www.justiceforchandra.com

[rd]

Thanks for the text, skipper. Yes, that Psalm 118 has the "bind the sacrifice with cords" verse and is the amount of ransom money demanded ($118,000). And the Bible was open to Psalm 118. What are the odds of that being a coincidence?

I believe the Victory! S.B.T.C was supposed to be an organization like S.L.A. (Symbionese Liberation Army) that kidnapped Patty Hearst. I read today in the Websleuth's SBTC thread that the housekeeper said there was a picture of a battleship with Subic Bay Training Center written in the water below the ship. The post said the picture was hanging over John's desk but is now missing. I don't know if the open Bible was in that same room or not, or just where the note was supposed to have been written on their pad of paper with their pen, but if allegedly on John's desk then the picture would be right there.

I don't know how an intruder would be writing a fake ransom note like that after murdering JonBenet. Also see the end of the third article I'll post that points out the incorrect and very rare use of "and hence" by both John and Patsy. Very, very strange going ons here.

rd

[rd]

from Longmont FYI (fair use)

04/14/2003

If not Patsy Ramsey, who? The unusual suspects

By Travis Henry
The Daily Times-Call

A lawsuit that once seemed intended to force Patsy Ramsey to implicate herself in the murder of her 6-year-old daughter has instead directed suspicion away from her.

In a 93-page ruling dismissing a civil suit filed by freelance journalist Chris Wolf against the Ramseys, U.S. District Judge Julie Carnes of Atlanta said there is more evidence pointing to an intruder as the person who killed JonBenet on Dec. 25, 1996, than there is evidence implicating Patsy Ramsey.

Wolf and his lawyer, Darnay Hoffman, filed a defamation lawsuit in March 2001 after the Ramseys publicly named Wolf as a possible suspect in the case.

Perhaps the biggest downfall of the lawsuit was the claim that Patsy Ramsey killed her daughter and was naming other suspects to shift attention away from her.

That statement meant that to win the lawsuit, Wolf would have to prove that Patsy Ramsey was involved in her daughter’s death.

Wolf and Hoffman based most of their theory on the case from a book written by former Boulder police Detective Steve Thomas, who suggested Patsy Ramsey killed JonBenet in a bed-wetting incident, even though Carnes said there was never any evidence JonBenet wet her bed on the night in question.

According to Wolf and Hoffman, the most damaging evidence against Patsy Ramsey was handwriting analyses they claim prove she wrote the ransom note found shortly before JonBenet’s body was found in the wine cellar in the family’s basement.

The ransom note

In her ruling, Carnes said the note — addressed to John Ramsey and demanding $118,000 in cash — is one of the longest ransom notes recorded in the history of kidnapping cases.

“This fact is important because the longer a document is, the harder it becomes to disguise one’s handwriting,” Carnes wrote.

The ransom note was signed “S.B.T.C.” after the salutation “Victory!”

The judge wrote that the ransom note was taken from paper at the Ramseys’ home and written with a pen that belonged to them.

She wrote that both the Ramseys and Wolf agreed the ransom note was not an “ideal specimen” for handwriting analysis because a broad fiber-tip pen was used.

“This type of pen distorts and masks fine detail to an extent not achievable by other types of pens, as for example a ball-point ben,” Carnes wrote.

However, Carnes wrote that the handwriting in the ransom note was consistent throughout the entire writing, contrary to someone trying to hide their handwriting style.

“One of the most common means to disguise one’s handwriting is to attempt to make the script erratic throughout the text,” Carnes wrote.

Investigators consulted with six handwriting experts, four hired by police and two hired by the Ramseys. All six excluded John Ramsey as the author of the note, and none identified Patsy Ramsey as the writer.

“Rather, the experts’ consensus was that she ‘probably did not’ write the ransom note,” Carnes wrote.

On a scale of one to five, with five eliminating someone from suspicion as the author of the ransom note, the experts placed Patsy Ramsey at 4.5 to 4.0, Carnes wrote.

Wolf and Hoffman, however, hired their own handwriting experts, Gideon Epstein and Cina Wong, who said they were “100 percent certain” Mrs. Ramsey wrote the ransom note.

“In contrast to the experts relied upon by defendants and by the Boulder Police Department, however, neither of these experts have ever seen or examined the original ransom note,” Carnes wrote. “In fact, Mr. Epstein and Ms. Wong do not know what ‘generation’ copy of the ransom note they examined.”

Carnes points out that other people under suspicion other than Patsy Ramsey were not eliminated as possible authors of the ransom note, including Wolf himself.

“For example, forensic document examiner Lloyd Cunningham cannot eliminate plaintiff as the author of the ransom note,” Carnes wrote. “Plaintiff’s ex-girlfriend has also testified that she was ‘struck by how the handwriting in the note resembled (Wolf’s) own handwriting,’ and believes that he is the note’s author.”

The other suspects

The Ramseys’ book “The Death Of Innocence” names five people who they believe should be further investigated, including Wolf.

According to Carnes, Wolf was identified as a possible suspect by Detective Lou Smit, who said there were too many “unanswered questions” about him.

In August 1997, Wolf’s then-girlfriend, Jacqueline Dilson, told Patsy Ramsey’s sister, Pam Paugh, that she believed Wolf was involved in JonBenet’s murder.

According to the Ramseys’ book, Dilson had reported to the police that Wolf had disappeared on Christmas Day and returned at 5:30 a.m. the next day. Dilson said he took a shower and went to sleep.

The next day, Dilson claims, Wolf watched the television report of JonBenet’s death and became angry, claiming that he believed JonBenet had been sexually abused by her father.

Dilson told Paugh and police that Wolf hated big business and once had a sweatshirt with the initials SBTC on it, which stood for the Santa Barbara Tennis Club. SBTC was the signature at the end of the ransom note.

Police never publicly named Wolf or other people named in the Ramseys’ book as suspects.

Carnes notes in her ruling that one man named in the Ramseys’ book, Michael Helgoth, committed suicide two months after the murder and one day after District Attorney Alex Hunter announced they were narrowing the search for JonBenet’s killer.

