A. With a ransom note present and an apparent botched kidnapping where the body was found in the
victim's home, that is correct.

Q. Is it your testimony, then, that there are cases that the FBI has in their files where a parent has
garroted a child, has strangled to death a child by use of a garrote; is that your testimony?

A. No, my testimony is I don't know what the FBI has in their files concerning their investigation or
review of child homicides.

Q. Did you ever ask about whether there was any prior case that you could study where a parent
had used a garrote to strangle a child; did you ever ask the FBI that?

A. I don't recall personally asking them that.

Q. Do you know whether anybody in the Boulder Police Department investigation ever made that
inquiry to the FBI?

A. There were several trips and inquiries and phone calls and meetings with the FBI. And I don't
know, but it would sound reasonable that one would ask that.

Q. If one asked, no one ever gave you the answer and you didn't find out about it, right?

A. They did explain that they have seen cases in which parents have feloniously slain their own
children in any number of ways. If garroting was one of those, I'm unaware of that.

Q. Wouldn't that be something you would want to know since you have a garrote involved in this
case?

A. Let me answer it simply. Again, I don't know of the FBI, have any knowledge firsthand or
secondhand, denying or confirming the use of a garrote in a previous child homicide.

>Someone he dated
IF he dates.
But I think you might recall how many murderers are ordinary guys and are often thought of as model citizens and a 'good catch'.

>and tried to get kinky with,
he may date girls who like it even kinkier.

>someone who listened to his sick stories when they shared a cell,
That type is only willing to 'sing' when they need something in return.

>I just hope that someone isn't sitting around thinking, well I told
>the police and they didn't do anything about it, so I must have been wrong.
Given the general level of competence at the BPD and the FBI, . . .

>>and tried to get kinky with,
>he may date girls who like it even kinkier.
I am thinking that there might be someone who would recognize the tape, hand ropes, and garrote, but I doubt the M as in S&M would be 'into' child molesting.
>>someone who listened to his sick stories when they shared a cell,
>That type is only willing to 'sing' when they need something
>in return.
This person and crime were bold. You don't get bold from small egos and by running from attention.
>>I just hope that someone isn't sitting around thinking, well I told
>>the police and they didn't do anything about it, so I must have been wrong.
>Given the general level of competence at the BPD and the
>FBI, . . .

To me that points away from the Whites and the Ramseys. They were all good friends - spent a lot of time together, trusted each other with their kids. I think they would have noted any problems between JonBenét and one of them.

(That doesn't mean that I don't agree with the necessity of checking their DNA to what was found with the body - - and it sure doesn't mean I think the male company is automatically cleared and shouldn't be checked as well. I say follow ALL reasonable possibilities.)

Looking at the photo with the hair in the knot, it appears that the stick portion of the garotte, could have been slipped in the loop around JBR's neck, and then twisted around to tighten the loop, and the hair caught in a twisting motion---not as a result of the garotte actually being made on JBR--it could have been done beforehand--which might also explain why the bristle end was placed back in the tray. I hadn't realized this, until I recently read a book on John Gacy---that was his MO in several of the murders of young boys. It might also explain why the paintbrush was broken--so it could be slipped in the loop around the neck, and turned. We know John Gacy tortured his victims before killing them.

Actually, a brutal crime is -- 35 knife wounds for example -- shows anger. Although her injuries were heinous, and just the fact any child is killed is brutal, I'm not sure we can call this an actual brutal crime.

Yes, the head wound was extensive -- someone wacked her hard -- but only once. There is no continuation of hitting as in many brutal violent crimes that show "anger."

The binds around her wrists were tied loosely -- there was no bruising from them being tied very tight.

The veginal injuries, given this was a sexual assault, are mild relatively speaking.

No defense wounds -- she was already unconscious and dying from the head injury when the final ligature was applied. There were several attempts at appling the ligature, so if JonBenet was conscious you and struggling, you would see wounds on her neck, fingers, reflecting this -- you don't.

As far as no history, murderers whether the death they inflict be premeditated or accidental, had to start somewhere.

>Actually, a brutal crime is -- 35 knife wounds for example
>-- shows anger. Although her injuries were heinous, and
>just the fact any child is killed is brutal, I'm not sure we
>can call this an actual brutal crime.

Brutal 1: befitting a brute; unfeeling, cruel 2:harsh severe.

IMO something shoved up the vagina with any damage inducing force is cruel and unfeeling, strangulation is an up close action and befitting a brute, and a wack on the head that leaves a hole in the skull is harsh and severe. It may not be the most brutal crime, but this is a brutal one even if it had not happened to a child which only makes it worse.
>
>Yes, the head wound was extensive -- someone wacked her hard
>-- but only once. There is no continuation of hitting as in
>many brutal violent crimes that show "anger."
Once was enough, this killer was not alone in the house, he got away with what he thought he could. Any wack that hard would have made some noise and I would think he wanted to keep that to a minimum.
>
>The binds around her wrists were tied loosely -- there was
>no bruising from them being tied very tight.
The cord tied around her wrists was there on purpose and she didn't or couldn't pull her hands out of them. She also might not have been just holding her arms out still waiting for the cord to be tied properly and she might not have had much chance to struggle after it was on.
>
>The veginal injuries, given this was a sexual assault, are
>mild relatively speaking.
This was a break-in, a kidnapping, a murder, an escape and a sexual assault. Even if you only want to believe that it was a murder, a sexual assault, a disposal of evidence, and a note writing, you would have to agree that the element of others in the house and getting caught red handed would make anyone want to move very quickly. With the bondage elements the bad guy probably had a lot more in mind but didn't have the time, didn't think he could get away with it all, lost interest, or got scared off.
>
>No defense wounds -- she was already unconscious and dying
>from the head injury when the final ligature was applied.
>There were several attempts at appling the ligature, so if
>JonBenet was conscious you and struggling, you would see
>wounds on her neck, fingers, reflecting this -- you don't.
A stun gun also temporarily incapacitates the victim (I don't know if they have done tests on children to see how they react), so the several attempts at applying the ligature could also have been efforts to get a reaction. The head wound could have also come after she was strangled and failed to struggle if you stil need an angry element.
>
>
>As far as no history, murderers whether the death they
>inflict be premeditated or accidental, had to start
>somewhere.
I agree, but to be so controlled and remorseless after your first murder would in my opinion not manifest itself overnight.