tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post2510994514111557430..comments2024-02-23T18:09:21.379-05:00Comments on Solving the JonBenet Ramsey Case: More Handwriting Evidence - Part 2DocGhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17359004200002936544noreply@blogger.comBlogger105125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-21373880682231639342017-03-22T23:51:06.767-04:002017-03-22T23:51:06.767-04:00No, the writing on the legal form looks nothing re...No, the writing on the legal form looks nothing remotely like anything Patsy ever wrote. And no, she did not change her handwriting. That's a myth perpetrated by Steve Thomas, based on his assumption that she stopped using manuscript "a" after the night of the murder. Yet there are several examples of manuscript "a" in samples she penned during the investigation. Thomas saw what he wanted to see and perpetrated a falsehood.DocGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17359004200002936544noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-75425072796889438362017-03-22T23:04:35.107-04:002017-03-22T23:04:35.107-04:00Of course it was most likely Patsy who filled out ...Of course it was most likely Patsy who filled out the legal form above, for John (or to use as a template to then type out a filed court document from). Interesting also that Patsy was noted to have permanently changed her handwriting in letters to friends after her daughter's death. --WyattAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-83293365528612628882016-11-07T12:06:43.147-05:002016-11-07T12:06:43.147-05:00CC,
Yes the suit was filed in Michigan in the 3rd ...CC,<br />Yes the suit was filed in Michigan in the 3rd Circuit Court in Wayne County. You can read the full complaint here: https://www.scribd.com/document/326687568/Burke-Ramsey-vs-Werner-Spitz<br />KatieAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-83235704509322642502016-11-07T07:26:05.011-05:002016-11-07T07:26:05.011-05:00Was the suit filed in Michigan, where the cause of...Was the suit filed in Michigan, where the cause of action arose? If so, Wood may not be admitted to the bar in that state and so have hired local counsel.<br />CC<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-24084336219944746162016-11-06T22:50:29.652-05:002016-11-06T22:50:29.652-05:00There is no way John would attempt to implicate Bu...There is no way John would attempt to implicate Burke. For one thing, it wouldn't be credible unless Burke confessed. For another, it would expose him as a liar, responsible for inflicting all sorts of harm on the many people who've been investigated as suspects and, of course, all the investigative resources that have been devoted to this case over the years.<br /><br />John's only possible defense is the intruder theory, which he would stick to regardless of how absurd it is. And Lin Wood is not a criminal lawyer, so if he were indicted, Wood would most likely not be defending him in any case.DocGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17359004200002936544noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-72950374437369935392016-11-06T21:36:15.259-05:002016-11-06T21:36:15.259-05:00What I meant is that maybe Burke is technically re...What I meant is that maybe Burke is technically represented by another attorney?HKHnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-23927130686436532892016-11-06T21:29:55.917-05:002016-11-06T21:29:55.917-05:00Mike G., I *believe* that the complaint filed agai...Mike G., I *believe* that the complaint filed against Spitz was technically filed by attorney, John Lesko. Lin Wood's name is also listed on the complaint, however.<br /><br />Maybe CC can explain the reason for this. HKHnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-76689795593672032542016-11-06T21:05:07.499-05:002016-11-06T21:05:07.499-05:00True. But the BDIers here have been arguing Burke ...True. But the BDIers here have been arguing Burke was put to bed unaware of how serious the injuries he inflicted on his sister were. Which raises another interesting question I've been meanig to ask you. <br /><br />If John went to trial, BDI might be a better alterative theory defense than an IDI theory. Yet by Wood representing both John and Burke, he strips himself of possibly his greatest weapon. Do you agree? If not, why? If you do agree, of the following possibilities, which one would you predict?<br /><br />1) John's position with respect to Burke is "united we stand, united we fall". He insists Wood stay on as his attorney and deploy only an IDI defense.<br /><br />2) Wood stays on with John, but drops Burke as a client. This leaves open the option which, if deployed, by all appearances effectively throws Burke under the bus.<br /><br />3) Wood retains Burke as a client and tells John he will no longer represent him. <br /><br />4) Wood drops both Burke and John as clients.<br /><br />5) Some other possibility I'm missing?<br /><br />Mike G. <br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-19531438157832551292016-11-06T20:46:40.721-05:002016-11-06T20:46:40.721-05:00I've read too, on other sites, that Patsy'...I've read too, on other sites, that Patsy's side of the bed was still made. I can't quite understand where anyone got this information though. In JR's 1997 interview, he says:<br /><br />JR: The alarm is a clock radio which is on my side of the bed, which is the north side, left as you face the bed.