The jonbenet Ramsey letter

when they finished, neatly put the felt-tip pen in its container.
Well naturally, you wouldnt want things to look out of place when the family return.
The police listed twenty-five indications that pointed away from an intruder: Lab tests showed that the fine-line Sharpie pen with which the note was written was one that Patsy had used before.
Yeah, because it was her pen!
 
I was reading about another odd event regarding the Ramsey's and something stuck out immediately, JR said the thief wore socks on his hands.

Where would that come from? Could this explain why there were no fingerprints on the ransom note in the JB case?

Here is page 5 of a police report filed in Atlanta, GA in Feb. 2001, detailing an encounter JR had with an apparent burglar in his home, and the socks are mentioned.


This was at the time the Ramseys were facing a several million dollar lawsuit from Steve Thomas, if I recall, and their main lawyer was making the rounds on TV proclaiming their innocence.
That's an interesting report! I had not seen this before.

While wearing socks on your hands is an innovative way to avoid leaving finger prints behind, I would think it would be restrictive and clumsy to one's hand use. I can imagine opening drawers with socks on the hands, but not writing a lengthy note while trying to disguise your handwriting. It would also be a weird coincidence that two perpetrators in different states involving the same victim(s) would use the same unusual method to avoid leaving hand prints behind. Maybe I'm just not well versed enough in thievery, but I had not heard of anyone wearing socks in this way before. It think it's probably a safe assumption to make that most wear some sort of gloves, in particular since medical gloves are so readily available and are not at all restrictive to hand and finger movement.
 
Maybe I'm just not well versed enough in thievery, but I had not heard of anyone wearing socks in this way before. It think it's probably a safe assumption to make that most wear some sort of gloves, in particular since medical gloves are so readily available and are not at all restrictive to hand and finger movement.
As a thief, your no1 choice is gloves. If you can't quickly access gloves, a sock will do, but you lose significant grip.
Medical / latex gloves leaves a chance of fingerprints as theyre so thin. I wouldnt feel that I've covered my tracks enough with latex gloves. Plus, they rip easily
 
I see signs of attempting to disguise his writing in some of the examples you said, and he only really half-managed that.
Please bear in mind that the ransom letter may be have been written by flashlight with the excitement of creeping around the house of someone he was obsessed with. Completely different to being calm and bored, perhaps from a prison cell, writing with a different pen, and all the time in the world.

True. Our handwriting can definitely change in appearance according to whether we're focused, rushed, excited, tired, and so on. So how does handwriting analysis even work? Let's say a really good graphologist examines four documents, written by the same person but quite varied in overall appearance, and then you hand her a new document that has some similarities with some of the first four. How is it that she can accurately tell you whether the same person wrote #5?
 
That's an interesting report! I had not seen this before.

While wearing socks on your hands is an innovative way to avoid leaving finger prints behind, I would think it would be restrictive and clumsy to one's hand use. I can imagine opening drawers with socks on the hands, but not writing a lengthy note while trying to disguise your handwriting. It would also be a weird coincidence that two perpetrators in different states involving the same victim(s) would use the same unusual method to avoid leaving hand prints behind. Maybe I'm just not well versed enough in thievery, but I had not heard of anyone wearing socks in this way before. It think it's probably a safe assumption to make that most wear some sort of gloves, in particular since medical gloves are so readily available and are not at all restrictive to hand and finger movement.
My thought here was that John concocted the socks on the hands for the ransom note to avoid leaving fingerprints, and it would serve well enough to restrict hand movement enough to alter the letters.Then when describing the Atlanta break-in, it just popped back into his head.
 
Well naturally, you wouldnt want things to look out of place when the family return.

Yeah, because it was her pen!

I see what you're saying, but this response is a bit skewed. Let's get it back in context. You quoted two sentences of my long post, #160. That post was in reply to sunspun at #141. sunspun didn't realize how thoroughly the Sharpie had been investigated. Lacking that information, sunspun arrived by conjecture at the conclusion that there was no proof that Patsy's pen was the pen used to write the note. I offered the proof as described by Thomas and Schiller.

Re our conversation -- We agree! It was Patsy's pen alright! You see this as a point in the Ramsey's favor. But in the context of the evidence overall, to which both Thomas and Schiller allude, it was not in their favor. It was one more item on a growing list of things that pointed away from an intruder. JonBenet's blanket, the Barbie nightgown, the paint brush, the flashlight (as possible weapon), the pad of paper, the Sharpie, the ransom note - these items associated with the murder all came from within the home. Since they were in use, the paint brush, flashlight, paper, and pen should have had Ramsey fingerprints on them; instead, they had no prints at all. No weapon for the head injury was found. Possible weapons - the flashlight, golf clubs, baseball bats - came from within the home. All the outside doors were locked; there was no known point of intruder entry or exit. These are just a few examples of a pattern that was emerging in the evidence. It doesn't mean there wasn't any evidence in favor of an intruder; but the physical and circumstantial evidence against the Ramseys was much stronger than the intruder case. The Sharpie was part of that evidence.
 
When the police arrived, they thought they were dealing with a kidnapping. They searched the house which included the basement, but did not go in the wine cellar because they A. didn't know it was there and B. didn't see the latch.

Just a footnote - Off. Reichenbach was supposed to search for places where a kidnapper might have exited the house, taking JonBenet with him. He found the wine cellar and saw the wooden block but didn't open the door because it was obvious no one had exited through it.
 
Just a footnote - Off. Reichenbach was supposed to search for places where a kidnapper might have exited the house, taking JonBenet with him. He found the wine cellar and saw the wooden block but didn't open the door because it was obvious no one had exited through it.
Yes! Good addition…..thank you!
 
I see what you're saying, but this response is a bit skewed.
I see what you're saying too, and thanks for listening, but I think you're focusing on the wrong areas.
Re our conversation -- We agree! It was Patsy's pen alright! You see this as a point in the Ramsey's favor. But in the context of the evidence overall, to which both Thomas and Schiller allude, it was not in their favor. It was one more item on a growing list of things that pointed away from an intruder. JonBenet's blanket, the Barbie nightgown, the paint brush, the flashlight (as possible weapon), the pad of paper, the Sharpie, the ransom note - these items associated with the murder all came from within the home. Since they were in use, the paint brush, flashlight, paper, and pen should have had Ramsey fingerprints on them; instead, they had no prints at all. No weapon for the head injury was found. Possible weapons - the flashlight, golf clubs, baseball bats - came from within the home. All the outside doors were locked; there was no known point of intruder entry or exit. These are just a few examples of a pattern that was emerging in the evidence. It doesn't mean there wasn't any evidence in favor of an intruder; but the physical and circumstantial evidence against the Ramseys was much stronger than the intruder case. The Sharpie was part of that evidence.
The idea that they washed the blanket and nightgown is cobblers. All of this can be explained by the intruder wearing gloves. And there was indeed a known point of intruder entry - the open basement window with a suitcase under it.
Seems we're too busy looking at Sharpies and flashlights when we should be looking at the fact there was a convicted pedo sex attacker by the name of Gary Oliva sleeping just 13 doors away, who also was sneaking into windows with a stun gun, which JB was also knocked unconcious with.

The case for IDI will continue to increase, mark my words.
 
Last edited:
To those of you who doubt what I say, have you even listened to the podcast accounts of Michael Vail? Gary Oliva has told him stuff much more important to the case than sharpies or pineapples
>26/12/96 23:00 Gary Oliva phonecalls Vail [approx 20 hours after JB's killing] crying hysterically that he had hurt a little girl. Hung up, and dropped off the radar for a while.
>26/12/97 A year later Oliva attends JB's vigil, at the front, clutching a folder

And you guys are more concerned with sharpies?? open your eyes
Anybody who hasnt listened carefully to Micheal Vail shouldnt even be posting in this thread.
 
Last edited:
True. Our handwriting can definitely change in appearance according to whether we're focused, rushed, excited, tired, and so on. So how does handwriting analysis even work? Let's say a really good graphologist examines four documents, written by the same person but quite varied in overall appearance, and then you hand her a new document that has some similarities with some of the first four. How is it that she can accurately tell you whether the same person wrote #5?

It is mostly science. People cannot subconsciously erase all of their writing tendencies. These people are trained for which ones are almost impossible to disguise.
 
I challenge anyone here to disregard the accounts of Micheal Vail.

Reality check: for almost 30 years Gary Oliva has been amazed and giggling to himself that everybody and all the media thought the parents did it. He's spent many nights in prison laughing over it. He even left his black backpack there.

If you dont believe its an intruder, you are essentially saying nope, it wasnt the local paedophile vs the doting mother.
 
Last edited:
Hey, this is true

Truth Passes Through Three Stages: First, It Is Ridiculed. Second, It Is Violently Opposed. Third, It Is Accepted As Self-Evident​

This is the IDI movement.
 
I see what you're saying too, and thanks for listening, but I think you're focusing on the wrong areas.

The idea that they washed the blanket and nightgown is cobblers. All of this can be explained by the intruder wearing gloves. And there was indeed a known point of intruder entry - the open basement window with a suitcase under it.
Seems we're too busy looking at Sharpies and flashlights when we should be looking at the fact there was a convicted pedo sex attacker by the name of Gary Oliva sleeping just 13 doors away, who also was sneaking into windows with a stun gun, which JB was also knocked unconcious with.

The case for IDI will continue to increase, mark my words.
Can someone explain Why Linda Hoffmann Pugh had Stolen Notepads and pens from the Ramseys home? Why she knew the white blanket came from the dryer and that the Barbie nightgown was stuck to it because of static cling? Excerpt from her 1) chapter from the book she wanted to write but couldn’t.
“Patsy You then wrapped her in a favorite white blanket of hers, which you took from the dryer, except her Barbie nightgown was stuck to it because you never did have the sense to throw in a static cling strip with the wash. So you laid the nightie next to her.” How would She know that Boring insignificant detail about the Barbie nightgown that it was stuck to the blanket because of static unless She took the blanket from the dryer that Horrible Night.
Linda Hoffmann Pugh’s last day working was Dec 23rd She helped clean up (Linda also took the paint tote down to the basement)prior to the Ramseys Christmas party on December 23,1996. and her Granddaughter Ariana was with her. Patsy lent her clothes and shoes because the little girl 13 was not dressed for the party. Linda Hoffmann Pugh called out of work for the night of the 24th day before murder. But she knew where JonBenet favorite blanket was?
Linda Hoffmann Pugh said in a statement only Patsy would know where the pocket knife was because she hid it, hmmmm No then 2 people would know the second person being Linda Hoffmann Pugh. She asked for money, she had access, she had the time (she took the 24th off) she has on multiple occasions Slipped up misspoken and her Only Chapter of her book reads like a confession. Why is she always given the benefit of the doubt. The area JonBenet was found in had a safe. It was a kidnapping that turned into a murder orchestrated by LHP.
 
Can someone explain Why Linda Hoffmann Pugh had Stolen Notepads and pens from the Ramseys home? Why she knew the white blanket came from the dryer and that the Barbie nightgown was stuck to it because of static cling? Excerpt from her 1) chapter from the book she wanted to write but couldn’t.
“Patsy You then wrapped her in a favorite white blanket of hers, which you took from the dryer, except her Barbie nightgown was stuck to it because you never did have the sense to throw in a static cling strip with the wash. So you laid the nightie next to her.” How would She know that Boring insignificant detail about the Barbie nightgown that it was stuck to the blanket because of static unless She took the blanket from the dryer that Horrible Night.
Linda Hoffmann Pugh’s last day working was Dec 23rd She helped clean up (Linda also took the paint tote down to the basement)prior to the Ramseys Christmas party on December 23,1996. and her Granddaughter Ariana was with her. Patsy lent her clothes and shoes because the little girl 13 was not dressed for the party. Linda Hoffmann Pugh called out of work for the night of the 24th day before murder. But she knew where JonBenet favorite blanket was?
Linda Hoffmann Pugh said in a statement only Patsy would know where the pocket knife was because she hid it, hmmmm No then 2 people would know the second person being Linda Hoffmann Pugh. She asked for money, she had access, she had the time (she took the 24th off) she has on multiple occasions Slipped up misspoken and her Only Chapter of her book reads like a confession. Why is she always given the benefit of the doubt. The area JonBenet was found in had a safe. It was a kidnapping that turned into a murder orchestrated by LHP.
Who made Linda Hoffman Pugh, the Queen of information?
 
So, I've come across some new information that I would like to note here.
The autopsy report describes the injuries that Lou Smit would have us believe were made by a stun gun, as "abrasions". A stun gun delivers a high voltage, low current shock via two prongs. The voltage causes muscles to contract, causing pain and confusion. There is a lot of writhing around and often verbal expression of pain. The marks left on the skin are burn marks.The marks on JBR were not burns and even Lou Smit at one point had to admit that they were close, but did not match the marks of a stun gun. The prongs of a stun gun were wider apart than the marks on JBR. Lou's stun gun theory is not shared by many, and not by anyone who has an expertise in stun guns and tasers, which Lou did not.

The ransom note writer was identified by multiple handwriting experts as having been PR. Even the experts hired by the R team could not rule her out. The other experts expressed with confidence that she was the writer. When asked about his percentage of certainty that PR wrote the note, Gideon Epstein, one of those experts with unquestionable credentials, replied "100%". Cina Wong, another expert who is very highly regarded in the field, was able to access over 100 samples of PR's handwriting which she used to compare to the ransom note. Her compilation of charts of her findings which outline the similarities of exemplars is thought to be the most extensive of any analyst who has been associated with the case. She also reviewed a report by one of the experts that team Ramsey had hired. He spoke about what he called the "master pattern" of the note writer, and noted that if those handwriting characteristics could be found in the writing of a suspect, that person would be the note writer. Cina was able to take every part of his master pattern and match it to PR. In 2010, Mozelle Martin identified PR as the ransom note writer. Mozelle as we know is now claiming that Gary Oliva wrote the note. It must also be noted that Ms. Martin's claims of of her expertise and her training and background are just that, claims made by her and her alone that cannot be verified. The "institute" where she claims she was trained does not exist. I note with interest that current information about her where she lists training and education no longer include the names of where she trained.

Another tidbit I was not aware of. Typically a Grand Jury only hears the evidence that the prosecution has, so in effect it's a one sided presentation without representation or argument of the defense. The R's liked to talk about this to bolster their claim that the Boulder PD had it in for them and did not seriously investigate anyone else. In this case, both Lou Smit and John Douglas did in fact testify to the Grand Jury about their intruder theory. Fairly unprecedented that their testimony was included. And yet, as we now know, the GJ voted to indict the R's on two counts. Child abuse resulting in death, and of being accessories to a crime. The GJ considered all the evidence presented, which again, included the defense's intruder theory and evidence, and didn't buy it.

If you watch the self recorded video of Lou Smit climbing in the window in the basement, his entire body takes up every inch of the open window. Additionally, the spider web was found to have a portion of it attached to the grate. Upon testing, it was found that the web detached from the grate when the grate was lifted 10 inches. This is very strong proof that no one entered the house through that window, as the spider web was still attached to the grate and there was no debris from the web or leaves that were disturbed or found in the basement, which surely would have happened as they would have been brushed in by a full grown adult entering. Further, the Boulder PD went as far as identifying the species of spider who made the web, which had been there for quite some time. That spider was in hibernation during the winter months, so there is no way it could have re-weaved the web so that it was still intact.
 
Well naturally, you wouldnt want things to look out of place when the family return.

Yeah, because it was her pen!
A Notepad and 3 pens that were taken from the home of Linda Hoffmann Pugh are similar to the notepad and pens used to write the Ransom found in possession of Linda Hoffmann Pugh. She stole them from the Ramseys home. Collected in evidence from her home.
 
Linda Hoffman Pugh wrote the ransom letter using lines from certain movies, including “ransom” copying samples of notes that Patsy left her, sprinkled in with phrases that Patsy was known to use.
 
Linda Hoffman Pugh orchestrated the kidnapping, and then murder of JonBenet Ramsey.
 
The sharpies you mean felt tip pens that Linda Hoffman Pugh also had because she stole them from the Ramsey‘s home, along with a similar notepad that was used to write the ransom.
 

Staff online

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
244
Guests online
3,998
Total visitors
4,242

Forum statistics

Threads
591,521
Messages
17,953,472
Members
228,514
Latest member
Northern Lights
Back
Top