I believe the Ramseys are innocent.

[Shylock]

NO ONE was identified as being in "the writer" category

Thomas lied about the silly "24 out of 26" coming from Ubowski, and Ubowski had to publicly deny it. Thomas also lied about quoting Ubowski as saying Patsy wrote the ransom note, and Ubowski had to publicly deny that too.

BlueCrab,
I don't know where you get this information. Ubowski stated that Patsy wrote the note. His statement is public record as it was used in the warrant to search the Ramsey house:

After comparing one Patsy handwriting sample to the ransom note, Chet Ubowski of CBI concluded, "This handwriting showed indications that the writer was Patsy Ramsey.''
http://63.147.65.175/news/jon101799.htm


GRAND JURY:
Day 9
Thursday October 15, 1998
? CBI Handwriting Analyst Chet Ubowski was the witness for most of the day. According to search warrants previously unsealed in the case, Ubowski said Patsy Ramsey could not be excluded as author of the ransom note she said she found early Dec. 26, 1996. John and Burke Ramsey were excluded as the authors of the note.
http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senate/6502/primer2/primer8_gjtl.html

 

[BlueCrab]

BlueCrab,
I don't know where you get this information. Ubowski stated that Patsy wrote the note. His statement is public record as it was used in the warrant to search the Ramsey house:

After comparing one Patsy handwriting sample to the ransom note, Chet Ubowski of CBI concluded, "This handwriting showed indications that the writer was Patsy Ramsey.''
http://63.147.65.175/news/jon101799.htm


GRAND JURY:
Day 9
Thursday October 15, 1998
? CBI Handwriting Analyst Chet Ubowski was the witness for most of the day. According to search warrants previously unsealed in the case, Ubowski said Patsy Ramsey could not be excluded as author of the ransom note she said she found early Dec. 26, 1996. John and Burke Ramsey were excluded as the authors of the note.
http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senate/6502/primer2/primer8_gjtl.html

The cops will put anything in their request for a search warrant as is needed to impress the judge into signing it. Ubowski's early opinion, using ONE exemplar, was an off-the-cuff comment which he later corrected when other exemplars became available. The search warrants were used to obtain historical exemplars of Patsy's, which along with the London Letter and other exemplars were used to show that Patsy did not likely write the ransom note.

JMO

 

[Spade]

it could be proven that Patsy/John/Burke did NOT write the note then IMO Keenan would be legally obligated to remove them from "The Umbrella".

What if the 1 person "wrote" the note and Patsy copied/re-wrote it to disguise the handwriting?

 

[BlueCrab]

it could be proven that Patsy/John/Burke did NOT write the note then IMO Keenan would be legally obligated to remove them from "The Umbrella".

What if the 1 person "wrote" the note and Patsy copied/re-wrote it to disguise the handwriting?

That's possible. One or more of the Ramseys has to be the perp or knows who the perp is or there wouldn't be a need for a fake ransom note in the first place. But Burke would have had to have been the original writer since Patsy wouldn't have likely re-written John's note.

In my opinion, with all of the threats, silly cliches and foreign faction crap in it, that ransom note has young male written all over it. That's why I believe Burke has to be involved one way or the other in the writing of that note.

JMO

 

[Shylock]

In my opinion, with all of the threats, silly cliches and foreign faction crap in it, that ransom note has young male written all over it.

Young male, or old drama queen...

 

[Spade]

I would like to edit my hypothetical question above to: What if 1 or 2 or 3 others wrote the fake ransom note and Patsy re-wrote/copied it to better disguise the handwriting?

 

[Nova]

In the deposition, Wood phrased the matter differently than Thomas did in his book.

WOOD: "And of those 73, how many of those individuals were eliminated as the author of the note based on the handwriting analysis itself?"

(Emphasis added.) In Thomas' book, he claims that PR was the only testee who could not be eliminated, based on handwriting analysis as well as other evidence. It was perfectly clear to me what he was writing the first time I read it, but many people think the claim is poorly worded and I will bow to their judgment.

So Thomas may be a poor writer. And you may believe him to be a poor detective.

