911 Call- THE TRUTH

[Jayelles]

One of the problems with Dave's analysis seems to be that he is depending on his aural competency for analysis.

>>I also think that there is a large difference between people's abilities to hear things. It takes some training to be able to distinguish sounds ("trained ear"). This may explain why some people seem to hear nothing at all, others hear conversation, and those of us who have at least somewhat of a trained ear can easily locate the noises but don't understand how anyone could possibly confuse these noises with conversation.

http://www.***********.com/dcf/DCForumID101/1772.html#38

The real experts do not just rely upon what they hear (aural) but also what they see on the graphs which are produced by the specialised forensic audio equipment. These graphs are called spectrograms and they can show sounds which are inaudible to the human ear (even a trained ear). The expert that I have been in contact says the real key to forensic audio analysis is the spectrographic. Aural analysis is guided by this. He suggested to me that I should ask how Dave analysed the audio waveforms (spectrograms). Courtesy of Rainsong, Dave was asked this very question and his response was:-

Rainsong,

The short answer is that my report stands on its own. I invite others to reproduce what I've done or to run their own tests and write up their results. Then we'll have something to discuss. The questions you posted are a form of cross-examination by a hostile attorney who isn't familiar with audio engineering and basic signal analysis, and isn't familiar with the spectral characteristics of voice and phone lines --- or assumes that the audience is not. I see no indication of a search for the truth here at all.

Technical issues are decided on based on technical merit, not on pedigree nor brand and cost of equipment used, etc.

http://www.***********.com/dcf/DCForumID101/1772.html#8

Here is a link which explains why aural analysis is insufficient on its own:-

"When listening to difficult to hear audio the brain will eventually impose an order to the frequencies and rhythm patterns, and may decide that something specific was said, or may assign a particular subjective interpretation."


http://caeaudio.com/illusion.html

Here is a link which demoshows how the visual analysis of the graphs aids with the analysis:-

http://caeaudio.com/forensicmethod.html#audibility

Also, check out these enhancement examples. There is one which sounds a bit like the Ramsey tape:-

http://caeaudio.com/forensicmethod.html#audibility

I've read quite a few websites about this at the suggestion of my contact. On one of the websites (it might be the CAE one actually), it stressed that the client should go and hear the enhanced tape in the studio because their playback equipment was far superior to an ordinary cassette and that this made a considerable difference to the audibility!

 

[Shylock]

Originally posted by Jayelles
One of the problems with Dave's analysis seems to be that he is depending on his aural competency for analysis.

There is only ONE problem with "Dave's analysis"--he jumped the gun. He did his analysis on the tape not the CD. The tape was not an accurate copy of the actual 911 recording. It was either poor quality, or had been tampered with.

Now that the CD version has come out, and anyone with ears can hear Patsy's voice, poor "Dave" is scrambling to cover his butt because his analysis is completely useless.
I feel sorry for the guy...he wasted his time and now he looks like a dufus.

 

[Toltec]

Originally posted by TLynn
Toltec,

Did John really say "We have said to ourselves, look, there is never going to be a victory in this, there is no victory..."JR 6/24/98

"Victory" was in the RN - I also heard John once say on a TV show - "proper burial."

Didn't mean to stray from the 911 call (but I'm one of those that heard it on TV before joining the forum - so, I already know it exisits with Burke & John on it).

TLynn...Its in the NE Police Files page 359:

MK: ...Is there anything I have asked or said or done that makes you feel makes you not want to...follow up...?

JR: ...No, I mean, you know, we, we are looking forward to being here and I absolutely want to continue an open dialogue...we have said to ourselves, look, there is never going to be a victory in this, there is no victory, but if we can find who did this, there could be some closure we can understand, what do we do, if anything, so our - you know, the only thing that's important to us is our existing children. And finding who did this.

TLynn...I have circled many phrases both John and Patsy have said in the NE Book. John seems to quote more phrases than Patsy; for example, he once said..."I scanned them."

 

[Tricia]

Shylock wrote:"I have more experience than any of the schmucks I've read commenting on this issue so far."

Gee thanks. That answers my question.

Shylock continues...


The CD was created from a cassette tape which was created from the original 911 tape.

Nobody knows that for sure, Tricia. The CD might have been made by plugging the original recording directly into a computer. I tend to think that's the case since Patsy's voice is clearly on the CD but not the tape."

Shylock I received this letter with my CD and tape from Bill Nagel of the Boulder District Attorny's Office.

"Dear Ms. Griffith,

You have requested a copy of Mrs. Ramsey's 9-1-1 call on December 26, 1996. We are providing you with the enclosed copies of the record of that call.

It is my understanding that the tape is a duplicate of the original and that the disk is a duplicate of the tape.

To answer your questions beyond that, would involve comments on the evidence or the investigation and it has been our policy to not make such comment.

