Day 12 The Ransom Note/The 12 Days of JonBenet

Here we are day 12. Tonight is the CBS special we have been waiting for but until then let's discuss the most important piece of evidence in this case. In my opinion anyway and that is the Ransom Note.

In my opinion, Patsy wrote the note to throw off law enforcement. It's ironic that just the opposite happened. Patsy left us with the one piece of evidence that points directly to her.

For the examination of the note let's turn to Cina Wong

Cina Wong is a Board Certified Forensic Handwriting Expert and Court Qualified Document Examiner.

Cina got involved in the JonBenet Ramsey case when a journalist named Chris Wolf sued John Ramsey and Patsy Ramsey, arguing that a book they wrote titled "A Death of Innocence" wrongfully accused him of killing JonBenet.

Cina was hired to do work for Wolf’s civil suit.

Below is information provided by Cina herself. I have no links to back up what she is saying but Cina Wong is a well respected professional in her field. I have every reason to believe she is 100 percent truthful.

Her analysis concluded that it was "highly probable" that Patsy Ramsey wrote the ransom note. She said there are over 243 points of similarity between a sample of Patsy Ramsey's writings and the ransom notes.
'
"There are so many unique similarities between both writings."

Through the process of discovery in the civil litigation, Cina was able to access over 100 exemplars (samples) of Patsy Ramsey’s handwriting which she used to compare to the ransom note.

Cina has compiled an incredible array of charts outlining the similarities between the Patsy Ramsey’s exemplars and the ransom note. Her compilation is the most extensive of any analyst associated with the case.

Interestingly, Cina was also able to review a report by one of the experts hired by the Ramseys. In his report, the Ramsey expert included what he dubbed the “master pattern” of the ransom note writer.

What he didn’t know is that Cina was able to take every part of his “master pattern” and match it to Patsy Ramsey. This is truly explosive information and part of that is revealed here for the first time.

Many have said it is the most important piece of evidence in the case, a vital piece of physical evidence which cannot be ignored.

Below is the classic exchange between Larry King, Steve Thomas, and John and Patsy Ramsey.


THOMAS: My theory is quite simple: Whoever authored the ransom note killed the child, absent some great conspiracy, that they think this intruder came into the house.

KING: So you agree that whoever authored the ransom note probably killed the child?

J. RAMSEY: I agree.

P. RAMSEY: I would agree with that.

KING: Your contention is she wrote the note. What do you base that on?

THOMAS: I do. I do. I base that on questioned document examiners. By the time I left the Boulder Police Department June of 1998, Patsy, out of 73 suspects whose handwriting had been looked at, you were the only one who showed evidence to suggest authorship.
Steve Thomas interview, Larry King Live
http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0005/31/lkl.00.html

Cina was featured in the three-part Investigation Discovery series, “JonBenét: An American Murder Mystery.”
Her segment can be seen starting at 24:10
[video=dailymotion;x4tmxl0]http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x4tmxl0[/video]

Finally, attached is a brief example of Cina Wong's work on the ransom note. The similarities are beyond question.

This is one part of a multi-page effort by the Ramsey document examiner's "Master Pattern" to show the unique characteristics in the ransom note that could only belong to the writer.

In the red circles, Cina takes Patsy's exemplars and shows for that particular letter that Patsy has those characteristics. In other words, Ramsey doc examiner says those letters are not unique to Patsy but only to the writer and Cina blows that observation out of the water. This is only a small sample of Cina's work on the ransom note.

I agree that the ransom note is extremely telling. I think PR wrote it. I think much of it is talking directly to JR.

We call it the ransom note but it's really the explanation letter. It explains why we have a dead body in the basement. Obviously there's been no kidnapping. The author wants us to believe someone is mad at John's company for doing business with a country they don't respect. They've taken the kid, if anyone is contacted the kid dies. EVERYONE is contacted so of course the kid is dead and returned. Totally believable. Not. Who benefits from this explanation? Only the people in the house. An intruder does not need an explanation or a letter, an intruder only has to leave. If you were writing the explanation you would not address yourself, the ransom note only addresses John. In the Larry King Live Interview with Steve Thomas, Patsy noted the author of the ransom note did not use Jonbenet's name, something she herself fails to do on many occasions when speaking about Jonbenet. The author even cared so much about getting the note perfect that he/she wrote a practice note out before the final draft. But why would an intruder care about imperfections? This indicates anxiety on the part of the author. The author is afraid they will let something slip that will show who they are. Only someone who will be around when police come would be worried that they might show through, or else they would have not written the note at all and been long gone. John was ruled out as the author. Patsy was not. What are the chances that an intruder who needed no explanation to murder a child, would make up such an elaborate 3 page explanation in the mother's handwriting, for no purpose whatsoever because no one even ever tried to collect on the ransom?

