had caused the triangular shaped bruise located on the front side of her throat.

2 - JonBenet reached up to her neck with her hands to attempt to pull away the collar causing some nail gouges/abrasions with her fingernails on the sides of her throat.

3 - Released from the grasp of the perpetrator, JonBenet turned and was struck in the upper right side of her head with a blunt object.

4 - The blow would have rendered JonBenet unconscious and accounted for the absence of any additional defensive wounds on her body.

5 - Inflicted perimortem with her death, was the insertion of the paintbrush handle into JonBenet's vaginal orifice. The presence of inflammation and blood in the vaginal vault indicated that she was still alive when this assault took place...

6 - The last injury sustained was the tightening of the garrote around JonBenet's throat that resulted in her death by strangulation / asphyxiation.

Foreign Faction, Kolar, 2012, pp.65/66

[Wickerman]

Hi, Jon--
The Burke theory panelists suggested the marks came from model train tracks rather than a taser due to no bleeding -- supposedly suggesting she was dead when they were applied. They also claimed the marks were not sized properly for
being from a taser, but that the track sections do fit.

I understand the argument Pat, yet the skin is not punctured, so why are the marks red - from what?
Tazer tests were done on a pig (common practice), and the wounds were identical to those on Jon Benet, even to the existence of the pale red spot in the center of the burn.

The difference was the colour, on JonBenet the two spots are dark red, on the pig they were pinkish red - but JonBenet had been dead for well over 12 hours when the photo was taken, whereas the pig had just been tazered - that wound was fresh.
I think time discoloured the burn to a dark red which was not accounted for with the pig test.

It is unfortunate that the autopsy only describes the marks as "abrasions", which in medical terminology is a surface injury to the skin. A tazer injures the surface of the skin, a two-pronged piece of track is sharp and pointed, and hitting the skin, or pressing this piece of track against the body will puncture or at least damage the skin.
The autopsy does not suggest the skin was pierced or punctured at those points.

[Wickerman]

Dr. John Meyer, Boulder County Coroner.

"An examination of her eyelids and the conjunctiva of her eyes revealed the presence of petechial hemorrhages, pinpoint blood vessels that had burst when JonBenet had been strangled. These hemorrhages indicated that JonBenet had been alive when the garrote had been applied and tightened around her throat"
Foreign Faction, p.55.

[Wickerman]

I'm going with intruder. They entered the home while the Ramseys were at the Christmas dinner, which is probably when they drafted the ransom letter.

Lou Smit theorized that this ransom note was not the original.
It is well believed an intruder bent on kidnapping will bring a ransom note with him, Smit accepts this. However, an intruder breaking in to the house while the family were out has all the time he needs to investigate every room on every floor.
The Ramsey's described to police, and police photographed drawers and doors open that were normally closed like someone had been routing through the house. The paperwork mentioning John's bonus, the $118,000 was in John Ramsey's office/study.
So an intruder could easily have read it.

Smit theorized that the intruder re-wrote his original ransom note to include a few details he just learned while in the house.

[Wickerman]

The tazer theory was ruled out.

Really!

There were two marks on her right jaw, below the ear - yes?
Both were dark red, one larger than the other.

The smaller one was covered with minute traces of melted adhesive.

Please explain to me how a piece of train track can melt adhesive directly over the injury.

[Wickerman]

In any case you don't know much about tazers if you think anybody would assume a tazer would revive somebody. It's more likely to kill them if they're already vulnerable.

You do not know what a killer might think a tazer can do, certainly it shocks the body. The small area of ruptured blood beneath the skin (they were small marks) is consistent with JB being dead or at the point of death when this was applied.
The contact area should have been larger if she had been alive when tazered.

Don't you think it is strange that the train track was "O" gauge, which requires three pins, yet to make their argument they have to remove the center pin.
The two outer pins certainly match the width between the wounds, I think by coincidence, but like I said, the argument only works when you remove the center pin.
In other words, if you make it look like the weapon, then it will look like the weapon.

[Wickerman]

Louisa:-

A killer always leaves something of himself behind. This one left nothing. It all points to one conclusion.



No, that's not what I meant.

In any murder or rape there is always a transference of DNA of some kind, however miniscule. I was referring to skin cells, DNA, fingerprints, fibres etc.

