tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post9023401738703909075..comments2024-02-23T18:09:21.379-05:00Comments on Solving the JonBenet Ramsey Case: Key QuestionsDocGhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17359004200002936544noreply@blogger.comBlogger58125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-74009514205869273042014-12-28T16:49:26.256-05:002014-12-28T16:49:26.256-05:00In regard to # 9, I think JRs plan was put JBRs wr...In regard to # 9, I think JRs plan was put JBRs wrapped body in the Samsonite suitcase and put it in the car. If PR or anyone saw him with the suitcase, he would say it's for the money (the RN would call it an "adequately sized attache."). Then he'd go out and dump the body, go to the bank and fill the suitcase with money and either dump the money and suitcase (saying the kidnappers intercepted him and took the money but didn't return JBR) or bring the suitcase with money home and wait for the call that never came.<br /><br />As to # 14 exposure, I think that JR was molesting JBR for some time (PR probably had no sex drive due to her ovarian cancer and its treatment so JR turned to JBR for his sexual gratification). This last time, JR was too rough and accidentally injured her and caused her to bleed, which led to JBR screaming out and trying to seek her mother, and JBR bashed her on the head to silence her. Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-30094711060063853302013-12-06T04:49:56.675-05:002013-12-06T04:49:56.675-05:00patsy says we have a kidnapping, but when the oper...patsy says we have a kidnapping, but when the operator asks her about the note, she does not say its a ransom note. she has just reported a kidnapping, so, obviously the note is a ransom note.lee dumetthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13069478296393921019noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-86082022665839798842013-09-20T22:45:26.343-04:002013-09-20T22:45:26.343-04:00"2. Why would the Ramseys call 911 if they we..."2. Why would the Ramseys call 911 if they were staging a fake kidnapping?"<br /><br />I kept the question short and to the point because I assumed readers were already aware of the details of this case. For your benefit, I will recast the question in a more complete form:<br /><br />Why would the Ramseys call 911 as part of a plan involving a staged kidnapping, knowing that the body of their victim was still in the house and would sooner or later be discovered by the police, thus nullifying the effect of their "ransom" note and making them look VERY suspicious?<br /><br />This is NOT simply a case of parents calling 911 to report a missing child. It is a case where someone in that house murdered a child and then wrote a phoney ransom note as part of a staged kidnapping. Why would that person want to undo his (or her) staging by calling the police before removing the body from the premises?DocGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17359004200002936544noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-25971301917819951942013-09-20T17:49:53.832-04:002013-09-20T17:49:53.832-04:002. Why would the Ramseys call 911 if they were sta...2. Why would the Ramseys call 911 if they were staging a fake kidnapping?<br /><br /><br /><br />Do you realize how many parents kill their kids then call 911 to report them missing. It is called alibi building everyone. <br /><br />I didnt do it, see... I called the cops.<br /><br />And then the I am not speaking.<br /><br />It works. Look at how many cases we have kids missing that really dont have the ability to just get up and leave on their own and you have parents refusing to speak, not remembering.<br /><br />Trust me, Patsy and John believe they are smarter and had the money to buy out what their perceived intelligence could not. <br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-64822285733255912252013-05-16T14:46:58.149-04:002013-05-16T14:46:58.149-04:00I think you are correct. John understood that the ...I think you are correct. John understood that the likelyhood of him being able to move the body out of the house was remote. I think he was in a panic of the body being discovered due to smell or Patsy..Bottom line, the police being in his house for 7 hours with her body hidden there was more than John's nerves could handle. <br />I wish someone would address the aspect of it being Christmas. I feel with a 6yrs old victim it had to have played a part in what transpired. Personally, and I am not real familiar with all the case evidence.<br />BUT I think the celebration of Christmas demands that special relationships be acknowledged. Perhaps John approached JB for special time with her that night. Perhaps they had a more indepth conversation than might have normally occured. During that encounter something was said/done by JonBenet that John believed was beyond his control and would ruin him. I also think he (on some level he blamed her for ruining their perfect special relationship) that accounts for the brutality.<br />I hope the case is proscecuted one day. JonBenet suffered tremendously, and someone needs to be held accountable for that.