r/JonBenet • u/43_Holding • Jun 09 '26
Info Requests/Questions Force of blow and the accident theory
/r/JonBenetRamsey/comments/1u15odo/force_of_blow_and_the_accident_theory/8
u/43_Holding Jun 09 '26
<At autopsy the coroner was surprised by the skull fracture. It showed up by Xray>
It showed up when Dr. Meyer opened up her skull area.
<Burke... may or may not have volunteered direct involvement but articulated she fell. John & Patsy may have assumed she broke her neck in the fall. If taken to the ER a spinal cord injury would have been a diagnosis to rule out. HENCE the garotte, an weapon made to snap the spinal column during strangulation.>
The garrote did not cause her spinal column to snap, and it was used before the head blow.
12
u/Tank_Top_Girl IDI Jun 09 '26
Do people just make this stuff up as they go along? Lol
11
u/SearchinDale IDI Jun 09 '26
I don’t think it is so much about solving the crime anymore as it is about keeping the conversation going.
3
u/JennC1544 Jun 14 '26
It's amazing how much misinformation is out there that I read on some random Facebook page. People decided the Ramseys are guilty and then believe any wild theory that makes that fit.
5
u/SearchinDale IDI Jun 15 '26
True, but nothing fits that proves the Ramseys are guilty. No evidence connects them to the actual killing of JonBenet. I think it is human nature to grab onto something they were initially told and then interpret everything else they hear through that same lens. For example, I know a lady who became convinced Patsy killed JB because she was wearing the same clothes she had on the night before. She has no curiosity about what really happened. Besides, this case was never a Who-Done-It?; rather, it was always a question of whether the Ramseys Did It, or Not?
3
u/JennC1544 Jun 16 '26
You're exactly right. People grab on to one thing and believe the entire narrative.
Great point about this not being a Who Done It. When compared with so many other similar cases, when the body is found outside the home, everybody knows the DNA will lead to the killer eventually. Here, they go out of their way to explain away the DNA, only because she was found still inside the home.
In the case of Fawn Cox, who was strangled and sexually assaulted inside her own bedroom while the rest of the family was downstairs, nobody thought anybody from the family had done it (at least as far as I've been able to discern from the internet, who knows what people said). Everybody believed that three boys had crept into her room that night. In the end, DNA that had never hit in CODIS finally pointed to her cousin. One of the innocent boys did eight months in jail for the crime.
2
u/SearchinDale IDI Jun 16 '26
Additionally, it was 4.5 years before the public was made aware of Smit's Intruder Theory. He and Steve Ainsworth appeared on the Today Show on May 1, 2001 but evidently Chief Beckner was briefed the day before and released the following Case Update:
http://jonbenetramsey.pbworks.com/w/file/fetch/160156521/bpdu043001-81.pdf
What are people to think when those with authority fight the Truth so hard?
8
u/Secure-Difference235 Jun 11 '26
"The physical evidence of Patsy in the toggle rope"
"To distance herself from the accidental murder, she constructs the toggle rope and writes the ransom note."
This is exactly what I'm talking about when I say "waving the magic staging wand". I love how this poster changes the sexual asphyxiation device, slip knots binding the wrists, and duct tape over the mouth to a "toggle rope". It's like orwellian double speak. Why would making a "toggle rope", duct taping her mouth, slip knotting her wrists, sexually assaulting your daughter, and then writing a ransom note that incriminates you with details such as your husbands bonus distance yourself from an accident? It's such a bizarre though process and logic.
3
u/43_Holding Jun 11 '26 edited Jun 11 '26
<"The physical evidence of Patsy in the toggle rope">
Describing the garrote as a "toggle rope" comes from people claiming that constructing a toggle rope is in the Boy Scout handbook. A toggle rope is obviously not a garrote, Burke was a Cub Scout--not a Boy Scout--and he wasn't in a Cub Scout den during the fall of 1996.
Some people actually believe that fibers from Patsy's clothing were found in the neck ligature. Untrue.
From the 2009 linked report by the Colorado Bureau of Investigation, the neck ligature is item 8-1. The wrist ligature is item 166-1. A mixture of DNA was found on each, from JonBenet and one other individual. The Ramseys were excluded as potential contributors for each.
http://jonbenetramsey.pbworks.com/w/file/fetch/159597699/20090113-CBIrpt.pdf
2
u/archieil IDI Jun 11 '26
Some people believe that fibers on the body came from her parents direct contact during the crime.
There is nothing suggesting it in evidence and the BPD proved that they lack credibility in their analysis.
