The ransom note

Discussion in 'JonBenet Ramsey' started by terralee, Jun 20, 2006.

  1. terralee

    terralee New Member

    Messages:
    29
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Dont get me wrong I think one of the Ramseys penned the ransom note, but Ive always thought it was wierd that there were no tears found on the paper, think about this, with all that went on that night how could anyone be composed, and not in a state of chaos, and yet be be able to pen a ransom note that was pristine?
     
    8paws likes this.
  2. Loading...


  3. Toltec

    Toltec New Member

    Messages:
    1,644
    Likes Received:
    4
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Remember that there were quite a few pages missing in Patsy's notepad. Who's to say she didn't cry on the paper, tore it up and began again.
     
    8paws likes this.
  4. narlacat

    narlacat Former Member

    Messages:
    9,182
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    What's wierder is there being no prints on the note.
     
  5. dingo

    dingo Former Member

    Messages:
    13,720
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Not even a crease in the paper........
     
  6. narlacat

    narlacat Former Member

    Messages:
    9,182
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Did Patsy say she picked up the note?
    Or did she just read it as it was layed out on the stair?
    I can't remember...John apparently knelt down and read it.
    He was supposedly reading it to her whilst she rang 911...was that from where it lay on the stairs?
     
    8paws likes this.
  7. ellen13

    ellen13 New Member

    Messages:
    749
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I believe she said she picked it up because they found her fingerprints on it and she was like duh, I picked it up, that's why it had fingerprints on it. but, i don't know if she picked it up to read it or picked it up to show the officers or john.
    not sure about that one. If she read it standing up, looking at it on the stairs, she had great eyesight!!!

    nighty night:rolleyes:
     
    8paws likes this.
  8. dingo

    dingo Former Member

    Messages:
    13,720
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
  9. Rupert

    Rupert Former Member

    Messages:
    342
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I would certainly have picked it up. I would want to read it very carefully. So, if in fact there are no prints on the note, then it is very suspicious. Are we sure that there are no prints whatsoever or just none that are discernible.

    As for tears, I would expect them somewhere on the note (even the tiniest) if indeed Patsy had penned that note, after the fact. I think the note just reeks of anger; no sorrow. To me, it seems to have been written before. If it was written after, then it was written by someone so callous and disconnected.
     
  10. narlacat

    narlacat Former Member

    Messages:
    9,182
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ok, well maybe I was wrong about no prints on the note..god I've been on the case less than 18 months and I'm forgetting stuff already :p
    I'm not sure Rupert, maybe someone else knows?
    Thanks for the link Dingo.
     
  11. Tricia

    Tricia Owner Websleuths.com Staff Member Administrator

    Messages:
    23,683
    Likes Received:
    2,162
    Trophy Points:
    113
    She said she picked it up. John on the other hand said he got down on all fours and spread it out to read it. In his underwear no less.

    A partial of Patsy's palm was on either on the note or the note pad but not her finger prints.
     
  12. narlacat

    narlacat Former Member

    Messages:
    9,182
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Thanks Tricia.
    I remember John kneeling down in his underwear, ooohh what a horrible thought :p
    So, did John touch it?
    As if he wouldn't have just knelt down and scooped it up as quick as he could...
     
  13. rashomon

    rashomon New Member

    Messages:
    1,670
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I think that's just what the note writer (I think it was Patsy) is: callous, because she valued her own reputation higher than bringing justice to the daughter she accidentally killed. She is callous because instead of turning herself in to the police, she has been able to live with that horrible lie.
    And John is just as callous because he obviously went along with it.

    Patsy is tough as nails. One need only read her interview with Tom Haney, and how she tries to intimidate him by condescendingly calling him 'bud'.

    She wanted to save her sorry hide which is why she had the nerve to write that ransom note. I don't even think she shed a single tear while writing it, because at that stage it was probably the adrenaline rush in her system which prevented her fom crying.
     
  14. sharpar

    sharpar If dogs dont go to heaven I want to go where they

    Messages:
    1,282
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    In order to cry, you would have to admit what you have done and then
    apply a moral code to it . When you are in denial an justify and rationalize what you have done then no need for those bothersome guilt feelings .
    I had to because ___________ and its all her fault anyways .
     
  15. Solace

    Solace New Member

    Messages:
    4,807
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Hi Rash,

    How are you? Love reading your posts. I agree with you 1000% Patsy is strong as steel; this is not to say she wishes it did not happen, but it is not going to destroy her life - A reporter asked her "you must be going crazy" and she replied "I am not going crazy for anyone". She is tough as nails. I hear she is free of the cancer again, but am not sure what I am reading is accurate.

    I have a question for you. Was reading Wecht's book and he is convinced from the small amount of blood in JB's skull that the crushing took place after the strangulation since her heart had virtually stopped. HOWEVER, Steve Thomas in his book says "there was massive hemmorhaging". I read the autopsy and it agrees with Wecht although it also says there was "extensive hemmorhaging" under the skull (I think under the skull - could be wrong - but it was in the area of the assault on her head. What do you think?

    Another thing, I was reading the interview that Barbara Walters did with them (John and Patsy) and she asked why they never took a poly and they replied "we were never asked". She lets them off the hook, because ST says he did ask her, (but I did read his transcript and he says "I am not asking you but how would you do with a poly". So I am still trying to find out if they were asked to take it. PM/PT author Schiller says they were asked, but according to the transcripts they were only "alluded to". Can you help with that?

    Rash, I am obsessed by this case and I think I am obsessed because of the absolute violence of it all. In looking at JB's skull, I am still speechless. In reading the note, I am shocked that Patsy has the audacity to think she can get away with it (to write such a long one), but then she has, hasn't she. But she has audacity to even contemplate it.

    And in the back of my mind I am still wondering every once in a while, because the crime is so horrific; and then I remember, oh yes, they tell lies when none are needed and that tells me so much. Usually when people are lying, it is a part of something bigger. They both tell lies that really there is no need to, but apparently they feel there is.
     
  16. rashomon

    rashomon New Member

    Messages:
    1,670
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Hi Solace, great to see you posting here! When we got into our off-topic talk about the JBR case on another forum, I thought how great it would be if you could become a poster on the JB forums on the net, and it is so good to see you over here - you ask such pivotal questions about this case, and have already read much more than I, who have just started reading PMPT after finishing ST's book.
    In terms of your question re the bleeding inside JB's skull: I haven't read Wecht's book (did he actually write a book about the case?), but this is what I read about Dr. Meyer's autopsy report (PMPT pb, p. 156/157) [bold type mine]:

    "The next thing Meyer noted in is report was a fracture of the skull that had not be visible before he removed part of the skull. There was subdural hemorrhaging over the surface of the right cerebral hemisphere and a thin film of subarachnoid hemorrhaging over the whole right cerebral hemisphere. In the report, he wrote about an extensive purple bruise, about 8 by 1 3/4 inches in area, underlying the skull fracture, as well as a bruise at the tip of the right temporal lobe measuring about 1/4 inch square."
    And I think that this is what Steve Thomas meant by 'extensive hemorrhaging' of the brain, because the surface below the skull where bleeding was noted was indeed extensive: 8 by 1 3/4 inches.
    And doesn't an amount of bleeding like that show even to laypeople that the damage done to JB's brain was horrendous?

    Which is why I'd like to read Wecht's book. What is the exact title?

    Is it a wonder that people are obsessed by this case? A case were in the initial investigation everything that could go wrong, went wrong?
    A case which will probably never see the inside of a courtroom because the affluent perps (I'll call them perps because I think (for whatever reason) John helped Patsy with the cover-up) lawyered up with top-flight attorneys right from the start, and a spineless DA let himself be intimidated by them?
    This strategy seems to be working down to the present day. The Ramseys' aggressive attack-dog lawyer Lin Wood sued everyone who tried to challenge the Ramseys. So it it seems that even judges were afraid of that big-mouthed lawyer. What a shame!

    Re the ransom note: I think when Patsy's wrote the ransom note she was operating on some kind of psychological 'auto-pilot': the damage had been done, nothing would bring her daughter back, and she just threw everything into that note which in her opinion would point away from the parents as the perps.

    In terms of the polygraph, maybe the other posters know more about it.
    I vaguely remember reading that the Ramseys did take a polygraph after all, but only by a polygrapher they themselves had chosen after their results of a previous polygraph had turned out not to be in their favor. But I'm not sure, so anyone correct me if I'm wrong.
     
  17. Solace

    Solace New Member

    Messages:
    4,807
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Hi Rash,

    You are always so nice. The name of the book is "Who Killed JonBenet". I think you can only get it on line. I see where you are saying re the extensive bruise. I was taking that to mean the fracture because the fracture is something like 8 inches. I was not reading carefully.

    Thanks for that reply. The Wecht book is good; His theory which he bases solely on forensics is that JB was killed during this game with the garotte and that John shook JB when she was not responding caused the bruising of her brain. He says the bashing of her head came after, - thus the lack of blood in her brain. He says there was less than 2 tablespoons or could even be teaspoons in her brain and that is where he disagrees with basically everyone. He says JB was near death by the time she was hit and her heart was NOT pumping blood.

    As far as the poly goes, I know they took three and finally passed the last one. The first one was inconclusive, the second found dishonesty and the third one they passed. (this according to S. Thomas)

    I disagree with the sex game, but what do you think?
     
  18. rashomon

    rashomon New Member

    Messages:
    1,670
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I disagree with that scenario too because the garrote obviously did not function as such but was a mere bogus contraption, constructed only for staging purposes.

    Re Wecht: he is a respected medical expert, but he for example was woefully misinformed when he offered his opinion about the forensic evidence in the Jeffrey MacDonald case. He didn't even have the basic forensic facts right. He later admitted not having studied the evidence himself, but only relied on what the defense told him.

    Maybe subdural and subarachnoid bleeding (as was the case with JB's brain) is not that profuse in general; there may exist wounds which just don't bleed much although they are very serious.
     
  19. Nuisanceposter

    Nuisanceposter Remembering Little Miss Christmas

    Messages:
    1,399
    Likes Received:
    2
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I know you're not asking me, but I'm really familiar with Dr Wecht and his book, co-authored with Charles Bosworth. I bought it in the book store when it was new and I have seen it at secondhand bookstores (that's where I bought DOI.) I have it and DOI and ST's book sitting on my desk next to my compy - all three underlined with margin notes throughout and reference page numbers listed in the back.

    Wecht's book, pb, pg 81

    Wecht theorized that the rope had pinched the vagus nerve that descends from the brain down each side of the neck to control the functions of many of the body's organs. Among its purposes is the key role of regulating the heart and lungs. If the nerve's electrical messages are interrupted, cardiac and respiratory function may cease, resulting in what doctors call "electrical death." The heart and lungs could begin to slow down, develop erratic responses, and eventually stop - leaving no evidence to establish an obvious cause of death.

    The tighteneing of the noose could have done exactly that to JonBenet. Her death would have been inexplicable to the one who had ignorantly applied the fatal pressure to her neck.


    * I find this important to note - on pg 101, Wecht says Meyer has noted a lack of damage to the front of JonBenet's neck. No fractures of the hyoid bone or thyroid cartilages. No damage to the cricoid cartilages in the trachea. The tongue showed no damage or injury. No hemorrhaging in the so-called "strap" muscles of the neck, which proved to Wecht (who is well-versed in strangulation physiology) there was no real intent to strangle JonBenet.

    Wecht doesn't believe the strangler meant to kill JonBenet.
     
  20. Solace

    Solace New Member

    Messages:
    4,807
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Right Rash, how he came to the conclusion that Jeff is innocent is beyond me and therefore I am suspect with his studies. I have to find out more about the bleeding because it means so much in this case.
     
  21. aussiesheila

    aussiesheila Inactive

    Messages:
    938
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    rashomon, the garotte/ligature was not a bogus contraption.

    It was a fully functional strangulation device that was used on JonBenet and it strangled her until she was dead. The evidence was there on her body.

    Paraphrasing PMPT.... "The groove circling the skin on her neck under the ligature was up to half an inch wide in places and hemorrhaging and abrasions could be seen both above and below it."

    How did this hemorrhaging occur? It must have occured before the head bash and it seems very unlikely that it could have been caused by anything other than the ligature.

    What possible basis do you have for saying the ligature was constructed for staging purposes?
     

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