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-38782007758836217302013-04-24T11:21:36.604-04:002013-04-24T11:21:36.604-04:00OK, now I get it. And thanks, I'm glad you see...OK, now I get it. And thanks, I'm glad you see my take as plausible. DocGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17359004200002936544noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-19613962817243450152013-04-24T00:44:48.248-04:002013-04-24T00:44:48.248-04:00Well, what I'm saying is the macro in this cas...Well, what I'm saying is the macro in this case is the ransom letter. All this analyzing of perceived reactions, other aspects, etc. should take a back stage. It signifies guilt of one or more of the Ramsey's period. Every detective worth his salt working on the case has always attested to this, forget about that Smith character. <br /><br />For instance, analyzing the 911 call. ALL kidnappers warn not to call the police or dire consequences will result, but probably most people end up calling anyway, instinctively feeling their chances are better relying on the experts. People know the police aren't going to pull up in black and whites wearing blue uniforms for a kidnapping case.<br /><br />But the note means ONE of them for sure. You know what. You're right on with JR and probably PR being clueless. While PR was a hysterical mess. explaining her silence, the detective monitoring the call that was suppose to come between 8 and 10, said neither PE or JR said a word about the deadline passing with nothing from the kidnappers. A call of the utmost importance. JR knew the note was a fake because he wrote it.<br /><br />Too bad that the detectives / prosecution couldn't put a plausible scenario together like the one you've proposed to get this thing prosecuted.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-25340356651501667872013-04-23T16:48:46.599-04:002013-04-23T16:48:46.599-04:00Yes, and I'm sure John was well aware of that....Yes, and I'm sure John was well aware of that. Which is why the note contains so many dire warnings against calling in the police. The 911 call was definitely NOT part of the plan -- it ruined the plan, forcing John to improvise, which he did very well, I must say.DocGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17359004200002936544noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-61876418127688282482013-04-23T16:44:44.495-04:002013-04-23T16:44:44.495-04:00Not sure I completely follow you, but thanks for t...Not sure I completely follow you, but thanks for this interesting take.<br /><br />I think the investigators got confused because, while it wasn't hard to see this note as part of a staged kidnapping, it WAS hard to understand why "the Ramseys" would have written such a note and then called the police with the body still in the house, thus negating their staging. It's only when we separate "the Ramseys" into two different individuals, one of whom is innocent and the other guilty, that the point of the note becomes clear. What they were dealing with was not simply staging, but staging gone wrong, but they lacked the imagination to consider such a possibility.DocGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17359004200002936544noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-82775866580212531162013-04-23T11:24:44.187-04:002013-04-23T11:24:44.187-04:00Once the 911 call was made, there was frickin way,...Once the 911 call was made, there was frickin way, not in a zillion years, not even with the keystone cops presiding initially, they were EVER going to be able to move that body. The FBI would be involved in a very short manner. And that's that.<br /><br /> Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-50495283857981687262013-04-23T11:03:42.525-04:002013-04-23T11:03:42.525-04:00In the Simpson case his lawyers' analysed the ...In the Simpson case his lawyers' analysed the Simpson-Goldman fight to its 9th degree with the aim being to show that the fight would have taken too long for Simpson to have returned to his house.<br /><br />How about this. The guy was in a hurry. Catching a plane to establish his alibi. Like maybe he set a record.<br /><br />Analyzing the micro to refute the macro (multiple, independent evidence chains overwhelmingly pointing to Simpson) is like analyzing a butterfly's moves to determine if a hurricane hit. How about this. Crawl out of the baement and look.<br /><br />The ransom note has always been highly undervalued with regard to evidence against the adult Ramseys. It's nothing less than a confession. It's almost directive toward a guilty verdict. To presume that someone besides one of the Ramseys would have written it wonders into the realm of fantasy land. Generous kidnapper, mere 100K, Dr. Zhivago book length, having to stay at the crime scene liked they owned the place, Ramsey's social circle included a psychotic, what have you ...<br /><br />Ok maybe that last one. Someone in the social circle who had intimate access to JonBenet. Someone who knew the lay of the house intimately. Someone who felt at home.<br /><br />Nevermind ... that would be JR.