Newcomers to this blog are advised to begin with the first two posts, Just the Facts, Ma'am and Case Solved, which explain in very general terms why I believe I've solved this case. Some important questions are answered in the following post, Misunderstandings, Misconceptions, Misdirections. After that feel free to browse whatever topics might interest you (see blog archive).

NB: If anyone has trouble posting a comment, email it to doktorgosh (at), and I'll post it for you.

Notice to readers of my Kindle book: I recently noticed that, on certain devices (though not all), the Table of Contents begins with Chapter One and omits the Introduction and Preface. Since the Introduction is especially important, I urge everyone to make sure to begin reading at the very beginning of the book, not the first chapter in the Table of Contents. Thank you.

Tuesday, December 6, 2016

In a Nutshell

In response to the heavy dose of speculation we've been seeing, both here and in the media generally, I've decided to one more time present the essence of my thinking on this case. Before I begin I want to stress that my approach was originally prompted by a situation very similar to the one we are now facing, which hasn't changed much over 20 years: since just about all the "evidence" is inconclusive, literally every theory based on the evidence is, of necessity, speculative -- based on little more than amateur profiling bolstered by a host of unsubstantiated assumptions.

Thursday, December 1, 2016

Leftovers, anyone?

Thanksgiving got too stuffed. Here's room for more . . .

Monday, November 21, 2016

Special Thanksgiving Edition

Happy Thanksgiving, everyone. Here's a generous portion of free space on which to post more comments without anything getting lost (for now). And by the way, if you suspect a comment of getting lost, be sure to go to the bottom of the page and click on Load More. The blog software has room for only so many comments on a single page. If you still can't find your comment, email me and I'll post it for you.

Wednesday, November 16, 2016

Did Lin Wood Have a Change of Heart?

Here we see an interview with Lin Wood, dated Sept. 22, 2016. In it, he assures the interviewer that he will file a lawsuit against CBS after a mandated waiting period, giving the network the opportunity to retract. If there is no retraction, the lawsuit will be filed "sometime within the next 30 days." He then adds: "It's not a threat. It's going to be filed."

Wednesday, November 9, 2016

More Handwriting Evidence -- Part 4:Tom Miller

Thanks to a link provided by an alert commenter calling herself "Danni," I recently came across an extensive document by attorney slash handwriting "expert" Tom Miller, outlining his view of the Ramsey case. For someone interested in learning more about what transpired among the various members of the investigation team, the Ramsey legal team and the media, Miller's document provides some fascinating information and insights. Much of his text is taken up by the story of how he became implicated in an attempt by an editor of The Globe to illegally purchase a copy of the ransom note. Interesting, but beside the point as far as I'm concerned. More relevant is the story about how he got hold of some handwriting exemplars attributed to Patsy. These had originally been acquired, according to him, by the same Globe editor, under mysterious circumstances. Apparently, Miller is the one who passed them on to Darnay Hoffman, who sent them to his team of handwriting "experts" with the express purpose of "proving" that Patsy Ramsey wrote the ransom note. In no uncertain terms, Miller makes clear his conviction that Patsy did indeed write that note. On what basis?

To learn more, let's proceed to the report Miller sent to Darnay, as posted at the Acandyrose website. I've already produced an evaluation of Miller's report on this blog, but at this point I find it necessary to go into more detail.

Sunday, November 6, 2016

More Handwriting Evidence - Part 3

Some more dubious comparisons from Cina Wong's analysis:

The oversized "c" in "crash course" and "contenders" in S1 closely matches the oversized "c" of "carefully" in line 2 of the QD.

Where is THIS coming from? The words "Crash Course" and "Contenders" are not "oversized," they are capitalized. The "c" in "carefully is not oversized, but roughly the same size as the other letters. And looks nothing like any of Patsy's "C"s.