But neither conclusion makes him a liar.

 

[BlueCrab]

Nova,

Actually, Don Davis wrote the book, based on what Steve Thomas told him.

But that aside, Thomas' deceptive description of Patsy's handwriting analyses really began on June 1, 1998 when the BPD made its presentation to the VIPs, which included the DA's staff, the FBI, the CBI, Barry Scheck, Henry Lee, etc., in the BPD's all-out pitch to get Patsy Ramsey indicted.

When it came to the handwriting part of the two-day presentation, here's how Steve Thomas trickily worded his prepared remarks:

"The CBI examiners explained that of the 73 persons whose writing had been investigated, there was only one whose writing showed evidence that suggested authorship and had been in the home the night of the killing and could not be eliminated by no less than six document examiners -- Patsy Ramsey."

WOW! That's overwhelming evidence Patsy wrote the ransom note. Right?

WRONG! Read the statement again. Thomas buried the crucial phrase "and had been in the home the night of the killing" in the middle of his illogically constructed sentence. That phrase limits the number of persons he's talking about to three (John, Patsy, and Burke), not 73.

Thomas deliberately failed to tell the group that most of the 73 persons tested couldn't be eliminated either, not just Patsy. Besides that, Thomas has since admitted in his deposition that he had never even seen the reports from the six CBI examiners.

JMO

 

[Shylock]

WRONG! Read the statement again. Thomas buried the crucial phrase "and had been in the home the night of the killing" in the middle of his illogically constructed sentence. That phrase limits the number of persons he's talking about to three (John, Patsy, and Burke), not 73.

Your reading too much into it BlueCrab, and finding Boogiemen in closets that don't even exist.
-Patsy was the only one who showed authorship of the 73 people tested.
-Patsy was in the house that night.
(Two different and distinctly unique facts.)

You are also having trouble keeping your stories straight, BlueCrab. On one hand you use the excuse that Don Davis wrote the book, then on the other you accuse Thomas of deception.
Well if Davis wrote the book, just how could Thomas be the one deceiving people? ANSWER:HE COULDN'T.
And if Davis wrote the book, why would he WANT to deceive people? ANSWER: HE WOULDNT.

So neither of your ideas make any sense, BC.

 

[Nova]

"The CBI examiners explained that of the 73 persons whose writing had been investigated, there was only one whose writing showed evidence that suggested authorship and had been in the home the night of the killing and could not be eliminated by no less than six document examiners -- Patsy Ramsey."

WOW! That's overwhelming evidence Patsy wrote the ransom note. Right?

Whether it's overwhelming or even convincing is another issue, Blue. The question was whether the apparent difference between this statement and Thomas' depo proves Thomas lied.

As I'm sure you know, for any statement containing the conjunction "and" (and this one has two), each and every linked contention must be true for the statement to be true. Therefore, Thomas (and/or his ghost writer) is saying ONLY PR can be characterized by ALL three of the following contentions: (1) showed evidence of authorship AND (2) was in the house that night AND (3) could not be eliminated by six examiners.

Other people may have shown evidence of authorship BUT were not in the house that night (in Thomas' opinion, because they have alibis, for example). Still others (JR) were in the house BUT may have not shown evidence of authorship.

In the depo (as you quote it), Wood asks Thomas how many of the 73 were eliminated by handwriting analysis alone and Thomas says he doesn't know.

This statement may well make his contention in the book seem less credible to you, but it is not a logical contradiction of the earlier statement and it doesn't make him a liar.

 

[sissi]

Whether it's overwhelming or even convincing is another issue, Blue. The question was whether the apparent difference between this statement and Thomas' depo proves Thomas lied.

As I'm sure you know, for any statement containing the conjunction "and" (and this one has two), each and every linked contention must be true for the statement to be true. Therefore, Thomas (and/or his ghost writer) is saying ONLY PR can be characterized by ALL three of the following contentions: (1) showed evidence of authorship AND (2) was in the house that night AND (3) could not be eliminated by six examiners.

Other people may have shown evidence of authorship BUT were not in the house that night (in Thomas' opinion, because they have alibis, for example). Still others (JR) were in the house BUT may have not shown evidence of authorship.

In the depo (as you quote it), Wood asks Thomas how many of the 73 were eliminated by handwriting analysis alone and Thomas says he doesn't know.

This statement may well make his contention in the book seem less credible to you, but it is not a logical contradiction of the earlier statement and it doesn't make him a liar.

Nova.....very accurate!!
In fact after a while one tires of the "truth according to Steve" as there is little truth in much he said. He tried to shove his opinion down the throats of his coworkers and the general public by using bits of information and putting powerful stevespin on them. The lead detective? I don't think he was ever (even) in that position! That darn ole deposition uncovered the truth,and the truth was "he didn't know",he clearly didn't know much about anything of importance.
IMO

 

[BrotherMoon]

Nova.....very accurate!!
In fact after a while one tires of the "truth according to Steve" as there is little truth in much he said. He tried to shove his opinion down the throats of his coworkers and the general public by using bits of information and putting powerful stevespin on them. The lead detective? I don't think he was ever (even) in that position! That darn ole deposition uncovered the truth,and the truth was "he didn't know",he clearly didn't know much about anything of importance.
IMO

What's a coworker? And how does one ork a cow?

 

[BlueCrab]

I would like to edit my hypothetical question above to: What if 1 or 2 or 3 others wrote the fake ransom note and Patsy re-wrote/copied it to better disguise the handwriting?

Yes, a group effort at writing the note would make it more probable because, even though the note sounds juvenile, I don't think Burke could have written it by himself, although it's possible he could have.

As you know, I think there was a fifth person in the house that night, and it wasn't an intruder. It was one of Burke's friends who had been invited in. There could have even been a sixth and a seventh kid in the house. If so, who were they, and how old were they? Was one of them a teen? IMO this is an area that wasn't investigated properly, if at all.

Therefore, the note could have been a group effort from kids that, after John and Patsy discovered what the boys had done, Patsy rewrote to disguise the handwriting -- and thus the nine missing pages from the notepad.

JMO

 

[sissi]

What's a coworker? And how does one ork a cow?

I'll bite how does one ork a cow?

main Entry: co-
Function: prefix
Etymology: Middle English, from Latin, from com-; akin to Old English ge-, perfective and collective prefix, Old Irish com- with
1 : with : together : joint : jointly <coexist> <coheir>
2 : in or to the same degree <coextensive>
3 a : one that is associated in an action with another : fellow : partner <coauthor> <coworker>

IMO

 

[vicktor]

That's possible. One or more of the Ramseys has to be the perp or knows who the perp is or there wouldn't be a need for a fake ransom note in the first place. But Burke would have had to have been the original writer since Patsy wouldn't have likely re-written John's note.

In my opinion, with all of the threats, silly cliches and foreign faction crap in it, that ransom note has young male written all over it. That's why I believe Burke has to be involved one way or the other in the writing of that note.

JMO

Although you make some interesting points regarding the note and who wrote it, it doesn't look like a foregone conclusion.

IF one of the Ramseys did it then a fake ransom note could explain them casting suspicion to an intruder. BUT..
I think the note was written by someone with clearly above average intelligence, despite its juvenile threats and boasting. AT 10 , Burke wouldn't be capable of writing like that. If you think that a fifth person dictated the note and Burke wrote it, then Patsy would then need to copy it. Because the note had only 1 scratch out and on word insertion into a sentence, the note almost certainly had to be copied, by someone. A veteran detective has said that after a murder (or accidental death), people are almost hysterical with nervous energy. Could those present really compose a 3 page note and copy it over? A much simpler way to stage would be to write a short note lefthanded in block letters, then put the body behind the church around the corner. It would be far more effective, and easier.

IF an intruder wrote a fake note it was because:
The crime itself looked like a thrill or revenge killing where the intruder took steps not to vandalize anything, steal anything, or leave his DNA in a sexual assault. The note wasn't connected to the actual crime, it was too long(FBI profilers) and asked for a silly amount which would only tend to point a finger at someone. The content of the note could be accounted for by someone who had significant personality problems, yet was smart. If an intruder had wanted to kidnap JB, its more than less likely he could have because: he felt comfortable enough to be there when the family was there, he would have been able to see the burglar alarm panel wasn't activated, and probably left thru the butler's door which was observed to be standing open that morning.
The note was part of the thrill, in his wishlist( it was Christmas), a way to verbally confront the parents who lived there. Nothing about it is inconsistant with what was found.

 

[BrotherMoon]

We are a group of individuals that represent a small foreign faction.

"Phrases like `the team spirit' are always employed to cut across individualism, love and personal loyalties,"

It was the Brodie set to which Joyce Emily mostly desired to attach herself, perceiving their individualism;

The lack of team spirit alone, the fact that the Brodie set prefered golf to hockey or netball if they prefered anything at all, were enough to set them apart,

Patsy wrote the note in state of psychological regression, thus the juvenile tone.

 

[Shylock]

That darn ole deposition uncovered the truth,and the truth was "he didn't know",he clearly didn't know much about anything of importance.
IMO

Again sissi, you just can't seem to understand how depositions work. The last thing you do in one is give the opposing side all the information they want. "I don't know, can't remember, not sure...." are all standard answers. The same way Patsy played "stupid" when asked who wrote the captions in Burke's photo album.

Thomas knew the answers to all the questions LIn Wood asked, and Patsy knows exactly who wrote the captions in the album. Neither was dumb enough to give the correct answers.

 

[Shylock]

after John and Patsy discovered what the boys had done, Patsy rewrote to disguise the handwriting -- and thus the nine missing pages from the notepad.

I don't think John and Patsy needed to re-write anything Burke came up with. They certainly had no prior experience writing a ransom note. And the wording of the note sure sounds like the product of a drama queen.

 

[sissi]

Again sissi, you just can't seem to understand how depositions work. The last thing you do in one is give the opposing side all the information they want. "I don't know, can't remember, not sure...." are all standard answers. The same way Patsy played "stupid" when asked who wrote the captions in Burke's photo album.

Thomas knew the answers to all the questions LIn Wood asked, and Patsy knows exactly who wrote the captions in the album. Neither was dumb enough to give the correct answers.

Again,Shylock,you have decided Steve didn't feel the need to back up his own lies. Most everyone would grab the chance ,given the opportunity. By having selective amnesia,as you suggest,he hurt himself. Who does this? I don't buy it,he clearly couldn't lie under oath,his inability to validate his lies is one of the only respectable actions he has taken,IMO.

 

[Shylock]

Again,Shylock,you have decided Steve didn't feel the need to back up his own lies. Most everyone would grab the chance ,given the opportunity. By having selective amnesia,as you suggest,he hurt himself. Who does this? I don't buy it,he clearly couldn't lie under oath,his inability to validate his lies is one of the only respectable actions he has taken,IMO.

Hurt himself in who's eyes, yours? Or maybe the in the eyes of a few other people who are foolish enough to believe the Ramsey crapola? Heh, sorry but Thomas could care less about ya.

Thomas didn't "lie" under oath. That seems to be what you can't comprehend. Thomas conveinently lost his memory so he didn't feed the opposing side any damaging information, the SAME WAY the Ramseys did when they were interviewed by the police. They couldn't remember their flashlight, they couldn't remember their own bowl and spoon, Patsy claimed she didn't know the ransom note was written on her personal pad of paper. They weren't sure about ANYTHING--even what they had said in previous statements.

And Thomas didn't "hurt himself" as you think. If he had, the Rammers would have gone forward with their lawsuit against him. Instead, they settled for what was offered by the publisher's insurance company and Thomas didn't pay a cent.

Thomas has stated that he stands behind everything written in his book. And NOBODY involved in the investigation has stepped forward to try and challenge that information and prove him wrong. Even Alex Hunter, who Thomas crusified many times over in the book, stuck his tail between his legs instead of challenging Thomas.