sissi
Former Member
narlacat said:yes, the acute mark is over the last e.
I think the mark is part of the upswing he shows in both diagonal lines, both in his "y's" and in the percentage mark.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
narlacat said:yes, the acute mark is over the last e.
princessmer81 said:Has anyone else commented on the way the letter "a" was written throughout the letter? Most of the a's are written just like the letter a looks when typed - with the little tail or hook on the top. I rarely see someone write the letter a that way. If you look at the "a" in Law Enforcement" it doesn't have that tail on the top - it looks like a "regular" a to me.
The way the "a's" are written looks like an intentional effort to disguise the writting - IMO.
You're right! Why the heck would you need to write the .00? To make sure that someone didn't misunderstand and think that the ransom was for $118,000.32? Silly!Voice of Reason said:this has been commented on. patsy was known to use this "fancy a" quite a lot before the murder, although she often used both a's. after the murder, she NEVER uses the "fancy a" and didn't use it in her handwriting sample.
something further on this reasoning...who requests "$118,000.00"? does anyone know if there has ever been a ransom note/request in history which requested any fraction of a dollar? why the decimal places? but, if you look at patsy's sample that she was asked to provide, she spelled out all the dollar amounts!!! if somone said to you, "write out the following: give me $118,000." wouldn't you write it as i just typed it? or would you write, "give me one hundred eighteen thousand dollars." patsy was VERY familiar with that note when she was asked to give a handwriting sample, which, to me, is very telling. she wrote the note $118,000.00, because she thought she could outsmart LE. when asked to provide a sample she spells it out! what a joke!
Hoosier Mama? said:I seem to remember hearing/reading somewhere that the ransom amount was exactly the sum that JR had received prior to his daughter's murder....a work bonus or something(?)
I've not found mention of that anywhere here yet....am I mis-remembering this info? Sorry if I've missed it somewhere.
Actually it was the '95 bonus and had been paid nearly a year earlier. Anyone who had knowledge of Access' payroll or worked in the house and saw John's pay stubs could know the amount. It wouldn't surprise me if it was one of the things that set the whole thing in motion.Voice of Reason said:JR's bonus for '96 was 118K and change. patsy claims she had no idea of this as she didn't handle the finances. even john claims he didn't know the exact dollar amount offhand. but no matter what either of them says, whoever wrote that note was aware of this fact. noone asks for $118,000. a real kidnapping would have differed in that it would have (1) asked for more money (e.g., 1million) and (2) asked for a more even amount (e.g., 100,000, 5 million, etc.).
to me, everything in this case screams RDI, but for whatever reason, they just can't gather enough to charge them. it's no coincidence that the BPD spent all their resources exploring the RDI theory. it's no surprise they didn't look elsewhere. THAT'S WHERE ALL THE EVIDENCE POINTS!!
I think Morag is talking about the where the acute mark goes in Jonbenet's name, not about the ransom note.sissi said:I think the mark is part of the upswing he shows in both diagonal lines, both in his "y's" and in the percentage mark.
EXACTLY, naralcatnarlacat said:And it worked!
Such a big piece of evidence and nothing can be done with it(or so it would seem)
wenchie said:But what would be the purpose on an intruder writing the ransom note in the first place?
You know that you're never going to collect any ransom: the child's body is in the house - which you know will be thoroughly searched. You know she'll be found.
Add that to the fact that no phone call came in when the note said it would (and that John or Patsy showed no interest in waiting for said call).
So, why not only waste time and take the chance at being caught while writing the note - but also leave it as evidence?
IMO, there's only one reason for that note: one of the parents (probably accidently) killed her. Now there's the problem of what to do about. Hide her in the house and then call the police and say that she's missing? Okay......but wait! There's no evidence of an intruder and it will be obvious that it was one of us.
So.....we have to write the note to stage some evidence of an intruder.
Lacy Wood said:My personal opinion, however, is that a writer trying to match Patsy's handwriting in a lengthy note would have betrayed himself with the typical features of a forgery...hesitations, restarts, etc. If these were found, I haven't heard it yet.
I took the trashed page with a changed "greeting" in the note the same way you suggest. In addition, the very act of rethinking the greeting suggested to me a state of relaxed reflection, which seemed to fit the idea of a plan as opposed to a panicked coverup. (By " hesitations and restarts" I was thinking of individual points in writing where an imitator stops, hesitates, or redirects the pen in trying to match a writing style.)Voice of Reason said:It is well documented that a "practice" ransom note was found in the pad from which the ransom note was written. It began "Mr. and Mrs. Ramsey" and said nothing more as opposed to "Mr. Ramsey" of the "real" note. To me, that is very telling. Why they felt the need to exclude Patsy means something....
It began Mr. and Mrs. l. I think the reason it was changed was Mr & Mrs sounded too friendly and the killer wanted to sound distant and serious/menacing.Voice of Reason said:It is well documented that a "practice" ransom note was found in the pad from which the ransom note was written. It began "Mr. and Mrs. Ramsey" and said nothing more as opposed to "Mr. Ramsey" of the "real" note. To me, that is very telling. Why they felt the need to exclude Patsy means something....