A stun gun was found near Mr. Helgoth’s body, as well as “HI-TEC” boots. Evidence in the case suggests that JonBenet’s killer used a stun gun on her. Unidentified shoeprints from HI-TEC boots also were found in the Ramseys’ basement.

Another possible suspect is Gary Olivia, a transient with a history of child molestation, who was seen in the Boulder area in December 1996. Carnes wrote that Olivia picked up his mail one block from the Ramsey home and was present at JonBenet’s memorial service.

The Ramseys also identified Bill McReynolds as someone who should be investigated. McReynolds, a former University of Colorado journalism professor, portrayed Santa Claus at the Ramseys’ home for the third consecutive year in 1996 — two nights before the 6-year-old was found slain.

In addition, McReynolds’ wife had written a play about a young girl held captive in a basement.

Carnes also noted that McReynolds’ daughter had been kidnapped and sexually assaulted 22 years to the day before JonBenet’s death. A card written to JonBenet from McReynolds was found in her trash can after the murder.

McReynolds died at the age of 72 last September. Police said they never considered him a serious suspect.

A new beginning

Last December, at the request of District Attorney Mary Keenan, Boulder police handed the primary responsibility of investigating the murder over to the district attorney’s office.

Smit, who had left the investigation after he said police were ignoring other leads, is back on the case.

Keenan’s announcement last week that she agrees with Carnes’ ruling is an about-face in the investigation, and it clearly has created some waves between Keenan and the Boulder police, who feel she was criticizing their focus on the Ramseys.

However, Chief Mark Beckner said in his own statement that he was not going to debate the weight of the evidence in the case.

“It is still our hope that this investigation will lead to a successful prosecution of JonBenet’s killer, whoever that may be,” Beckner said. “The Boulder Police Department will continue to do whatever we can to help make that happen.”

Keenan reportedly met with the Ramseys in February and said in her statement Monday that the investigation was “proceeding with the full cooperation of the Ramseys, Detective Lou Smit and the Boulder Police Department.”

Travis Henry can be reached at 303-776-2244, Ext. 326, or by e-mail at
thenry@times-call.com.

[Kortnie]

This passage exempts the Ramsey's from punishment because the Lord's "mercy endureth forever." I think this is how they have been able to keep going.

Oh, but it really is such a mystery, not a slam-dunk like Simpson, Peterson and Hacking. Like Skipper said, so many theories. Did one do it? Did they both do it? Did the son do it and they're covering for him? Was it an accident? Was it on purpose? But for sure the Ramsey's wrote the ransom note, which means someone in that family is the perp.

[rd]

(fair use)

The Ransom "Note"
By Donald Pugh
Behavioral Case Analysis
Profile of JonBenet Ramsey's Killer

In criminal enterprise crimes such as kidnappings, ransom notes typically serve two purposes: to notify family members that a kidnapping has occurred and state demands that need to be met in exchange for the release of the person held captive. In the JonBenét Ramsey murder, a two and one-half page document, which has come to be known as the "ransom note," was found on the morning of December 26, 1996. Later in the day, when the body of JonBenét was discovered in the basement of the Ramsey home, it was evident that this crime could not be classified as a kidnapping and there would certainly be no ransom.

This note played an extremely critical role in the murder of JonBenét. It effectively staged a kidnapping scenario and drew the focus of the police investigation away from what actually transpired. Because of this, the crime scene was irrevocably damaged and the first few "golden hours" that are so important in crime scene analysis were lost. The "note" had successfully served its intended purpose of misdirecting the investigation. From the perspective of the individual who penned the ransom note and murdered JonBenét, the note was a major "victory." Ironically, it will also be the killer's downfall.

The "ransom note" contains a wealth of information far beyond what the writer intended to communicate. It provides handwriting evidence, linguistic projections, vital background data and insight into the mind of the killer. Leaving the ransom note behind held a special meaning for the person who committed this brutal murder and this phony note is, in effect , the calling card of the individual who murdered 6-year-old JonBenét Ramsey.

The Ramsey case is not the first ransom note and kidnapping scenario used to draw attention away from a murder. In 1978, the murder of Gail Jackson and several other women occurred in Columbus, Georgia. There was a ransom note in this case also and parallels can be drawn between the notes in both the Ramsey and Jackson cases. Below, the first lines of the notes are compared.
Ramsey: "We are a group of individuals that represent a small foreign faction."
Jackson: "We are an organization composed of seven members."

The purpose of these statements is to suggest that a group of people is involved in the crime. Initial examination of the Jackson note revealed that the seven men mentioned were seven white men and experts, who examined the note in March of 1978, felt that it was a "bogus" ransom note. By looking in the opposite direction of what the staged note implied, experts concluded that the offender was a black man, "possibly an artillery man or military policeman" who was solely responsible for the murder. William Hance, a black man in an artillery unit at Fort Bennings, was later arrested in the Jackson case. He confessed that the note was a "hoax" and he was the only person involved in the murders.

Like the Jackson case, the Ramsey note states: "WE are a group of individuals" that are involved in this crime. The use of the pronoun, WE, suggests yet another "bogus" ransom note that is designed to draw attention away from the truth. Therefore, it is probable that the note writer and killer of JonBenét are one in the same -- an individual who acted alone.

The "note" makes other announcements that provide hints that someone from Access Graphics could be involved in the crime. The use of the $118,000.00 figure and "WE respect your Bu(s)siness" were intended to create this impression. Looking in the opposite direction of what the reference in the note implies, it can be concluded that the killer is an individual not connected with Mr. Ramsey's "bu(s)siness" or a "small foreign faction."

When viewing the ransom note in aggregate, there is a noticeable absence of consistency and flow in the style of the handwriting. Throughout the document there are changes in pen pressure, and letter and word spacing that suggest the writer did not pen the note in one sitting. This is significant because it indicates that the writer stopped and then started again several times with some time between. This person may suffer from a labile personality with up and down mood swings; therefore, the handwriting style could change from moment to moment at a much faster rate than a more stable individual. Considering the unstable mood changes of this individual, the time lapse between writings may have ranged from a few minutes, to an hour or a much longer period.

