1474 users online (258 members and 1216 guests)  


Websleuths News


Results 1 to 3 of 3
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    4,970

    Arrow Analysis of Ramsey's Press Conference+tv interview

    http://www.lsiscan.com/ramsey_s_press_conference.htm

    The JonBenet Ramsey Case: Analysis of Ramsey's Press Conference

    Introduction

    General

    The following is the analysis of the statement/transcript of the news conference with John and Patsy Ramsey on May 1, 1997.

    The statement/transcript does not give us the opening question or the surrounding circumstances under which the statement was obtained.

    Objective

    To analyze the language in order to find out if the subject(s) are involved in the murder of their daughter JonBenet Ramsey.

    Methodology

    The SCAN (Scientific Content Analysis) technique was used to analyze the language used by the subject in the enclosed transcript.

    What is the SCAN Technique?

    Every person has his own linguistic code. By using linguistic methods to break and decipher the subject's linguistic code, we are able to obtain more information and to reach an accurate decision concerning the reliability of the information.

    Both the interviewer and subject use language to communicate. However, there is no such thing as two people using the "same" language. Each person uses his own personal language. Each person might attribute different meanings to the same words. In a way, we can say that every single human being has his own personal linguistic code which he uses to communicate his thoughts and ideas.

    The SCAN analysis looks upon a statement as a mathematical equation.

    This means that in using SCAN we are not interested in the content of the statement, but in the relationship between:

    1. The different links of the statement.
    2. The subjective meaning the subject attributes to each word.
    3. The different locations in which a certain word is used.
    4. The relationship between the different words.

    The end result of the SCAN analysis is to know the background information which generated the subject's vocabulary or dictionary. Or, in other words, we would discover the full story that the subject didn't want to expose openly in the content of the story. However, the subject's language exposed it.

    NOTE: Since the following analysis is based upon the transcript, and it refers to the transcript throughout the report, it is recommended to have the transcript itself next to this report in order to enhance the reading.

    The report is divided into the following points:

    1. The couple's relationship with JonBenet.

    2. The couple's relationship with each other.

    3. The couple's perception of the investigation.

    4. The couple's perception of the situation.

    5. The couple's denials.

    6. Other comments.


    The Couple's Relationship with Jonbenet

    1. John Ramsey said:

    a) "But because we were the parents of JonBenet..."

    b) "I did not kill my daughter JonBenet."

    c) "They are totally false, JonBenet (stumbles on name) and I had a very close relationship."

    d) "Were as you might imagine insulted that we even would he considered suspects in the death of our daughter."

    e) "Our lives cannot go on the same as they might have, had JonBenet still been here."

    f) "...but there was an article in the Atlanta Constitution, 'Georgia Says Goodbye to JonBenet' - we were terribly touched by that."

    g) "That was just one very small part of JonBenet's life."

    h) "And if that effect happened to more than one person, then JonBenet's life had some meaning."

    Please notice that John Ramsey used the proper title "my daughter" only in (b) - when denying the accusation of killing JonBenet, and in (d) - when talking about being suspects in her death.

    Please also notice that John Ramsey used the proper title "daughter" in proximity to the word "kill" - (b), and "death" - (d). This connection between the proper title and JonBenet's death was also found in the CNN interview. Or, in other words, John Ramsey maintains consistency in using first name - "JonBenet" - when talking about her as alive, vs. "daughter" when talking about her when she is dead.

    2. John Ramsey said:

    a) "But because we were the parents of JonBenet..."

    b) "We also at that time, as parents, looked at retaining of attorneys."

    c) "...family members and parents are ultimately involved."

    3. Patsy Ramsey said:

    "I'm Patsy Ramsey, JonBenet's mother..."

    Please notice, that unlike Patsy, John Ramsey didn't use the title "father". He only talked in the plural - "parents".

    Again, the proper title "father" is missing from his language, not only in regard to JonBenet, the way she relates to him, but also to himself, the way he relates to her.

    4. After the denial, Patsy Ramsey added a sentence: "I loved that child with my whole of my heart and soul."

    Please notice the following:

    a. "That" means far away while "this" means close-by. This is to say that the subject is distancing herself from JonBenet when talking about loving her.

    b. When talking about "loving" the subject used the word "child".

    The word "child" in conjunction with the word "love" should raise the suspicion that Patsy Ramsey knows that JonBenet was sexually abused. It might also indicate that Patsy Ramsey herself might have been abused earlier in childhood, and very likely sexual abuse.

    The Couple's Relationship with Each Other

    5. John Ramsey said:

    a) " We felt from the beginning an obligation to talk with the Boulder authorities and let them do their formal interrogation of Patsy and I."

    b) "So he retained counsel for Patsy and I."

    c) "Really the purpose that Patsy and I had for doing that interview was that we were overwhelmed by the outpouring of caring..."

    d) "...frankly for the first few months Patsy and I were really not capable of making any decisions."

    e) "As Patsy said, we're up to where we're now looking at what're we going to be doing next week."

    Please notice the following:

    a. The subject didn't introduce "Patsy" as my "wife". This would amount to an "improper introduction" indicating a bad relationship.

    b. "Patsy and I" comes instead of the "us". This means distance in relationship in the points in which this phrase is used.

    6. Patsy Ramsey said:

    "I'm appalled that anyone would think that John or I would be involved in such a hideous, heinous crime."

    Again, she didn't introduce "John" as "my husband". This would amount to an "improper introduction" indicating a bad relationship.

    The Couple's Perception of the Investigation

    7. John Ramsey related to the recent conversation with the police in the following way:

    a) "...and let them do their formal interrogation of Patsy and I."

    b) "...what has been delayed has been this formal interrogation of us as suspects..."

    c) "And felt an interrogation of us was a waste of our time and a waste of police time."

    d) Question: "Have the police told you that they may need to do any more interviews with you?"

    Answer: "We had no conversation with them after we left the interrogation yesterday."

    In regard to the appearance on tv he said:

    e) "Really the purpose that Patsy and I had for doing that interview was that we were overwhelmed by the outpouring of caring."

    f) "And that was the principle reason we did that interview."

    Please notice the following:

    a. The subject related to the conversation with the police as "interrogation" and even as "interrogation of us as suspects..." - (b), while he labeled the appearance on tv as an interview - (e) and (f).

    In contrast Patsy Ramsey related to the conversation with the police in the following way: "...until we had spent time interviewing with the authorities."

    One can conclude that Patsy Ramsey perceived the conversation with the police as less threatening than John Ramsey.

    8. John Ramsey said:
    a) "So, as we looked at this group of people that we pulled together, it was not only to advise us in this process, but hopefully to assist the investigation to a closure."

    b) "But an arrest is absolutely necessary in our lives for closure."

    Patsy Ramsey said:

    "We need the one phone call to this number that will help the authorities come to a conclusion to this case.

    Please notice that both subjects are talking about "closure" (John) and "conclusion" (Patsy) but not a "solution".

    The Couple's Perception of the Situation

    9. John Ramsey said:

    a) "The 'how', is that on the day after the tragedy..."

    b) "...most tragedies of this nature, the killing of a child..."

    c) "...that's a tragic statement for our country."

    d) "One of the most heartlifting things to us that came out of this tragedy..."

    e) "That's been an outcome I think we certainly wouldn't have anticipated with this kind of tragedy."

    f) "It's a tragedy that many children are killed in this country every year."

    Please notice the following:

    a. The subject talked about "tragedy" to be "the killing of a child..."

    b. In (a) the subject said, "...on the day after the tragedy..." The subject didn't say, "...on the day after the tragic event..."

    c. The subject restricted the "tragedy" in (a) only to the time of the event. For him the tragedy is the killing, and not the effects of the killing on him or his family.

    In contrast please note the use of the word "tragic" in (c). This means that the "statement" is "tragic" and not the situation.

    10. John Ramsey said:

    "We felt we lived in a safe community. We still do..."

    Please notice that the subject still feels that he lives in a safe community. This means that the subject knows that there is no killer out there.

    11. Patsy Ramsey said:

    "I know you have been diligently covering this case, and we have appreciated some of what you've said - I'll be frank, not all of what you've said..."

    One should note that the subject acknowledged that some of the information in the newspapers is true.

    In a follow-up interview the subject should be asked to expand on this point: what was true and what was not true.

    The Couple's Denials

    12. John Ramsey related to two suspicions, murder and sexual abuse. In regard to the murder he said:

    "I did not kill my daughter JonBenet."

    In regard to the sexual abuse he said:

    "I can tell you those were the most hurtful innuendos to us as a family. They are totally false..."

