I found a handwriting match to the RN

Do you think Zodiac's handwriting resembles the RN?


  • Total voters
    49
http://www.people.com/people/archive/article/0,,20123391,00.html

Who wrote the ransom note??? Read (or reread) this old article offering insight into PR and JR's personalities, formal education, character, etc and see what you think...

In my opinion, it suggests:
A stranger to PR is involved in car accident...PR thrusts herself into the situation, taking the woman into her home. Nedra tells her about JBR and who they are...'the parent and grandparent of a slain beauty pagent child queen'...

PR's degree was in advertising journalism. She was taught to use her 'words to "sell" and "sell" she did. She sold JR and herself to anyone who would offer a listening ear to her advertisements of their innocence.

JR's quiet, reserved personality needed a 'take charge' public relations personality such as PR.... (I find it ironic that Patsy's initals even stand for "public relations" = "PR"!!!!)

This is an old, long article, but it confirms to me the how easily the mechanics behind the scenes on the night of Dec. 25 could have "flawlessly', (at least in Patsy's mind) and as second nature to her, been carried out by Patsy Ramsey.

From the ransom note, to conducting television interviews, to writing 'thank you' letters to their church, etc...which of the Ramseys would have been the 'take charge personality', trained to use their own words to 'sell' themselves to a 'gullible public'???

Note: The article says "she" brought her father into the company, in order to 'save' JR's faltering company, Microsouth....
 
JR's quiet, reserved personality needed a 'take charge' public relations personality such as PR.... (I find it ironic that Patsy's initals even stand for "public relations" = "PR"!!!!)

I'm glad someone finally mentioned that! Not that it has anything to do with the case one way or the other. It just strikes me funny.

PR's degree was in advertising journalism. She was taught to use her 'words to "sell" and "sell" she did. She sold JR and herself to anyone who would offer a listening ear to her advertisements of their innocence.

From the ransom note, to conducting television interviews, to writing 'thank you' letters to their church, etc...which of the Ramseys would have been the 'take charge personality', trained to use their own words to 'sell' themselves to a 'gullible public'???

Well done.
 
The simplest answer is most likely the correct one: PR did it.

Just like in the Caylee case where the mom is spinning all kinds of 'some other dude did it' scenarios, it is obvious that the mom did it.

There is no other dude.

A grand jury didn't think so. The Boulder DA's office didn't think so. The only office who thought so were the BPD. The very office who botched the investigation so badly. No disrespect, but I don't see how it's so obvious that the mom did do it. Sure, there's lots of speculation and rumors swirling around her, as well as John. My question is, if it's so obvious that she is guilty, why was she never arrested? Surely the BPD could have arrested her if they had the evidence. And now with the "touch" DNA evidence, PR is still being accused. If I'm correct, and I may not be because I haven't really had time to research the info, the foreign DNA was found not only on the waistband of the underwear, but also in the crotch area. Now, I could understand if whomever packaged the undies touched the waistband, but when you have the same DNA in two different areas, doesn't that count for anything?
 
A grand jury didn't think so. The Boulder DA's office didn't think so.

Yeah, we KNOW what they thought: "oh, there's no way a mommy could do something so awful."

No disrespect, but I don't see how it's so obvious that the mom did do it.

How much time have you got?

My question is, if it's so obvious that she is guilty, why was she never arrested? Surely the BPD could have arrested her if they had the evidence.

weasel, I've heard that question at least a thousand times. And I keep giving the same answer: because of the DA's office. The police WANTED to arrest her! The FBI TOLD them to arrest her! The Dream Team attorneys BEGGED them to arrest her! But the DA shot them down each time.

Now, I could understand if whomever packaged the undies touched the waistband, but when you have the same DNA in two different areas, doesn't that count for anything?

It might IF they could tell what KIND it was or WHEN it was left. So far they can't.
 
Hi SD.

Ya that's cool.

Just, that for voynich to have posted a sample that does represent the varatian seen in the rn, is a find. They may just be similar on 'at first glance' level, not close examination.

PR was there. And at first glance at the rn, JR commented on the similarity to his wife's handwriting.

She was where?
 
You gotta admit that it's kinda weird to see this as a coincidence.
The person that cannot be excluded as the writer is one of the 3 persons who happened to be in the house at the time of the murder.....I mean.......it is something.......


How many millions of others could not be excluded?
 
It might IF they could tell what KIND it was or WHEN it was left. So far they can't.[/QUOTE]


And that would do what?
 
It might IF they could tell what KIND it was or WHEN it was left. So far they can't.


And that would do what?[/QUOTE]

Quite a bit, really. If it could be established that it was semen or blood, that would go a long way in answering a lot of questions. Same deal with the when: if it could be found beyond doubt that it was left that night, it cuts the transfer possibilities drastically.
 
