Good Southern Common Sense

Discussion in 'JonBenet Ramsey' started by GuruJosh, Jun 10, 2005.

  1. GuruJosh

    GuruJosh Inactive

    Messages:
    156
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The ransom note implies that the author thought John was from the South.

    There are at least 3 possibilities that i can think of:

    1. The author deliberately tried to confuse investigators, by writing something that would imply that the murderer was unfamiliar with the Rams

    2. The author was being sarcastic; it is said that more than once, relatives teased John about "southern common sense", knowing that he WASN'T Southern and therefore, jokingly, had no common sense (i.e. a light-hearted bit of fun)

    3. The author actually THOUGHT that John must be from the South.

    I'm interested in possibility number 3. Why would the author think John was from the South? One strong possibility, is that the author KNEW that Patsy was Southern (i.e. had heard her speak, obviously with a bit of an accent) and then ASSUMED that John must be form the South too.

    This possibility, though i think it's unlikely, actually narrows the suspect lists dramatically. If true, it means that we are looking for someone who was familiar enough with Patsy to know her name and origin; but not familiar enough to know that her hubby was not from Georgia.

    Anyway, just a thought :)
     
  2. Loading...


  3. K777angel

    K777angel New Member

    Messages:
    515
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The note writer was being sarcastic to John with the southern common sense crack. It has been reported that this was a familiar phrase in the Ramsey/Paugh clan. As well as the phrase 'fat cat' which Patsy's father was known to use around the office.
    The reason these phrases as well as other familiar ones to the Ramseys find themselves in the note is because one of them WROTE it.
    My bet is on Patsy. That has never wavered.
     
  4. sissi

    sissi Former Member

    Messages:
    1,832
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    John Ramsey said he had something to "attend to".
    JR has stated "somewhere" that his affair with the Williams woman was that of a fatal attraction. I do forget how long JR and Patsy were married, maybe 16-17 years at the time of Jonbenet's death? Do we know how many years he had the "other woman"? Could the other woman have a child of his? Would this child in Georgia expect John would be southern? Is this over the top? :)
     
  5. Lacy Wood

    Lacy Wood Former Member

    Messages:
    3,486
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    GuruJosh's most salient point is that inside knowledge of the family is shown by the note content, which dramatically reduces the field of possible note writers.
     
  6. BlueCrab

    BlueCrab New Member

    Messages:
    3,053
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    0

    Lacy,

    That's correct. An intruder would not easily know some of the things that were written in the fake ransom note. For instance, the term "southern common sense" was reportedly a TIC saying among Ramsey adults, but would likely be interpreted as a fact by a nine-year-old who constantly heard it used on John Ramsey. Therefore, the term ended up in the naive note along with movie adages and other things that were a part of a nine-year-old's world.

    BR could not be eliminated by the CBI as the writer of the note, and IMO he wrote it with the help of an older accomplice. That accomplice, if identified, would probably be the killer of JonBenet. I think the authorities know who he is and are illegally covering it up under the pretension that it all falls under the jurisdiction of the Colorado Children's Code and therefore none of the names can be disclosed.

    But IMO a person of criminally culpable age is likely getting away with murder with the help of an illegal coverup spawned by politically powerful authorities in Boulder.

    BlueCrab
     
  7. Lacy Wood

    Lacy Wood Former Member

    Messages:
    3,486
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    In the realm of comparing likelihood of theories, the standard is that the simplest explanation (i.e., the one with the fewest assumptions), that adequately accounts for the event, is preferred. Not necessarily "right", but more "likely" to be right than an alternative. That is one reason why K777angel is more likely to be correct about who wrote the note than someone who makes additional assumptions.
     
  8. capps

    capps New Member

    Messages:
    2,970
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    That's one theory ...

    Here's another:

    There was a reason for the ranson note.
    The perp did not want to leave,letting JR to think this could have been done by just anyone (crazy person in the area,pedophile stalking JonBenet, etc.) The ransom note was covert enough to let JR know,maybe not exactly who did it,but narrowed it down.

    The "inner" information: $118,000(JR's bonus),southern common sense(used jokingly by JR's inner circles),fat cat(his wealth,business),SBTC(JR's military service),Victory(possibly a word that was used often during JR's annual Regatta races in Chicago). These were all covert messages,that led JR to believe this was an "inside job". I believe the rest was "filler" to sound like a "standard" ransom note.

    IMO ... I think the person who wanted revenge for JR is a powerful, important person,who would not personally kill JonBenet,but paid off someone,who knows someone,who would.I also believe,JR has a good idea of who this person is ...and for reasons we don't know ... he's not talking.
     
  9. BlueCrab

    BlueCrab New Member

    Messages:
    3,053
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    0


    capps,

    But the theory you just spelled out does not explain why the Ramseys are lying their heads off, obfuscating their responses to questions, refusing to cooperate with the investigation, and carrying out a coverup that began on day one and is continuing to this day. Wouldn't they coverup only for a family member? Why would they coverup for an intruder, no matter who he was?

    The coverup strongly points to a family member as the perp.
     
  10. Lacy Wood

    Lacy Wood Former Member

    Messages:
    3,486
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I agree with your line of thought because the issue of the specific circumtances within the family that would lead them to write the note is secondary. The writing of the note (by whomever) suggests an underlying reason or motive and we look for one. Stating the family would not write a note is actually saying "I don't know why they would write a note"...a statement giving substance to things you do not know. Absence of evidence is not... (Don Rumsfeldian?) The note exists. It is a fait accompli and is not subject to math or speculations that include subtle factors diminishing its likelihood to exist. That applies here just as it would to a lottery result of numbers 1 2 3 4 5 6 drawn. Our observational biases make that result seem unlikely when it is just as likely as any other established result. This fact conflicts with (and explains) the common observations such as saying someone "couldn't have done such a thing" or "things like that just don't happen here." The concept is addressed in some writings by stating the laws of probability apply only to variables, not results.

    Since you mention your main theory, I will mention that the reasons a family member might write a note include doing so in advance for a plan or scheme related to earlier abuse that went awry, or was preempted by escalated abuse. A remote possibiity is a note, a plan, and an unexpected intruder. Don't laugh at the last sentence because it is a possible defense IF famiy wrote the note.
     
  11. capps

    capps New Member

    Messages:
    2,970
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    BlueCrab:

    Although I am theorizing ... there could be many reasons.These are powerful people,maybe the Ramsey's are afraid of further revenge,or maybe by revealing the perps,it might open up "a can of worms";to unethical business dealings that could put JR himself in jail,something in that vein. But obviously strong enough,to make the Ramsey's not reveal the whole truth of what they know.

    The problem I have with your theory is this:

    If BR was involved with another person old enough to convict ... I can't imagine the legal system,even in Colorado,not having a way to keep BR clear,while being able to press charges against the older person. I just don't think they would let the person walk,because of BR.There would be ways around that.
     
  12. BlueCrab

    BlueCrab New Member

    Messages:
    3,053
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    0


    capps,

    The town of Boulder and the state of Colorado was under the control of the Democratic party at that time, from the governor down to the D.A. As everyone knows, one-party control leads to excesses and brazen behaviors.

    If my theory is correct, the coverup of the crime by the authorities would have been routine in 1996 -- with them expecting the murder to become nothing but a temporary local news story and a pussycat to cover up. But the sexy videos of JonBenet competing in the pageants changed all of that, and the authorities suddenly had a man-eating tiger by the tail and they couldn't let it go.

    IMO a culpable perp was involved in the killing of JonBenet and his name is being hidden by Boulder authorities and other powerful figures who got sucked up in the coverup and are now themselves culpable of a crime for participating in an illegal coverup. For them to tell the truth now would probably bring scorn and criminal charges against each and everyone involved.

    What I am not sure of in this theory is WHY the rich and powerful of Colorado got themselves illegally involved in a coverup that has lately scooped up even the judicial system and the liberal media in attempts to pin the crime on a non-existent intruder.

    BlueCrab
     
  13. capps

    capps New Member

    Messages:
    2,970
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    BlueCrab,

    I understand what your saying.

    But if you look again at your third paragraph ...


    "What I am not sure of in this theory is WHY the rich and powerful of Colorado got themselves illegally involved in a coverup that has lately scooped up even the judicial system and the liberal media in attempts to pin the crime on a non-existent intruder."

    Why the rich and powerful of Colorado got themselves illiegally involved in a coverup ... fits perfectly with my theory.

    They're part of the crime.
     
  14. K777angel

    K777angel New Member

    Messages:
    515
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Bluecrab - I think this is where your BDI theory falls apart. The notion that HE was involved in the note writing. That is ludicrous. The note has Patsy's linguistics, style and point of view (directed mostly to "John") all over it.
    There is nothing in that note other than movie phrases (which an adult would just as much use) that would be of a mindset of a kid. Or kids.
    Not only that - the note was OVER done. OVER the top. So very Patsy.
    It does not mean that she harmed JonBenet or caused her death - I am of the opinion that it was most likely Burke who did that - but it DOES mean that she was deeply involved in the cover-up. And the note is not the only piece of physical evidence that points that way.
     
  15. TLynn

    TLynn New Member

    Messages:
    350
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    John's ex-wife and children lived in Georgia. John felt Atlanta was home.

    Where did John live when he was married to Lucinda and raising their family?
     
  16. Toltec

    Toltec New Member

    Messages:
    1,644
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I believe it was Marietta...

    Anyhoo, Patsy wrote the note...no doubt in my mind. She and she alone wrote it and I don't buy that she found it on the spiral stairs...she had it put away until morning...and when John jumped in the shower, she got her plan going.
     
  17. K777angel

    K777angel New Member

    Messages:
    515
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Right Toltec. The note was never on the spiral stairstep. Her story fell apart when detectives attempted to re-enact Patsy's story of coming down the steps, seeing the 3 pages "laid out" (yeah right) stepping OVER the spiral step (impossible it was discovered in tests) turning around and picking up the pages.
    The note was written IN the house.
    Patsy's pen and paper tablet were used to construct the note.
    The pen was PUT BACK in the pen cup holder.
    Patsy's routine was to come down those steps each morning.
    Patsy's habit was to put things on the steps to be noticed and taken upstairs.
    It is natural then that in Patsy dreaming up her story of how she "found" this kidnap note that morning - that her routine would be woven into it.
    Her subconscious mind was very much at work. And can be seen throughout the fake ransom/kidnap note she wrote as well.
    How in the world would some random intruder/pedophile KNOW all these things??
    He wouldn't because he does NOT exist.
     
  18. BlueCrab

    BlueCrab New Member

    Messages:
    3,053
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    0

    angel,

    But BR exists, and he knows all these things.
     
  19. Toltec

    Toltec New Member

    Messages:
    1,644
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Excellent post Angel...thank you for coming to my defense.

    John didn't have a clue until he read the ransom letter...my belief is that he grilled Patsy until she admitted that she wrote it. Then they both had to put a plan in place.

    Burke heard "SHOUTING" and my belief is that John was shouting at Patsy.
     
  20. K777angel

    K777angel New Member

    Messages:
    515
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Bluecrab - Burke did not write that 3 page note! He would NOT use words like "attache" nor phrases like "and hence" or words like "gentlemen." and he would not put the pen back in the cup nor have NO fingerprint marks or smudges or wrinkles in the paper! He was a TEN year old boy! I have boys.
    Believe me - they are MESSY and unorganized.

    He would not refer to his father in the note as "John" - but a wife would.

    Like the FBI experts said - this note was written by a WOMAN or a "genteel" man. And they were educated.
    Both are plainly obvious.
     
  21. BlueCrab

    BlueCrab New Member

    Messages:
    3,053
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    0

    angel,

    Well, none of us know for sure, do we?

    BR could not be eliminated by the CBI as the WRITER of the ransom note. The CBI used six nationally accomplished handwriting experts who had the original note to examine and I give a lot of weight to their opinions.

    If BR wrote it I think he likely had help with the wording from an older accomplice and the dictionary that was found open. IMO the naive note, with its exaggerated threats and terrorist-type scenarios, had juvenile male written all over it.

    There was no intruder because the Ramseys wouldn't be lying their asses off, refusing to cooperate, and covering up to protect the identity of an intruder. Yet, there were a lot of crime scene items of evidence missing, and a fifth person in the house that night is the only way these items could have gotten out of the house before the cops got there. That person also helped with the ransom note -- and he may be the killer.

    That fifth person, known to both BR and JBR, could have been an adult or it could have been another kid, but there was another person in the house. It's the only scenario that works.

    BlueCrab
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice