What we know about Ransom Note

It is too bad that this book is so expensive that it is not really accessible to everyone (it is $90!), but Forensic Linguistics by Gerald McMenamin has an excellent Ramsey section, even though I ultimately disagree with him because he says Patsy Ramsey is excluded as the writer. However, in his limitations of findings, he writes:

"There are two known limitations of the data, the request writings produced just after the first one are not from dictation, making conscious manipulation of the reference sample possible, and not all of the variables occur in Mrs. Ramsey's nonrequest writings. Two additional limitations relate to the frequency estimate of the patterned stylistic profile of the questioned letter: one is that qualitative analysis does not take into account the possibility of attempted disguise; another is that the corpus of baseline writing used is from Colorado writers, and the questioned writer may not be from Colorado (e.g. the Ramseys)." (p. 205)

If it is possible to upload a small exerpted scan of his chart from page 185, I'll do that.

poco said:

I am sure this has probably been done 9,000 times, but would someone please post a copy of the original Ransom note compared to Patsy Ramsey's RIGHT AND LEFT handed comparisons.

I know it is somewhere to be found, but I can't find it......... or email it to me and we can delete the thread, unless you guys want to discuss it.....

Click to expand...

absolut_alexis said:

It is too bad that this book is so expensive that it is not really accessible to everyone (it is $90!), but Forensic Linguistics by Gerald McMenamin has an excellent Ramsey section, even though I ultimately disagree with him because he says Patsy Ramsey is excluded as the writer. However, in his limitations of findings, he writes:

"There are two known limitations of the data, the request writings produced just after the first one are not from dictation, making conscious manipulation of the reference sample possible, and not all of the variables occur in Mrs. Ramsey's nonrequest writings. Two additional limitations relate to the frequency estimate of the patterned stylistic profile of the questioned letter: one is that qualitative analysis does not take into account the possibility of attempted disguise; another is that the corpus of baseline writing used is from Colorado writers, and the questioned writer may not be from Colorado (e.g. the Ramseys)." (p. 205)

If it is possible to upload a small exerpted scan of his chart from page 185, I'll do that.

Click to expand...

I believe Gerald Mcmenamin is correct.

LOl, don't you think if Patsy wrote the note, she would have at least destroyed the pen and notepad. She wouldn't leave the notepad out in plain sight, would she? On a scale of 1-5 experts rated Patsy's handwriting analysis at 4.5. Patsy did not write the ransom note.

magnolia said:

I believe Gerald Mcmenamin is correct.

LOl, don't you think if Patsy wrote the note, she would have at least destroyed the pen and notepad. She wouldn't leave the notepad out in plain sight, would she? On a scale of 1-5 experts rated Patsy's handwriting analysis at 4.5. Patsy did not write the ransom note.