Friday, November 4, 2016

More Handwriting Evidence - Part 2

Let's move now to Cina Wong's written report, as reproduced at the Acandyrose website. Here's what she writes on the first line of her analysis: "The "R" is open to the left in the "Ramsey" written in S4, closely matches the "R" of "Ramsey" in line 1 of the QD." Exemplar S4 is a poster reading "Ramsey Xmas" in large letters, with a very small "Ramsey" near the right hand bottom corner. It's the small "Ramsey" she's referring to, as the large one is not open to the left. "QD" stands for "questioned document," i.e., the ransom note. Here are the two examples she's referring to, presented side by side:

Thursday, November 3, 2016

More Handwriting Evidence

I've already covered some of this territory in an earlier post, Some Revealing Comparisons. Also in a much older post, Some Handwriting Evidence. At this point, however, I'd like to go into more detail, starting with some of the so-called "matches" claimed by Darnay Hoffman's star "expert," Cina Wong. I've been hampered in the past by copyright issues preventing me from posting copies of Wong's comparisons on my blog, so I'll have to make do, once again, with Internet links. However, it occurred to me that the actual exemplars used by Wong are not her private property, so as long as I don't directly display her graphic, I won't be violating her copyright.

Wednesday, November 2, 2016

I'm Running as Fast as Can to Keep Up

I wish this blog didn't do that "Load More" thing, which makes it so hard to find some of the later posts. Here's still more space to vent. Enjoy!

Friday, October 28, 2016

Hot Off the Press:Doubtful DNA

An anonymous poster (thank you) just linked us to an article titled DNA in doubt: New analysis challenges DA's exoneration of Ramseys, from the Boulder Daily Camera of Oct. 27. The lead author is Charlie Brennan, the reporter who sued to get the GJ indictment made public, and a long term student of the case -- he assisted Lawrence Schiller in the writing of PMPT. At first glance this looks like nothing new. The presence of multiple DNA samples at the crime scene was reported some time ago in James Kolar's book. (Interesting that Kolar is not mentioned.) What makes it important is its thoroughness. Brennan digs deeply into many details of this evidence, consulting with and quoting several DNA experts (though fans of Dr. Henry Lee may be disappointed).

Tuesday, October 25, 2016

Burke's Interview

The full transcript of Burke Ramsey's 1998 interview is now available via the Oct. 3 issue of the National Enquirer. Thanks to diamondlil16, we have a link to a Websleuth's page where the entire document has been reproduced. You'll need to scroll down a bit, but you'll eventually find it, as posted by "DrollForeignFaction." While most items emanating from the NE should be taken with a huge grain of salt, this one looks authentic. It's also important, as it provides us with some information we didn't have before, and either clears things up or muddies the waters, depending on how reliable a witness we take Burke to be.

Wednesday, October 19, 2016

Some Revealing Comparisons

The handwriting evidence has once more emerged as a topic of discussion by certain commenters on this blog -- and thanks to Zed, we were linked to one of the better known sets of comparisons compiled by Cina Wong:

(NB: Due to copyright considerations I've been warned not to directly reproduce any of Cina Wong's comparisons on this blog -- so I've done the next best thing by posting the appropriate link above.)

I took another look and decided to respond with some comments of my own regarding this particular document. And now, thinking about it some more, I realize that my observations are relevant enough to warrant a blog post of their own. Here's what I wrote in response to the image linked to by Zed (with some additions and edits):

Sunday, October 16, 2016

Wednesday, October 12, 2016

Tuesday, October 11, 2016

Lin Wood for the Defense

NB: I am not any longer going to tolerate posts containing personal attacks, on me or anyone else. If you feel the need to vent some frustration, that's OK. But attacks on an individual are not OK. Posts containing such attacks will be deleted.

WARNING: Especially offensive posts will be marked as spam -- meaning that from now on nothing posted from the offending source will appear at all. If you desire reinstatement, you may email me with your request.

As I'm sure we all know by now, Lin Wood has sued Dr. Werner Spitz over his allegations that Burke Ramsey murdered his sister. Now, in an interview with Westword, he discusses his plans to sue CBS and the production company Critical Content over the same allegations. I have mixed feelings regarding Mr. Wood. On the one hand, I find his stubborn defense of "the Ramseys" over so many years to be misleading in the extreme. Thanks to his aggressive involvement in this case, all sorts of inaccurate and often outdated information has been widely disseminated (my all time favorite, the outrageous bit about "seven open doors and windows"). Stubbornly clinging to an intruder theory that's long since been thoroughly debunked, Wood has done everything possible to blow smoke over the substantial evidence of an inside job in which one or more of his clients very likely committed horrific acts.

Saturday, October 8, 2016

This is Getting Ridiculous

The volume of comments on this blog is hard to keep up with. Once we reach a certain number, the software turns a page and comments can easily become hard to find or lost altogether. I welcome your comments and hope they'll keep coming, but to keep up with the volume I need to keep adding more posts such as this. Please from now on, post your comments here. Or, speaking generally, always post your comments under the most recent blog post, to make sure they get seen. Thank you.

Thursday, October 6, 2016

More Room Still

More free space for comments. If you can't find your comment on one of the longer threads, go to the bottom of the page and select "Load More." You may need to do this more than once. Sorry about that.

Tuesday, October 4, 2016

Still More Room

OK, time to make space for more comments. Please everyone, try to keep your comments under the most recent post. If not, they may not get read, by me or anyone else.

Sunday, October 2, 2016

The Gospel According to Michael Tracey and David Mills

Warning: this post contains disturbing images some readers might prefer to avoid.

Well, finally I was able to view the recent A & E show, The Killing of JonBenet: The Truth Uncovered, produced by the same person who produced the first A & E "Documentary," David Mills, with his former co-producer, Michael Tracey, serving as consultant. It's now available, on a pay-per-view basis (not much), via youtube. (What would we do without youtube? I'm almost tempted to refer to it as Saint youtube.)

Friday, September 30, 2016

More on Woodward's Book

Continuing with my review of Paula Woodward's book. Also, I'd appreciate any comments anyone would like to make on the CNN special that just aired. I don't have cable so I'm curious as to whether they've come up with anything new.

Thursday, September 29, 2016

The Gospel According to St. Paula

NB: Don't forget the CNN HLN 2 hour special on the Ramsey case, starting tomorrow night (Friday) at 9 PM Eastern time.

Paula Woodward has finally released her long-promised book. Current title: We Have Your Daughter: The Unsolved Murder of JonBenet Ramsey Twenty Years Later. She's been a long-time Ramsey supporter (more accurately: apologist) practically from day one, so I more or less knew what was coming and was reluctant to shell out hard cash to read more of same. On the other hand, she did claim to have new information and also some access to images and files that have never before been released. So, what the Hell, I decided to get it anyhow.

Tuesday, September 27, 2016

More Room More Room

Making more room for comments.

`No room! No room!' they cried out when they saw Alice coming. `There's plenty of room!' said Alice indignantly, and she sat down in a large arm-chair at one end of the table.

NB: I've been informed that CNN Headline News (HLN) will be presenting a 2 hour program on the JonBenet Ramsey case on Friday, Sept. 30 (this Friday). At either 8 or 9 PM, depending on your time zone. This is a bit of a mystery because I've seen no advance publicity on this show, nor do I see it on the CNN HLN schedule. It's possible the show has been cancelled, but for those of you with cable it might be worth tracking down. Hope you can find it. I don't have cable. :-(

This just in. The CNN show WILL be aired, on HLN, at 9PM Eastern time this Friday, the 30th. Here's a preview

Monday, September 26, 2016

Straw Poll

I've come up with a couple questions designed to help me understand the mind set of those reading and posting here. For purposes of this poll, please try to forget about the Ramseys and assume this is something happening to you personally.

Sunday, September 25, 2016

Evidence of "chronic sexual abuse" -- a guest post by CC

[NB: Since my inbox is now overwhelmed with comments I can no longer deal with any comment not found under the most recent blog post. So please try to avoid posting anywhere else. I appreciate all the many comments but lack the time to individually address every single one, sorry. If you've already posted something important elsewhere feel free to repeat it here. DocG]

An autopsy of the body of Jonbenet Ramsey was conducted on 12/26/96 by Dr John Meyer, Boulder County Medical Examiner,  and witnessed by Detective Linda Arndt of the Boulder Police Department.   Dr Meyer told Arndt that JBR had injuries consistent with prior  digital penetration of her vagina.   Meyer later returned to the morgue with Dr Andrew Sirontak,  Chief of Denver Children's Hospital Child Protection Team, who also examined the body and found the hymen "shriveled and retracted", among other old injuries to her vagina, and agreed that JBR had been sexually abused prior to the night of her death.

Saturday, September 24, 2016

Assumptions, Speculations, Logical Inferences, etc.

What the world might need least is yet another lecture from DocG on the importance of logic. Well, screw the world. You're going to get one anyhow.

Thursday, September 22, 2016

Thinking Through the 911 Call

To me the 911 call is the most important aspect of the case, as it literally tells us who wrote the ransom note, and also, very likely, who killed JonBenet. It's also the most controversial aspect of my interpretation of this case, and many challenges have been offered ever since I first proposed it (see the first three posts on this blog). So I'd like to take this opportunity to clarify.

Wednesday, September 21, 2016


This just in! Lin Wood has announced he will be suing CBS over their investigator's allegation that Burke killed JonBenet. Read all about it! Here's what I just wrote in response to the news:

Tuesday, September 20, 2016

The Case of: JonBenét Ramsey - Part 2 continued

It's now tomorrow -- and I've decided to start over on a new page.

While the investigators heading up the CBS team make much of their decision to make a fresh start, they fall into many of the same old traps. First, they accept many of the same assumptions that have led everyone else astray. Second, they overestimate their ability to interpret the evidence, which remains elusive, ambiguous, and -- to use that magic word we see so often: inconclusive. Third, they tend to neglect or downplay the logic of the case, which, for me, is of the greatest significance. And the profiling to which they attach so much importance is rife with confirmation bias.

Monday, September 19, 2016

The Case of: JonBenét Ramsey - Part 2

I must say, it's extremely gratifying to see all the comments pouring in -- and now that part 2 of the CBS special has just concluded I'm expecting many more. Much more, I'm afraid, than I'll be able to handle myself. I'm hoping I can just find enough time to read them all. So for the time being at least this blog will be morphing into an open forum, where everyone participating can share their thoughts and bounce them off each other -- with me trying to keep up as best I can.

Now to the matter at hand, which is, of course Part 2 of the program, and an overview of the entire thing:

Sunday, September 18, 2016

The Case of: JonBenét Ramsey - Part 1

[NB: Don't forget. Today at 3PM Eastern, Dr. Phil completes his interview with Burke. Tonight at 9 Eastern, the final episode of the CBS program. Also, a very interesting followup to the first two Dr. Phil interviews can be found here on youtube. (During the course of this segment, Ramsey attorney admits to what I have long suspected: DA Lacey was intimidated by the threat of a huge lawsuit -- it was only after Lin Wood threatened her that she decided to "exonerate" the Ramseys.)

For those of you curious as to what my take on this case might be, please read the first three posts on this blog -- links can be found in the intro, just above. But please don't comment under those posts, as they are already much too cluttered. If you have questions, post them here.]

See below for the long-awaited 911 "enhancement"

I just saw part one of "The Case of: JonBenét Ramsey" on CBS, as I feel sure everyone reading here did -- at least those of you living in the USA. It's late, so I won't be going into any details for now, but I plan on adding more thoughts in this space from time to time, so please stay tuned.

For now, I'll just share a few thoughts:

Friday, September 16, 2016

Showtime Thread Part Three

[Update: Last night I found part three of the ID/Discovery program on the Ramsey case on youtube. It contained two especially interesting segments, a fascinating interview with John Mark Karr, and a clear statement by a DNA expert asserting that the DNA evidence should not be seen as an essential element in this case. In other words, there was never any reason to exonerate "the Ramseys." I was going to post the link but now I can't find it anymore. (I've just now found it: here. Not sure how long this is going to be up. It's much more interesting than part one.) Instead I see a copy of part 1 posted by some lady who feels sure she'll have to take it down soon due to copyright laws. But for now you can find it here. Looks like youtube is going to be an interesting place to search for Ramsey related materials in the next few weeks at least, so I suggest you check there periodically.]

Wow, the comments are coming thick and fast. I can no longer keep up. I'll try to find time to read them all but probably won't be responding much as I feel overwhelmed at this point. All I'll say for now is:

Wednesday, September 14, 2016

Showtime Thread Part Two

Room for more comments relating to the current spate of media presentations.

NB: I'm pleased to see all the comments, but I am also feeling a bit overwhelmed. Forgive me if I don't respond to all your questions, as I just don't have the time. For those of you new to the case and/or new to this blog: 1. Please post your comments and questions here rather than somewhere else on the blog, or they might not be noticed; 2. If you have questions about any aspect of the case, please use the search mechanism on the upper right of the page before posting a question here. Chances are your question has already been addressed somewhere on this blog. If not, feel free to post it here, and if it's something that has not already been addressed I'll try to answer as best I can.

For a relatively brief and succinct summary of my interpretation of this case, I recommend the post titled Why John?

It's nice to see so many of you reading here. Thanks for your participation.


PS: Please avoid adding comments to the first few posts or any other posts with lots of comments, as they are too difficult for me to find, and no one else is likely to see them. I won't be responding to such posts anymore. Please DO comment here or on the most recent post where there's sufficient room. Thank you.

Thursday, September 8, 2016

A Minor Mystery Revealed?

[Point of interest. I was recently contacted by an author offering her e-book on the Ramsey case as a "free book giveaway" this week only. The book is called "Little Girl Blu: The JonBenet Inside Circle Theory"  and it can be downloaded from this website: ]


Burke will be interviewed by Dr. Phil at 3PM Monday on CBS. First of a series.

JonBenét: An American Murder Mystery, this Monday, SEPTEMBER 12-14 10/9C on Investigation/Discovery.

The Case Of: JonBenét Ramsey, first episode, Sunday 8:30 p.m., CBS, Sept. 18, continues on Monday, Sept. 19 (9:00-11:00 PM, ET/PT) and concludes Sunday, Sept. 25 (8:30-10:30 PM, ET/PT)]

Thanks to the A&E trailer (I don't have cable, so was unable to access the show itself), we have a brief but tantalizing glimpse of John (I'm assuming it's John) writing on a lined notepad, which (finally) gives us a chance to see some examples of his "official" writing style -- assuming that's what we see in that shot. The use of "artfully" superimposed images makes things a bit challenging, but I was able to do a couple screen captures that might prove helpful.

Wednesday, September 7, 2016

Has the Author of the Ransom Note Been Unmasked? Part 2

(.....continued from previous post.)

I don't think Mr. Berger will mind my calling him Tom. Over the last week or so we've exchanged several emails and by this time I see him as a friend. Not that we always agree. But I find him to be affable, open-minded, reasonable and extremely helpful. Also very knowledgeable. As I mentioned last time, when Tom did me the favor of double-checking his previous result with a different set of exemplars, he came up with a completely different "suspect," drawn from the large pool of Enron texts used as a control. Did someone who once worked at Enron write the Ramsey ransom note? I seriously doubt it. The Enron "hit" can be regarded as an artifact of the methodology, designed to control for confirmation bias by including a large sampling of texts from a presumably innocent source.

Tuesday, September 6, 2016

Has the Author of the Ransom Note Been Unmasked?

In a comment dated August 30, we were directed by "Anonymous" to a web page titled Unmasking the JonBenet Ransom Note with Linguistic Analysis. The author has employed computer software, based on the science of "stylometry," to identify the writer of the Ramsey ransom note -- and lo and behold, as you might expect, the culprit turns out to be everyone's favorite villain: Patsy Ramsey.

Monday, September 5, 2016

It's Showtime!

This post is for comments on the various media presentations. I'm looking forward to reading them, especially since I don't have cable, so I'll be needing your eyes and ears.


 NBC's Dateline will be airing a 2 hour special on the Ramsey case Friday, Sept. 9, at 9 PM Eastern time.

Burke will be interviewed by Dr. Phil at 3PM this Monday on CBS. First of a series.

JonBenét: An American Murder Mystery, this Monday, SEPTEMBER 12-14 10/9C on Investigation/Discovery.

The Case Of: JonBenét Ramsey, first episode, Sunday 8:30 p.m., CBS, Sept. 18, continues on Monday, Sept. 19 (9:00-11:00 PM, ET/PT) and concludes Sunday, Sept. 25 (8:30-10:30 PM, ET/PT)

Saturday, August 20, 2016

Suggestions for Newcomers

There's been a steep rise in blog hits over the last few days, probably due to all the publicity generated by upcoming media events. And from some recent comments I've been reading it looks like this blog is being accessed by people either new to the case or unfamiliar with certain issues regularly discussed here. As a result, and to save myself the time and effort of answering the same questions or correcting the same errors over and over, I've decided to offer some suggestions to the newcomers among us. This might well apply to some of you old timers as well:

Thursday, August 18, 2016

Media Madness

Early last May I was contacted by a producer at one of the major networks. She'd discovered this blog, was impressed by my knowledge of the case, and wanted to include me in an upcoming JonBenet Ramsey special. Naturally I was interested. Shortly afterward we had a long phone conversation in which I outlined my take on the case, stressing my certainty that John was the long sought-after culprit. She didn't completely agree, but she made it clear that my argument impressed her and that she definitely wanted to interview me for the show. I was impressed by this woman's open mind and her intelligence, as evidenced by her many excellent questions, and looked forward to working with her.