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-65865144548847528182013-03-31T10:11:56.267-04:002013-03-31T10:11:56.267-04:00Excellent point, Erica. I see no reason to suspect...Excellent point, Erica. I see no reason to suspect that Patsy knew anything about either the sexual abuse or the murder.DocGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17359004200002936544noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-44301558196838089422013-03-31T01:47:05.785-04:002013-03-31T01:47:05.785-04:00"Chronic irritation or inflammation in that a... "Chronic irritation or inflammation in that area has symptoms that JBR would probably have mentioned to her mother. After all, PR did make many trips with JBR to the pediatrician other than for sinus infections. Maybe PR lied when she explained that the irritation was due to bubble baths."<br /><br />If Patsy Ramsey believed that JonBenet's history of vaginitis was caused by her husband abusing JonBenet, and Patsy was desperate to keep it a secret, why would she bring JonBenet to the doctor for it in the first place? <br /><br />-EricaAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-29178403135609721752013-02-04T11:02:45.945-05:002013-02-04T11:02:45.945-05:00I appreciate your contributions, Kay, especially b...I appreciate your contributions, Kay, especially because one function of this blog is to hash through all the various different interpretations of this case and subject them to critical scrutiny. And this goes for my interpretations as well.<br /><br />However, as I said, I am already familiar with most of the arguments you've presented. For example many of your questions are dealt with here: http://solvingjonbenet.blogspot.com/2012/09/the-911-call-part-2.html and I urge you to read that post.<br /><br />"THEY WOULD WANT TO ESTABLISH A KIDNAPPING as soon as possible in the morning (the only reason for the 911 call and the RN) so the police wouldn't search for a body - there would be no reason to. And we know that was in fact the case. They would search her bedroom or the main floors but would have no reason to give the basement a thorough search, especially a small relatively unused out-of-the-way basement room with no windows."<br /><br />The only way to be sure the police wouldn't find the body in their house would be to get it out of the house before calling them. And that would have been very easy for them to do -- if you read the note carefully you'll see how it would have given them the perfect excuse to dump the body while claiming to be delivering the ransom. Once the police are called, there is no way they could remove the body without being observed. And as of course you know very well, John found the body. Why would he find it for the police if the purpose of the 911 call was to discourage them from looking for it?<br /><br />"So only JR knows why he brought up JBR's body many hours later, he could have just as easily pretended to open that door and not see anything and move on."<br /><br />Yes, exactly. If his plan was to somehow remove the body under the noses of the police, then why didn't he pretend he'd searched that room and found nothing? Sorry, but nothing you say convinces me that calling 911 could have been part of the staging. Once the police arrive at that house, the house is going to be under observation until the victim has been located, and sooner or later the smell emanating from that room is going to be all too evident. John found the body simply because it gave him a chance to contaminate the crime scene. But his plan had already been blown and he was simply improvising at that point.<br /><br />Everything else you say is simply speculation, Kay. Patsy may or may not have guessed that John was molesting JonBenet. We have no way of knowing. But if she had, it's hard to see why she would take such huge risks to cover for him, even after he'd murdered their child.DocGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17359004200002936544noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-58192760089414247072013-02-04T10:37:05.129-05:002013-02-04T10:37:05.129-05:00As for the note being written with John's help...As for the note being written with John's help, the writing style in the note itself is very consistent throughout. If two people took turns printing it, there would be inconsistencies, but there are not. I posted my own comparisons between John's printing and that of the note here: http://solvingjonbenet.blogspot.com/2012/07/some-handwriting-evidence.html As you can see there are many striking similarities. But I too was cherry picking, so I wouldn't say this proves John wrote it. However, I invite you to put this beside Wong's comparisons and ask yourself which set looks more convincing.<br /><br />Yet another set of comparisons has been made between Chris Wolf's writing and the note, and again one finds some striking similarities. See here: http://solvingjonbenet.blogspot.com/2012/10/big-bad-wolf-or-dangers-of-cherry.html<br /><br />"It just doesn't make any sense at all for her to call 911 with that ransom note telling them they are being closely "monitored" and if they call police JBR will be killed/beheaded."<br /><br />Maybe -- but it makes much less sense for her to literally call the police on herself, so they can find the body of her victim and thus completely nullify the effect of the note she'd just written. It also makes no sense at all for her to then hand over to them a note she wrote on her own pad and in her own hand.