Sincerely,
William F. Nagel
Boulder County District Attorney's Office"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

So unless Nagel is lying then yes I know for sure the CD was a copy of the tape.

 

[Blazeboy3]

Originally posted by Show Me
Lin Wood stated to the newspapers..."I wanted to release this tape so the public can know that the Boulder Police Department lied about this tape containing a conversation between John, Patsy and Burke," Wood said.

http://www.ledger-enquirer.com/mld/ledgerenquirer/6261667.htm

Keenan hired a detective last month to lead the investigation and said her office is consulting with experts and investigators hired by the Ramseys.

Corruption, corruption!

Wonder what their (the R's) reasoning(logic/common sense) is for naming(making money on) their book "DEATH OF INNOCENCE"? ... hum maybe the dictionary? Probably "see no evil/hear no evil?LOL

Main Entry: in·no·cence
Pronunciation: 'i-n&-s&n(t)s
Function: noun
Date: 14th century

1 a : freedom from guilt or sin through being unacquainted with evil : BLAMELESSNESS b : CHASTITY c : freedom from legal guilt of a particular crime or offense d (1) : freedom from guile or cunning : SIMPLICITY (2) : lack of worldly experience or sophistication e : lack of knowledge : IGNORANCE <written in entire innocence of the Italian language —E. R. Bentley>

2 : one that is innocent

3 : BLUET

 

[candy]

Shylock,

Thank you very much!

 

[Shylock]

Originally posted by Tricia
It is my understanding that the tape is a duplicate of the original and that the disk is a duplicate of the tape.
Sincerely,
William F. Nagel
Boulder County District Attorney's Office"
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

So unless Nagel is lying then yes I know for sure the CD was a copy of the tape.

Tricia, well at least now I know where you get your opinion, but it proves nothing to me. Who is Nagel, a clerk in the DA's office that works in the mail room? The guy says "It is my understanding" which means he can turn around at any time and say "I guess I understood wrong". I don't think that would constitute him lying to you. I mean let's face it, the CD version is OBVIOUSLY different than the tape version. Did you hear or read anyone commenting about Patsy's voice when the tape version was released?

If you believe Mr. Nagel above, then Patsy's voice would have to be a product of the conversion process from analog audio to digital CD. That's not possible. Things like that DO happen, but those sounds don't agree with transcripts published in book years earlier.

 

[candy]

Bill Nagel is an Assistant DA and the top assistant to Mary Keenan
on all things Ramsey.

 

[Shylock]

Originally posted by candy
Bill Nagel is an Assistant DA and the top assistant to Mary Keenan
on all things Ramsey.

Candy, thank you. I'm still very leary when someone says "it is my understanding" versus "I can tell you for a fact that..."
I would like to hear Nagel's explaination for the 5-second gap on the recording where I believe John and Burke's voices should appear.

I also amazed that none of the papers or tabloids have picked up on Patsy's voice and the gap. What a great story that would be. (Someone call the Globe and NE!...LOL)

 

[candy]

I can imagine the tabs will say something about it at some point.

 

[candy]

Keenan on the 911 tape and CD released to the public:

http://www.dailycamera.com/bdc/city_news/article/0,1713,BDC_2422_2104808,00.html

But Keenan said there should be no difference between any tape or CD copies. Her office released one of each, but she said the CD simply had been copied off the tape.

There is some clicking noise on the end of the CD that can't be heard on the tape, but it's unclear whether it's the sound of someone shutting off the tape recorder.

"I have no idea why there's any difference between the two," Keenan said. "My understanding is that the tape should be the same as the original. I can't say the same about the CD."

 

[Ivy]

Anyone know how much money the DA's re-investigation has cost Boulder County so far, and how long Lin Wood insists it continue before the case is relegated to the cold case files?

 

[candy]

The money so far has come from early retirements, to pay for Tom *******'s salary, etc. There's no outcry about this investigation in Boulder or Colorado, and it's not costing much.

 

[Tricia]

Shylock I agree that Nagel gave himself a ton of wiggle room.

I had a copy of the cassette but the only way I can listen to it is in my car. If I remember correctly I could still hear Patsy but I couldn't make out what she was saying.

The tape/CD was released several months ago. Until last week when I posted a link to the call no one thought Patsy's voice was on the tape. So the tabs have not had a chance to pick up on the story yet. I hope someone does though.

Can anyone find anything where Wood difinitively states that Patsy did not say "help me Jesus" or that Patsy hung up the phone completely and therefore there is no conversation?

Thanks Candy for posting the press release.

 

[sissi]

I am suspicious concerning just what the police thought they heard. I have no quarrrels with Aerospace and their enhancement,but do believe from that point it was the BPD's interpretation. Never have I seen in print,that aeropspace did anything other than "enhance", and
never heard they interpreted.