The language used at the points where these variations appear also reflect a different mood or change in the writer's attitude. Each page distinguishes itself with a difference in tone, conviction and purpose. Page one is full of extraneous information that primarily focuses on convincing through deception that a kidnapping by a "group of individuals" has occurred. On the second page, the writer is primarily concerned with predicting the future and demonstrating an ability to "monitor," "watch over" and stay in touch with both the Ramseys and police authorities. At this point, the flow of handwriting becomes more expressive and reveals the writer's true aggressive and controlling nature. At the time the note was written, the writer may have suffered from some underlying personal conflict. There are indications of stress in the handwriting and the source of the stress is directed toward the future. This implies that the writer is experiencing stress and has concern about some future event at the time of the writing.

The handwriting characteristics signify stress regarding some future event, and there are indications that the note was penned in several sittings with some time between each sitting. The lengthy note is also well-thought out and complex, and would have taken quite some time to compose. This leads one to the conclusion that the ransom note could not have been written after the death of JonBenét as part of a cover up. It was most likely written beforehand as part of a planned effort to commit premeditated murder.

Identifying the gender of any criminal is always beneficial because it reduces the population of likely offenders by one half. Examination of handwriting never accurately reveals gender. It does, however, identify an aggressive individual with a masculine touch. The language used in the note however, suggests that the individual who composed and penned the note is female. The note is advisory, instructive and uses feminine phraseology not typically used by a male or a criminal. The following phrases that instruct Mr. Ramsey are all feminine in nature:
"withdraw...money.. from your account"
"when you get home"
"I will call you between 8 and 10"
"bring an adequate size attaché to the bank" and
"I advise you to be rested"

[rd]

Referring to the a kidnapper's two henchmen as "two gentlemen watching over your daughter" and suggesting that they "do not particularly like you so I advise you not to provoke them" is also very feminine and not the language of a male or street criminal. Likewise, the use of percentages with "99% chance of killing her...and 100% chance of getting her back" is most commonly used by a female. Kidnappers, usually men, do not provide information about their identity and authentic ransom notes are short and to the point. The note writer (she) rambles on and on with a persistent nature and provides unnecessary details not characteristic of a male or any ransom note.

However, the note does give additional details regarding the offender's background. When people speak or write, their choice of words is influenced by a number of factors. For instance, words frequently used in one's profession often become words that are adopted for use in day-to-day living. Other influences on verbal or written communication come from daily experiences, including books and movies. To gain additional information regarding the note writer's background, it is essential to examine the choice of words used for this note.

The entire tone of the note is written from the perspective of a person with authority. Throughout the note, the writer is advising, warning and cautioning John Ramsey not to try and "outsmart us" (her). Near the end of the note, she states aggressively and personally, "Don't underestimate us, John." The writer feels it is impossible for anyone to outsmart her and this overconfident and superior attitude allows her to think she could get away with anything. This attitude may explain why she would defiantly leave a lengthy handwritten note. She is familiar with throwing her weight around and would be employed in some position of authority.

On the second page of the note, there are also many interesting references to figures of authority. Bank authorities are mentioned and there is a discussion of putting the family and authorities "under constant scrutiny." Use of the word "scrutiny" suggests that she is familiar with examination or investigation. Handwriting analysis indicates that she would stick to what she knows and she makes reference to being "familiar with law enforcement countermeasures and tactics" and warns "that you will be scanned for electronic devices." Police scanners or frequency counters are the most common devices used to intercept radio transmissions. More sophisticated technology is available, but not commonly known, and allows the screening of any electronic device or transmitter.

The size of the letters and capitalization of law in "Law enforcement" is an indication of her respect for law enforcement or fear of being identified by law enforcement agencies. The phrase, "Police, F.B.I., etc." again uses capitalization and large letters, and is a further example of her respect for and expansive thoughts concerning law enforcement. The offender fantasized extensively about law enforcement and this fact may shed light on the killer being someone who is familiar with police procedure and has studied crime scene analysis. Specific quotes in the ransom note from movies such as "Ransom" and "Dirty Harry" indicate that the killer's fantasies may have been strengthened by multiple viewings of thriller, cop-oriented movies.

Handwriting indications and other ritualistic behavior illustrate that the offender is a chronic daydreamer and spent a significant amount of time fantasizing. Fantasies are often the origin of violent crimes. When violent crimes have some basis in fantasy, the act of committing the crime does not completely satisfy the offender's needs. The act of killing JonBenét by execution with a garrote and blow to the head was insufficient to satisfy her (the offender's) needs.

When items like the garrote, ligature and ransom note are left behind, this is considered unusual behavior and a sign of the offender's personal needs. These items represent something very special and have some significant meaning to the offender. When crime scenes contain evidence of activities that go beyond what is necessary to commit the crime, these indications are referred to as "personation." When "personation" is present at a crime scene, this unique expression or personal touch reflects the true inner needs of the offender. Repetitive "personation," when used by serial killers in multiple crimes, is referred to as the "signature" aspect of the crime. "Signatures" are most often present in crimes that are motivated by anger. The offender acts out and expresses anger and aggression through the signature or "personation" more so than the violent act itself.

The ransom note clearly expresses a great deal of anger and interpersonal aggression toward John Ramsey. The execution of JonBenét using a garrote with the word, KOREA, painted on the device, is a symbol of John Ramsey and has some special significance to the offender. A ligature and garrote are often used in erotic sexual activity. In accidental erotic asphyxiation deaths, staging is very prevalent and used to protect a family member. The use of the garrote with KOREA painted on it together with the sexual assault make a clear connection between the child's death and John Ramsey. Mr. Ramsey would be the most likely suspect in a death that occurred in the Ramsey home due to an accidental death during sexual activity involving erotic asphyxiation. The autopsy, however, reveals only a single red mark on JonBenét's neck and an absence of the multiple marks that are common in erotic asphyxiation deaths due to tightening and loosening of the ligature. The SBTC in the note makes reference to John Ramsey's connection to Korea. In Korea , erotic asphyxia is a very common sexual practice. The ransom note, garrote with KOREA, evidence of a sexual assault, and positioning and covering the body are all part of the excessive and detailed staging at the Ramsey crime scene. Efforts to stage the crime scene were very involved and meticulous. They were carried out to satisfy a need and personal cause more important to the killer than the actual murder. This is also evidence of the organized nature and sophistication of a killer with police knowledge. The murderer's paramount need was to stage a domestic homicide, implicate John Ramsey and act out her aggression in that way. The ransom note and the other indications of staging are the "signature " or "calling card" of the offender.