Click to expand...

~~~~~~~~~
Personally, I don't think it matters at all what we 'think' Patsy 'would have done'. Her actions from Dec. 1996 until June 2006 proved time and time again that she did not respond as many would assume she would have.

magnolia said:

I believe Gerald Mcmenamin is correct.

LOl, don't you think if Patsy wrote the note, she would have at least destroyed the pen and notepad. She wouldn't leave the notepad out in plain sight, would she? On a scale of 1-5 experts rated Patsy's handwriting analysis at 4.5. Patsy did not write the ransom note.

Click to expand...

Well, I think he is saying that she is excluded because they are not able to consider that she might be attempting disguise and the database they used is full of Colorado writing samples, and he specifically says the Ramseys are not from Colorado.

So I think he HAD to exclude her, but he stresses in his book that there are serious limitations.

"There are two known limitations of the data, the request writings produced just after the first one are not from dictation, making conscious manipulation of the reference sample possible, and not all of the variables occur in Mrs. Ramsey's nonrequest writings. Two additional limitations relate to the frequency estimate of the patterned stylistic profile of the questioned letter: one is that qualitative analysis does not take into account the possibility of attempted disguise; another is that the corpus of baseline writing used is from Colorado writers, and the questioned writer may not be from Colorado (e.g. the Ramseys)." (p. 205)

Not only that, but I seriously doubt that Mr. McMenamin had as many of her samples as the original analyst, Mr. Foster did. That's basically what he's saying there. If he had access to all of it, I imagine his conclusion would be much different.

"On a scale of 1-5 experts rated Patsy's handwriting analysis at 4.5. Patsy did not write the ransom note."

That's false. The two experts the Ramseys HIRED said that. I've talked to several document examiners, and they've never heard of such a thing. One of them actually said that to use such a scale suggets more of a scientific basis than exists as yet in handwriting analysis.

Even if it WERE true, take in the other factors:

-we know she was there

-we know that all of the profiles of the ransom note writer said that this was most likely a woman, so that narrows it down

-the linguistics of the note itself are chock-full of little sayings she was known to use, which suggests someone very close to the family, so that narrows it down even more

-and she can't be eliminated when everyone else was

Ergo, when you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth.

Except that ten experts indentified her as the writer of the note, including Gideon Epstein, who is generally recognized as THE handwriting expert in the country. Officer Rick French was asked what he thought of Epstein's analysis. His EXACT response:

"Pretty darn accurate."

One thing everyone agrees on: whomever wrote the captions in the Ramsey family photo album wrote the note. And since the captions match other writings of hers, what does that leave?

Plus her left-hand samples were said to be an almost perfect match.

Speaking of which, Cherokee IS working on it!

magnolia said:

I believe Gerald Mcmenamin is correct.

LOl, don't you think if Patsy wrote the note, she would have at least destroyed the pen and notepad. She wouldn't leave the notepad out in plain sight, would she? On a scale of 1-5 experts rated Patsy's handwriting analysis at 4.5. Patsy did not write the ransom note.

Click to expand...

You are correct - Patsy did not write it - John Karr wrote it ---

A well-known national handwriting expert said Monday he is 99.9 percent certain John Mark Karr wrote the ransom note found near the scene of JonBenet Ramsey's murder.

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_4934911,00.html

Were these what you were looking for Poco?


http://www.acandyrose.com/w1.gif

http://www.acandyrose.com/w3.gif

poco said:

You are correct - Patsy did not write it - John Karr wrote it ---

A well-known national handwriting expert said Monday he is 99.9 percent certain John Mark Karr wrote the ransom note found near the scene of JonBenet Ramsey's murder.

http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_4934911,00.html

Click to expand...

I am 100% sure he wrote it and is INVOLVED with the murder. That document posted here shows that Patsy's handwriting samples are nothing like the ransom note. I'm not impressed. By the way she also had no motive. I digress. But I nearly gasped a couple weeks ago when I compared the yearbook writing of Karr with the note. I'm sorry but he wrote it. I don't care if there's no freakin dna on the body or in the house. He wrote it even if someone else took it there and killed JBR, someone who was a friend or partner of his. How quickly we throw out everything else when the dna doesn't match. It doesn't match anyone because it's degraded!!! I have no faith in it, I've read too many experts say it was not good enough quality to ever match anyone. The handwriting, the confession, throw them all out because there is no dna match! it's such a snobbish form of detective work. "In modern science we trust! nothing else matters!" Karr or his accomplice could have a video of the murder that surfaces in the future and people will still say BUT THE DNA DOESN'T MATCH SO THAT MUST BE FAKED.

