Let's begin again, shall we?
Because you missed the other thread, I can understand why you misunderstood both the tone and reason for my post. I was frustrated and in a hurry when I posted to you, and I didn't make myself clear. As Open Mind has stated, I went into detail about the reason for the "squiggles" on the other thread that has now been deleted. If I'd KNOWN it was going to be taken out, I would have saved my post, but I'll try to re-post the main points. I have been told DocG is insinuating on his blog that I had the thread pulled. Once again, he's wrong.
The reason I posted on that thread, and on this one, was that a poster here at WS alerted me to them and wanted me to comment. I did not come over here looking for a fight, or to upset anyone. After ten years of being on the Ramsey forums (and lurking for years before that), I get VERY frustrated when I hear the same misinformation from people like DocG being repeated ad nauseam. I felt he might have misled you about there being experts who have said John Ramsey wrote the ransom note in order to back up his claims. I understand you don't know all the back story, so I do apologize if my post seemed to be in anger, as that was not my intention. Of course, you are perfectly welcome to your opinion that John wrote the ransom note.
Now, for a reply to you concerning my request for a handwriting expert who said John's handwriting matches the ransom note.
As I said on the other deleted thread, I am well acquainted with Dr. Fausto Brugnatelli. I had NO IDEA that he was the expert DocG was referring to when he said there was an expert who agreed John wrote the ransom note. The reason? Brugnatelli NEVER says John wrote the note, only that he found some similarities. Brugnatelli is smart to do this because he knows what every handwriting expert knows - that everyone has similarities in their handwriting, and that is NOT enough to make a claim regarding authorship. I'm sure there are similar traits in your handwriting and mine. Patsy and I share common letters. It is EASY to find examples of letters that are made the same, but REAL analysis takes into account the writing
as a whole.
A good document examiner/handwriting analysis takes many factors into consideration - not just letter formation. There is speed, rhythm, style (angular or rounded), pressure, patiosity, spacing, and many other factors. I have been involved with handwriting analysis for over 35 years, and have done it as a paid professional for the past 10.
If I had known you and DocG were referring to Brugnatelli, my post to you would have been worded much differently. It's not enough to keep saying an expert, or experts, believe John wrote the ransom note. It has to be backed up with names. The problem is: Brugnatelli said no such thing. To bring up the similarities also exposes the differences - such as how John uses upper case letters indescriminately in this words, mixed in with lower case words. Patsy doesn't do that, and neither does the ransom note writer. Furthermore, John's handwriting has a more consistent backward slant than that of the ransom note writer. His spacing between words is much tighter. These are just three of the major differences a true handwriting analyst would include in any analysis, and it underscores the danger in placing too much emphasis on a few alleged letter similarities. In addition, Brugnatelli has NEVER seen any originals of Patsy's exemplars! He has only worked with copies of copies. Cina Wong, the experts at the CBI, and others HAVE seen the originals. It makes a difference.
Next, we have the
poor excuse for a handwriting expert, Bart "I'll do anything to make money" Baggett. I'm sorry, but he is not a certified handwriting expert, AND he also does not claim John wrote the ransom note ... which is good for him because he's already ERRONEOUSLY claimed on national TV that John Mark Karr wrote the ransom note!
Baggett and his "Handwriting University" are absolute JOKES among real document examiners and handwriting analysts. It would be like someone claiming they're an astronaut just because they toured NASA and started an online NASA club, complete with a gold star when you finished their NASA study course!
Let me tell you how Baggett got the TV gig where he said he would STAKE HIS REPUTATION on the fact that he believed "100%" John Mark Karr wrote the ransom note - obviously, THAT should keep anyone from believing anything he says because he wagered his own reputation and lost - but here's the story:
When the John Mark Karr circus hit, the TV media heads scrambled to find someone who could look at something JMK wrote in an old yearbook. Do you know what they did? They Googled "handwriting," and of course, found Baggett and his Handwriting University. At the same time, they were also calling other handwriting experts, and here's what the TV programmers said, "if you'll come on and say John Mark Karr wrote the ransom note, we have a spot for you on our show. If not, don't bother to call back." Reputable document examiners and handwriting analysts would not sell their souls like that, but guess what? Bart Baggett couldn't RESIST getting on national TV and promoting himself and his Handwriting University. I suspect if they'd wanted him to say his own mother wrote the ransom note, Bart would have done it! You can't BUY that kind of advertising!
Bart took a chance with his staking his reputation on JMK being the ransom note writer because he couldn't pass up a chance at self promotion. Unfortunately for him, he lost. Unfortunately, for us, no one at the networks called him on it later, and he is STILL in business, but he is no handwriting expert, as his own words attest.
So ... we're back to the reality that there are NO real, certified document examiners or handwriting experts who have seen original copies of the Ramsey exemplars who say that John wrote the ransom note. That's why I said in ten years of research, I'd never seen one expert who had said as much, and it's still true. Brugnatelli does not make the claim, and neither does Baggett. Ubekowski at the CBI said Patsy was the closest match of the three Ramseys, and the other experts there agreed. They had multiple examples of John Ramsey's handwriting with which to compare, not just one. Miller, Epstein, Wong, Leibman, and others have all singled out Patsy's handwriting as matching that of the ransom note. These are real experts with real credentials. They have specialized microscopes and equipment, not just computer magnification of copies of copies, and they have years of training and expertise. Most of them are court certified experts.
Now, about the "squiggles." I believe Patsy wrote the ransom note with her left hand, using gloves. The gloves were primarily used to keep Patsy's fingerprints from touching the paper, but they also helped disguise her handwriting, as did writing with her left hand, even though she was semi-ambidextrous. Add to that the fact that Patsy was shaky with shock and nerves, but she knew her grief would have to wait until she finished her part of the cover-up because she had a mission. She'd already lost JonBenet, and she was determined not lose the only child she had left.
The main reason for the "squiggles" is that Patsy used a Sharpie felt-tip pen on a cheaper type of paper, such as the kind found on a legal pad. It is more porous than stationary or even typing/computer paper. All handwriting analysts/document examiners know that the pen and paper used have an effect on handwriting. If Patsy had used a ball-point pen, there would not have been as much bleed-through at the beginning and ends of words, or as many "squiggles." The reason for this is that the ball-point "rolls," but a felt-tip does not. It tends to stop at the edge of a stroke, and if the writer is shaking and writing fast, this effect is accentuated. I've seen this many times with elderly writers who have a bit of palsy.
A person writing left-handed is going
against the point of the felt-tip pen when writing instead of
with the point, as a right-hander does. Said another way, a right-handed person
drags the point across the page towards themselves, but a left-handed person has to
push the felt-tip across the paper. This makes for more interruption in the flow of the letters and the felt-tip will stop more abruptly when getting caught against the friction of the paper. This causes "squiggles" where the pen pressure was stopped. This effect would be increased if the writer were using gloves because they would have less control over the handling of the pen. Not having good control of a felt-tip pen will cause the "squiggles" that you see. In addition, it is more difficult to make rounded parts of letters like the tops of lower-case 'f's and the loops of lower case 'y's with a felt-tip pen, going against the paper. It makes the writing appear more angular, straight-edged and squared off.
I do believe Patsy touched up some of the letters in order to make them more legible, and to help make them look different to her own handwriting. Patsy also marked out words, edited like the journalism major that she was, including using a caret to insert a word, and generally churned out the best ransom note she could muster on short notice.
Patsy was the wordsmith of the family, and she prided herself on that. She loved using exclamation marks and being dramatic. Unfortunately, for her, it gives us another another clue as to the authorship of the ransom note. Linguistic analysis is just as important as handwriting analysis when trying to determine the ransom note's author, and linguistic analysis says a well-educated, middle-aged woman (most likely a mother), who had journalim training and was raised somewhere along the Mason-Dixon line (or south of it), wrote the ransom note.
When the ransom note wording was first released to the public, I read it in disbelief as I realized who must have written it. For someone of my training, it was obvious that all of the linguistic traits pointed to the person I described above. I was floored. I'd heard the Ramsey weren't cooperating with the police, but I also knew that didn't make them guilty. I didn't WANT to believe they were guilty, so I gave them the benefit of the doubt, but after I read the ransom note, all doubt was gone. I KNEW from the words written, Patsy wrote that ransom note even before I ever saw any of her handwriting. Linguistically, she might as well have signed her name to it.
It was hard for me to believe a mother could be involved in the cover-up of the murder of her child, and that's what drew me to the case and finally, to the forums. I've always said through the years that I didn't know whether Patsy wrote the note for herself or for Burke. I now believe, because of what we've learned from Jim Kolar's book, that it was done to cover up for Burke, who caused the initial, and fatal, head wound to JonBenet. I don't know that he meant to kill her, but I think he struck out in a blind rage. I've always thought JonBenet's death was "accidental," not premeditated, even if Patsy were responsible, but John and Patsy coordinating a cover-up to protect Burke makes sense of the case.
I suspect John may have had some input into the beginning of the ransom note, and that's why it sounds more focused and direct, but I believe he left the writing of the note to Patsy, and then busied himself with other aspects of the cover-up. We know there was a practice note done on the legal pad, and I think Patsy may have copied the first part, along with the intentionally mis-spelled words. Then Patsy, shaken and shaking, did what Patsy does best - she talked and talked and talked some more. She rambled, and she got angry, and she changed from singular to plural to having church with "Victory!" at the end.
I can't imagine the whirl Patsy's mind must have been in with her JonBenet dead in the basement, and Burke on his bed upstairs, and Patsy in the kitchen, trying to write something that would buy them time and freedom. And it worked.