From the author's personal experiences investigating and interviewing parents of murdered children (daughters), it is apparent that nothing demoralizes and destroys parents more than having a child murdered. Both parents experience what they feel is the ultimate failure and being falsely accused of committing the murder causes incomprehensible pain. The confusing and complex ransom "note" and the carefully constructed garrote were prepared in advance of the murder. In addition, other carefully orchestrated preparation went into the complicated plan. The killer thoroughly enjoyed this preparation as she fantasized and expanded on the plot in the weeks or even months prior to the murder. The involved planning has paid off in the eyes of the killer.

The Ramseys have been suspects in the investigation for more than one year. What seems to be missing when thinking logically about this crime is the fact that IF John or Patsy Ramsey had killed JonBenét and what actually occurred at the Ramsey home was a staged domestic homicide, there would have been staging to include clear signs of an intruder, or secondary criminal activity. All previous cases of "staged domestic homicide" share this similarity. If the Ramseys had time to write the ransom note and complete the other "work" necessary to set the stage in the house, they surely would have included some obvious method of entry by an intruder. They would have also created other evidence that announced by staging that they were not involved. Items like the garrote and ligature, which are inculpatory to the Ramseys, would have been removed. Instead, there were no indications of forced entry, many of the references in the note implied inside knowledge and everything at the crime scene pointed directly to the Ramseys. Framing the Ramseys may have been the offender's personal need and part of the fantasy that the killer has enjoyed for well over a year.

The killer's fantasy period will soon be over. Authorities are unraveling the perplexing mystery and have developed an understanding of the crime scene. The sophisticated killer, despite her own understanding of crime scenes and police knowledge, did not commit the perfect crime. JonBenét's killer will be brought to justice soon. John and Patricia Ramsey, however, will never perceive happiness and JonBenét will never laugh or smile again.

Copyright 1998
Donald Pugh
All Rights Reserved
skypilot@ptd.net

[rd]

(fair use)

Statement Analysis
by Mark McClish

JonBenet Ramsey Ransom Note

A key piece of evidence in solving this murder is the ransom note. The police as well as the Ramseys believe that whoever wrote the note is probably the killer. If the police can match the handwriting in the ransom note to a suspect's handwriting, the case is solved. The problem has been they have not found a match. Even without a positive match, the ransom note is still the key to solving this crime.

Using Statement Analysis we can examine this ransom note and determine if it is a legitimate ransom note. Was it the intention of the writer to extort money from the Ramseys, or was the note written as a ploy after JonBenet was killed? Determining the veracity of the ransom note is important. If the note is legitimate, then we know we have a kidnapping that went bad. This would exclude the Ramseys as possible suspects. Why would they kidnap their own child and demand money from themselves? If the note is fraudulent, then we know this was a murder made to look like a kidnapping. Anyone could be a possible suspect. Let's examine the ransom note left at the Ramsey residence. I have added the numbers in the left hand column to make it easier to reference while analyzing it.

1. "Mr. Ramsey.
2. Listen carefully! We are a group of individuals that represent
3. a small foreign faction. We xx respect your bussiness
4. but not the country that it serves. At this time we have
5. your daughter in our posession. She is safe and unharmed and
6. if you want her to see 1997, you must follow our instructions to
7. the letter.

8. You will withdraw $118,000.00 from your account. $100,000 will be
9. in $100 bills and the remaining $18,000 in $20 bills. Make sure
10. that you bring an adequate size attache to the bank. When you get
11. home you will put the money in a brown paper bag. I will call you
12. between 8 and 10 am tomorrow to instruct you on delivery. The
13. delivery will be exhausting so I advise you to be rested. If we
14. monitor you getting the money early, we might call you early to
15. arrange an earlier delivery of the money and hence a earlier
16. delivery pickup of your daughter.

17. Any deviation of my instructions will result in the immediate
18. execution of your daughter. You will also be denied her remains
19. for proper burial. The two gentlemen watching over your daughter
20. do not particularly like you so I advise you not to provoke them.
21. Speaking to anyone about your situation, such as Police, F.B.I.,
22. etc., will result in your daughter being beheaded. If we catch you
23. talking to a stray dog, she dies. If you alert bank authorities, she
24. dies. If the money is in any way marked or tampered with, she dies.
25. You will be scanned for electronic devices and if any are found, she
26. dies. You can try to deceive us but be warned that we are familiar
27. with Law enforcement countermeasures and tactics. You stand a 99%
28. chance of killing your daughter if you try to out smart us. Follow
29. our instructions and you stand a 100% chance of getting her back.
30. You and your family are under constant scrutiny as well as the
31. authorities. Don't try to grow a brain John. You are not the only
32. fat cat around so don't think that killing will be difficult. Don't
33. underestimate us John. Use that good southern common sense of yours.
34. It is up to you now John!
35. Victory!
36. S.B.T.C"


One of the first things we notice is that this is a very long ransom note. Most ransom notes are short and to the point. "We have your kid and she is safe. It will cost you $400,000 to get her back. Do not call the police. We will be contacting you." This ransom note was written on three pieces of paper. This is our first clue this note may be bogus.

As we read the ransom note, we find it doesn't make much sense. Line #2, "We are a group of individuals." What exactly does the writer mean by "group of individuals?" Every group is comprised of individuals. That's what makes it a group. Is the writer telling us despite being a group, they maintain their individuality? Most of the year they live separate lives, but everyone once in a while they come together as a group?

1. "Mr. Ramsey.
2. Listen carefully! We are a group of individuals that represent
3. a small foreign faction. We xx respect your bussiness
4. but not the country that it serves.

