The ransom note & Patsy Ramsey, letter by letter.

vlpate said:

Whomever wrote the ransom note is either the killer, or knows who the killer is. Patsy obviously wrote it. See Cina Wong's chart....how could anyone doubt it. The fact that she changed her "a" post ransom note, is rather suspicious, IMO.

Click to expand...

How many other comparison charts have you seen?

Smelly Squirrel said:

How many other comparison charts have you seen?

Click to expand...

I've seen a lot of comparisons - notes she wrote, permission slips for school, contest entries, etc. IMO, she wrote the note based on everything I've seen.

I mean comparisons to other potential suspects.

Smelly Squirrel said:

I mean comparisons to other potential suspects.

Click to expand...

There have been a few over the years smelly, but why bring them up at this point when Patsy's is the only writing that could not be eliminated.....and, if one has any vision at all, one can see why.

vlpate said:

There have been a few over the years smelly, but why bring them up at this point when Patsy's is the only writing that could not be eliminated.....and, if one has any vision at all, one can see why.

Click to expand...

Unfortunately, vlpate, a lot of people don't HAVE that vision.

vlpate said:

There have been a few over the years smelly, but why bring them up at this point when Patsy's is the only writing that could not be eliminated.....and, if one has any vision at all, one can see why.

Click to expand...

Because you're saying you can judge handwriting. Did Cina Wong eliminate all the others?

i would reiterate that JRs handwriting was NOT eliminated, and should be looked at again:

http://members.fortunecity.com/webbsleuths/case/docg.html



Oh, and he did have a problem with knowing how to spell words with one 's' or two: business, occasion, etc.

He also wrote capital F's in the middle and end of words... flattened squiggly letters, including w and o....connected letters of to and ti....

So many people focus on PR as the obvous RN writer. I would say, take another look.

Smelly Squirrel said:

Because you're saying you can judge handwriting. Did Cina Wong eliminate all the others?

Click to expand...

Since she said she was 100% sure the writer was Patsy, I would say yes, she eliminated any others that she was given to examine.

Whaleshark said:

i would reiterate that JRs handwriting was NOT eliminated, and should be looked at again:

http://members.fortunecity.com/webbsleuths/case/docg.html

Oh, and he did have a problem with knowing how to spell words with one 's' or two: business, occasion, etc.

He also wrote capital F's in the middle and end of words... flattened squiggly letters, including w and o....connected letters of to and ti....

So many people focus on PR as the obvous RN writer. I would say, take another look.

Click to expand...

It looks to me like the letters are further apart in one than in the other. As for capital "f" in the middle and end of words.... that looks like a small "f" with the curve at the top. I can't think of any words ending in "f" in the ransom note.... but I could be wrong.

I remember docg well....

vlpate said:

Since she said she was 100% sure the writer was Patsy,

Click to expand...

What's your source for that? On this report, she says

It is quite rare for a Document Examiner to quantify degrees of certainty on a numerical scale. But, for the purposes of allowing a general understanding of my results, I have designated a rating of probability based on a scale of 1-10.

It is my preliminary opinion, given the multitude of similarities linking the Questioned Document to the exemplars, that the probability these documents were written by the same hand is 8.5 on this scale.

////

Statistically, it can only be concluded that it is very likely the same hand wrote all the documents
involved.

Click to expand...

Did she make a later report?

I would say yes, she eliminated any others that she was given to examine.

Click to expand...

The above report only mentions Patsy's samples. Did she do more work later?

I've also seen that they were analysts who ruled out Patsy as the author. What do you know about forensic handwriting science? I don't know enough to say how valid a a valid science it is. How do they come up with these percent numbers or estimations?

Anyway, I don't see why I should prefer Cina Wong's opinion over the others. At best, I can say the matter is inconclusive.

Unforunately I don't think we'll ever know the truth. Especially since PR is no longer here.

Smelly Squirrel said:

What's your source for that? On this report, she says



Did she make a later report?



The above report only mentions Patsy's samples. Did she do more work later?

Click to expand...

Yes, she did. She and I spoke a few months ago, and I asked these questions.

I've also seen that they were analysts who ruled out Patsy as the author. What do you know about forensic handwriting science? I don't know enough to say how valid a a valid science it is. How do they come up with these percent numbers or estimations?

Click to expand...

Well, it's not a science, Smelly Squirrel. Some people would have you believe that only one group is qualified to make those judgments, but that strikes me as ridiculous. There are different schools of training, but for my money, experience is not enough. I have to take into account how much actual effort a person puts into their analysis.