<br /><br />I can understand why she might panic and be so desperate for police assistance that she would ignore the warnings in the note and call 911 anyhow. After all, the kidnappers could still be in the house or lurking around the premises, so she might well have felt she herself was in danger. Call her selfish, call her a narcissist. That doesn't make her a criminal.<br /><br />"So the purpose of the 911 call (despite the body still being in the house) was to establish the phony kidnapping as soon as possible. That makes a lot of sense"<br /><br />What do you mean by "establish the phony kidnapping"? How does calling the police with the body of the supposed kidnap victim hidden in the house establish a phoney kidnapping? Once the body is found the phoniness of the kidnap staging is exposed, not established -- which means the note was almost certainly written by one of the Ramseys. <br /><br />I admit it's hard to understand why Patsy would ignore those threats in the note (unless, as she claimed, she never read the whole thing, which is certainly possible). But claiming she made that call only because she knew JonBenet was already dead isn't really an explanation. If the body of her victim is in the house, and she has just written a "ransom note" giving her an excuse NOT to call the police and giving her an opportunity to get the body out of the house, then why on Earth would she undo her staged kidnapping by calling the police so soon?<br />DocGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17359004200002936544noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-43422140974926072722013-02-04T10:13:46.811-05:002013-02-04T10:13:46.811-05:00Everything in your post is the sort of thing that&...Everything in your post is the sort of thing that's been claimed or argued for years, and of course I am well aware of all these arguments and discuss them at some length in this blog. If you actually take a look at a sample of Patsy's hand you'll see that her writing style is totally different from that of the note. However, when any two people share the same overall approach to handwriting, then it's often possible to find "striking" similarities when comparing isolated letters, as Cina Wong and most of Darnay Hoffmann's experts do. When one is already convinced ahead of time, and is therefore looking only for such similarities and ignoring all the differences, that's called "cherry picking" and is a commonly known problem in scientific research.<br /><br />I analyze Cina Wong's comparisons here: http://solvingjonbenet.blogspot.com/2012/10/the-experts-see-patsy-part-1cina-wong.html And in the following posts I examine the claims made by her and the other "experts" hired by Darnay Hoffmann, who was determined to "prove" Patsy wrote the note. In all cases, there is clear evidence of cherry picking, alongside other obvious problems with the approach each one takes. I urge you to read all these posts carefully in order to understand why someone who's writing is so different from that of the note is nevertheless so widely regarded as the one who wrote it.<br /><br />With respect to the list of similarities offered by Cina Wong, unfortunately I was forced to remove all those comparisons due to a complaint regarding copyright infringement. However, if you read my analysis you'll get a pretty good idea of what the problems are. One good example: She compares two letters "D," which do in fact look quite a bit alike at first glance. However, on closer examination of a better quality copy than the one usually posted on the Internet, it's possible to see that one of those was formed with two strokes while the other was formed with three. Since Wong is supposedly an expert you would think such a difference would matter to her -- but she ignores it. All that matters is that they look alike. But if they were formed differently, then the visual similarity is beside the point. Clearly she was interested only in similarities and not differences, which means she was cherry picking.<br /><br />Another example: one of the similarities she pointed to was based on her observation that some of Patsy's examples exhibited margin drift, which she also saw in the note. However there is NO margin drift in the note. What she saw was a crooked xerox, and she never even bothered to check for that, she just saw what she wanted to see -- a similarity. I.e., cherry picking.DocGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17359004200002936544noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-37563132389972080692013-02-03T22:06:32.304-05:002013-02-03T22:06:32.304-05:00Another thought:
Beheading and multiple threats o...Another thought:<br /><br />Beheading and multiple threats of "she dies" if they contacted anyone was specifically emphasized in the RN so when PR made that 911 call it would insure that the "kidnappers" would "kill" her. They had to make that 911 call - it was the reason why JBR would not be found alive. They just never got the opportunity to complete their plan, probably not foreseen by them during their staging.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-21913955465989719152013-02-03T20:54:46.740-05:002013-02-03T20:54:46.740-05:00If the RN was fake, the 911 call could be a fake j...If the RN was fake, the 911 call could be a fake just as easily, and PR could be convincing because (as mentioned before) she was good at "dramatic speech" since that was her pageant talent. Neither the RN nor the 911 call make sense with the body still in the house, yet both are facts in this case. <br /><br />It makes sense to me that since they weren't able to remove JBR's body from the house, they were due to be leaving soon for a trip to Michigan (wasn't a plane being made ready for them?), they would have to explain to someone soon why JBR wasn't with them, THEY WOULD WANT TO ESTABLISH A KIDNAPPING as soon as possible in the morning (the only reason for the 911 call and the RN) so the police wouldn't search for a body - there would be no reason to. And we know that was in fact the case. They would search her bedroom or the main floors but would have no reason to give the basement a thorough search, especially a small relatively unused out-of-the-way basement room with no windows. <br /><br />Also note that the first thing Patsy said when she called 911 was "we have a kidnapping." <br /><br />So only JR knows why he brought up JBR's body many hours later, he could have just as easily pretended to open that door and not see anything and move on. Maybe he knew the chance of their getting her out of the house was getting smaller and smaller and knew they couldn't hide the whole thing much longer.. <br /><br />I think Patsy may not have killed JBR but I find it hard to believe she had no clue her daughter was being molested. Chronic irritation or inflammation in that area has symptoms that JBR would probably have mentioned to her mother. After all, PR did make many trips with JBR to the pediatrician other than for sinus infections. Maybe PR lied when she explained that the irritation was due to bubble baths. She could have been an enabler, I think many mothers of child abuse victims look the other way. Maybe she didn't want to believe the husband she loved was doing that to JBR so was in denial. So when she was finally faced with the truth and a dead daughter IMO she decided to go along with the cover-up of the accidental murder out of guilt or in lieu of facing scandal or having her family torn apart by a murder conviction. She wouldn't necessarily run out of the house yelling for help from the neighbors, especially if she loved her husband despite all that happened and wanted to protect him or her family unit.<br /><br />KayAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-86643002703172950042013-02-03T20:53:50.656-05:002013-02-03T20:53:50.656-05:00DocG:
I know you think Patsy did not write the no...DocG:<br /><br />I know you think Patsy did not write the note but it's very hard to ignore the startling similarities between Patsy's handwriting and and the writing in the ransom note. If you look objectively with no preconceived notions at side by side comparisons of the individual letters you will see that too (consider Cina Wong's analysis for example and note the bend in the stick of the letter "d", her number 20, those curvy L's, there is at least one capital "U" from the word "Use" in the second to last sentence of the RN that is almost identical to Patsy's "U" in her version of the RN, etc. - you must be objective and check it out side by side to see what I mean). According to a former teacher of Patsy's she was ambidextrous. You can't deny the similarities. Your point that JR's handwriting matches and there is a study that shows this is possible - especially with the very similar "sey" of "Ramsey" - could show that they co-wrote it to further disguise the handwriting. <br /><br />Based on that it seems very plausible that she wrote it with John's help (I can see her asking - "what else should I say to make this sound like a kidnapping?" - or "here, you write some of it") - supposition I know, but plausible. It just doesn't make any sense at all for her to call 911 with that ransom note telling them they are being closely "monitored" and if they call police JBR will be killed/beheaded. That threat was made very clear and no mother under those instructions would have called 911 so soon (or even at all!) at the risk of causing her child's death. <br /><br />So either she did not read past the first couple of lines (I know she claims she just "glanced" at it - hard to believe IMO) or she knew that there was no risk of JBR being killed because she was already dead. Virtually everyone knows that with the "classic" kidnapping scenario the idea is to hand over a ransom without contacting the police in order to get your child back unharmed or else. PR would have thought of that too, panicked or not. Her first thought would have been for JBR's safety if she truly believed she had been kidnapped. So the purpose of the 911 call (despite the body still being in the house) was to establish the phony kidnapping as soon as possible. That makes a lot of sense - calling 911 and risking your daughter's life does not. <br /><br />To be continued in next post...<br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-46132557413481626182013-02-03T10:08:43.431-05:002013-02-03T10:08:43.431-05:00Thanks for the link, which makes it easy to respon...Thanks for the link, which makes it easy to respond to certain details of Hyatt's analysis. He assumes Patsy is responsible for the "and hence" in the Christmas message, but the Ramseys said they wrote that together. Anyone familiar with Patsy's writings and her verbal style generally would notice how informal it is. John's style on the other hand tends to be rather formal and stilted. It's far more likely the "and hence" in the xmas message comes from John, but Hyatt simply assumes Patsy wrote it. Here's an excerpt from an interview with John:<br /><br />Newseum interview, Oct. 12, 2000 (http://64.225.95.82/dcf/Publicdiscussion/433.html)<br />"The police as a gov-, …you know, the justice system is a government organization. And hence, should be looked at with some degree of skepticism, and, uh…and, uh…suspicion."<br /><br />I wonder if "and hence" could be found in any of Patsy's interviews. I doubt it, because that very formal, academic term is not consistent with her style.<br /><br />"It is difficult to imagine a stronger bond than mother to child, which is why "my" is the expected."<br /><br />Sorry, but in what universe would the above observation be considered scientific? I see no reason to assume that "my" rather than "our" is what would be expected under such circumstances and I wonder whether there's ever been any really controlled scientific study of that? (Even if there were, it would be a statistical study, which deals only with what is normal in most cases -- there is NO way to correlate the use of any such term with deliberate deception in all cases, that's absurd.)<br /><br />Hyatt's analysis depends very heavily on his ideas of what is or is not appropriate, but even if these ideas are correct, what can that tell us about deception? One could as easily conclude that Patsy said what she said because she is a narcissist, for example, or because she bears some hidden resentment toward JonBenet, or even because she is parroting something John just said. <br /><br />She first refers to "our daughter," which he finds deceptive, but later she says "my daughter," which he also finds deceptive. So clearly she can't win. He has programmed himself to look for signs of deception so that's what he finds.<br /><br />In the recorded interview, he acknowledges that her extreme distress seems sincere, but explains that away by observing that if she had just murdered her daughter she would have been in distress anyhow, so the clear indications that Patsy is so upset that she can barely get her words out are "explained" by her distress over having killed her daughter. However, according to the timetable implied in Hyatt's thinking, JonBenet's death would have occurred hours ago. And in the meantime Patsy would have pulled herself together sufficiently to have written a 2 1/2 page phoney "ransom note," which would probably have taken a least a couple of hours to put together. So it seems highly unlikely that the acute distress clearly evident in the 911 call, where Patsy is literally hyperventilating, could be a carryover from her initial distress on "accidentally" killing her child. But Hyatt has no real interest in the emotions conveyed by that call -- because that's not his field. <br /><br />He claims that if Patsy were innocent she would not have referred to JonBenet as "our daughter," but he has nothing to say about her reasons for making the 911 call in the first place. Again, because that's not his field. As I've argued many times on this blog, if John and Patsy were in on this together, as he certainly believes, they would have had every reason NOT to call the police at that time, but would have removed the body from the house first. This has nothing to do with content analysis but everything to do with the basic logic of the case, which he totally ignores.<br /><br /><br />DocGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17359004200002936544noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-60875435711953945852013-02-03T09:11:59.218-05:002013-02-03T09:11:59.218-05:00"If she read the note through (as she claims ..."If she read the note through (as she claims she did) and believed it to be genuine, she would NEVER have made that call so quickly after finding it at the risk of having her kidnapped daughter beheaded, as it was made very clear what would happen if they called the police by the many references to "she dies" in the RN."<br /><br />She has claimed she didn't read it through but simply glanced at it. So she might not have read the threats. <br /><br />"-they decided to cover it up because if they took her to the ER or called 911 then their gooses were cooked"<br /><br />You mean HIS goose would be cooked, NOT hers. If your husband woke you in the middle of the night and announced that he'd just murdered your daughter, what would YOU do? I'd think Patsy would have high tailed it out of the house as soon as possible and asked the neighbors to call 911 immediately. I see no reason whatsoever for her agreeing to cooperate to cover for HIS crime against HER beloved and much doted upon daughter. Not to mention agreeing to write a phoney note for his benefit. In sum, if John did this crime I see no reason for Patsy to help him cover it up.<br /><br />You say Patsy never had a chance to change, but I have no idea what you mean. She had all the time in the world to change, and if in fact she'd been up all night why wouldn't she take some time in the morning to shower and change? That's what John did, by the way. There was no deadline she had to meet for calling 911. If she and John were in it together that would have put them in complete control of the situation and they could have called the police whenever they were ready. <br /><br />"-I think they originally planned to remove JBR from the house right away but something prevented that (some activity outside by passersby or neighbors, etc.) so they decided to establish alibis quickly with the 911 call and get rid of the body later, which may have worked if JR hadn't brought the body upstairs"<br /><br />If you read the note carefully you'll see what John's plan was. It would have been very foolish to try to remove the body that morning, in full daylight, but if he waited till night he could have placed it in his trunk and dumped it in some remote place. If anyone had spotted him or his car, he could have claimed he was delivering the ransom as instructed. If Patsy hadn't called 911 nothing would have prevented him from carrying out that plan.<br /><br />If we assume they wrote it together, then they'd have followed the same plan. But there is NO way they'd have called 911 that morning. The body was still in the house. There would be no way to get it out of the house without the police noticing. And besides, John was the one who found it, which is not consistent with a plan to remove it after the police left (which they wouldn't have done in any case). Also, if Patsy wrote the note, why would she have wanted to hand it over to the police with her handwriting all over it?<br /><br />Sorry, but I'm not sure what you mean by "establishing alibis quickly." What alibis? What could they have possibly gained by calling the police so early? With the body still in the house, the ransom note becomes pointless and in fact becomes evidence against them, since at that point it becomes clear the "kidnapping" was obviously staged.<br /><br />You don't need scientific research on statement analysis, handwriting analysis or any other field to help you reach this conclusion. All you need is simple common sense.DocGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17359004200002936544noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-36947997990798467562013-02-03T00:12:37.748-05:002013-02-03T00:12:37.748-05:00Thanks for the link. I just listened and I have to...Thanks for the link. I just listened and I have to say, this is an excellent example of why it's so important to stick with the known facts. Mr. Hyatt is only one of a huge number of "experts" with theories about this case and the theories are all over the place. There is no scientific basis for the sort of interpretation he is offering. It's interesting and it might possibly have some statistical significance over a wide range of instances, but to apply this sort of cookie cutter thinking to a specific case is, imo, irresponsible.<br /><br />There are any number of reasons why Pasty might have expressed herself the way she did, and certainly it is impossible to predict the actions and words of someone under extreme stress. Hyatt is clearly biased, but refuses to take his own bias into account. So instead of presenting these theories as interesting possibilities they become, in his mind, certainties. Again, that's irresponsible. Science works on the basis of statistics, i.e., probabilities, NOT certainty. <br /><br />A clear example of overreaching is his take on Patsy's describing JonBenet as "blonde," which he finds grossly inappropriate. If your child has been kidnapped then one of the reasons you are calling the police is in the hope they might spot her, and to do that you need to give them some sort of description. Obviously Patsy was too upset to give a detailed description, but her use of the word "blonde" is completely understandable in such a context. But Hyatt is convinced she's lying, so anything she says that seems unusual becomes some sort of "indicator."<br /><br />As far as content analysis is concerned, let me offer my own content analysis of Hyatt's spiel. As I see it, one sign of someone truly sure of himself and honestly expressing his ideas is that he is brief and to the point. Hyatt wanders all over the place. It takes him 30 minutes just to get around to discussing the issue at hand, the Ramsey case. And once he gets there then one waits endlessly for him to make his first point, after which he goes all over the place trying to convince his listeners that he has to be right, because so and so did such and such a study. Then on to the next, again with a long pointless preamble followed by a rambling explanation. What could have been pointed out in a few minutes takes almost a full hour. To me, this sort of presentation is a sign of someone who doesn't really know what he is talking about, but badly wants to convince us that he does.<br /><br />Early in the case, Donald Foster, a man widely believe to be an expert on content analysis, wrote to Patsy telling her he knew for a fact that she could not have written the note and would stake his career on it. Yet a few months later, after John had been ruled out and everyone was starting to suspect Patsy, he completely reversed himself. This time he wrote the DA claiming that, based on his "scientific methods," he could prove Patsy wrote the note. Of course, he never mentioned his earlier letter to Patsy, but the truth ultimately came out and the DA had to drop him as a witness -- for obvious reasons. <br />The guy was simply looking for attention, and since everyone now seemed sure Patsy wrote the note he was happy to hop on the bandwagon.<br />DocGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17359004200002936544noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-12589021115857122702013-02-02T22:29:41.803-05:002013-02-02T22:29:41.803-05:00I just found the written text of the 911 call anal...I just found the written text of the 911 call analysis by Peter Hyatt - (I found the radio show's host rather annoying and disruptive when trying to listen to Mr. Hyatt) - wish I would have seen this first! For your consideration:<br /><br />http://seamusoriley.blogspot.com/2012/08/statement-analysis-patsy-ramsey-911-call.htmlAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-33613586124389978352013-02-02T21:46:49.235-05:002013-02-02T21:46:49.235-05:00Some additional comments:
I think the fact that P...Some additional comments:<br /><br />I think the fact that PR called 911 so quickly after "finding" the RN on the stairs suggests that she knew it was a fake, and the fact that during the call she said "we just got up.." also suggests she was trying to establish their alibis. If she read the note through (as she claims she did) and believed it to be genuine, she would NEVER have made that call so quickly after finding it at the risk of having her kidnapped daughter beheaded, as it was made very clear what would happen if they called the police by the many references to "she dies" in the RN. <br /><br />IMO this is what could have happened:<br /><br />-JR killed JBR accidentally in the process of you know what<br /><br />-PR woke up or was already awake and discovered it or was told about it by JR<br /><br />-they decided to cover it up because if they took her to the ER or called 911 then their gooses were cooked<br /><br />-JR borrowed what he had read about kidnappers from that book by John Douglas ("Mind Hunter" - I believe it was found on a table in their bedroom) and movies he had seen recently and dictated at least part of the RN to PR, they wanted to sound like genuine kidnappers/criminals<br /><br />-Patsy was so busy wiping down the flashlight (including the batteries), writing the ransom note, etc., etc., while JR staged the body and hid it that she never had time to change, but didn't necessarily get mussed up doing those things so she looked presentable enough a few hours later (I don't think she had anything to do with the molestation and murder)<br /><br />-wrote a few crib notes before calling 911 (notice that she says "we have a kidnapping.." and then starts to repeat that same line again later before quickly saying "there's a note left.." as if possibly she was repeating something she had written down; she also sounded convincing because remember she had performed dramatic speech at her own pageants (talent portion) so she was familiar with dramatic prose/acting<br /><br />-I think they originally planned to remove JBR from the house right away but something prevented that (some activity outside by passersby or neighbors, etc.) so they decided to establish alibis quickly with the 911 call and get rid of the body later, which may have worked if JR hadn't brought the body upstairs (how many police and Fleet White went over the basement and didn't find JBR at first??)<br /><br />Sorry for repeating the link but I urge you to listen to Peter Hyatt's analysis of the 911 call - makes a lot of sense and explains why the 911 call was made!<br /><br />http://www.blogtalkradio.com/insidelenz/2013/01/23/crime-wire<br /><br /><br /><br /><br />Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6494242281396312957.post-60423922528218093722013-02-02T18:21:00.118-05:002013-02-02T18:21:00.118-05:00DocG: You MUST listen to an analysis of the 911 c...DocG: You MUST listen to an analysis of the 911 call done by Peter Hyatt (an expert in statement and linguistic analysis) on a Crime Wire radio show from January. It is fascinating and it's his view that the 911 call was staged and its purpose was to establish an alibi based on what PR says. He says do not listen to the emotion in her voice, just listen to her actual words. I know you think that PR did not write the ransom note, but if the RN was staged, the 911 call was probably staged as well. And since PR did make that call, and Peter Hyatt's analysis is very compelling that it was rehearsed and planned, she could have written the note as well. They must have gone ahead with the 911 call for the purpose of establishing an alibi even though JBR's body was still in the house (well hidden from view, obviously), and whatever plan they had for removing the body from the house was foiled. They were thinking on the fly since her death was not premeditated and couldn't plan for all of the possible scenarios that would enfold. To get to the actual analysis of the 911 call go to about 28 min:<br /><br />http://www.blogtalkradio.com/insidelenz/2013/01/23/crime-wireAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com