Anyway however irritating this all is, the good thing is that Karr will serve his six mos. and then his charming gay transvestite self can host a talk show or something. He won't have the desire to molest females anymore once he becomes a real woman and has no testosterone at all.

John Karr if you're reading the forums from your current hideout can you please post and set everyone straight. Thanks.

aspidistra said:

I am 100% sure he wrote it and is INVOLVED with the murder. That document posted here shows that Patsy's handwriting samples are nothing like the ransom note. I'm not impressed. By the way she also had no motive. I digress. But I nearly gasped a couple weeks ago when I compared the yearbook writing of Karr with the note. I'm sorry but he wrote it. I don't care if there's no freakin dna on the body or in the house. He wrote it even if someone else took it there and killed JBR, someone who was a friend or partner of his. How quickly we throw out everything else when the dna doesn't match. It doesn't match anyone because it's degraded!!! I have no faith in it, I've read too many experts say it was not good enough quality to ever match anyone. The handwriting, the confession, throw them all out because there is no dna match! it's such a snobbish form of detective work. "In modern science we trust! nothing else matters!" Karr or his accomplice could have a video of the murder that surfaces in the future and people will still say BUT THE DNA DOESN'T MATCH SO THAT MUST BE FAKED.

Anyway however irritating this all is, the good thing is that Karr will serve his six mos. and then his charming gay transvestite self can host a talk show or something. He won't have the desire to molest females anymore once he becomes a real woman and has no testosterone at all.

John Karr if you're reading the forums from your current hideout can you please post and set everyone straight. Thanks.

Click to expand...

If Karr was in anyway involved, R's team of bloodhounds would have nailed him already. R can still afford the best and he'd love nothing better than to put this whole thing behind him, which will never happen until someone has been proven guilty.

s_finch said:

If Karr was in anyway involved, R's team of bloodhounds would have nailed him already. R can still afford the best and he'd love nothing better than to put this whole thing behind him, which will never happen until someone has been proven guilty.

Click to expand...

What bloodhounds? Are any of them at all interested in the case anymore? Mary Lacy says that Karr's family provided an alibi, and the dna doesn't match. Then a couple days later Karr's ex wife admits they were separated and he might not have been with her at Xmas. What else might she not know about him?
No one in the case looks at the forest for the trees. Are Ramsey's bloodhounds checking up on Karr's claims to be in Boulder? His hints that he knew JBR through school or pageants, possibly through music? May be just the ravings of a deluded madman but maybe he or his PARTNER the unknown suspect, did know JBR. How about the real estate man who was short and peculiar, who owned a black Jaguar, the only one John Ramsey ever saw in Boulder besides his own? (Interview with JR June 25, 1998).
Sorry if these questions are boring, but I find discussion of sheets boring. There's more to the case than bedwetting. There's giving us some proof that the man who gave a full and detailed confession was not in Boulder and never met the Ramseys. Did any of you see any proof? Is it just a mild coincidence that at one time John Karr and the Ramseys both lived on Paces Ferry Road, in the same block? I completely admit Karr's dna is nowhere to be found in the evidence. But he KNOWS the Ramseys, knew JBR, and no one seems to care to find out how and why. Just because John Ramsey "doesn't remember him." Karr most certainly may be involved with the real killer, and Karr or his partner had to somewhere, sometime meet and spend time with JBR. His monomania about her is more than just an internet addict's interest.

LinasK said:

Were these what you were looking for Poco?


http://www.acandyrose.com/w1.gif

http://www.acandyrose.com/w3.gif

Click to expand...

No, not exactly Linask, but thanks to you and everyone else who has attempted to locate this for me - I am looking for the full ransom note (or at least the first page of it), and Patsy's handwriting copy of it, one using her left hand, one her right.

However, what you (and others) did provide links to are, IMO, very revealing!!!!!

I'm gonna keep looking when I find time......

"That document posted here shows that Patsy's handwriting samples are nothing like the ransom note."

What documents are YOU looking at?

"What bloodhounds?"

That would be the PIs working for him.

"Are any of them at all interested in the case anymore?"

Yep!

"No, not exactly Linask, but thanks to you and everyone else who has attempted to locate this for me - I am looking for the full ransom note (or at least the first page of it), and Patsy's handwriting copy of it, one using her left hand, one her right."

I promise you, poco, Cherokee IS working on it!

aspidistra said:

Is it just a mild coincidence that at one time John Karr and the Ramseys both lived on Paces Ferry Road, in the same block?

Click to expand...

The Paces Ferry Road address Karr gave did not exist.


-Tea

icedtea4me said:

The Paces Ferry Road address Karr gave did not exist.


-Tea

Click to expand...