And to my knowledge, there was NO analyst who ruled Patsy out, no even the two her husband HIRED. And there are a lot of issues with those analysts, as well.

Anyway, I don't see why I should prefer Cina Wong's opinion over the others. At best, I can say the matter is inconclusive.

Click to expand...

By itself, maybe. Even granting that, the odds that someone else could have written it are astronomical.

SuperDave said:

Yes, she did. She and I spoke a few months ago, and I asked these questions.

Click to expand...

She said 100% sure? Why doesn't her report say that?

Well, it's not a science, Smelly Squirrel. Some people would have you believe that only one group is qualified to make those judgments, but that strikes me as ridiculous. There are different schools of training, but for my money, experience is not enough. I have to take into account how much actual effort a person puts into their analysis.

Click to expand...

How do you know the effort behind every analyst's conclusion?

And to my knowledge, there was NO analyst who ruled Patsy out, no even the two her husband HIRED. And there are a lot of issues with those analysts, as well.

Click to expand...

This JonBenet Ramsey Case Encyclopedia says,

No BPD-Hired Experts Identified Patsy as RN Author. "During the investigation, the Boulder Police Department and Boulder County District Attorney's Office consulted at least six handwriting experts. (SMF P 191; PSMF P 191.) All of these experts consulted the original Ransom Note and original handwriting exemplars from Mrs. Ramsey. (SMF P 205; PSMF P 205.) Four of these experts were hired by the police and two were hired by defendants. (SMF P 191; PSMF P 191.) None of the six consulted experts identified Mrs. Ramsey as the author of the Ransom Note. (SMF P 195; PSMF P 195.)

Click to expand...

SuperDave said:

By itself, maybe. Even granting that, the odds that someone else could have written it are astronomical.

Click to expand...

Based on what? How did you calculate those odds?

Smelly Squirrel said:

She said 100% sure? Why doesn't her report say that?

Click to expand...

She's 100% sure now.

How do you know the effort behind every analyst's conclusion?

Click to expand...

I don't. We can only speculate based on the sources available. One in particular, PMPT, talks about the Secret Service analysis. Chet Ubowski was actually upset about that, not just because the DA's office sought another opinion before he'd even given his full report, but because the analyst didn't spend much time on it.

Moreover, we have Gideon Epstein, who knows these people, stating officially that he does not believe that some of the analysts put much effort into their examinations. He gives some reasons for why that might be.

This JonBenet Ramsey Case Encyclopedia says,

Click to expand...

Yeah, I know what it says, Squirrel. The problem there is, and you don't have to take MY word for it, the Carnes ruling says a LOT of things that are not true. And this is most likely one of them. That statement was based on unchallenged preliminary reports that Lou Smit took illegally from the police file. Point-of-fact, during the Wolf lawsuit, Darnay Hoffman challenged Lin Wood to produce the actual, final handwriting analysis reports and prove that they actually said what the ruling claims. Wood said it would be a pleasure. So he went to Hal Haddon, the Ramseys' defense attorney to get them. As defense counsel, Haddon would have access to those reports.

Here's where it gets interesting. Wood had already asked Haddon for those reports, and Haddon REFUSED to give them up, citing the Grand Jury secrecy laws. Well, by the time of the Wolf trial, the Grand Jury secrecy law had been struck down, and Wood tried again. Haddon STILL would not give him those reports. To THIS DAY the Ramseys have not released the reports that supposedly are on their side. And that's troubling, because they release EVERYTHING ELSE they think will help them. They released John Douglas's profile of a suspect, they released the results of their polygraph test, etc. But they hardly ever MENTION the ransom note.

If there's anyone else who would like to add to what I've just said, BE MY GUEST!

Based on what? How did you calculate those odds?

Click to expand...

Occam's Razor, for one thing.

Patsy did write the note being dictated by John. I also wanted to wonder about the movie quotes found within the RN. Is it possible that The Ramseys had watched these movies during days leading up to the murder? Patsy and/or John may have been writing down quotes while watching the movies and inserted them into the RN when it was time to write. BTW I know at least one of these movies premiered a day or two before the murder. I know I'm getting off topic, but I always wondered if inserting the quotes was one of the first steps to be made when writing the RN.

weeble said:

Patsy did write the note being dictated by John. I also wanted to wonder about the movie quotes found within the RN. Is it possible that The Ramseys had watched these movies during days leading up to the murder? Patsy and/or John may have been writing down quotes while watching the movies and inserted them into the RN when it was time to write. BTW I know at least one of these movies premiered a day or two before the murder. I know I'm getting off topic, but I always wondered if inserting the quotes was one of the first steps to be made when writing the RN.