The writer also states in lines #2 and #3 that they "represent a small foreign faction." The use of the word "foreign" doesn't make sense. Even if to us they are foreigners, they wouldn't call themselves foreigners. They are not foreigners to themselves. They would tell us, "We are the Islamic Jihad." Remember you can learn a lot if you ask yourself how you would state something. Then compare your statement with the suspect's statement. If you went to Iran and kidnapped someone, it is doubtful you would leave a note stating you are a foreigner.

The writer goes on to say in lines #3 and #4, "We respect your bussiness but not the country that it serves." Are we to believe that JonBenet was kidnapped and then murdered because someone has a hatred for the United States? Most people would agree this crime is not an international incident.

1. "Mr. Ramsey.
2. Listen carefully! We are a group of individuals that represent
3. a small foreign faction. We xx respect your bussiness
4. but not the country that it serves.

In line #3, the writer crossed out the beginning of a word. It appears that the first letter was a "d" and the second letter possibly an "o." The writer may have started to write "We don't respect your business" but then changed it to "We respect your business." A kidnapper who already has his mind set would probably not make this mistake.

The writer misspells two common words in lines #4 and #5, "business" and "possessions." However, the writer correctly spells the words "deviation" and "attache" even including the accent on the word "attache." This leads us to believe the writer purposefully misspelled these two words to try to make it look like an uneducated person or a foreigner wrote this note. The two misspellings occur in the first paragraph. After that, the writer uses correct grammar except for using the article "a" when he should have written "an." This is further indication the misspellings were done on purpose. The writer showed his true writing skills and forgot to misspell words throughout the note.

1. "Mr. Ramsey.
2. Listen carefully! We are a group of individuals that represent
3. a small foreign faction. We xx respect your bussiness
4. but not the country that it serves. At this time we have
5. your daughter in our posession. She is safe and unharmed and
6. if you want her to see 1997, you must follow our instructions to
7. the letter.

In lines #4 and #5, the writer tells us "...we have your daughter in our possession." Remember that the shortest way to say something is the best way to state it. A true kidnapper would have said, "We have your daughter." The words "in our possession" are understood and unnecessary. This wordiness shows us that someone was trying to make this look like a kidnapping.

[rd]

The writer states in line #8, "You will withdraw $118,000.00 from your account." The kidnapper may know the Ramseys are wealthy, but how does the writer know they have $118,000 in their account. Most kidnappers would simply state "get the money." They don't care where you get it from just get it.

8. You will withdraw $118,000.00 from your account. $100,000 will be
9. in $100 bills and the remaining $18,000 in $20 bills. Make sure
10. that you bring an adequate size attache to the bank.

The amount of $118,000 is a relatively small amount of money. Kidnappers are greedy. A true kidnapper would demand much more money.

The phrase "your account" is very interesting. First, as I previously mentioned a kidnapper would not tell you from where to obtain the money. If the kidnapper did, the writer would probably use the phrase "the bank." Secondly, if Patsy Ramsey was the author of this note, then we can see how in targeting the note towards her husband, she would use the phrase "your account" vs "my account."

In line #10, the writer tells the Ramseys to "bring an adequate size attache to the bank." Most kidnappers are not going to remind you to bring an adequate size case to hold the money. Likewise in line #13, it is doubtful that a kidnapper will tell you "to be rested" because the delivery process will be exhausting.

8. You will withdraw $118,000.00 from your account. $100,000 will be
9. in $100 bills and the remaining $18,000 in $20 bills. Make sure
10. that you bring an adequate size attache to the bank. When you get
11. home you will put the money in a brown paper bag. I will call you
12. between 8 and 10 am tomorrow to instruct you on delivery. The
13. delivery will be exhausting so I advise you to be rested. If we
14. monitor you getting the money early, we might call you early to
15. arrange an earlier delivery of the money and hence a earlier
16. delivery pickup of your daughter.

Line #13 and #14 the writer states, "If we monitor you getting the money early...." Later in line #30 the writer states, "You and your family are under constant scrutiny...." The kidnapper would have us believe that they are continually watching the Ramsey family. Highly unlikely.

In line #19, we have an unnecessary word, "over."

17. Any deviation of my instructions will result in the immediate
18. execution of your daughter. You will also be denied her remains
19. for proper burial. The two gentlemen watching over your daughter

Unnecessary words are words that can be taken out of the sentence, and yet the sentence still makes sense. The writer could have stated, "The two gentlemen watching your daughter." By including the extra word, the writer is including extra information. What is the difference between watching someone and watching over someone? The best example I can think of is in reference to God. If I say that God is watching over me, I visualize God keeping his distance. He sees me, but he also see the entire world at the same time. He can see me because I am part of the world. While He is watching over me He is also watching over others. The word "over" means God is spreading His watchful eye upon the earth. However, if I say that God is watching me it becomes more personal. Even though He can see the entire world, He is focusing His attention on me. Another example would be if a friend asked you to "watch over" his house while he was out of town. In this case, he probably wants you to stop by every once in a while and make sure everything is okay. Maybe you will pick up his mail and water his plants. However, if he asked you to "watch" his house he probably wants you to housesit. He wants you to be there where you can keep a close eye on things.

In a kidnapping, the kidnappers should be "watching" the abductee. They will want to keep a close eye on her. They want to make sure she doesn't escape or alert someone that she needs help. They will want to make sure she doesn't harm herself if her being alive is dependent upon them receiving the ransom. When the writer of the ransom note said they were "watching over" JonBenet, the writer was telling us they were not keeping a close eye on her. There are only two reasons why you would not closely watch your hostage: 1. If you knew for certain she was alright and could not escape; 2. If you knew she was dead. Since a dead body isn't going anywhere, it is something you "watch over." Based on the language used, it appears the writer knew JonBenet was dead when writing the ransom note.

Line #19 continues on stating "The two men watching over your daughter do not particularly like you...." When we look at a copy of the ransom note, we find the writer originally wrote "....do particularly like you...." The word "not" was then written above the space between the words "do" and "particularly." A line was then drawn indicating the word "not" should be inserted between these two words. A true kidnapper would not make the mistake of saying these gentlemen do like you.

17. Any deviation of my instructions will result in the immediate
18. execution of your daughter. You will also be denied her remains
19. for proper burial. The two gentlemen watching over your daughter
20. do not particularly like you so I advise you not to provoke them.