She was where?

In the house that night, Fang. Which leads me directly to your next question:

How many millions could not be excluded?

The question you should be asking is "how many millions could not be excluded and can be placed in the house that night?" The answer: ONE. That was the point of madeleine's post.

madeleine said:
The person that cannot be excluded as the writer is one of the 3 persons who happened to be in the house at the time of the murder.....I mean.......it is something.......

I couldn't put it any better.
 
Hey SD.

But I suppose you could look at it the other way. If PR was the only one in 73 iirc samples to score as not excluded, perhaps 1 out of x numbers of samples would score at that same position.

I noticed in voynich attempts to duplicate the rn, he could not duplicate the curves and ornate strokes. (I had similiar results.)
However, his rn resembled my handwriting style.

Maybe shared fundementals in handwriting style, combined with the modifications each handwriting specialist would have made due to the use of the marker, maybe that combination could result in a false placement on the scale. I dunno, handwriting analysis is half art and half arbitrary science.
 
Hey SD.

But I suppose you could look at it the other way. If PR was the only one in 73 iirc samples to score as not excluded, perhaps 1 out of x numbers of samples would score at that same position.

I noticed in voynich attempts to duplicate the rn, he could not duplicate the curves and ornate strokes. (I had similiar results.)
However, his rn resembled my handwriting style.

Maybe shared fundementals in handwriting style, combined with the modifications each handwriting specialist would have made due to the use of the marker, maybe that combination could result in a false placement on the scale. I dunno, handwriting analysis is half art and half arbitrary science.

Just one? Of all those who could not be excluded, besides you know who, it would only take 1.
 
Hi WHITEFANG.

I suppose I meant? in the house.

not, She was in the house. So was the killer

Hi WHITEFANG.

yes, PR was in da house.
BTK resembles JBR rn font.
Agreement with SD that PR was in the dwelling.
The resemblence in handwriting was obvious to JR.





Originally Posted by Tadpole12 [ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=4170682#post4170682"]
viewpost.gif
[/ame]
So the idea that only PR exemplars resemble the rn is not accurate.

Originally Posted by SuperDave [ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=4172494#post4172494"]
viewpost.gif
[/ame]

Even if it isn't accurate, PR's have one thing on them that no one else's do: we KNOW she was there

Originally Posted by Tadpole12 [ame="http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=4170682#post4170682"]
viewpost.gif
[/ame]

Just, that for voynich to have posted a sample that does represent the varatian seen in the rn, is a find. They may just be similar on 'at first glance' level, not close examination.

PR was there. And at first glance at the rn, JR commented on the similarity to his wife's handwriting.
 
Super,
Some times, like now, when an unidentified male's DNA is found inside a murdered child's underpants (regardless from where on/in his body it originated) that matches DNA found on both sides of the murdered child's long john underwear, you have credible evidence that this unidentified male killed the child. The DNA proves that a male was in contact with the murdered victim's under clothing, which was strictly, totally off-limits to all unknown males.

It is scientifically verifiable in every/any laboratory. In this particular case, there is no other scientifically verifiable evidence that incriminates the killer.

Again, DNA, from an unidentified male, found in three locations on the child's underwear, is evidence. It is proof that a male, though we don't know his name, was in intimate contact with this child and with the clothing she was wearing when she was found murdered, that has no plausible explanation. It is "credible evidence" admissible in a court of law. It is powerfully incriminating.

No one can explain away this proof. It is real. It is damning. There is no acceptable, rational reason for it to be there, other than it belonged to the murderer.

The Merry-Go-Round of theories x theories x theories is a whole lot of theories and nothing more.

Nothing, No thing, compares to this evidence. The most brilliant, advanced, logical, credible theory means absolutely nothing in light of it.

Whether it was from blood, semen, etc. makes no difference. The is no justifiable reason for his DNA to be in those places, period.
 
PR was there. And at first glance at the rn, JR commented on the similarity to his wife's handwriting. [/QUOTE]

Kind of a dumb thing to say out loud in front of others who could and did hear you, when, all along, you know your wife killed the child and wrote the note at your direction (because you were molesting her.) No?
 
I couldn't put it any better.

haha cool strategy,bumping old posts of mine.But remember ,
I said that BEFORE researching and finding out WHO were the ones saying she can't be excluded and who backed them up.
 
How many millions of others could not be excluded?

Dunno,the "experts" weren't hired to identify the killer,the only experts I know of who said that PR is the rn author were speaking on behalf of their client CW who ACCUSED PR OF MURDER.Do you trust such experts?I know I don't,never have,never will.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
132
Guests online
2,085
Total visitors
2,217

Forum statistics

Threads
589,996
Messages
17,928,856
Members
228,037
Latest member
shmoozie
Back
Top