Re: 'John Mark Karr as much killed JonBenet Ramsey as Mickey Mouse did'...

"tiny dancer" wrote:

"8MilesHigh" wrote:
And they never found strange fingerprints on it, or on the writing
implement used to make it. I also can't figure out how anyone could
spend the time in that house to write the thing if they didn't live
there, without leaving a single fiber of evidence.

Well, on one hand it's been mentioned here quite a lot about all the
people
in the house that day, and the fact that some of Patsy's friends attempted
to 'clean up the kitchen' and such. So who know's for sure that the
intruder didn't leave any evidence behind? It could very easily have been
there, and cleaned up. My guess, anybody breaking into a house now days
wears those disposable gloves one can purchase at any pharmacy. You know,
the clear ones like medical personel wear.

Latex gloves. They won't always stop a bleed-through fingerprint from
showing up, but they prevent fingeprints about 90% of the time.

And there are 'unidentifed' fibers noted.

There were, IIRC. There were fibers and a pubic hair found on the blanket in
which the body was wrapped that have never yet been linked to a source, if
memory serves me correctly.

Okay, but loving mothers kill kids. It's the strangest form of murder
I can think of, since it contradicts everything we know about nature,
nurture and normal psychology, but it happens.

Yes, I agree with that. I just don't see it in this case. I realize
that's
just my opinion though. But the Ramsey's have been accused for nearly 10
years now, on nothing more than 'they were in the house at the time'. All
the wild spectulations that were made against them in the gossip rags,
none
of it ever was proven. In all this time, not a single person or
accusation
was able to be verified. Not the John Ramsey was involved in kiddie porn,

That was despicable. A scurrilous story that got started and was never found
to be substantiated by a drop of truth. Not one link was ever made to John
Ramsey and kiddie porn. It's utterly vile. Something similar happend in the
Elizabeth Smart abduction. The tabloids reported police found evidence on Ed
Smart's PC and on his brother's linking them to a gay man's dating club. It
was pure BS. Not a word of truth to it. Despicable.

Patsy *forced* JonBenet to enter pagents, etc. By all accounts no one
could
ever come up with a single person to tarnish them.

Certainly no evidence has ever surfaced in the ensuing years that either
Ramsey had a personality prone to impulsive, savage rages that would result
in a violent assault on their child or any other person, and nothing to
suggest they were mentally ill, or vulnerable to a condition that would
cause a psychotic break. Not conclusive proof, admittedly. But certainly it
casts serious doubt on such things existing in them. Same thing w/ Burke.

Agreed, this isn't a believable scenario. I've read other scenarios
that seem to fit better, where the head wound is the cause of death (no
one has officially declared what killed JB)

IIRC, JonBenet died from strangulation.

IIRC from the Schiller book, the exact cause of death could not be
pin-pointed w/ certainty. It was determined the 2 injuries most likely
occurred in close proximity to one another timewise, and either could or
would be fatal. The head injury might not have been fatal had it been
treated quickly.

If the blow to the head was inflicted by either parent in a moment of rage
or as a result of a hard fall caused by a fierce shove or slap, throwing the
child backwards violently, then almost no time was spent deciding what to do
next. It would mean that almost immediately the guilty party (the mother or
father for the sake of this hypothetical argument) would've had to have
decided to implement the strangulation by garotte. The garotte would've had
to have been fashioned very quickly--really, within a couple of minutes at
the most IMO--and the strangulation begun, w/ death follwiing quickly.
Otherwise, there would've been more bleeding in the brain.

Strangulation by garotte could not ever result from an uncontrolled and
unintended moment of impulsive rage. A parent who gets really enraged w/ a
disobedient or trouble-making kid does not on impulse fetch a length of
rope, hold the child down, wrap the cord around the child's neck, fashion a
garotte and begin twisting tightly to asphixiate the child. Can we all
agree? I would imagine so.

Therefore, it stands to reason that, if either of the parents struck/caused
the blow to the head, or if even the brother caused it in a fight or rough
play, the parent/s would've had to have decided almost instantly from that
moment to instigate a mamoth cover-up that would involve garotting the
unconscious child, starting within a minute or 2.

If you knocked your kid unconscios w/ accidental hyper-force in a moment of
uncontrolled rage, or if you discovered your son had done so to his little
sister in a fight or rough play, would you take one look, decide there's
nothing to do but make it look like the child was strangled to death w/ a
garotte, and, having settled upon this plan, institute the plan instantly?
Or would you more likely call an ambulance and report your child fell and
hit her head somehow--maybe slipping in the bathroom and hitting the tub? Or
would you spend a few minutes trying to rouse her to consciousness? Would
you splash cold water on her face? Pat her on her cheeks and call her name
over and over, to rouse a response? Would you call your husband or wife in
to see if you together could wake her? Would you place her on her bed and
sit by her side, watching her closely for a while...5 min., 10 min., a half
hour, to see if she'll come to? Would you fetch a bowl of cut up pineapple
and force it down her throat to see if it might bring her round? Would you
wait a while longer to see if the food helps? And then when none of it
works, would you then seek medical help, or decide all is lost and implement
the garotte plan, followed by simulated sexual assault, hide the body in the
basement, write a rambling ransom note and then call the police, certain
they will never think to search the house?

Before you answer, be reminded that if the Ramseys, or any 1 of them, caused
the child's death, none of the above actions were taken other than the one
where the child was garotted almost immediately after the head injury.
Otherwise, there would've been evidence of swelling and bleeding in the
brain, given the severity of the injury to the head. In summation, one must
believe that if one of the Ramseys struck the child or shoved her violently,
knocking her against a hard object, causing the skull fracture, this person
(or a discovering adult) would have had to pretty much immediately decide
the best thing to do was to quickly fashion a garotte out of a length of
rope and a broken paintbrush and begin twisting the remaining life out of
this little girl. All the rest would've come after that.

I can imagine that either parent could do this--only if one of the following
things became known:

1. The parent suffers from dissociative individuation disorder (multiple
personality disorder), previously and since never detected by anyone, and
lapsed into an alter personality immediately upon causing or discovery the
head injury, and carried out the garotting, or:

2. The parent suddenly went into a psychotic state--also never before or
since detected as occurring--and acted out a ghoulish ritual of savage
murder, ritualistic staging and psychotic ransom note writing, or;

3. The parent's mind and soul was suddenly inhabited by the devil,
subordinate demon, evil ghost or space alien.

I don't see any other eplanation offering validity. Of the three
extraordinarily bizarre and implausible scnearios, I would be forced to
select the psychotic break from reality as the least implausible. And my
estimate would be a less than 1% chance of that being the explanation.

and there wasn't any sexual
assault - just genital irritation that could have many causes (like bed
wetting or sleeping in wet Pull Ups.) Maybe I missed it, is it
absolutely certain that JB was assaulted?

Yes, she was assaulted with a part of the broken paint brush used to
fashion
the garrotte. They found a sliver of wood or something inside her.

There were cells identified as from wood fiber found in her vagina, and the
hymen was perforated. No semen was found. The perforation was thought to be
the kind that would occur in a person not moving, as the puncturing was
unnatural--the kind one would expect to find w/ someone who had been
unconscious and had a sharp object jabbed inside her vagina. This finding
led investigators to support the theory of a staged crime scene and staged
sexual molestation for the purpose of a cover-up.

That was the reason it's stated that the blow to the head came 'at or near
the time of her death'. Because there was no hemorraging, her head wasn't
swollen, there was no internal bleeding into her skull. If the blow to
the
head had come first, there would have been extensive internal bleeding in
her skull, but there wasn't. She was strangled first, strangled a number
of
times, and then beaten over the head 'at or near the time of her death'.
Her heart wasn't pumping anymore, or had stopped pumping within a very
short
time of the head wound to account for the lack of internal bleeding in her
skull.

This is what I've read too, to the best of the recollection. It sure doesn't
fit well w/ the scenario of an accidental blow to the head by a parent (or a
brother) covering up the accident w/ a staged crime scene, does it?

NS
(add sbc before global to email)


.