The sentence "The two gentlemen watching over your daughter do not particularly like you so I advise you not to provoke them" is not very aggressive language. This would indicate that a woman wrote this note. Other statements in the ransom note such as "I advise you to be rested" also show a feminine touch.

Saying that JonBenet will be "beheaded" in line #22 is very unusual. This was put in the note to make it look like a "foreign faction" was behind this kidnapping.

21. Speaking to anyone about your situation, such as Police, F.B.I.,
22. etc., will result in your daughter being beheaded. If we catch you
23. talking to a stray dog, she dies. If you alert bank authorities, she
24. dies. If the money is in any way marked or tampered with, she dies.
25. You will be scanned for electronic devices and if any are found, she
26. dies.

Four times the writer uses the phrase "she dies." (Lines #23 - #26) The problem is the writer should be speaking in the future tense; "she will die." This is a strong indication the writer knew JonBenet was dead when the ransom note was written.

The note is addressed to "Mr. Ramsey." However, towards the end of the note Mr. Ramsey becomes "John." The writer refers to Mr. Ramsey as "John" three times in lines #31 - #34. If this was a foreign faction, they would continually use the term "Mr. Ramsey." Referring to him by his first name is too personal for an unknown kidnapper.

30. You and your family are under constant scrutiny as well as the
31. authorities. Don't try to grow a brain John. You are not the only
32. fat cat around so don't think that killing will be difficult. Don't
33. underestimate us John. Use that good southern common sense of yours.
34. It is up to you now John!
35. Victory!
36. S.B.T.C"

Everyone has a personal dictionary. Certain words mean certain things. If the writer saw John Ramsey as being "Mr. Ramsey" then he should always refer to him as "Mr. Ramsey." When he changed the language and call him "John" there has to be a justification for the change. There are no synonyms in Statement Analysis. Every word or name means something different. If the change in language is unjustified, then the person is making up the story.

The note is signed "S.B.T.C" There is no period after the letter "C." When writing we end a thought by placing a period at the end of the sentence. Not using a period tells us the writer intentionally stopped writing. There may be conflict at this point in the story. The writer may have more information that was purposely withheld.

There has been a lot of speculation as to what the letters S.B.T.C. mean. The one that makes some sense to me is "Saved By The Cross." This is because the Ramseys profess to have faith in God and because word "Victory" precedes the initials S.B.T.C. As all Christians know, it is through Christ's sacrifice on the cross that we have "victory" over death.

In examining the pronouns, we find this crime was not committed by a group. If you are writing for a group, then your language will reflect there are several people involved. Throughout the ransom note, the writer uses the plural pronouns "we," "us" and "our" because the writer wants to give the impression that a group is responsible for the kidnapping. In lines #2 - #5 we find the statements, "We are a group of individuals." "We respect your business." "We have your daughter." In line #6 the writer states, "You must follow our instructions." In line #28, "Follow our instructions." However, in line #17 we have, "Any deviation of my instructions." If this was a group effort, the writer would have a group mentality and would consistently use the plural pronouns. Look at line #11 and line #14, "I will call you" vs "We might call you." People's words will betray them. The truth will slip out and in this case we can easily see it in the pronouns. We see deception in this ransom note with the changing pronouns. This kidnapping was not the work of a terrorist group. One person, probably a woman, wrote this ransom note. One person and perhaps an accomplice committed this crime.

[rd]

As you can see there is a lot of deception in this ransom note. The writer's own words tell us this ransom note was not written with the intent to obtain money. Since the ransom note was written as a ruse, we can conclude this was not a kidnapping that turned into a murder, but a murder made to look like a kidnapping. This means we cannot exclude the Ramseys as possible suspects. Let's look at what evidence ties John and Patsy Ramsey to the ransom note.

1. The ransom note was written on a pad of paper that was in the Ramsey's residence. Likewise, the pen that was used to write the note also came from their residence.

2. The killer placed a nylon cord made into a garrote around JonBenet's neck and strangled her. A broken paintbrush belonging to Patsy Ramsey was used to make the garrote.

3. While handwriting analysis shows that John Ramsey did not write the ransom note, Patsy Ramsey could not be completely eliminated as the writer.

4. Certain words in the ransom note such as "instruction" "monitor" "execution" "scanned" "electronic" and "device" are computer terms. At the time of JonBenet's death, John Ramsey was president of Access Graphics a computer distribution company.

5. The kidnapper demanded $118,000 from the Ramseys. This is a very unusual amount. Most people would ask for a much larger amount. There is a reason why the writer chose $118,000. Even John Ramsey agrees that the number 118 is significant to the killer. It has been reported that in 1996 John Ramsey received a bonus of $118,000. Is this a coincidence? When the writer had to think of a number, $118,000 was on his mind.

13. delivery will be exhausting so I advise you to be rested. If we
14. monitor you getting the money early, we might call you early to
15. arrange an earlier delivery of the money and hence a earlier
16. delivery pickup of your daughter.

6. In lines #13 - 16, the writer states, "If we monitor you getting the money early, we might call you early to arrange an earlier delivery of the money and hence a earlier pickup of your daughter." The word "hence" is not a very common word. When was the last time you used that word in a sentence? Chances are you have not used it this week. We should look to see if this word appears in any writings of John or Patsy Ramsey. Well, it does. On December 14, 1997, the First United Methodist Church in Boulder, Colorado held a memorial service for JonBenet. In the program, there was "A Christmas Message from the Ramsey Family." This message was also posted on the Ramsey family's web site. In the message, we find the statement, "Had there been no birth of Christ, there would be no hope of eternal life, and, hence, no hope of ever being with our loved ones again."

7. The word "hence" is a transition word. You do not have to use the word "and" with it. For example, "The arcade was closed, hence, I spent my money at the mall." The writer of the ransom note used the incorrect phrase "and hence." In their Christmas Message, the Ramseys used this exact same phrase. "Had there been no birth of Christ, there would be no hope of eternal life, and, hence, no hope of ever being with our loved ones again."