I believe the human brain can pick a rhythm and interpret things as what they choose to hear. We see it often in the geriatric set,where hearing is often limited. "feed the dog..bleed the frog..need the hog.." this is typical of patterns that can be interpreted differently by those that can only pick up a rhythm however little sound.
Does a bird really say,"Bob White".

Even when we read,can we trust ourselves?
Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a total mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe.

Amzanig huh?
IMO JMO

 

[Britt]

Originally posted by Tricia
Can anyone find anything where Wood difinitively states that Patsy did not say "help me Jesus" or that Patsy hung up the phone completely and therefore there is no conversation?

Tricia, I posted this earlier on this thread, but here it is again:

From the Abrams Report interview of July 17, 2003:

WOOD: ...the problem you have is that you read the transcript published by Steve Thomas, the former detective in his book and that transcript is absolutely inaccurate. The operator only says Patsy four times and it’s followed by about five or six seconds of noise, probably keyboard typing that somehow this aerospace corporation allegedly came up with the conversation between Ramsey family members...

http://www.cybersleuths.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=004627

 

[Britt]

Tricia... You can order an official transcript of The Abrams Report by going to this link:

http://www.msnbc.com/news/MSNBCTRANSCRIPTSMAIN_Front.asp?0ct=-33f&ta=y

 

[candy]

Originally posted by Tricia
Can anyone find anything where Wood difinitively states that Patsy did not say "help me Jesus" or that Patsy hung up the phone completely and therefore there is no conversation?

No, he did not say that that I can find. He's says "it's not Patsy" but in the context of a conversation. Here's what he said:

http://www.cybersleuths.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=1;t=004627

WOOD: Thanks, Dan. I want to make clear to your viewers that the tape that I provided to NBC was, in fact, authenticated as being identical to the tape that was tested by the Boulder Police Department. And that authentication came directly from Mary Keenan who provided the tape to me, and I provided NBC with the tape that Mary Keenan provided to me, the entire tape. It wasn’t a third or fourth-generation tape. It was a first-generation off of the 911 original call, the same type tape that was tested by the Boulder Police Department and there is no conversation on there.
And when Michael Kane admits that there’s-quote-unquote - “something there”, that’s a word game. There’s something there after the phone hangs up. There’s about five or six seconds of noise. There’s no conversation there. It’s not Burke. It’s not John. It’s not Patsy. And that’s the lie that the Boulder Police Department told about this tape.
And it is, as I represented, the smoking gun that demonstrates objectively that the Boulder Police Department leaked false information about this family in an effort to smear their name to try to convince the public that they were guilty. And I think Michael Kane will tell you, on the air right now, that he never heard Burke Ramsey’s voice on that tape. You didn’t hear it, did you Michael?

and from the Today Show:

Lin Wood: Well, let me answer that with a quick question. Why did the Boulder Police
Department fight me tooth and nail to prevent me from obtaining that tape and making it
public? The Boulder Police Department did not want the public to know the truth about this
case. They lied about this idea that there was a conversation with John and Patsy and Burke
after Patsy tried to hang up the phone. I gave you the tape, a tape that Mary Keenan, the
district attorney gave to me. It was, in fact, identical to the tape that was tested by the Boulder
Police Department. And this alleged conversation with John and Patsy and Burke, it's not there.
Your folks tested it, the FBI tested it, the Secret Service tested it.

It was all a lie, and it was part of a, a theory, a plan, to publicly disseminate information about
this family in an effort to assassinate their character, to convince the public that they were
guilty when, in fact, they had no evidence to back it up. And this tape exposes it. It's the
smoking gun that shows that the Boulder Police Department, in fact, lied about this family.

 

[Toltec]

Why was Lin Wood given a copy of the 911 tape? I want to request the same copy he got...first generation as he says.

 

[DejaNu]

Ok, in the article Candy has posted several times, LW states that the tape he listened to during the NY Post settlement negotiations was a copy provided by the Ramseys from someone other than Jenkins. In this article he states that the tape in his possession was given to him by Keenan, WHO AUTHENTICATED IT, as an exact replication of the original. Then Keenan states in another article posted by Candy that the tape and CD she released publicly SHOULD be exact copies of the originals.

So LW first names the Rs as a source, then tags Keenan as the supplier and authenticator, then Keenan tries to cover her arse by stating SHOULDs. So again, chain of custody is a very important issue. Where did the Rs get their version of the tape that listening to led to a settlement of their case against NY Post and was it authenticated and by whom?

Oh BTW, Nagel's statement "...to the best of my knowledge..." is a very common phrase most legal people use in answering pointed questions. It provides easy out for culpability should the speaker have reliance on others for information that later could be found undependable for whatever reason. Good faith reliance on others doesn't always pan out and such statement isn't intended to purposesly mislead or deceive usually. It's simply lawyer-speak and everybody uses it when we have to speak about something we don't have first-hand knowledge about.