$100,000 explained

cindysnow3 said:
I feel this case will IMO never be solved, due to the fact eveyone is so biased in their own facts about the case, they are not willing to look at the TRUE facts in it to base a case in the matter.

It doesn't help to have an entrenched position, cindysnow3. So I guess I qualify as a fence-sitter as far as this forum goes. The evidence really is inconclusive, although it must favour the RDI side, I think. The ransom note, for a start, reeks of Ramseys. As I say, the author seems to know John Ramsey and, judghing just from the nature of the note, it is hard to believe that JR doesn't know who the author is.

I've only just come to this particular case. I'm still dealing in first impressions. I start with the RN, just as the cops did that morning. At first, all they had was a missing child and a ransom note. I'm looking at it fresh from that point. A fresh approach necessitates a wide open mind on all issues. I must say I am surprised by the heat of the hostility towards the Ramseys in the RDI camp. There are minds that are really quite closed on this issue. I don't think it helps. IMO.
 
PagingDrDetect said:
>>>>"I am simply looking at what the note says, assuming nothing."<<<<

:waitasec:
You're looking at what one small portion of the note says that by itself is insignificant. What any one small portion of the note says means nothing without taking into account the totality of the note. What in the world is the point to playing around with one small portion of the note and plugging it into a calculator without any purpose? The whole point to the note and examing it for any reason is to find out who wrote it and why. We already know who wrote it and have a pretty darn good idea as to why.

Clearly, your intension of pointing out that $11800 can be split 3 ways equally suggests that you believe there is any truth to this note being written by an actual "group of individuals" representing a "foreign faction". There is no group of individuals, and Patsy wrote the note. The End.



I don't believe for one minute that Patsy or John Ramsey wrote that note nor do I believe that they had anything to do with JonBenet's death. When we get a match on the DNA spot in JonBenet's underpants then we will know who wrote the note and who committed the murder. A Grand Jury could find no evidence to arrest the Ramseys and the DNA didn't match either of them. End of story.
 
I must retract a statement I made earlier in this thread, namely that there are only general genre allusions to films but nothing specific. I've just read the relevant sections of the script of Dirty Harry and there is no denying an allusion there. The lines:

"If I even think you're being followed, the girl dies. If you talk to anyone, I don't care if it's a Pekinese pissing against a lamppost, the girl dies...No car. I give you a certain amount of time to go from phone booth to phone booth. I ring four times. You don't answer by the fourth ring, I hang up and that's the end of the game. The girl dies...Cop!...I hope you're not stupid."

The Pekinese here is just too close to "If we catch you talking to a stray dog, she dies." So I count that as a definite allusion to Dirty Harry. Not sure what it means, but it is somewhat more than just a "genre" allusion.
 
Plenum7 said:
I should say, though, that my first impressions of the RN are:

1. This person knows John Ramsey.
2. John Ramsey must know who wrote this note.

That's my second and third impression too.

But my further impression of the note (going over it all day today) is that the author is making some effort to distance themselves from the "kidnapping". which is a very odd feature of the note. It is way too helpful. Far too many instructions. Too much advice to John. There is a tension in the note. The author is not 100% with the crime.

I don't care if this doesn't fit into any readymade scenario, but it is what I get from the RN. The author is not as hostile to JR as are the reported "two gentlemen" and indeed the author is almost trying to help JR out. The tone of it is, "Look John, don't mess with these guys!" I can't imagine why the author would fabricate this particular aspect of the note as a diversion. It is what is *implicit* in this note that is most interesting. I detect fear in the author of the note.

It is also my *impression* that the author doesn't seem to know the child is dead. Of course, this might be integral to the whole ruse of the note but I genuinely have the impression from the note that it is pre-murder. Other facts in the case would strongly suggest otherwise, but looking at the note on its own terms - textual analysis of the note alone - does suggest to me that the author does not know the child is dead. Otherwise, they have done a good job at disguising it, and that is hard for any author in any circumstance to hide.

Anyone willing to put all assumptions aside and read the RN fresh? The only good thing to come out of the Karr fiasco is that lots of new eyes are looking at this cold case again, so let's put aside the old RDI vs IDI rivalry and look at the evidence like its a new day. First piece of evidence, the note.
 
Plenum7 said:
But my further impression of the note (going over it all day today) is that the author is making some effort to distance themselves from the "kidnapping". which is a very odd feature of the note. ......
The author is not as hostile to JR as are the reported "two gentlemen" .......... I detect fear in the author of the note. .... The only good thing to come out of the Karr fiasco is that lots of new eyes are looking at this cold case again, so let's put aside the old RDI vs IDI rivalry and look at the evidence like its a new day. First piece of evidence, the note.