In their book, The Death of Innocence, Patsy Ramsey addresses the use of the phrase "and hence."
"Actually, I have no idea why we used that phrase. Maybe we'd seen it so many times in reading the ransom note - and having to write it over and over again for the police - that it became a part of our subconscious vocabulary. Who Knows? Then again, maybe people everywhere use the phrase �and hence' everyday of the week, because it's a normal part of the English language."
Like I said, when was the last time you used that incorrect phrase? It is not part of the normal English language. Patsy Ramsey does not tell us why they used that phrase. She only says "maybe" it is because they saw it in the ransom note and had to write it several times for the police. She then asked a question, "Who knows?" She is trying to sweep this under the carpet as if it is no big deal. However, this is a very big deal. We have the same incorrect phrase that is in the ransom note, appearing in their writings.

On October 12, 2000, the Ramsey's did a webcast interview with Newseum (www.newsuem.org). In the interview, John Ramsey makes the following statement:
"The justice system is a government organization. And hence, should be looked at with some degree of skepticism."
8. Many Ramsey supporters believe the Ramseys did subconsciously adopt the phrase "and hence" found in the ransom note. Okay. I will admit it is possible. But lets take a closer look at the phrase "and hence." When we look at the original ransom note we find the writer had crossed out a word.

13. delivery will be exhausting so I advise you to be rested. If we
14. monitor you getting the money early, we might call you early to
15. arrange an earlier delivery of the money and hence a earlier
16. delivery pickup of your daughter.

The writer started to say that upon receiving the money he would "deliver" JonBenet to her parents. He then realized that a kidnapper would not deliver the hostage but would tell the authorities where she could be found. Therefore, he changed it to "pick-up." It is doubtful that a kidnapper would make this mistake.

More importantly, an examination of the author's writing style shows us that whatever comes before the phrase "and hence" comes after the phrase "and hence."

13. delivery will be exhausting so I advise you to be rested. If we
14. monitor you getting the money early, we might call you early to
15. arrange an earlier delivery of the money and hence a earlier
16. delivery pickup of your daughter.

We see the same writing style in the Ramsey's Christmas message.
"Had there been no birth of Christ, there would be no hope of eternal life, and, hence, no hope of ever being with our loved ones again."
So, the Ramsey supporters would have us believe that the Ramseys not only adopted the word "hence" they also adopted the incorrect phrase "and hence" and they also adopted the killer's writing style! Possible but not probable.


For a complete Statement Analysis of the JonBenet Ramsey murder, get the book
I Know You Are Lying
Detecting Deception Through Statement Analysis

[laskipper]

One major clue that most people overlook in this case is the Swiss Army knife that was found by JonBenets' body.

The housekeeper, Linda Pugh, has taken the knife away from Burke around Thanksgiving. Burke had a habit of walking through the house whittling. It created additional work for the housekeeper and she talked to Patsy about the problem. Patsys' comment at first was something blase
such as "what are you going to do?". The housekeeper suggested taking the knife and hiding it in a linen closet near JonBenets' bedroom. That is what she did. Both John and Patsy knew that Linda Pugh took the knife from Burke and where she hid it.

Could be, because it was Christmas time, that Burke may have been looking for presents and discovered the knife in the closet? Seems like it would be next to impossible for a stranger to have come across the knife to use in the murder of JonBenet.

Many believe that Burke was very jealous of JonBenet due to the constant attention that she received from his parents. With the focus on Beauty Pageants, Burke got lost in the shuffle.

The Swiss Army knife being taken from him may have been the last straw? He was working on a project with the knife, as I recall. Listed in the items that the police took from the house (evidence) was a school project that Burke had been working on. Could be it was taken for the handwriting, but that is doubtful. No 9 year old would have the vocabulary of the ransom note. My guess is that the project had something to do with whittling.

Then there is the matter of the pineapple in JonBenets' stomach. As I recall, the pineapple was said to have been eaten shortly prior to her death (autopsy). Hours maybe?

Many speculate that JonBenet woke up hungry, went to her brothers' room, as was he habit, and pestered him for food.

They went downstairs via the spiral staircase near their bedrooms and Burke took the pineapple out of the refer for her. The pineapple was too high in the refrigerator for the little girl to reach.

Detectives later found 2 sets of prints on the bowl of pineapple. Those of Patsy and Burkes. Two sets of fingerprints were on the bowl of pineapple- Patsys' and Burkes'.

http://denver.rockymountainnews.com/extra/ramsey/0811ramse.shtml

Ramsey housekeeper sues DA

State gag rule on grand jury testimony makes it a crime to 'utter truth,' federal lawsuit says


The housekeeper was forbidden to disclose any testimony given to the Grand Jury about the case. Too bad, because she had lots of good information.

She worked at the Ramsey house up to the day of the murder.

She wrote a book about the Ramsey family but it was suppressed. Bits and pieces of her info can be found on different forums about the Ramsey case. The housekeeper was the first one that was a person of interest in the case and brought in for questioning. The case ruined her life, and that of many other people close to the Ramsey family.

Lin Wood factors in somewhere. He is the Ramsey attorney- one of them anyway.

So 2 key points- the Swiss Army knife by JonBenets' body and the pineapple with Burkes' fingerprints (and pineapple in JonBenets' stomach). Huge, if you ask me.

Fact is, even if Burke did kill JonBenet, he was 9 years old at the time and would not be charged in the state of Colorado.

Interesting quote from young Burke:
http://crimemagazine.com/jonbenet.htm

Excerpt:
The National Enquirer reported, On Sept. 1, 1998, that Burke told Dr. Suzanne Bernhard, a Boulder child psychologist, that he was "getting on with my life." He reportedly said this on Jan. 8, 1997 – 13 days after JonBenét died.
End excerpt

This is found about 9/10ths of the way down- portion on Burke Ramsey

****

Another article on the subject:

http://www.longmontfyi.com/ramsey/storyDetail99.asp?ID=33

Fair use

5/10/1999
DA's office denies reports of Ramsey plea


by B.J.Plasket
Daily Times-Call


BOULDER -- District Attorney Alex Hunter's office has denied reports that John and Patsy Ramsey are in plea negotiations that would place blame for the death of their 6-year-old daughter JonBenet on their now-12-year-old son Burke.

