Question re Ransom Note

Discussion in 'JonBenet Ramsey' started by poco, Feb 2, 2004.

  1. poco

    poco A cat will blink when struck with a hammer.

    Messages:
    38,905
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I have followed this case, but not as closely as some of you sleuthers. What I am wondering is has it ever been discussed as to why the kidnappers would leave a ransom note and then kill JB and leave her in the basement???

    I thought I had read that the ransom note was written on stationary from the Ramsey home. If this is correct. did the kidnappers write the note before they killed JB, planning on only kidnapping her and then something went wrong and they had to kill her (doesn't make too much sense) and then just left the note with the wrong information on it anyway???

    of, did they write the note after they killed her which would make absolutely no sense at all - (like, maybe noone will look in the basement and we can get the ransom money before they find her)???!!!

    The whole thing seems staged to me - why would kidnappers write that type of note only to leave the body dead in the house???

    Fill me in here, guys. Thanks!
     
  2. Casshew

    Casshew Former Member

    Messages:
    27,884
    Likes Received:
    9
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Poco.. that note always bothered me too... for one thing it states that they (the ramsey's) will be contacted tomorrow...

    Assuming the intruders were in the house after midnight.. then 'tomorrow' would have been the next day... not the day JonBenet was found but the day after. :confused:

    I wish someone, somewhere would solve this case.... I guess as long as peolle do not forget and keep asking questions there will be interest.
     
  3. Toth

    Toth Inactive

    Messages:
    968
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The note was certainly written before the murder. I don't think any kidnapping was ever contemplated. The note seems to have been mere entertainment for the intruder. Entertaining to write, entertaining for him to imagine its consequences as the parents sat by the phone.
     
  4. LovelyPigeon

    LovelyPigeon Former Member

    Messages:
    13,806
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    No, not on stationary but from a pad of paper in the Ramsey's house. John Ramsey gave the pad to BPD early in the morning of Dec 26 when handwriting samples of both John and Patsy were requested.

    The pad had been on a small table in the hallway beside the kitchen telephone. There were other pads in the house, also, but this pad had matching tears to the 3 sheets of paper the ransom note was written on.

    There were no fingerprints on the 3 pages from anyone in the house (paper doesn't *take* fingerprints very well). A single fingerprint from the lab technician who examined the note was found.

    Steve Thomas' book and PMPT both cover the ransom note extensively. If you haven't read them, you really should.
     
  5. TLynn

    TLynn New Member

    Messages:
    350
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Then the intruder should've removed the body from the house - now that's entertainment.

    Leaving the body there so it could be found - no fun, game over.

    Dump the body - torment the Ramseys until the body is found.

    Doesn't make sense, Toth.
     
  6. Ivy

    Ivy Inactive

    Messages:
    2,199
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The note was penned by Patsy, with input by John, to provide some kind of "proof" to present to police that an intruder had broken into the house and murdered JonBenet. The Ramseys knew very well that a note would be the only physical evidence they could come up with that would point to an intruder. At the crime scene there were no foreign hairs, fibers, footprints, fingerprints, or anything else, to indicate anyone had entered the house that night...and no DNA. The so-called "foreign" DNA that's been entered into the FBI database is more than likely nothing but a Ram scam. It probably belongs to Sum Yung Gai, or it's the result of lab contamination, or the extra markers in the sample are a false positive resulting from the DNA amplification process. The Rs like to spin the facts and claim that the DNA is from a non-Ramsey male, but the truth is that if the extraneous, non-JonBenet DNA extracted from the sample is from more than one person, no Ramsey can be excluded.
     
  7. poco

    poco A cat will blink when struck with a hammer.

    Messages:
    38,905
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    So, if they wrote the note from paper that was in the house --- you're telling me the intruder took time out to sit down and pen the note (maybe while feeding JB some pineapples), before he killed her. I would think, in that case, the note would have read more like:

    "Mr. Ramsey.
    Listen carefully! We are a group of individuals that represent
    a small foreign faction. We xx respect your bussiness
    but not the country that it serves. At this time we have
    killed your daughter. She is in the basement."

    ? ? ? ? ? ? ?
     
  8. K777angel

    K777angel New Member

    Messages:
    515
    Likes Received:
    7
    Trophy Points:
    0
    The note was written AFTER the killing as a means to divert attention away from what really occured and who did it.