<br /><br />http://www.acandyrose.com/1997BPD-John-Interview-Complete.htm<br /><br />If you google an image of the Ramsey's bed, if anything, it appears that JR's side was still made. Although, I still wouldn't put much stock into this, as the picture doesn't show the bed closely enough, to determine that the left side of the bed was totally undisturbed. I'm also not sure what JR means by the "north side."HKHnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-15361379476858506752016-11-06T18:08:33.156-05:002016-11-06T18:08:33.156-05:00On the other hand, let's suppose Burke actuall...On the other hand, let's suppose Burke actually DID say "what did you find?". Seems to me that if he already knew what happened, according to the theory of the CBS investigation team, he would not have had any reason to ask such a question. So that could be considered evidence he was innocent, no?DocGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17359004200002936544noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-18812089689807196522016-11-06T18:05:43.373-05:002016-11-06T18:05:43.373-05:00Yeah, a competent judge would probably toss it.Yeah, a competent judge would probably toss it.DocGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17359004200002936544noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-76702763320065785982016-11-06T17:43:35.426-05:002016-11-06T17:43:35.426-05:00"Yes, Mike. I believe I drew on that same sou..."Yes, Mike. I believe I drew on that same source myself a while back. What's heard after the 911 hangup could certainly be crosstalk."<br /> ---Doc<br /><br />To the attorney's out there: <br /><br />Regarding this "crosstalk" phenomenon, in the hands a sharp prosecutor, could it be used to convince a judge to rule inadmissible as evidence, the sounds heard after Patsy's call to 911? There's so many differences of opinion as to what's heard and what's not, if you add in the possibility of "crosstalk", couldn't it be used to prejudice a jury? <br /><br />Rule 403. Excluding Relevant Evidence for Prejudice, Confusion, Waste of Time, or Other Reasons<br /><br />"The court may exclude relevant evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of one or more of the following: unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the jury, undue delay, wasting time, or needlessly presenting cumulative evidence."<br /><br />Mike G.<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-39498967769201824972016-11-06T13:31:57.856-05:002016-11-06T13:31:57.856-05:00OK, technically it can mean different things, but ...OK, technically it can mean different things, but it has come to mean pretty much one thing. He did say "foreign object".<br /><br />Brainstorming, if not the bedwetting, maybe poop was what really pushed Patsy over the edge that night?<br /><br />That note is directed at John. "Its all on you now, John" (you never have to deal with this stuff, do you?) <br /><br />GSAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-53606460295289964372016-11-06T12:18:05.063-05:002016-11-06T12:18:05.063-05:00The word "sodomized" can mean different ...The word "sodomized" can mean different things. There's no evidence of any rectal disturbance, according to the autopsy. Nor is there any evidence she was assaulted with the paintbrush handle. "Birefringent material" from the handle was found in her vagina -- most likely transferred via her assaulter's finger.<br /><br />From the photos I've seen it's not at all clear that Patsy's side of the bed was still made. If it were that obvious, it would have been trumpeted to the heavens by Steve Thomas. Yet I couldn't find a single reference to that in his book.DocGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17359004200002936544noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-28845075563648904222016-11-06T12:06:15.590-05:002016-11-06T12:06:15.590-05:00"Help me Jesus" not hysterical enough fo..."Help me Jesus" not hysterical enough for you?DocGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17359004200002936544noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-39312060419052396172016-11-06T12:06:03.274-05:002016-11-06T12:06:03.274-05:00The statement is made by forensic pathologist Mark...The statement is made by forensic pathologist Mark Taff, in the second program, at about 41:20. The movies are up at the Lifetime site this morning. You may be able to log in and view this through your service provider, if it is one listed, for free.<br /><br />He says based on the autopsy report, it appears that....<br /><br />I can't believe that the producers allowed that in, since I have never heard any other commentator use the word "sodomize".<br /><br />Possible, I suppose, if the perp was randomly stabbing with the paint brush handle.<br /><br />Otherwise, I thought the main movie fairly well followed the timeline and events mentioned in The Bonita Papers.<br /><br />My first thought was that if she was deliberately sodomized, that it might be related the so-called scatological problems observed in JonBenet's room.<br /><br />GSAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-32803532616462322702016-11-06T12:05:14.905-05:002016-11-06T12:05:14.905-05:00There's no evidence of that. It's just a t...There's no evidence of that. It's just a theory I floated to explain why she was changed into an oversize pair of panties.DocGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17359004200002936544noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-80819041082362001522016-11-06T10:37:10.692-05:002016-11-06T10:37:10.692-05:00There were a few errors in the shows (at least bas...There were a few errors in the shows (at least based on the evidence that has been publicized). The Autopsy Report clearly states there was no disturbance to JB's rectal area. They also said (in the show) that Patsy's side of the bed was still made up, meaning she was up all night, but the pictures they showed were not the actual evidence photos. I thought the shows were NOT very well done, and I wouldn't give much credence to anything that was said in either of them. Just my opinion.<br /><br />DanniAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-66408651676724465792016-11-06T10:12:03.551-05:002016-11-06T10:12:03.551-05:00I watched the Lifetime Movie last night, and the d...I watched the Lifetime Movie last night, and the documentary on Patsy afterward. Thought I was pretty familiar with this case, so was shocked to hear that "JonBenet was sodomized with a foreign object"! Do not remember hearing or seeing that in print before. About dropped my teeth. How about a source for that?<br /><br />GS<br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-60213750563121167532016-11-06T10:04:32.156-05:002016-11-06T10:04:32.156-05:00Forget Burke's voice being heard or not heard....Forget Burke's voice being heard or not heard. What was important for me is that IF Patsy is heard speaking and its not in a hysterical tone, then hook, line and sinker.<br /><br />-JAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-41722610266136486062016-11-06T09:36:31.551-05:002016-11-06T09:36:31.551-05:00Someone mentioned above that JB's (I'm ass...Someone mentioned above that JB's (I'm assuming original)panties were thrown in the hamper (Anon, 11/5, 9:28). This is the first I have heard of that. Does anyone have a source for that statement?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-84300382363523893432016-11-06T09:30:40.820-05:002016-11-06T09:30:40.820-05:00Yes, Mike. I believe I drew on that same source my...Yes, Mike. I believe I drew on that same source myself a while back. What's heard after the 911 hangup could certainly be crosstalk. DocGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17359004200002936544noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-32897647639607995432016-11-06T06:37:22.002-05:002016-11-06T06:37:22.002-05:00Anon 9.28 PM - there's so many using the Anony...Anon 9.28 PM - there's so many using the Anonymous moniker at present, maybe you can sign out at the bottom of your comment so we know who we're responding to? :)<br /> "Why go to the trouble of "staging" a body no one would ever see? Why not bury the panties along with the body instead of throwing them in the hamper?" <br />John orchestrated the staging *after* Patsy made the 911 call, probably in the ninety minutes he went AWOL. In his original plan, no one was going to see JonBenet's body - at least probably not until it had decomposed to some extent after being exposed to the elements, ideally. There was no need for any kind of staging (other than the note to fool Patsy) prior to that. I believe his plan was to bury her panties (and any other incriminating evidence) along with her body, but when Patsy foiled his plans, he had to improvise - and he had to do it fast - therefore the end result wasn't ideal but his options were limited by that point. (Though plan B. worked for him anyway. Not because his plan was foolproof, but rather due to the lax treatment of the crime scene by LE. John got lucky, pure and simple)Ms Dhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15732858990595163048noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-73695637859110612972016-11-06T06:15:19.617-05:002016-11-06T06:15:19.617-05:00Inquisitive, how is it that the Pughs never left o...Inquisitive, how is it that the Pughs never left one iota of physical evidence at the crime scene - not even so much as a hair? Ms Dhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15732858990595163048noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-71415255785708963302016-11-06T00:34:27.758-04:002016-11-06T00:34:27.758-04:00Doc:
Sorry to change the subject, but maybe the ...Doc:<br /> <br />Sorry to change the subject, but maybe the handwriting issue has run its course. The sounds heard over the phone after the 911 call ended, could they have been telephone crossstalk?<br /><br />"Crosstalk is a type of interference. Interference can come from just about anywhere - e.g. RF interference from all sorts of things emitting radio waves (including, but not limited to, radio transmitters). Interference can also come from coupling from other devices. In the case of a phone system, this could be hearing humming from a power line or music from the local AM radio station on the phone line. Generally crosstalk refers to interference from an 'adjacent' signal - be it in a wire, radio channel, etc - leaking into the 'victim' signal. In the case of a phone system, this could be in the form of being able to hear your neighbor's phone calls on your line because the two lines are routed next to each other on the telephone pole."<br /><br />http://electronics.stackexchange.com/questions/141271/crosstalk-vs-interference<br /><br />Mike G.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com