In this case the only DNA found in this house was that of the Ramseys. When the duct tape was forensically analysed it was shown to bear fibres that came from the red and black jacket Patsy had been wearing the previous night.

Ok, well brown fibers were found all over the crime scene, these brown fibers were never traced. Lou Smit believes the intruder wore brown gloves.

Here's some data covering the DNA under the fingernails from Kolar's book.

1) There had been trace DNA samples collected from beneath JonBenet's fingernails of both hands during autopsy that was identified as belonging to her.

2) There had been trace DNA samples collected from beneath her left fingernails during autopsy that belonged to an unidentified male.

3) There had been trace DNA samples collected from beneath her right fingernails during autopsy that belonged to another unidentified male, and a female. (JonBenet could not be eliminated as a possible contributor of the female DNA).

4) [samples of DNA found in the panties, as we know]

5) [samples of DNA found on waistband of leggings, as we know]

6) The new technology of Touch DNA had located another sample of DNA located on the wrist bindings that belonged to a different unidentified male.

7) The new technology of Touch DNA had located another sample of DNA located on the garrote that belonged to yet another unidentified male.
Foreign Faction , A, James Kolar.

It is understandable that the authorities are cautious about using items 6) and 7), but items 4) and 5) were a match so they received publicity.

With respect to items 1), 2) & 3), James Kolar believes JonBenet scratched her own neck when first assaulted by the grasp of the fist.
However, Lou Smit believes JonBenet scratched her throat when the garrote was applied - either way she did scratch her own throat at some point.
The fingernail DNA evidence (points 1), 2) & 3) are the subject of caution due to the finding of two different male DNA samples, one for each hand.

[louisa]

Dr Werner Spitz, forensic medical examiner for Wayne County, Michigan studied the wounds and injuries to JB's body and provides a sequence of events consistent with the wounds described in the autopsy findings.

The first injuries committed against JonBenet are seen on either side of her neck. To visualize this you need to picture a person standing in front of JB and grasping the top/front of her nightshirt with a clenched fist, grasping a fistful of shirt, and then twisting his hand - we see this in gangster movies when one man threatens another.

1 - JonBenet had constriction marks on the sides and front of her throat. Spitz believed the her assailant had grabbed her shirt from the front and twisted the collar in their fist. The cloth from the edge of the collar had created the discolored, striated bruising and abrasions on the sides of her neck, and the knuckles of the perpetrator had caused the triangular shaped bruise located on the front side of her throat.

2 - JonBenet reached up to her neck with her hands to attempt to pull away the collar causing some nail gouges/abrasions with her fingernails on the sides of her throat.

3 - Released from the grasp of the perpetrator, JonBenet turned and was struck in the upper right side of her head with a blunt object.

4 - The blow would have rendered JonBenet unconscious and accounted for the absence of any additional defensive wounds on her body.

5 - Inflicted perimortem with her death, was the insertion of the paintbrush handle into JonBenet's vaginal orifice. The presence of inflammation and blood in the vaginal vault indicated that she was still alive when this assault took place...

6 - The last injury sustained was the tightening of the garrote around JonBenet's throat that resulted in her death by strangulation / asphyxiation.

Foreign Faction, Kolar, 2012, pp.65/66

But that's what I've been saying all along - that the skull trauma came before the garotting.

I don't disagree with the above scenario.

I've never disagreed that she was alive when the paintbrush business took place. She could well have been.

There would have been no point in "an assailant" garrotting JonBenet if the assailant thought she was dead.

In this case garrotting was not necessary....because it was not sexual. JB was already unconscious. It was an afterthought - part of the elaborate 'staging'.

[louisa]

Really!

There were two marks on her right jaw, below the ear - yes?
Both were dark red, one larger than the other.

The smaller one was covered with minute traces of melted adhesive.

Please explain to me how a piece of train track can melt adhesive directly over the injury.

No. You explain it to me.

It's the first I've heard about melted adhesive. Are you going to provide a source? (I'm turning the tables on you now).

[louisa]

Ok, well brown fibers were found all over the crime scene, these brown fibers were never traced. Lou Smit believes the intruder wore brown gloves.

Do you honestly think I give a rat's behind what Lou Smit believed? The man told more tales than Pinnocchio. He was paid by the Ramseys and would have found all kinds of different evidence if he had been working for the police instead.

An intruder wore brown gloves, presumably beaver skin?. Honestly! whatever next? A person sexually molesting a child wouldn't wear gloves.

Here's some data covering the DNA under the fingernails from Kolar's book.

I haven't C & P'd your entire post because it would take up too much space.

You've obviously just got hold of the Kolar book.

The material under JB's fingernails was proved non relevant when it was admitted by the pathologist that the same clippers were used for ALL corpses in that department and we not always cleaned between times.

JB was not the cleanest of children and hated being scrubbed clean so she was bound to have all kinds of stuff under her nails. It is totally inconclusive to say that simply because she had DNA of an unknown source under her nails it MUST have come from an intruder.

You're bending the facts to fit your theory. Ignoring anything that doesn't fit.

Writers are going to theorize in order to titillate their readers. Kolar is theorizing.


AND HERE IS THE FACT

The official line, from both parties in this case, was that there was NO evidence of an intruder. Even the Prosecution, with the best lawyers in the land, could not prove otherwise and no matter how you try and juggle the facts the bottom line remains the same.

[louisa]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kOfATfILHys

An obviously scripted performance, and when Patsy forgets her lines John obligingly whispers them to her, then lip syncs the rest of the sentence with her.

Just look at those two pious faces. "Keep your babies close to you" Patsy says, trying to shed a tear, which never comes.

Going on a nationwide TV tour of the states in order to tell people to keep their babies close to them. What good is that?

Well, her babies were close to her and look what happened!

It's funny isn't it, how grieving people always somehow manage to make money out of their grief?

Which makes me wonder whatever happened to all that money that poured into the JonBenet Memorial Fund, set up by John and Patsy. Where they personally pledged $15,000 per year - which was never forthcoming. The $100,000 ransom money disappeared too.

http://www.acandyrose.com/jonbenet-foundations.htm

[Abby Normal]

Ok, well brown fibers were found all over the crime scene, these brown fibers were never traced. Lou Smit believes the intruder wore brown gloves.

Here's some data covering the DNA under the fingernails from Kolar's book.

1) There had been trace DNA samples collected from beneath JonBenet's fingernails of both hands during autopsy that was identified as belonging to her.

2) There had been trace DNA samples collected from beneath her left fingernails during autopsy that belonged to an unidentified male.

3) There had been trace DNA samples collected from beneath her right fingernails during autopsy that belonged to another unidentified male, and a female. (JonBenet could not be eliminated as a possible contributor of the female DNA).

4) [samples of DNA found in the panties, as we know]

5) [samples of DNA found on waistband of leggings, as we know]

6) The new technology of Touch DNA had located another sample of DNA located on the wrist bindings that belonged to a different unidentified male.

7) The new technology of Touch DNA had located another sample of DNA located on the garrote that belonged to yet another unidentified male.
Foreign Faction , A, James Kolar.

It is understandable that the authorities are cautious about using items 6) and 7), but items 4) and 5) were a match so they received publicity.

With respect to items 1), 2) & 3), James Kolar believes JonBenet scratched her own neck when first assaulted by the grasp of the fist.
However, Lou Smit believes JonBenet scratched her throat when the garrote was applied - either way she did scratch her own throat at some point.
The fingernail DNA evidence (points 1), 2) & 3) are the subject of caution due to the finding of two different male DNA samples, one for each hand.

Hi wick
But doesn't all that unknown unmatching male DNA just weaken the DNA argument for an intruder.

In other words, people pick up boatloads of touch DNA from all kinds of sources in there day to day normal existence.

[Harry D]

Where's the DNA to link this to one of the Ramseys?

[louisa]

Where's the DNA to link this to one of the Ramseys?

It'll be there amongst all the other debris under JB's nails, but being carefully ignored. It would a strange thing for JB NOT to have some family member's DNA under her nails after spending the entire day with them, her dad carrying her upstairs and her mother undressing her for bed.

[Wickerman]

Hi wick
But doesn't all that unknown unmatching male DNA just weaken the DNA argument for an intruder.

In other words, people pick up boatloads of touch DNA from all kinds of sources in there day to day normal existence.

Hi Abby.
Look at it this way, if unknown fingerprints were found throughout the house, would that weaken the argument for an intruder?