Click to expand...

There is no way to know if the Rs actually went to see that movie, but it was said that a video of one of the movies quoted was played at the White's party that day.

SuperDave said:

She's 100% sure now.

Click to expand...

SuperDave, last Sunday on the WS radio show, she said she's never said she was 100% sure. I guess somebody must be mistaken.

That she says she never said 100% actually makes her more credible in my eyes. "100%" is not a scientific, objective conclusion in such a matter. Even DNA analysts can't give you 100% certainty of identification.

I was impressed by her on the show as to her sincerity and passion for her profession, but I still have my doubts about handwriting analysis though. Too much subjectivity involved, imo.

I don't. We can only speculate based on the sources available. One in particular, PMPT, talks about the Secret Service analysis. Chet Ubowski was actually upset about that, not just because the DA's office sought another opinion before he'd even given his full report, but because the analyst didn't spend much time on it.

Moreover, we have Gideon Epstein, who knows these people, stating officially that he does not believe that some of the analysts put much effort into their examinations. He gives some reasons for why that might be.

Click to expand...

Wong said Epstein has said 100%, which as I said I find dubious.

Yeah, I know what it says, Squirrel. The problem there is, and you don't have to take MY word for it, the Carnes ruling says a LOT of things that are not true. And this is most likely one of them. That statement was based on unchallenged preliminary reports that Lou Smit took illegally from the police file. Point-of-fact, during the Wolf lawsuit, Darnay Hoffman challenged Lin Wood to produce the actual, final handwriting analysis reports and prove that they actually said what the ruling claims. Wood said it would be a pleasure. So he went to Hal Haddon, the Ramseys' defense attorney to get them. As defense counsel, Haddon would have access to those reports.

Here's where it gets interesting. Wood had already asked Haddon for those reports, and Haddon REFUSED to give them up, citing the Grand Jury secrecy laws. Well, by the time of the Wolf trial, the Grand Jury secrecy law had been struck down, and Wood tried again. Haddon STILL would not give him those reports. To THIS DAY the Ramseys have not released the reports that supposedly are on their side. And that's troubling, because they release EVERYTHING ELSE they think will help them. They released John Douglas's profile of a suspect, they released the results of their polygraph test, etc. But they hardly ever MENTION the ransom note.

Click to expand...

Can you give some sourcing for your account?

weeble said:

Patsy did write the note being dictated by John. I also wanted to wonder about the movie quotes found within the RN. Is it possible that The Ramseys had watched these movies during days leading up to the murder? Patsy and/or John may have been writing down quotes while watching the movies and inserted them into the RN when it was time to write. BTW I know at least one of these movies premiered a day or two before the murder. I know I'm getting off topic, but I always wondered if inserting the quotes was one of the first steps to be made when writing the RN.

Click to expand...

Are you saying they planned the ransom note and murder days ahead?

Smelly Squirrel said:

SuperDave, last Sunday on the WS radio show, she said she's never said she was 100% sure. I guess somebody must be mistaken.

Click to expand...

Yeah, it's me. I was briefly confused. After 10 years of this, it happens.

That she says she never said 100% actually makes her more credible in my eyes. "100%" is not a scientific, objective conclusion in such a matter. Even DNA analysts can't give you 100% certainty of identification.

Click to expand...

I'm with you on that one.

I was impressed by her on the show as to her sincerity and passion for her profession, but I still have my doubts about handwriting analysis though. Too much subjectivity involved, imo.

Click to expand...

It's a troublesome field, I grant you. But I'm glad you decided to tune in, Smelly Squirrel. I know some people who probably refused.

Wong said Epstein has said 100%, which as I said I find dubious.

Click to expand...

It's tough, all right.

Can you give some sourcing for your account?

Click to expand...

Absolutely I can!

The reference to wanting the reports and being refused because of Grand Jury secrecy laws was taken from an exchange between Darnay Hoffman and Lin Wood during John Ramsey's 2001 deposition (it's right before Wood's infamous bragging about how much money he's made off this case). Wood says in it that Haddon turned him down because of the Grand Jury secrecy laws, but now ("now" being December 2001) that the GJ Secrecy law has been struck down, he'd be only too happy to get those reports and shut Hoffman up.

That didn't happen, and we know it didn't happen, because as late as 2006, Hoffman stated publically that Haddon was STILL refusing. He stated this on Bill O'Reilly's TV show in August 2006.

Does that help?