    Please note that John Ramsey didn't say "I didn't do it" in regard to the sexual abuse.

    On the other hand, Patsy Ramsey said:

    "But let me assure you that I did not kill JonBenet, I did not have anything to do with it."

    Please notice that Patsy Ramsey added one more sentence in her denial - "I did not have anything to do with it." This emphasis is missing from John Ramsey's denial.

    Other Comments

    13. Patsy Ramsey said:

    "We feel like there are at least two people on the face of this earth that know who did this. And that is the killer, and someone that that person may have confided in."

    Please notice the following:

    a. Patsy Ramsey talks about two people who know who did it - the killer and the killer's confidant.

    b. She didn't say, "And that is the killer, and someone that the killer may have confided in." Instead, she used the word "person".

    One should note that the word "person" usually indicates an attempt to conceal identity.

    Please note that John Ramsey said: "As a person, I think it makes you very much more guarded..."

    14. John Ramsey said:

    a) "I think one of the issues that uh, was distressing to us and perhaps caused some bias of opinion is, why did we bring lawyers into this, uh, process early on?..."

    b) "And I think that's a, that's a... that's a tragic statement for our country."

    c) "As a person, I think it makes you very much more guarded..."

    d) "I think, think probably the first issue that raised people's curiosity was the involvement of lawyers."

    e) "I think we also as a country, and perhaps some of you as a reporting entity are cynics..."

    f) Question: "Mr. and Mrs. Ramsey, what do you think of the investigation by the Boulder Police Department?"

    Answer: "Well, we think there are some very good people working on the case we're very impressed with the people the D.A.'s office has brought in."

    g) "We think we are a normal American family that loves and values their children..."

    Please notice the following:

    a. The subject used "I think" which expresses a lack of commitment. No commitment = no "total belief". This means that in the above-mentioned quotations the subject is not sure of himself.

    b. The uncertainty relates to the following points:

    i. Points (a) and (d) - what "caused some bias of opinion" against the couple - bringing lawyers into the picture.

    ii. Points (b) (c), and (e) - talking about the effect on the country and on himself personally.

    iii. Point (f) - the police's performance.

    iv. Point (g) - the subject's family as a normal family.

    c. In (f) the question dealt with the "Boulder Police Department" while the subject answered about "the D.A.'s office".

    This indicates that the subject might be upset with the Police Department.

    d. In (g) the subject related to the family as being "normal". The subject did so also earlier in the interview by saying, "We are a normal family. We love our children dearly."

    One should note the following;

    In this place the subject used "their children" instead of "our children".

    One should notice that the word "normal" is usually used only by people who were abnormal once in their life.
    Last edited by madeleine; 06-25-2009 at 08:07 AM.
    The rice is already cooked...

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    4,970
    http://www.lsiscan.com/ramsey_s_t_v__interview.htm


    The JonBenet Ramsey Case: Analysis of Ramsey's T.V. Interview

    The following are my observations from the CNN interview with John and Patsy Ramsey, JonBenet Ramsey's parents:

    1. John Ramsey said:

    a) "Patsy and I... Burke our son is 9, every family member."

    b) "I told Patsy to call the police immediately..."

    Please note the following:

    a. The subject didn't introduce "Patsy" as my "wife". This would amount to an "improper introduction" indicating a bad relationship.

    On the other hand, Patsy Ramsey used a "proper introduction" in saying:

    "...to take care of my children and my husband..."

    This should bring us to conclude that while John perceives himself as distant from Patsy, Patsy perceives herself as close to John.

    b. The missing possessive singular pronoun "my" ("Burke our son")
    One should note that the overwhelming majority of people use the singular possessive "my" when referring to their son or daughter. When a person uses the "our" instead of the "my" it might indicate divorce or adoption in the person's past.

    2. John Ramsey related to the victim in the following:

    a) "JonBenet didn't carry any burdens."

    b) "There is no answer as to why our daughter died."

    c) "...and to know where JonBenet's bedroom was..."

    d) "We wanted to get our daughter buried."

    e) "Like all parents would say she's a perfect child."