Fear? If so, mention of "the two gentlemen" is probably partly "bluffing", to reassure himself, partly, that he's with stronger people than himself.

If PR wrote the note, she'd have known, I think, that JonBenet was already dead, though the full shock of it wouldn't have yet hit her full force.

She required zoloft for some period of time after this event, so leaving the body in the house which seems so unthinkable to any of us was something other than just insensitivity. Don't ask me what. I don't know how long she was on the anti-depressant. Probably didn't much care if she gave sensible correct answers or not. I don't think I would if it happened to me. I think I'd be feeling it's the end of the world and nothing else matters if I'd lost any one of my kids.
 
tumble said:
Yes, the RN is one of a kind, funny thing it's not the only unprecedented thing in this case. Take a look at the so called garrote, first of it's kind.
I am also new to this case and have been reading everything I can on it and thank everyone for their input.
What I dont understand is - if JB was manually strangled (which I presume means someone either used their hands around her neck or put their palm over her mouth) then why was the garrote around her neck so tight and why was there a deep furrow around her neck as if the garrote had strangled her. I have seen the autopsy photo of her neck and it is shocking how narrow her neck is around where the garrote was. Am I right in saying that as well as being manually strangled the garrote was also tightened so much it reduced the circumference of her neck significantly and do we know if that was done before or after death? The picture of her neck really shocked me. Why would anyone do that if she was already dead?
Sorry if this has been discussed before.
 
Fantastic line by line analysis, Plenum7. It certainly does demolish the theory that the note was written by a kidnapper.

The book "Compulsion" was very widely read.
Compulsion was also a (very well-made, IMO) movie which is aired on TV occasionally. I saw it recently on AMC late one night.
 
K. Taylor said:
Compulsion was also a (very well-made, IMO) movie which is aired on TV occasionally. I saw it recently on AMC late one night.
"Rope" by Hitchcock was also inpired by the L&L case.

eastender said:
What I dont understand is - if JB was manually strangled (which I presume means someone either used their hands around her neck or put their palm over her mouth) then why was the garrote around her neck so tight and why was there a deep furrow around her neck as if the garrote had strangled her.
No it doesn't make much sense does it. Some think this indicates staging.
Not everyone think she was manually strangled.
Some even think she was bashed on the head FIRST then the 'garrote' was applied.
 
I just ran into Blue Crabs theory that the 118 is a time code for time of death, namely 1:18am.

Creative, at least. The theory is almost certainly wrong but the t.o.d. is probably not too far out.

Can anyone direct me to any efforts by cryptologists on the SBTC problem? It occurs to me that it is part of the sequence: ASBTCUDVEWFXGYHZ etc. But so what?
 
Plenum7, you have speculated on the degree of detachment between the writer of the note and act of murder/kidnapping, it is almost as though the writer is not aware of the murder, suggesting that perhaps the writer of the note and the kidnapper/murderer are not the same, that the note was written first and murder was not part of the plan. Pardon me if I am not clearly understanding your point and this is not what you are saying, I just wanted to give credit for this line of reasoning.

The idea that the note writer is not aware of the murder is a very interesting point. Along these lines, I wonder if the housekeeper was indeed involved in the plot in an effort extort money from the Ramseys.

She would have had access to the home previously and keys to enter on that night, knowlege of Patsy's handwriting, etc. She could have taken the writing pad/pen home and completed the note. It would have been easy for her to get these things out of the house undetected and she may have had knowledge of JR's work bonus, thus the amount of the ransom. Then the person(s) who were supposed to have done the kidnapping part of the plan could have easily slipped in with the key, remained in hiding until the Ramseys returned home that night, left the note downstairs upon grabbing JB. But in the process of trying to get JB out of the house quietly the plan was foiled when JB put up a struggle, the "gentlemen" used too much force to quiet her and killed JB. Or maybe the struggle came as they used force to try to rape JB.

I have also often wondered, as others have suggested, if the discovery of JB by JR when he went in the cellar was the first. He and Fleet may have found JB somewhere else in a more distressing position (or maybe the housekeeper was called in from a car waiting nearby after the others had killed her) and in an attempt to clean up the body/give JB some dignity before Patsy and everyone else saw JB, someone replaced her soiled panties, pulled up her pants, fixed her hair, etc.
 
leighl said:
Plenum7, you have speculated on the degree of detachment between the writer of the note and act of murder/kidnapping, it is almost as though the writer is not aware of the murder, suggesting that perhaps the writer of the note and the kidnapper/murderer are not the same, that the note was written first and murder was not part of the plan. Pardon me if I am not clearly understanding your point and this is not what you are saying, I just wanted to give credit for this line of reasoning.

The idea that the note writer is not aware of the murder is a very interesting point. Along these lines, I wonder if the housekeeper was indeed involved in the plot in an effort extort money from the Ramseys.

She would have had access to the home previously and keys to enter on that night, knowlege of Patsy's handwriting, etc. She could have taken the writing pad/pen home and completed the note. It would have been easy for her to get these things out of the house undetected and she may have had knowledge of JR's work bonus, thus the amount of the ransom. Then the person(s) who were supposed to have done the kidnapping part of the plan could have easily slipped in with the key, remained in hiding until the Ramseys returned home that night, left the note downstairs upon grabbing JB. But in the process of trying to get JB out of the house quietly the plan was foiled when JB put up a struggle, the "gentlemen" used too much force to quiet her and killed JB. Or maybe the struggle came as they used force to try to rape JB.

I have also often wondered, as others have suggested, if the discovery of JB by JR when he went in the cellar was the first. He and Fleet may have found JB somewhere else in a more distressing position (or maybe the housekeeper was called in from a car waiting nearby after the others had killed her) and in an attempt to clean up the body/give JB some dignity before Patsy and everyone else saw JB, someone replaced her soiled panties, pulled up her pants, fixed her hair, etc.
LHP had no reason to extort money from the Ramseys, she only had to ask and they gave it to her.
PR had just lent LHP $2000, just like that.
People like LHP don't bite the hand that feeds them!
That is just my opinion though, but I really doubt the housekeeper had anything to do with this.
 
Plenum7 said:
I should say, though, that my first impressions of the RN are:

1. This person knows John Ramsey.
2. John Ramsey must know who wrote this note.

That's my second and third impression too. The content of the note says so all the way through. The author knows JR and must be someone in his circle of family or friends and there are surely things in the note that are meant to be significant to JR (the signature, for example) and I'd be very surprised if he doesn't know who wrote it. This also suggests to me that he probably didn't have a hand in writing it. But he must know who wrote it. My impressions.

Signals I think the author is giving to JR knowing he would understand them (shared idiom):

"small foreign faction"
"fat cat"
"stray dog"
"don't grow a brain"
"that good southern common sense of yours"
"victory"
S.B.T.C.
All of the above can be explained by Patsy writing the note.
 
Plenum7 said:
Can anyone direct me to any efforts by cryptologists on the SBTC problem? It occurs to me that it is part of the sequence: ASBTCUDVEWFXGYHZ etc. But so what?

What does this letter sequence mean? Never heard of it. Can you tell us more about it, where you got it, etc.? Why would you think of it? Just curious. We learn something new every day. Thanks.
 
Looking at the housekeeper, my impression is that she was probably way too lazy to have been out and about at this time, involved in any plot. I realize I could be wrong in my assessment of her. Example, leaving the loom hair ties scattered on the bdrm floor, putting too-large panties on JonBenet, the work of any kind of housekeeper, even an inefficient one? Don't think so.

P.S. Edit, The killer evidently likes blue, chose the blue loom pieces when doing up her hair.

Another thing, did the R's have to give permission for an autopsy? Because if there'd been no autopsy, the head blow wouldn't have been noticed. It didn't break the skin and there was no bleeding from it. Was the hair put up just in case there might be a noticeable bruise or something?
 
Eagle1 said:
What does this letter sequence mean? Never heard of it. Can you tell us more about it, where you got it, etc.? Why would you think of it? Just curious. We learn something new every day. Thanks.

You get this sequence by superimposing two alphabets:

A B C D E F G...
S T U V W X Y...

I only thought of it because in cryptology you are looking for any pattern you can find. This type of pattern is the basis for some well-known codes. Its the only pattern I can find. You test various possibilities....
 
Plenum7 said:
You get this sequence by superimposing two alphabets:

A B C D E F G...
S T U V W X Y...

I only thought of it because in cryptology you are looking for any pattern you can find. This type of pattern is the basis for some well-known codes. Its the only pattern I can find. You test various possibilities....

Thanks much, Plenum. I was aware that you look for whatever patterns you can find, and I see you get some from studying cryptology. Great to have you here! We learned something. So you're saying maybe the note writer knew this. As he or his accomplice knew a mountain-cllimbing rope knot.

Editing to add that maybe he started some kind of little secret society using the acronym(?) Didn't Helgoth have a baseball cap and/or T-shirt with SBTC on them? (Or was it Helgoth? I need my 2nd cup of mud this morning.)
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
157
Guests online
3,950
Total visitors
4,107

Forum statistics

Threads
592,534
Messages
17,970,548
Members
228,798
Latest member
Sassyfox
Back
Top