    It's hogwash to suggest that this person who chose to break in to a large expensive home - on Christmas day no less - which had an alarm system as most if not all large expensive homes do - wrote 3 PAGES of a letter ahead of time just to "entertain" himself while assuming the parents wouldn't FIND her right away.
    SO many things this dude would have to know AHEAD of time.
    1. That the Ramseys would be leaving that evening.
    2. That the Ramseys would be returning that evening.
    3. That the alarm system was not turned on.
    4. That the yippy little dog would not be in the home that night.
    5. That JonBenet would be in HER bed that night.
    6. That the family members would be asleep all night.
    It makes no sense to even think for a minute that this was what someone planned out.

    You cannot have it all ways. It is either a: *Kidnapper wanting money;
    *A pedophile wanting sex; or *Someone who wanted revenge on the family.
    NONE of these scenarios fit the facts of the crime.
    ALL of these scenarios were lamely suggested by the stager because the depth of the fear was so great at the truth being found out - the stager overdid the staging to the point that it was OBVIOUS it was staging.
    Long and rambling note ("thou doth protest too much...")
    Implying the motivation was money -thus the kidnapping angle claimed
    Implying they didn't like the USA or John Ramsey - thus the revenge angle
    Implying perhaps a sexual motivation by the abuse done to her although it
    was attempted to be wiped away and hidden - so this may have been more
    the trigger ending in a rage than staging - but it could have been staging.

    Had the stager stuck to ONE angle/motivation and followed through with it - it just might have worked.
    But jumping from one to another when the facts do not associate with either - big mistake.

    If you're a kidnapper - THEN KIDNAP!
    If you want money - CALL FOR IT!
    If you are a pervert - DON'T HANG AROUND WITH THE KID

    Just as the stager was not satisfied that one page was enough to convince the authorities that a kidnapping had taken place - nor was 2 pages enough - but finally 3.... So too was the stager not satisfied in pointing to just ONE motivation in the crime. Desperation in the crime and staging is patently obvious. NO "entertainment" was going on that night. Just sheer panic and fear.
     
  9. Shylock

    Shylock Former Member

    Messages:
    1,058
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Actually, there were more than just 3 pages missing from the note pad, and there is evidence that a practice note was written first. Maybe this mystery intruder needed to practice his penmanship...or maybe after finding only pineapple to feed her, he was planning on leaving Patsy a quick grocery list.
     
  10. Toltec

    Toltec New Member

    Messages:
    1,644
    Likes Received:
    11
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I watched a forensics show last night and there was something said that I found interesting:

    "Intruders do not stay and clean up the crime scene."

    JonBenet was wiped down and re-dressed.
    JonBenet was wrapped "like a cocoon" in her blanket.

    No doubt about it folks....crime scene was cleaned up.
     
  11. Britt

    Britt New Member

    Messages:
    1,911
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    lol, Shylock.

    But, y'know, maybe Toth is right. During the two hours or so between the time JB ate the pineapple and was killed, she and the intruder sat in the kitchen visiting while the intruder practiced and perfected the note. Uh huh. :rolleyes:

    K777angel - great post, as usual. :)
     
  12. LovelyPigeon

    LovelyPigeon Former Member

    Messages:
    13,806
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    poco, it is Smit's theory that the killer entered the house while the Ramseys were at the Whites' house on Christmas night, and awaited their return.

    Finding pen and paper handy while waiting, the killer wrote a "ransom" note naming a ransom he probably never planned to attempt recovering. Smit thinks it may have been a kidnapping "gone wrong" but I don't think there was ever an actual plan to collect money.

    Comparisons of John and Patsy's handwriting to the ransom note have ruled John out as writer and concluded that Patsy probably did not write it. I think samples of the killer's handwriting, when he's caught by DNA will be a good "match" to the handwriting on the note.

    Actually getting JonBenét out of the house wasn't as easy as molesting and killing her inside the house, so that's what happened IMO.
     
  13. poco

    poco A cat will blink when struck with a hammer.

    Messages:
    38,905
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    \

    SOOOOO, who killed JBR?????????? (I know, that's the $1,000,000,000 question).
     
  14. LovelyPigeon

    LovelyPigeon Former Member

    Messages:
    13,806
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I think the owner of that male DNA in her panties is the killer.

    Who is that? We don't yet know but I have hope that a "match" will eventually be made. It's happening almost everyday now on other cases, old and new, with DNA comparisons.
     