``It is false,'' Hunter spokeswoman Suzanne Laurion said on Thursday.

Burke Ramsey , who was 9 at the time of his sister's death, cannot be prosecuted, since Colorado law precludes criminal charges against anyone under 10.

According to editions of the tabloid newspaper the Star due to be distributed this week, Ramsey lawyers have talked with Hunter in recent days about a plea agreement that essentially claims Burke Ramsey attacked his younger sister in a jealous rage after she climbed into his bed after wetting her own bed. The story said she often went to her brother's bed after wetting her own.

The New York Post, in a Thursday column, said the tabloid claims Burke -- jealous over the attention JonBenet got as a child beauty queen -- ``let loose his pent-up rage at his sister that night and lashed out at her physically.''

The Star also reported that Burke, on an earlier occasion, hit JonBenet in the face with a golf club and cut her cheek, the Post said.

The Post also reported that, according to the Star, police became suspicious of Burke when he failed to ask any questions on the morning JonBenet's body was found in the family basement. He reportedly didn't question being taken to a friend's house as his own home filled up with police officers.

The Post said the Star article also claims Burke later told a police psychologist, ``I know what happened. She was killed. Someone took her quietly and took her down in the basement ... took a knife out ... hit her on the head.''

That statement came at a time when only the police knew Burke's Swiss Army knife had been found next to her body, the Post said.

The story also says the plea negotiations involve Patsy Ramsey pleading guilty to charges stemming from a cover-up of the slaying and Burke being forced to go to counseling sessions.

According to the Post, Hunter is entertaining the plea agreement because he wants to put the case to rest and spare the cost of a trial.

The Post article said Bill Wise, Hunter's second-in-command, has also denied the plea negotiations.

``We can only say the claim that DA Hunter and Mr. Haddon have talked at all -- and that they may have talked about serving up Burke Ramsey as the fall guy in this case -- that's false,'' he reportedly said.

Haddon, the head of the Ramsey legal team, was out of his office on Thursday and did not return calls seeking comment.

end excerpt

***

Politics played heavily in this case. The police were certain it was an inside job and many were convinced that it was Burke. Fortunately for the Ramseys, the Prosecutor was in their camp.

Many lives were runied over the mishandling of this case.

[Kortnie]

Thanks rd and Skipper for pasting in all that good Ramsey info. I've gone to statementanalysis.com (Mark McLish) before and read his stuff on how our language will betray us. I've thought for a long time that just the old-fashioned and rarely used word "hence" in the ransom note convicts them. Please, what kidnapper is going to use the word "hence?" But the Ramsey's use it, as is documented in their correspondence. I love 17th century English poetry, and one of my favorite quotations comes from Ben Jonson. It applies 100% to how we can tell the Ramsey's wrote the ransom note: "Language most defines a man. Speak, that I may see thee." Well, Patsy "spoke" and she said "hence." Case closed!

[laskipper]

You're welcome, Kortnie.

You're right, rd. Very, very strange goings ons here. It gets stranger still the more you read.

I agree with you and Kortnie that the "hence" is a tip-off. Thing is, did Patsy do the cover up work and not the murder?

As I mentioned, the theory that holds the most water, IMO, is that about Burke.

About the Subic Bay picture, I pulled out my copy of "Perfect Murder, Perfect Town" and found the following:

**

Excerpt from interview with housekeeper Linda Wilcox, housekeeper in the Ramsey household until Labor Day 1995, when Linda Hoffmann-Pugh started to work for them:

"I don't remember if I told them about the large photograph John had of an aircraft carrier. On the bottom ot the picture in fancy writing were the words Subic Bay Training Center. The script was faint because it blended in with the water, so the words were hard to read. It used to hand behind his (Johns') desk in the bedroom."

End excerpt

Excerpt from "Perfect Murder Perfect Town" by Lawrence Schiller- Hard cover page 259

**

The picture was in the bedroom on the third floor, not in the 1st floor den/office.

[rd]

Ok, that answers that about where the picture was versus where the ransom note was supposed to have been written.

The ritualistic positioning of her body and a bizarre long ransom note which would presumedly have been written by someone who just left a murdered girl in the wine cellar is in the realm of insanilty, or a really desperate attempt to look like it.

From the comments above, I'm not sure you guys understood the significance of "and hence", which is far more than "hence". The "and" makes it both incorrect usage and that much rarer. And it is in the writings of both Patsy and John in the following year.

rd

[Kortnie]

hey everybody, check this out! Yesterday I sent a respectful e-mail to Mary Keenan, the DA of Boulder who won't prosecute the Ramsey's! This morning I sent another one 'cause I had forgotten to include my Ben Jonson "language" quotation. Well, she e-mailed me back a little while ago! She began with "Dear Madam, You are an intelligent woman... rd, is it possible for me to paste in my e-mails and her response? You should see it! She is still refuting that the Ramsey's did it! I just sent her an e-mail back thanking her for her response.

[rd]

yes, absolutely, paste them in Kortnie. We'd love to see them.

rd

[laskipper]

Good catch, rd. "and hence"...I'll check it out some more.

Funny about families using the same vocabulary. The latest with my grandkids is 'perhaps'.

Can't wait to see the email, Kortnie. We'll have to make sure we don't say anything about the Ramsey family on this board that could lead to problems. They have a nasty habit of suing, they use Lin Wood and they have a few spies looking over forums for potential candidates.

I'll have to keep my opinions to myself.

**

I just read on a JB forum that there is a volunteer group in Colorado seeking justice for the Ramsey family (MMMPH... that's me keeping my opinion to myself).

What it's about is the blood specks that were found on JonBenets' panties. To recap: there were 2 blood spots on the panties. 1 was DNA tested that was JonBenets' blood. 3 years later, the DNA within the DNA of JonBenets' was found to be that of a male and the same as that under the fingernails of JonBenet. Unknown, white male.

They claim that the person has not yet been found in the database- Codex (I believe). The claim is that if this person ever commits a crime or has DNA tested, they will have their killer.

More news after August 26, 2004 about the above.

It was Crime and justice forums, I believe. I'll have to check and post the link.