The Presence of the Ransom Note

[Agatha_C]

Well done, DeeDee.......

 

[tumble]

If the pen shows Patsy's prints, (and why wouldn't it, it is her pen) the RST would not want that public, though her prints SHOULD be there, even if she didn't write the note. Yet, if her prints are NOT there- why aren't they? It is her pen. So we have a damned if you do, damned if you don't problem.

If the Pen shows prints that means it's not wiped. If there are no prints from anyone else but members of the house then I guess no intruder used it to write the RN assuming he didn't use gloves. But then, why wipe the flashlight...

 

[DeeDee249]

If the Pen shows prints that means it's not wiped. If there are no prints from anyone else but members of the house then I guess no intruder used it to write the RN assuming he didn't use gloves. But then, why wipe the flashlight...

See what I mean? More telling- why wipe the BATTERIES? They were found to have been wiped, too.
If I had to simplify this case into TWO WORDS that convince me the parents are lying about knowing what happened it would be these two words: PINEAPPLE and BATTERIES
They are two very innocuous items that should have had absolutely no need to be connected to the case. A bedtime snack is almost universal in most homes with little kids. Denying she ate it in the face of an autopsy report proving it can only mean the parents needed there to be nothing to indicate she was awake before her assault and death. Just as when they admitted BR was awake that morning after all, and said they thought it was easier if he was assumed to have been asleep the whole time. What they really meant was "better for no one to have a reason to question him about that morning"
And I can conceive of absolutely NO innocent scenario where flashlight batteries need t be taken out, wiped of prints, and the same batteries replaced in the flashlight.

 

[kcabnroh]

Imagine how differently the case would have folded out if the 911 operator forced PR to give her more details about the ransom note over the phone. If the operator would have questioned PR more, she would have discovered that the RN would have warned them not to contact anyone, then resulting in maybe noone (friends, police) going to the house right away to contaminate the crime scene.

IMO PR wrote the RN after the death of JBR, and she hung up the phone when she realized the operator was asking so many questions about the RN.

911: “Does it say who took her?”
Patsy: “What?”
911: “Does it say who took her?”
Patsy: “No! I don’t know. There’s a, there’s a ransom note here.”
911: “It’s a ransom note?”
Patsy: “It say’s SBTC. Victory! Please!”

Then the call continues, PR states that she is the mother and asks the operator to send help, and then just hangs up. Why did she hang up??


911: “Patsy? Patsy? Patsy? Patsy?”



Why did she only include that the RN said SBTC. Victory!... thats fishy to me. IMO the ransom note was there only to divert attention from the parents to an intruder.

 

[freshwater]

kcabnroh - Interesting point.

I almost wonder if PR indeed wrote the note, perhaps she didn't include the "Victory! S.B.T.C." part until AFTER the 911 operator asked her if the note says who took her. Like, she hadn't thought to "sign" the note? I mean, does a real ransom note need a signature anyway? One would think that formality kind of goes out the window in a ransom note situation.

Maybe PR saw the letters S.B.T.C. somewhere and just blurted that out when the operator asked the question. Could it have been imprinted on the phone? (Southern Bell Telephone Company???....I don't know.)

Although I'm sure we would have heard something by now about the phone having something associated with that acronym on it! Never mind.

 

[kcabnroh]

kcabnroh - Interesting point.

I almost wonder if PR indeed wrote the note, perhaps she didn't include the "Victory! S.B.T.C." part until AFTER the 911 operator asked her if the note says who took her. Like, she hadn't thought to "sign" the note? I mean, does a real ransom note need a signature anyway? One would think that formality kind of goes out the window in a ransom note situation.

Maybe PR saw the letters S.B.T.C. somewhere and just blurted that out when the operator asked the question. Could it have been imprinted on the phone? (Southern Bell Telephone Company???....I don't know.)

Although I'm sure we would have heard something by now about the phone having something associated with that acronym on it! Never mind.

You make an intresting point also! JMO if you actually listen to the 911 call it sounds like someone is doing something in the background. Maybe PR actually writing the RN? Because the operator asks, "does it say who took her?" PR says she doesnt know, which might mean that she was just writing the ransom note in a hurry then which is why she could not give a lot of information about the note. I think its BS that both JR and PR say they didnt really read the note because they were too upset. JMO, I guess we will always be left to wonder.

 

[DeeDee249]

You make an intresting point also! JMO if you actually listen to the 911 call it sounds like someone is doing something in the background. Maybe PR actually writing the RN? Because the operator asks, "does it say who took her?" PR says she doesnt know, which might mean that she was just writing the ransom note in a hurry then which is why she could not give a lot of information about the note. I think its BS that both JR and PR say they didnt really read the note because they were too upset. JMO, I guess we will always be left to wonder.

Right. NO one who finds a ransom note doesn't READ it- every word. This was just more of he Rs distancing themselves from it. It is as if they really expect people to believe they didn't write it just because they SAID they didn't read it!

 

[Toltec]

"What do we do?" I stammer.
He shouts, "Call the Police!"
"Are you sure?"
"Yes. Call them!"

Standing next to the wall phone, I instantly dial 911, and try to make the voice on the other end of the line understand. It is as if she doesn't believe what I am saying.I slam the phone back into its cradle on the wall.

