A best-fit analysis of the facts and circumstances related to the death of JonBenet Patricia Ramsey

Another view of the skull as an X-ray image

But, we must also clarify what is meant by a blow “below” the point of impact. The definition of “below” depends on the exact orientation of the assailant and victim. Let us recall that JBR was 47 inches long or 47 inches tall. This is one inch shy of four feet. The free-body diagram above reveals in what position the victim was likely in when she received the head trauma (that is, seated).  For the sake of discussion, we assume JBR was not attacked by a midget. We consider all heights equal to JBR’s height or greater.

Standing positions can be mostly ruled out for three reasons. First, we think it unlikely that the victim was able to stand at this time (for reasons we’ll discuss). Second, we think it unlikely that no laceration would occur from a blow of this nature as lack of laceration requires minimal movement of the victim’s injury area. If standing the victim’s head would likely move in response to the blow. Third, the victim would likely not be constrained if standing and would seem less likely to stand and simply wait for the blow to connect. There is no evidence of a struggle beyond what can be seen from a struggling victim who is sufficiently restrained. However, the mechanics would allow a blow of this nature while standing, either from behind or in front, provided the victim’s head were tilted very slightly downward (if from behind) or very slightly upward (if from the front). We concluded that if attacked from the front, this required angle would be insufficient to meet the assailant’s gaze.

The next degree of freedom we examine is how the two individuals were physically oriented with respect to each other. If the victim were not standing but were seated, which orientation is most likely, face-to-face or front-to-back? Given the direction of the stress fracture in the skull, the blow was one of the two and not from any off-angle. The blow most likely came from the rear because the stress fracture extends in the direction at which the bludgeon weapon was moving. From the front the bludgeon weapons movement would have likely cracked the posterior portion of the skull down to its base. In fact, from these angles, the weapon would have tended to act like an axe, splitting the skull almost vertically downward. Thus, the victim was likely attacked from a front-to-back orientation.

Next, we examine the scenario in which the victim was lying on a surface, such as the floor. Given that the blow most likely came from behind, the victim would necessarily be lying face down. If lying down, the head must still be rotated such that the face is tucked downward toward the chest. With the assailant straddling the victim and positioning themselves just right, the angle of the blow could be attained. With a blow of 300 feet pounds we would thus expect some carpet, concrete or other abrasion to the forehead area. It is also possible that skull fracturing at the forehead or just above the eyes or to the nose could occur. What we rather see is a more or less pristine anterior skull with no noticeable abrasions on the face or anterior scalp. How could the head be out of contact with a surface but still have the required angle AND provide the resistance needed to absorb the momentum of the blow Barring any other information, the seated, front-to-back orientation is considerably most likely and is corroborated by the ligature evidence discussed previously.

Finally, we consider the “random position” orientation, in which, for reasons we can’t know, the orientation of victim and assailant was none of the above. Of course, the probability of that is prima facie lower than the probability of a seated, front-to-back orientation. The mechanics most generally require the head to be restrained from movement such that the skull can absorb the energy of the blow while simultaneously positioned such that injury to the head related to the constraint of the head does not occur. The only way to achieve that is by hyperextension in the neck. In other words, the head is placed in a position reflecting the maximum physiological range of motion. The only positions meeting that criteria are face-down with chin to chest or face up, with the back of the skull as close as it can extend to the back of the body. The latter orientation is mechanically impossible if struck by a bludgeon weapon because this orientation constrains the range of motion of the weapon, making it impossible to swing. Therefore, we can assert with high confidence that the victim was seated, chin to chest, and was struck from the rear with a bludgeon object.

The victim was then seated. A ligature as found in the autopsy was placed about the victim’s neck from behind. It was fashioned “in place” (this corroborates the view that the victim was restrained at this point – see below). Pressure was applied restricting the oxygen supply. The ligature was not used as a garotte because the design precluded it. The strangulation was achieved solely by tightening of the rope loop around the neck. The victim was sitting with her face down to her chest at this time as the angle of strangulation indicates (she would be too short to be standing or facing strictly forward). It is unclear how and why the victim remained seated, but obvious defensive movement would seem to suggest that the victim was restrained. Possible “drag” marks found in the autopsy may indicate a struggle against restraint to a chair, achieved by some mechanism such as duct tape. Petechial hemorrhaging began as the victim suffered loss of oxygen. The victim’s heart began increasing its pumping rate, compensating for the loss of oxygen. The victim would have appeared dead well before death actually came. The assailant was probably not an experienced killer since, just as most might assume under similar circumstances, the killer seemed to erroneously believe the victim was deceased. This ensured a bollixed murder. The initial strangulation lacked sufficient vigor to kill as evidenced by the rub marks on the neck showing initial ligature placement lower on the adams apple than its final position in the furrow. This is also evidenced by the only strangulation consistent gross neck damage being a dissection of the anterior neck muscles. Again, assuming the victim was dead, the assailant broke off the attack momentarily.

The victim regained consciousness and emitted a 3 to 5 second scream as a last defensive measure. During or near that time the victim likely reached up to the rope and loosened it from her neck. The assailant panicked upon realizing that the strangulation had not worked, grabbed the nearest suitable bludgeoning object and re-engaged the victim. The scream was either automatic upon regaining consciousness or it came in response to the victim seeing her perfidious assailant approach with the bludgeon weapon. If in response to seeing the weapon, the victim likely regained consciousness and made that known to the assailant without screaming. We feel it is more likely that the victim screamed upon regaining consciousness as an automatic reaction to realizing that she was being murdered. In an axe-like swing (as opposed to a baseball bat style swing) JBR’s assailant swung the object down against the skull of the victim, slightly to the right being right handed, and permanently silenced the child.  Part of the victim’s reaction by screaming could also have been due to waking and realizing she was in the basement and taped to a chair after an asphyxiation attack in her bedroom.

The assailant, likely noticing the loosened ligature around the neck, re-tightened it by looping the rope around the neck yet again creating a double loop. With the ability to breathe already weakened, and with the assailant likely now resuming the strangulation more vigorously and creating the ligature furrow by heaving the victim upward slightly out of her seat, the victim’s heart entered into a race condition and pulmonary vascular congestion presented, at which point JBR expired and voided just outside the “wine cellar”. The heaving action is also evidenced by the disproportionate gross neck damage in which muscle dissection is reported only with the anterior neck muscles. And it is further corroborated by a differential deepness in the furrow: the furrow is deepest at front and slightly shallows on both sides as it completes at the spine. These factors indicate very strongly that the victim was not simply strangled and not hanged under her own weight either. It indicates, rather, that moderate heaving forces were applied. Since the coroner’s report notes slight evidence of brain swelling, the final asphyxiation took considerable time since the victim would have to live long enough for the brain swelling to occur after receiving the head trauma. This swelling could also reflect the delay created in attempting to locate a suitable bludgeoning weapon. It is also consistent with evidence, though not indicated by it, that PR may have placed her feet, one or both, on either side of the chair’s lower rungs for leverage and that JBR grasped PR’s beaver fur boots with her hands. All this further indicates that the assailant lacked sufficient strength to simply lift the 45 pound child and chair off the floor and heave the child up and down in midair, resorting rather to dragging the child on the back legs of the chair for each successive heave, backward toward the “wine cellar” door.

There is an old boatswain mate’s trick (U.S. Navy) for learning to tie knots or for tying them under stressful conditions when the individual doing the tying has limited experience in the same. A wire, such as a copper wire, is formed into a loose exemplar of a particular type of knot. When the individual has to tie the same type knot with a string or rope, the rope is placed along the wire as a guide for tying the knot string or rope knot version. Boatswain mates are known for having pocketfuls of these wires for just that purpose. These same kinds of wires, tied into the same kinds of knots found on the decedent, were found at the crime scene in at least two places (in the boiler room and in the “wine cellar”). This is a likely indication that an amateur was recently present and attempting to tie knots using these wires. It further suggests the likelihood of premeditation. See the evidence list for the wires we’ve mentioned here.

Given the mechanical advantage likely applied, and given the height of the overhead pipes and ceiling, the assailant probably did not exceed 5 feet 8 inches in height. The assailant was likely an adult female or minor. The assailant was right handed. The assailant likely harbored no empathy for the victim. The victim likely knew her assailant. The killer likely wore brown cotton gloves during the attack. The assailant was likely an amateur at handling knots and garottes. The victim was likely confident of the homicidal intent of her assailant at some point during the attack.

Window in storage room next to the basement laundry room, note the chair at bottom. Is that a candidate for restraint? This general chair design is broadly consistent with the “drag” abrasions found on the victim.

Prior to the final events, an assault against the person of JBR occurred in which what was likely a paint brush was forced into her vagina. Rather than being an act of sexual passion, the act was more likely an act of sexual humiliation and ‘punishment’ or exploratory play by someone unfamiliar with female genitalia (and likely a male minor). We can see this from the report, which indicates a series of painful, pointless attacks upon the child’s undeveloped body. Since the coroner’s report indicates signs of “organization” and bleeding of the pubic wounds, the penetration of the vagina likely occurred prior to the homicidal attack. The location of the physical assault by strangulation and bludgeoning was most likely at the point of bladder voiding, just outside the door of the “wine cellar”. Duct tape remaining on the chair was likely removed by the assailant and possibly flushed down the toilet in the basement bathroom. Upon hearing the scream the assailant likely at some later point placed duct tape over the vicitm’s mouth as a precaution, even though the victim was likely already deceased by that time. It is possible, though unknown, that the assailant had originally placed duct tape over the victim’s mouth in her bedroom, but that upon regaining consciousness, the victim removed it and screamed.

Neighbors did notice some out of place events the evening/morning that JBR was killed. The referenced scream was heard by multiple neighbors between 12 and 2 a.m. 26 December, 2006. It likely was heard closer to midnight. One neighbor living across the street, Melody Stanton, could tell it was coming from the Ramsey home and even deduced it must be JBR, who was the only female child there. The scream sounded to her like “the most terrifying child's scream I have ever heard". At least one witness also reported the appearance of lights and activity in the kitchen area around the time of the scream. Lights “flickering” in the butler area were reported. These facts are consistent with the likelihood that had an assailant been forced to use an impromptu bludgeoning weapon they would have probably wanted to get rid of it, or at least place it somewhere where, once cleaned for any traces of evidence, it would appear innocent and unrelated to the murder. The best way to do this would be to take the weapon to the kitchen for examination and cleaning, then take it outside and place it somewhere in the yard to make its appearance look innocent. We suspect this involved use of a flashlight, which produced the “flickering light” seen by a witness. And we surmise the general disposal location because this is the farthest the assailant could get it from the crime scene without leaving the premises. Similarly, if it had been an intruder, we’d expect it more likely that the intruders would have taken it with them. Investigators should have looked for a bludgeon weapon; long, very hard, smooth and cylindrical, in an area just outside the area covered by fixed lighting. The object likely bore a thin film of ice around it given the outside temperature and its likely contact with water inside the house. It is possible but unlikely that the killer washed the object in Ammonia before disposal. An attempt to conceal markings on the object consistent with head trauma may have been attempted by cleaning, scraping, scratching or bending or breaking the object. Any object fitting that description should be suspect.

The view to Melody Stanton’s house from the Ramsey front door