  15. Shylock

    Shylock Former Member

    Messages:
    1,058
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I still think you should get over to ACR's web site and take a look at the actual side-by-side comparisons of Patsy's known writings and the Ransom note. If after that, you still think Patsy didn't write the note, you still have accomplished something: You can honestly tell the world that you have a habit of playing games with yourself.

    IMO
     
  16. Ivy

    Ivy Inactive

    Messages:
    2,199
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Not true, LP, especially regarding Patsy. David Liebman, former president of the National Association of Document Examiners, and Gideon Epstein, director of the forensics unit of the documents lab at the Immigration and Naturalization Service until he retired in 2000, are both convinced Patsy wrote the note.

    Lin Wood asked Epstein in his Wolf v Ramsey deposition last year, "What is your degree of certainty as you sit here today, that Patsy Ramsey wrote the note?"

    "I am absolutely certain she wrote the note," Epstein replied.

    "Is that 60 percent certainty?" Wood asked.

    "No, that's 100 percent certainty."
     
  17. LovelyPigeon

    LovelyPigeon Former Member

    Messages:
    13,806
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Neither were consulted by the BPD or the Boulder DA office, and both were rejected by the federal court as unbelievable.

    You should read, if you haven't already, Gideon's deposition for further enlightment of why their analysis was useless in court.
     
  18. LovelyPigeon

    LovelyPigeon Former Member

    Messages:
    13,806
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Shylock, I am no expert at document examination, but I've looked at all available "professional" comparisons, including those of Cynthia Wong.

    I see more dissimilarities than similarities in any and all comparisons.

    The professionals consulted by the BPD, the DA, and the Ramseys' attorneys all concluded the same, and they had the original documents for comparison.
     
  19. Shylock

    Shylock Former Member

    Messages:
    1,058
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Well that's pretty interesting since the examplars on the Hoffman PDF file are all "similarities" and don't include any "dissimilarities". One has to wonder exactly what it is you're looking at. (or what drugs you're on...LOL)

    The Hoffman file points out dozens of matches between Patsy's writing and the ransom note. Sure, there are probably dozens of examples which don't match, but that's not the point. There is NO WAY that ANY stranger is going to break into ANYONE'S house and write several paragraphs that contain dozens of matching examplars with the homeowner. And we don't even have to be talking Ramsey here--it's an impossibliity--no chance--no way--zippo!
    That's why Patsy, or someone who knew her well enough to immitate her writing, could only have written the ransom note.

    And as far as Gideon's testimony goes, the judge found fault in it because Hoffman failed to ask Gideon how he arrived at his conclusions. It was another failure on the part of the world's worst attorney, Darnay Hoffman. Gideon's analysis is right on the money.

    imo
     
  20. Ivy

    Ivy Inactive

    Messages:
    2,199
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    0
    By "federal court" you mean Judge Carnes--who knew nothing about the JonBenet case except what was hand fed to her by the Ramsey team.

    Crime Magazine article excerpt:
    http://crimemagazine.com/solvingjbr-carnes.htm

    Finally, Judge Carnes does a tap dance on the question of the credibility of Gideon Epstein, the handwriting expert Wolf was relying on for his assertion that Patsy wrote the ransom note. Judge Carnes acknowledged that in reaching her decision on whether to dismiss Wolf's suit before it goes to a jury that she is not supposed to assess the credibility of any of his witnesses, because that is something only a jury is permitted to do. Judge Carnes also acknowledges that Epstein is qualified to render such an opinion.

    But she complained that in his deposition in the case Epstein hadn't explained the methodology he had used to conclude with "absolute certainty" that Patsy had written the note. Yes, he had said there were similarities between the note and Mrs. Ramsey's handwriting. But he hadn't specified how many similarities or what kind. His failure to do so, Judge Carnes concluded, meant that "the weight and impact" of his testimony would "necessarily" have been less than the weight of the handwriting experts relied on by Boulder police.

    Epstein could, of course, have explained his methodology in more detail in his deposition, had Wolf's attorney asked him to, and to a jury, had Carnes permitted the case to go forward. But barring a successful appeal, the judge has made sure he won't get the opportunity.

    Now, how is it that Judge Carnes knows about the handwriting experts Boulder police relied on? The Ramseys told her about them and their findings. And how did they know? Because Boulder prosecutors, bending over backwards to accommodate the Ramseys, had told them.
     

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