DOI ppb page 12

Hmmm, doesn't believe her...Patsy hung up the phone because she knew she could not pull it off when more questions wanted to be answered by the 911 operator.

 

[joeskidbeck]

"What do we do?" I stammer.
He shouts, "Call the Police!"
"Are you sure?"
"Yes. Call them!"

Standing next to the wall phone, I instantly dial 911, and try to make the voice on the other end of the line understand. It is as if she doesn't believe what I am saying.I slam the phone back into its cradle on the wall.

DOI ppb page 12

Hmmm, doesn't believe her...Patsy hung up the phone because she knew she could not pull it off when more questions wanted to be answered by the 911 operator.

Toltec, you may not be familiar with the Haleigh Cummings case but this theory on the 911 call is exactly what happened with Haleighs. Misty Croslin had NO idea what to say to the operator. She couldn't even answer simple questions about the child. It was like she had been told what the questions would be and then, when the questions were different, she freaked out and couldn't even talk, handed the phone over to Ronald. I really see the similarities here. When you're not hearing what you thought you would hear, just hang up the phone, I'm truly surprised she didn't hand the phone over to John. Let him worry about what to say.

 

[Agatha_C]

IMO, and this is just me, I would be freaking out to much to talk to anyone. My 911 call would record like this....

MY BABY SOMEONE TOOK MY BABY.. CRY SCREAM WAILING... CURSING CRYING WAILING... OH MY GOD WHO HAS MY BABY WHERE IS MY BABY OH MY GOD OH MY GOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Sir could you repeat that I couldn't hear you over the screaming...... HONEY YOU HAVE TO CALM DOWN SHE CANT HEAR ME!!!!! I DONT CARE ALL I CARE ABOUT IS MY BABY!!!!!!!!!!!WAILING WAILING FREAKING OUT

 

[wonderllama]

I think that is the problem with analysing the manner of the response of the 911 call.

Until you're in that situation, you don't know how you'd be reacting.

We know how we THINK we should react, but that's something altogether different.

 

[Agatha_C]

You're right Wonder, but I'm pretty sure, I wouldn't be able to call anyone.

 

[Ames]

Toltec, you may not be familiar with the Haleigh Cummings case but this theory on the 911 call is exactly what happened with Haleighs. Misty Croslin had NO idea what to say to the operator. She couldn't even answer simple questions about the child. It was like she had been told what the questions would be and then, when the questions were different, she freaked out and couldn't even talk, handed the phone over to Ronald. I really see the similarities here. When you're not hearing what you thought you would hear, just hang up the phone, I'm truly surprised she didn't hand the phone over to John. Let him worry about what to say.

Nah, she couldn't of handed the phone over to John, because SHE was the actress in the family. As far as I know, John couldn't act. According to Patsy, John was "cool and collected"...and she was "hysterical", so why then was SHE the chosen one to make the 911 call? Because SHE was the actress in the family!

 

[Agatha_C]

Ames your right. In fact it seemed pretty calm all the way around. Except for the theatrics, that even the operator did't seem to buy.

 

[DIRK SCHILLER]

Hi everyone, I have only just joined but have been reading for a few weeks.

I hope this is not too repetitive a post. Please if it is, let me know or delete it.

I'm really hung up on the presence of the ransom note. I have been trying to understand what purpose it served, in relation to the murderer. These are the options as far as I can think:

1. Intruder - the ransom note is legitimate. Killing JB in the house was not part of the plan, but it happened. Problem - Why did they not take JB's body with them & still collect on the ransom. Why leave behind physical evidence in the form of the ransom note. Once JB was dead, the RN served no purpose other than to potentially incriminate the true murderer.

2. Intruder - the ransom note was a ruse to divert suspicion to another fictituous intruder. Problem: Why leave a ransom note pointing to an intruder, when you are one. You are placing yourself (as an outsider) into the pool of possible suspects. Why not allow LE to focus almost solely on the Ramsey's, as is highly likely if no ransom note had been left. Again, why leave behind physical evidence, when there is nothing to be gained from it.

3. Insider - the ransom note was a ruse to divert suspicion to an intruder & remove suspicion from the real murderer. Problem - Leaving of physical evidence. However did this outweigh the fact that without a RN suspicion would be immediately on members of the household.

I'm interested in anyone else's view as to the purpose of the ransom note. Particularly if anybody has any ideas on how it could benefit an intruder.

well, I´d like to ask other question,
what if there was not RN,
how would have they reacted in case they did not find any RN,
could this be the reason they needed one
what would they have done,call the 911 without a note?
would they have gone downstairs finding self dead JBR without witnesses ?

 

[otg]

well, I´d like to ask other question,
what if there was not RN,
how would have they reacted in case they did not find any RN,
could this be the reason they needed one
what would they have done,call the 911 without a note?
would they have gone downstairs finding self dead JBR without witnesses ?

That's a good point, DS. Without the RN, what would there be to report? They would have to report their daughter missing, and they knew that the police would first suspect the parents of some sort of wrong doing. If on the other hand, they had no RN and reported finding her dead body, the police again would first suspect the parents.

The only thing the RN did was divert attention from the parents to some unknown outsider (at least, that was its intent, desperate as it was).
.

 

[SunnieRN]

Can I just throw out there that this RN is rambling, epicly long and disjointed. The only 'presence' to the note is it's ambiguity.