~~~~~~~~~~
Well, in "reality" it did not and does not exist, but in the mind of JMK, delusional thoughts seem to be his reality.

All of "his facts" may indeed be truth in his own mind...

~He was with JBR.
~She loved him.
~He was there in Boulder.
~He lived on Paces Ferry Road.
~etc.etc.etc

Still and yet, we have not been privy to one single fact of the JBR case which JMK revealed to Tracey or to LE or to media, which has not been plastered all over the internet, TV, newspapers, books, magazines, and radio. Most likely JMK found out everything he knows about the case the same way we did.

If he knows someone who was indeed involved or if he, himself was, in reality, involved, don't you think his ego would have caused him to reveal it during his '15 minutes of fame'? If he had revealed some 'secret tidbit', the Boulder DA would still have his warped butt in custody in Colorado and she would not be wiping egg off her face right now?

Unfortunately, I don't think the Boulder LE and DA's office showed enough common sense and ethical judgement to first withold secret information. If by chance they did initially withold it, they most likely failed miserably in keeping it secret.

I don't mean to be argumentative, but Gerald McMenamin is the studied textbook author and stylistic developer of forensic linguistics. I have great respect for the literary detective, Donald Foster, but his fame is due to work he built upon the work of others, specifically Cambridge professors researching publishing linguistics of the 1600s, and Foster's abilities are based on research areas divided and classified by McMenamin.

As for the letters, he says he uses the available samples, and Donald Foster is a reference in his book. He uses five samples for his charts from Patsy, but Mr. Foster is mentioned frequently and respectfully, and clearly these men know each other and work together.

They came to different conclusions because Foster uses more psycholinguistics and McMenamin is a pure stylistics.

SuperDave said:

"There are two known limitations of the data, the request writings produced just after the first one are not from dictation, making conscious manipulation of the reference sample possible, and not all of the variables occur in Mrs. Ramsey's nonrequest writings. Two additional limitations relate to the frequency estimate of the patterned stylistic profile of the questioned letter: one is that qualitative analysis does not take into account the possibility of attempted disguise; another is that the corpus of baseline writing used is from Colorado writers, and the questioned writer may not be from Colorado (e.g. the Ramseys)." (p. 205)

Not only that, but I seriously doubt that Mr. McMenamin had as many of her samples as the original analyst, Mr. Foster did. That's basically what he's saying there. If he had access to all of it, I imagine his conclusion would be much different.

Click to expand...

Well, alexis, all I can say is that, if you read PMPT, you'll see that they had to throw out several pre-crime writings because he analyzed them without being cleared by a search warrant.

But I will say this: McMenamin, that I know of, never worked this case directly. Why not hire him? Or, at least, another linguistic analyst? No need to throw the baby out with the bathwater, right?

For all the new posters and skeptics, please go over to FFJ and read Cherokee's analysis of the ransom note with a totally open mind. It is an excellent, comprehensive analysis.

I'm sure Holdontoyourhat won't dare take a look, it may force him to open his tightly shut mind, but for everyone else, it's a really excellent summation and cannot leave anyone in doubt that Patsy wrote the note.

This is the link...

http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/showthread.php?t=6404

Zotto said:

For all the new posters and skeptics, please go over to FFJ and read Cherokee's analysis of the ransom note with a totally open mind. It is an excellent, comprehensive analysis.

I'm sure Holdontoyourhat won't dare take a look, it may force him to open his tightly shut mind, but for everyone else, it's a really excellent summation and cannot leave anyone in doubt that Patsy wrote the note.

This is the link...

http://www.forumsforjustice.org/forums/showthread.php?t=6404

Click to expand...

Zotto,
Excellent, now you know the ransom note is staging. Can you tell who killed JonBenet or staged the wine-cellar crime-scene ?


.

UKGuy, I apologise if I sounded bombastic. I've been at this a long time and it infuriates me when the identity of the note author is staring us in the face and some people refuse to even take a look to check it out for themselves.

I don't know who staged the scene. My personal theory is that Patsy and John covered up for Burke. Taken in context with John saying they weren't angry at the killer and JAR saying the killer should be given "forgiveness" it makes sense to me.

The one thing I know for sure is that Patsy wrote that note!

Zotto said:

UKGuy, I apologise if I sounded bombastic. I've been at this a long time and it infuriates me when the identity of the note author is staring us in the face and some people refuse to even take a look to check it out for themselves.

I don't know who staged the scene. My personal theory is that Patsy and John covered up for Burke. Taken in context with John saying they weren't angry at the killer and JAR saying the killer should be given "forgiveness" it makes sense to me.

The one thing I know for sure is that Patsy wrote that note!

Click to expand...

And that is also ONE thing that I know for sure!!!