    Please notice the following:

    a. The subject used the "proper introduction" ("our daughter") only in proximity to the words "died" and "buried". However, when talking about her in regard to the time when she was alive he used either her first name ("JonBenet") or "child".

    b. It is interesting to note the following:

    i. Many parents who abuse their children have a problem in using the words "son" and "daughter". This is due to the process which a person must undergo in his/her mind before being able to abuse his/her own son/daughter.

    ii. In many cases of child abuse which result in murder, we find a change of language after the murder. As if to say that once the victim is dead, the victim is "safe".

    iii. Usually, the word "child" might indicate that speaker might have been abused earlier in childhood, and very likely sexual abuse.

    I would recommend to start the follow-up interview with the following question:

    "I have inside knowledge that you might have been abused in childhood, and quite likely sexual abuse.
    How do you relate to it?"

    Please be on alert to the fact that the subject might answer with a question. In any case, the subject should not be told the source of the information!!!

    3. Patsy Ramsey said:

    a) "...and I said our child had been kidnapped..."

    b) "She loved her daddy... She loved her daddy, she was daddy's girl. She's such a happy spiritual child... she's a very spiritual...deeply...deep sense of understanding the world around her for a very young child."

    Please notice the following:

    a. The subject used the word "girl" in regard to "daddy".

    One should notice that the overwhelming majority of parents suspected of child abuse (including sexual abuse) relate to their children either by first name or by the gender/sex.

    The fact that the word "girl" entered the language in proximity to the word "daddy" would raise the suspicion that the subject knew of JonBenet's sexual abuse by her father.

    b. The word "child" entered in proximity to "daddy's girl". While the word "girl" is in proximity to "daddy", the word "child" is in proximity to the word "spiritual".

    It would be safe to suspect that the subject is running a comparison here: "child" is for "spiritual" as "girl" is for "physical" (="daddy").

    4. John Ramsey said:

    a) "...we now have to find out why this happened..."

    b) "...the only way that my family can move on now is to resolve why, who this happened."

    Please compare this to Patsy Ramsey who said:

    a) "...we have to find out who did this."

    b) "There is a killer on the loose. I don't know who it is..."

    While John wants to know "why" (he doesn't say that he wants to know "what happened"), Patsy wants to know "who did this".

    Please also note the following:

    a. In (b) John produced the "who" in a broken sentence. The sentence would have been a good sentence if he were to say, "is to resolve why, who did this." As it is now, the "who" is inserted as an afterthought.

    b. In (b) Patsy said, "I don't know..."

    The "editing process" means that the subject can report to us only what the subject knows/remembers. What the subject does not know/remember, the subject would not report to us. Therefore, the phrase "I don't know/remember" in an open statement (which is controlled by the "editing process", unlike answers to specific questions) is a signal of suppressing knowledge.

    5. John Ramsey said:

    "Well like all parents would say she's a perfect child. But the thing to remember about her was that uh if I would frown she would look at me and say, 'Dad, I don't like that face,' and I would smile, and she'd say, 'that's better.' That's just the way she was."

    Please notice the following:

    a. The subject said, "But the thing to remember about her..." The subject didn't say, "But the thing I remember about her..."

    By omitting the pronoun "I" the subject violated the formula of "first person singular past tense". This formula establishes commitment on the part of the subject as to what happened. But, since there is no commitment, there is no "Total Belief".

    Since the subject ran away from commitment to that part of the story it should be considered as a sensitive point for the subject and is likely to be unreliable.

    b. The word "if" reduces commitment as to what the subject describes in this section.

    c. The word "would" violated the above-mentioned formula of "first person singular past tense".

    Since the subject didn't tell us that this actually happened (past tense) we cannot say that it happened.

    One should conclude that in the only place in which the subject wanted to portray his relationship with the victim as a good relationship, it is also the only place in the transcript in which the subject avoided commitment by running away from the past tense.

    6. John Ramsey said:

    "...when I opened the door, there were no windows in that room and I turned the light on and I... that was her."

    Please note that when a subject mentions "turning the lights on" in an open statement, it has been found in the past to be associated with a sexual motive for the crime.

    Conclusion: There are enough signals in the language to indicate that John Ramsey is involved in the murder of JonBenet. Patsy Ramsey is likely to have known of the sexual abuse.
    The rice is already cooked...

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1,019
    That is fascinating, Madeleine: you're on stunning form today.



Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 57
    Last Post: 09-12-2010, 04:59 PM
  2. Replies: 33
    Last Post: 09-09-2010, 07:48 PM
  3. CNN Press Conference on Now!!!
    By Jodes in forum JonBenet Ramsey
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 08-17-2006, 08:27 PM