*The truth is out there*

Sunshine4Me said:

We call it the ransom note but it's really the explanation letter. It explains why we have a dead body in the basement. Obviously there's been no kidnapping. The author wants us to believe someone is mad at John's company for doing business with a country they don't respect. They've taken the kid, if anyone is contacted the kid dies. EVERYONE is contacted so of course the kid is dead and returned. Totally believable. Not. Who benefits from this explanation? Only the people in the house. An intruder does not need an explanation or a letter, an intruder only has to leave. If you were writing the explanation you would not address yourself, the ransom note only addresses John. In the Larry King Live Interview with Steve Thomas, Patsy noted the author of the ransom note did not use Jonbenet's name, something she herself fails to do on many occasions when speaking about Jonbenet. The author even cared so much about getting the note perfect that he/she wrote a practice note out before the final draft. But why would an intruder care about imperfections? This indicates anxiety on the part of the author. The author is afraid they will let something slip that will show who they are. Only someone who will be around when police come would be worried that they might show through, or else they would have not written the note at all and been long gone. John was ruled out as the author. Patsy was not. What are the chances that an intruder who needed no explanation to murder a child, would make up such an elaborate 3 page explanation in the mother's handwriting, for no purpose whatsoever because no one even ever tried to collect on the ransom?

*The truth is out there*

Click to expand...

Great post.

The thing that bothers me most about this letter is....how the heck did PR manage to write a
long ransom note (under what must have been extreme duress) and have a handwriting analyst say it is highly probable?

For fun, I've tried to disguise my handwriting to see if I could make it where no one could tie it to me. I've tried printing, I've written by left hand etc. There is no way anyone could look at it and say it wasn't my handwriting.

Not only did she have to be careful making the letters so they didn"t look like hers, but she had to also come up with that "story"
about the foreign factions as well as having the letter point to one of John's ex co-workers.

How did she manage to keep her tears (from crying) off the paper? And her fingerprints? Did she write it with gloves on?

I'm not saying it was someone other than the Ramseys but wow, I could not have pulled that off.

I look forward to the show this evening. Obviously much more has been discovered and analyzed since the few years following JBR's death.

Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk

Some thoughts I have nagging at me and they basically stem from the RN. I am firmly RDI (was not firmly until recent shows/interviews/books/forum discussion...specifically the Dr P interviews nudged me over the fence squarely into RDI camp). Any way, I feel that PR wrote the RN...not a doubt in my mind. So I go back and forth on PDI and BDI. I lean towards BDI because I just don't feel that a spouse would help stage/cover up a murder of their child for their spouse. Especially not in the R household where I don't get the feeling they were all that close a couple. And JR made some comment about not thinking about her much since she passed away. BR said she was a nice mom in his Dr P interviews but he made that one comment that his dad loved them or his dad was a good dad to them or something like that where I thought it was odd that he left off PR. So that got me thinking that maybe PR did this crime and told JR that BR did it so he would go with her plan to stage/cover up. But then the things JR did that morning (allowing her to call the cops and call friends over...trying to arrange a flight out...finding her body after FW looked in the wine cellar and didn't see the body...not being upset when the 10am ransom call never came) lead me to believe he was part of the whole cover up from the get go. So back to BDI...maybe PR wrote that silly RN in case the police started to zero in on BR...she could then come forward and say it was her and admit to writing the RN to cover her crime.

Lamima said:

Some thoughts I have nagging at me and they basically stem from the RN. I am firmly RDI (was not firmly until recent shows/interviews/books/forum discussion...specifically the Dr P interviews nudged me over the fence squarely into RDI camp). Any way, I feel that PR wrote the RN...not a doubt in my mind. So I go back and forth on PDI and BDI. I lean towards BDI because I just don't feel that a spouse would help stage/cover up a murder of their child for their spouse. Especially not in the R household where I don't get the feeling they were all that close a couple. And JR made some comment about not thinking about her much since she passed away. BR said she was a nice mom in his Dr P interviews but he made that one comment that his dad loved them or his dad was a good dad to them or something like that where I thought it was odd that he left off PR. So that got me thinking that maybe PR did this crime and told JR that BR did it so he would go with her plan to stage/cover up. But then the things JR did that morning (allowing her to call the cops and call friends over...trying to arrange a flight out...finding her body after FW looked in the wine cellar and didn't see the body...not being upset when the 10am ransom call never came) lead me to believe he was part of the whole cover up from the get go. So back to BDI...maybe PR wrote that silly RN in case the police started to zero in on BR...she could then come forward and say it was her and admit to writing the RN to cover her crime.

Click to expand...

Is there any possible way that BR could have written the note w/ PR dictating it?

Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk

If I found a ransom note on my stairs, not knowing what it said, you can bet I would pick it up to read it. My fingerprints would be all over it. There is no way I would not handle it. I've read several times that the ransom note had not fingerprints. In my view, that is not possible unless someone already knew what it said and was intentionally keeping his/her fingerprints off it. Is it true that there were no fingerprints on the ransom note or is that just something that gets passed along?