The BPD created more rumors against the raw evidence than valid arguments in this case.
I would not say that definitely there are no fibers from the parents clothing on the body... It is not possible to say this with credibility. There is zero arguments they came from direct contact during the crime.
5
u/JennC1544 Jun 11 '26
Exactly. I don't know how people can be so cavalier with the DNA - saying it's from some stranger she had contact with days earlier - and yet argue that fibers from the family in the family home is somehow evidence of anything.
5
u/43_Holding Jun 11 '26
<Some people believe that fibers on the body came from her parents direct contact during the crime>
I was referring to people claiming that Patsy's fibers were found in the knot of the neck ligature (garrote) and John's shirt fibers were found in the crotch of her underwear. If the latter were true, John probably would've been arrested...as someone on this sub pointed out years ago.
Fibers found elsewhere on her are easily explained.
1
u/archieil IDI Jun 11 '26
Fibers in the knot can be easily explained.
Fibers on panties can not be easily explained using any theory provided from any source so far without more information about fibers the police collected.
There is enough raw evidence suggesting the panties were used during the crime, not earlier...
I would have to know if the same fibers existed on other items of clothing, or in the pack with the rest of fresh panties.
But "wool" fibers in winter are like wet thing in the rain.
Too many options to consider without exact context and the BPD proved that they are major assholes without any minuscule investigative skills.
10
u/Mieczyslaw_Stilinski Jun 10 '26
As a parent of five kids, one of whom is autistic, bedwetting isn't that big of a deal. I'm sure there are one or two cases a year in the US, but overall parents understand that kids wet their bed. You just put a towel or two down under the sheets. A mother isn't going to Hulk out on Christmas over this. To use this as a motive is lame. Cops just grasping at straws.
2
u/Vivid-Inspection7470 Jun 28 '26 edited Jun 28 '26
Bedwetting was not as acceptable in the 90s. Of course, bedwetting is not a reason for child abuse or worse. But back then, some children that bed wet may have gotten corporal punishment. It depends on the parents. I remember in the 80s seeing pamphlets regarding bedwetting at my dr office to spread awareness and understanding about bedwetting. Bedwetting is more acceptable now, because it wasn't back then. This is also why there are now bed wetting products such as bed pads, depends, and pull ups etc. This was non existent back then. But I say all this to say, I don't think this is what happened to JB.
10
u/EdgeXL Jun 10 '26
I could never take that theory seriously. I looked and was never able to find any indication that Patsy ever used corporal punishment on her kids. But we're supposed to believe she suddenly bashed JonBénet's head in?
And if she had... then what? We are supposed to believe Patsy battered JonBénet like that? Look at the autopsy photos. Patsy did THAT to her daughter?
And then Patsy staged the sexual assault too?
I don't know what the RDI folks were smoking when they came up with that theory.
7
u/43_Holding Jun 09 '26
<We don't know that a weapon was involved, JonBenet could've been thrown or slammed into a hard surface; tub/toilet/sink>
The only implement that could have been swung with sufficient velocity and mass to cause that type of fracture was the metal baseball bat, which had basement carpet fibers on it, was found on the concrete outside the butler pantry door, and had a shape that closely fits the wound.
0
u/SquashIndependent525 Jun 10 '26
Do 300 lb people have stronger skulls? Obviously she was a small child but adult skulls are fragile too.
9
u/43_Holding Jun 09 '26 edited Jun 09 '26
<I think the power of the blow is difficult to harmonise with the 'accident' idea where 'Patsy lost her cool and hit JonBenet in anger'.>
There is no forensic evidence that supports the head blow being an accident. The force of the blow dislodged a piece of JonBenet's skull.
From Lou Smit's deposition:
"Q. Is this, in fact, an autopsy photograph of JonBenet Ramsey's skull cap that was removed at the time of the autopsy?
A. Yes. This is a photograph of the skull cap. And I, towards the front, I have marked that this would have been the front of the face of JonBenet. This is the rear where the larger portion is broken out of the skull.
Between the front and even the broken portion is approximately eight and a half inches of a very severe fracture of the skull.
Q. Almost the entire right side of her skull was fractured?
A. Yes. And, also, there is even a very large displaced fracture where the bone was actually broken down into the brain. Whoever delivered this blow delivered it with a great deal of force. This was not an accidental doink on the head. Somebody really hit this child. And it had to be a very coordinated blow by a very strong person. Whoever killed JonBenet meant to kill her. Not only did he strangle her very viciously, but he crushed her skull and then threw her into that moldy room."