If I were a bettin girl, I'd put money on it. He wrote that note. I'm no handwriting expert, but there is something that looks so familiar to the note.
I don't care what any so-called "experts" have to say about it. The emperor has no clothes and I'm not going to listen to some expert tell me otherwise. I know what I see.
The characteristics don't happen just once or even twice, but many times.
It's not just a few single letters here or there, but the overall look of the same letters together and how he places certain letter cominations together.
Karr spacing and size and slants of his letters, and the placement of certain letter combinations together look just like the RN note. How can a man's natural writing habits from 1982, look so very close to the ransom note?
Patsy's writing doesn't really look the same.
Patsy's printing (her london letter)I would characterize as short/fat/stubby letter formations. Her words and letters are mostly straight or slant a certain direction sometimes. Her writing is more neat and her letters line up. The ransom writer and Karr have a messier look, a strange look.
How can a person who is "just a false confessor obsessed with the jonbenet case", happen to have such strikingly similar handwriting to the killer 14 years earlier before the crime occurred or jonbenet was even born??? Does he have psychic powers and imitate the writing style of a killer of jonbenet 14 years into the future?
If so many similarities can be found in a piece of handwriting from 1982, I can just imagine how strikingly similar a sample of Karr's writing samples from 1996 would be, give or take a few years earlier or later.
They theorized that the ransom note writer (who many believe was Patsy) disguised their handwriting, and that's why it looked the way it did. How could Patsy disguise handwriting to look coincindentally just like Karr's, the man who is presently confessing to the crime.
The handwriting is the same as Karr's. It's as plain as day. Only a fool or an extremely stubborn person would deny it. A person needs to do a certain amount of mental gymnastics to try to explain away the obvious. I just follow the fundamental facts of the case, keep it simple and use common sense.
What do you think? I put these charts together for comparison.
http://i8.tinypic.com/25g598x.jpg
http://i8.tinypic.com/25g56ac.jpg
I don't care what any so-called "experts" have to say about it. The emperor has no clothes and I'm not going to listen to some expert tell me otherwise. I know what I see.
The characteristics don't happen just once or even twice, but many times.
It's not just a few single letters here or there, but the overall look of the same letters together and how he places certain letter cominations together.
Karr spacing and size and slants of his letters, and the placement of certain letter combinations together look just like the RN note. How can a man's natural writing habits from 1982, look so very close to the ransom note?
Patsy's writing doesn't really look the same.
Patsy's printing (her london letter)I would characterize as short/fat/stubby letter formations. Her words and letters are mostly straight or slant a certain direction sometimes. Her writing is more neat and her letters line up. The ransom writer and Karr have a messier look, a strange look.
How can a person who is "just a false confessor obsessed with the jonbenet case", happen to have such strikingly similar handwriting to the killer 14 years earlier before the crime occurred or jonbenet was even born??? Does he have psychic powers and imitate the writing style of a killer of jonbenet 14 years into the future?
If so many similarities can be found in a piece of handwriting from 1982, I can just imagine how strikingly similar a sample of Karr's writing samples from 1996 would be, give or take a few years earlier or later.
They theorized that the ransom note writer (who many believe was Patsy) disguised their handwriting, and that's why it looked the way it did. How could Patsy disguise handwriting to look coincindentally just like Karr's, the man who is presently confessing to the crime.
The handwriting is the same as Karr's. It's as plain as day. Only a fool or an extremely stubborn person would deny it. A person needs to do a certain amount of mental gymnastics to try to explain away the obvious. I just follow the fundamental facts of the case, keep it simple and use common sense.
What do you think? I put these charts together for comparison.
http://i8.tinypic.com/25g598x.jpg
http://i8.tinypic.com/25g56ac.jpg