Did they compare BR writing to the RN? I don't have a feeling he wrote it but it could be.
No fingerprints on the note is odd to me too. I bet gloves were worn. Shoot...maybe JBR was placed in her bed after the head injury and then whoever (PR, IMO) geared up like they were an intruder (with gloves on) and played the part as the staging happened. That also points to JR being in on the cover up because he read the RN as it was spread out on the floor so as not to touch it either. I bet it was NEVER placed on the spiral stairs. I bet it was laid on the floor after it was written.

I find this interesting. I am however of the belief that JR dictated the note and PR wrote it. http://solvingjonbenet.blogspot.co.uk/2013/02/johnisms.html?m=1
Also I don't necessarily think that had it been one of the parents that they wouldn't have covered for each other. Reputation is everything to the Ramsey's and I think this was a terrible accident that they went to great lengths to cover. JMO

Would having gloves on while writing the ransom note change the handwriting quite a bit? I'm sure it would have some effect, especially if the gloves did not fit all that well.

Sunshine4Me said:

We call it the ransom note but it's really the explanation letter. It explains why we have a dead body in the basement. Obviously there's been no kidnapping. The author wants us to believe someone is mad at John's company for doing business with a country they don't respect. They've taken the kid, if anyone is contacted the kid dies. EVERYONE is contacted so of course the kid is dead and returned. Totally believable. Not. Who benefits from this explanation? Only the people in the house. An intruder does not need an explanation or a letter, an intruder only has to leave. If you were writing the explanation you would not address yourself, the ransom note only addresses John. In the Larry King Live Interview with Steve Thomas, Patsy noted the author of the ransom note did not use Jonbenet's name, something she herself fails to do on many occasions when speaking about Jonbenet. The author even cared so much about getting the note perfect that he/she wrote a practice note out before the final draft. But why would an intruder care about imperfections? This indicates anxiety on the part of the author. The author is afraid they will let something slip that will show who they are. Only someone who will be around when police come would be worried that they might show through, or else they would have not written the note at all and been long gone. John was ruled out as the author. Patsy was not. What are the chances that an intruder who needed no explanation to murder a child, would make up such an elaborate 3 page explanation in the mother's handwriting, for no purpose whatsoever because no one even ever tried to collect on the ransom?

*The truth is out there*

Click to expand...

Totally agreed. I wanted to point out, for anyone young here, that blaming a random group of outsiders for anger at a business, specifically with an unusual acronym, is a very 90's thing to have done. This was a big deal in the 90's. She blamed the "usual suspect" of the 1990's in her letter. It has all the uniqueness of a little child from any era blaming their imaginary friend or teddy bear for stealing the cookies from the jar.

All this letter does is place blame. And the biggest issue with this letter is actually not in the letter. It's that John and Patsy never noticed that the time had come and gone for the phone call from the "kidnappers." This of course, was before they found the body. If we didn't already think this letter was fake enough, we have accounts from that day that show even John and Patsy had no reason to believe the letter was real.

The note is over the top, too elaborate, way overboard dramatic - just like Patsy.
Ask yourself - if you found the note. After discovering you child was actually missing from her bed- The ones responsible claimed to be watching your home and threatened to behead her.
Who among you would not wake up your other child to question, who would call everyone you know and instruct them to come to your house?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Who would know to put the note where Patsy claims to have found it?

Johns early declarations that the house was all locked up, that it was an "inside job" lead me to believe he wasn't part of the murder or the cover-up.
He did however figure it out as the morning wore on.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Linda7NJ said:

The note is over the top, too elaborate, way overboard dramatic - just like Patsy.
Ask yourself - if you found the note. After discovering you child was actually missing from her bed- The ones responsible claimed to be watching your home and threatened to behead her.
Who among you would not wake up your other child to question, who would call everyone you know and instruct them to come to your house?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Click to expand...

And then have their friends clean up evidence and make sure none talk to the authorities...

Sent from my HTCD100LVWPP using Tapatalk

Razz said:

Great post.

The thing that bothers me most about this letter is....how the heck did PR manage to write a
long ransom note (under what must have been extreme duress) and have a handwriting analyst say it is highly probable?

*snip*

Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

Hi Razz,

It is my understanding that a document examiner will rarely say anything is 100 percent certain. I could be wrong but I was told that a long time ago

Tricia said:

Hi Razz,

It is my understanding that a document examiner will rarely say anything is 100 percent certain. I could be wrong but I was told that a long time ago

Click to expand...

Yes, I agree. I believe handwriting experts and lie detectors only deal in probabilities.

I tried opening the examination report from the expert and was unable to open the file.

Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk

BlueShoe said:

If I found a ransom note on my stairs, not knowing what it said, you can bet I would pick it up to read it. My fingerprints would be all over it. There is no way I would not handle it. I've read several times that the ransom note had not fingerprints. In my view, that is not possible unless someone already knew what it said and was intentionally keeping his/her fingerprints off it. Is it true that there were no fingerprints on the ransom note or is that just something that gets passed along?

Click to expand...

Thank you!!

This is one of the things that really bothers me and points back to Patsy and John being involved. Not only did Patsy not pick up the letter she said during her police interrogation that she read the first few sentences and then yelled for John. However, during the 911 call she told the operator the person who took their daughter signed the ransom note SBTC and Victory! Funny how she remembered the last line of the letter.

According to John he got down on the floor to read the letter. Really?? A 54 year old man gets on the floor to read the letter instead of picking it up? When he found JBR body even in full rigor he removes all the ropes and blanket and carries her upstairs. Who would do this? He is a very intelligent man so why would he even pick up her body? I watch crime shows all the time where a family member finds the body of their loved one and they never disturb the body. No matter how distraught they are.

Here is my take on Patsy Ramsey's handwriting and ransom note.

Patsy Ramsey's Handwriting


Ransom Note


Lori Drew's Handwriting


Jodi Aria's Handwriting


Another Jodi Aria's Handwriting


Looking at her handwriting, it has a consistent pressure, like in the ransom note. There is muddying of a's, e's and o's in Patsy's and ransom note. That would suggest that Patsy is secretive and repressed. They both angle to the right which indicates she is very sociable. The ransom note states the person will call, which never happened to my knowledge. Whoever wrote the ransom note was in a hurry from the way it is written. Whoever wrote the ransom note has an overactive imagination. That person who would odd thinking at times.

Lori Drew, Jodi Arias, and Patsy Ramsey's have writing have similar characteristics. However, Drew's and Arias's handwriting have inconsistent pressure, which indicates a combination of volatility and insecurity. All have different looking g's and y's, which is pervasive in Drew. The y's touch other letters below in all three of them. The g's and y's would sexual repression and issues. It would suggest all of them have sexual issues, especially with Drew. Drew most likely struggles with sexual identity and got angry at Megan Meier for calling her daughter Sarah a "lesbian". That is not the case with Ramsey and Arias. There are also stingers in c's in Ramsey and Drew, which suggests issue with the past. It is surprisingly lacking in Jodi Arias. Ramsey and Drew carry a lot of baggage with them. This would suggest that Patsy Ramsey has a lot anger issues. She harbors deep shame and has issues of self-hatred, which characterizes Drew and Arias. Even though Arias does not have stingers in her writing, it is known she had a negative relationship with her parents and had issues in the past.

Patsy Ramsey's handwriting suggests she has a lot of repressed anger issues. She is very negativistic and controlling person. She is very conscious about herself and prefers being liked and accepted. On that ground, Patsy Ramsey is more similar to Lori Drew than Jodi Arias. However, Arias prefers respect over being liked.

when I look at the ransom note and compare it to Patsy's writing sample it strikes me how they both show the capital letter "I" written with the top and bottom horizontal lines, not just a plain vertical line. I never write it like this, and rarely see it written by other like this - really curious to how many websleuthers write their capital I's like patsy??

I can"t help but think this RN was generated by JR.

The amount of $118,000 is specifically mentioned in the RN.

In "Perfect Murder, Perfect Town: The Uncensored Story of the JonBenet Murder" by Lawrence Schiller, Schiller writes about a long time business associate of JR's who had been given an option of a big pay cut, or he could leave the company by April, 30, 1996. Merrick left the company but later claimed the company owed him close to $118,000.

Would PR have known about that? Did JR confide in her about work troubles? Would she have remembered that or the amount Merrick told JR he was owed?

I am thinking maybe JR dictated it while BR wrote it? I had very decent handwriting (printing) in 2nd grade.

Could BR and JBR have had a fatal encounter? Started as play but descended into anger and jealousy?

Who would BR go to to get help that night. Mom? No, he'd go to Dad.

He takes JR down to the basement to show him that JBR was dead. But it was just a game, Dad! I didn't mean to.

What to do? Clean her up but leave the garrot on her.

They go upstairs and JR decides to make it look like a kidnapping.
(He's not good at this kind of thing but he can't let his son go to prison for this...."accident".)

He dictates the letter to BR including the reference of $118,000. Surely someone would believe this man capable of abducting his daughter. After all, he was owed $118,000.

I think PR was totally unaware. I don't think she had the wherewithal to plan on contaminating the scene by inviting friends over or to print a RD.

I am probably way off on this.

But did they ever take handwriting samples from BR or would LE have been reluctant to do so or would they have ever thought to because of his age.

This is way out there speculation.
Well, maybe not way out there but speculation. nonetheless.



Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk