Sbtc

[Nehemiah]

As noted by another poster, Victory, S. B. T. C. makes it more complete.

Since tennis is favored by many in John's position, maybe it was a sarcastic reference to a victory at South Boulder Tennis Club.

saved by the cross is a pretty good fit, but the rest of the note makes no religious (direct) references, and in fact mentions a time line including the beginning of the next year, as opposed to after Christmas.

stop bombing third-world countries could be the best possibility and is in keeping with the opening of the note, and would provide closure. The statement by the 'small foreign faction' and 's.b.t.c.' both indicate a lack of respect for the US. The Signs were reportedly seen in Boulder in Dec. '96 saying,
Stop
Bombing
Third world
Countries

Hi Vicktor. Being from Colorado, did you see the signs, or where did you hear about them? I don't remember anything about signs before.

Imo

 

[vicktor]

Hi Vicktor. Being from Colorado, did you see the signs, or where did you hear about them? I don't remember anything about signs before.

Imo

Hi, Nehemiah, I didn't personally see the signs. It seems that some media reported prior to 2000 that a protest took place in Boulder, where signs with this message were seen.

 

[Britt]

I assume since you all think that the signature S.B.T.C. was actually something 'true' in the note - then all else in the note must be assumed to be true as well, correct?
Because surely you wouldn't consider the entire note bogus and fake - but believe just ONE little piece of it to have been written in truth would you?

Possibly. But only in the sense that it was a personal message from the note writer - Patsy - to the person she was addressing: John. The message being, a call to join the cover-up. The last three lines of the ransom note: Don't underestimate us John. Use that good southern common sense of yours. It is up to you now John!

From Patsy's 1995 Christmas letter: This year John, John Andrew, and Melinda took the crew of the Miss America (our sailing sloop) to victories in the NOOD Races in Chicago...

My theory:

Stand By To... is a basic sailing command. IMO, Victory! S.B.T.C is a sailing term and it is directed to John.

Possibly, when Patsy wrote the note John was not yet involved in the cover-up and she was writing a clear message TO HIM in terms he would immediately recognize and understand...

Oh I know what you're thinking. You're thinking: But John is the sailor and the boat racer. Indeed he is, so the other possibility is that John helped compose the note and used a sailing command, a command he used in his sailing competitions: Victory! Stand By To.... C... what might the C mean? Cover?

 

[tipper]

I'm not a sailor. The closest I get to open water is floating around the pool. But I have a question - Stand By To (whatever) sounds like a spoken term meaning "Get Ready to do X, Y,or Z" It doesn't seem like something that would be written down often enough to have a common abbreviation. In other words - I've never seen the initials A.S.! used as a substitute for Abandon Ship! because it's a command that demands a fairly immediate reaction.

 

[Britt]

I'm not a sailor. The closest I get to open water is floating around the pool.

Yes, that's my idea of sailing, too.

But I have a question - Stand By To (whatever) sounds like a spoken term meaning "Get Ready to do X, Y,or Z"

Exactly. The important thing here is that it is specifically a nautical term:

STAND-BY
An order to get ready, as, 'Stand by to drop the anchor

http://www.barnetsailing.bc.ca/memnautical.htm

It doesn't seem like something that would be written down often enough to have a common abbreviation.

Who said it did? It is Patsy Ramsey who likes initialed abbreviations. And she may have used it to convey a familiar, silent message to John that he would get.

Stand By To Cast-off, maybe? Like, "It's showtime."

 

[Ivy]

I still think S.B.T.C stands for "Saved By the Cross." Patsy, who penned the note, was trying desperately to hold onto the Christian belief that when Jesus was crucified, the sins of humankind (of True Believers, anyway) would be forgiven, and that the person who killed JonBenet (Burke, imo) would not end up in Hell, nor would the persons who staged the coverup (John and herself, imo).

IMO

 

[BrotherMoon]

As noted by another poster, Victory, S. B. T. C. makes it more complete.

saved by the cross is a pretty good fit, but the rest of the note makes no religious (direct) references

Good point, but the note is a small work of literature with an introduction, plot, climax and denoument. And the note has the quality of psychotic fantasy, personal dream imagery known only to the writer. Ditto, much of the Bible, ditto much of mythology, oral or written.

Victory. Symbols of victory are the palm, crown, garlands, wreaths of laurel, ivy, myrtle, parsely, etc. the triumphal arch and wings. [Angels]

Garland. Garlands also involve the symbolism of binding and linking together; they were used in initiation as a setting-apart and in sacrifice on sacrificial animals or captives of war as sacrifice.

From An Illustrated Encylcopedia of Traditional Symbols.

Pieces of garland were found in her hair.

 

[twizzler333]

Who else besides Patsy would know these nautical terms?

I think there has to be someone close to John that would know these terms as well.

I believe if I were "staging" a kidnapping and a ransom note I would absolutely NOT use terms that would be associated with me in any way, shape or form. You'd have to be an idiot. If I were the perp and I knew the family, I may use some acronym that would just get to them, something they would be familiar with to let them know that I mean business! That would make more sense than Patsy making this fake note and putting something on there to possibly incriminate them by using terms relating to sailing, of which John was in to somewhat.

Not buying it being her that wrote that for any sailing reference, but then again, these theories here make no sense to me anyway. I've seen a lot of things in my life and this does not add up. Nor does Tracey's theory of an intruder being one of these other guys mentioned earlier. I think it is someone they are very familiar with. But I will admit, I have no idea who it could be. I am just convinced in my heart and by the dream I had recently that brought me to look into this case at all, that it is someone she trusted and knew but NOT her parents/brother. IMO.

 

[Britt]

Who else besides Patsy would know these nautical terms?

I think there has to be someone close to John that would know these terms as well.

That's true. John Andrew, for one, who is even mentioned in Patsy's Christmas letter I quoted above as helping his dad race the boat. There are things that point to JAR, as has been discussed in this forum: e.g. less than ironclad alibi (could've easily been manipulated), neighbor initially said he saw JAR arrive at the Ramseys on Christmas or (Eve?) and changed his story after the Ramsey PI's got hold of him, the missing allegedly nonexistent Christmas video in a family with strong video/photo-op traditions, JAR's semen found on the blanket in the suitcase in the basement, and more.

However, JAR didn't write the note. Patsy did, but even if you don't believe Patsy wrote it, JAR was excluded as the writer, wasn't he? (not sure) But, going with a JAR theory, with Patsy helping to cover by writing the note, maybe she deliberately used a sailing phrase, as well as putting the incriminating blanket in the suitcase by the broken window, as well as marking the word "incest" in the open dictionary, all to point to JAR... of course, maybe she did that anyway even if he were innocent, in order to frame him.

I believe if I were "staging" a kidnapping and a ransom note I would absolutely NOT use terms that would be associated with me in any way, shape or form.

Yes, that makes all kinds of sense. But what if you wanted to frame someone else? e.g. Patsy framing John, Patsy framing JAR, and so on.

On the other hand, it's not necessarily a term that would be associated with John and Patsy if it were something they said to each other while on the boat. As Tipper pointed out, it is not a classic abbreviation that everyone would know. But it may be an abbreviation of words instantly recognizable to John if Patsy intended to use the note to convey her message to him.

I gotta say, I don't believe anyone but Patsy and John were involved, but if there were someone else, the JAR theory is the most compelling. I also wonder if JAR was the one who molested JB, but did not kill her and was in fact in Atlanta per his alibi. Patsy learned about the molestation and after JB ended up dead, however it happened, Patsy deliberately left the JAR blanket and dictionary marked to "incest" for that reason.

 

[vicktor]

I think it is someone they are very familiar with. But I will admit, I have no idea who it could be. IMO.

Thanks for sharing some of your ideas, Twizzler. If true, the sailing acronyms would be interesting. Using your theory as a jumping off point, it brings into question another observation about theories. If part of a theory makes good sense, but the part about choosing the best suspect from those as defined as being possible can't point to any good suspect, then it weakens the theory. For example, JAR was a good suspect, but apparently LE studied his alibi, movements, and the timeline from the 25th and found it would be nearly impossible for him to come to Boulder, then return to Atlanta.

 

[twizzler333]

I was just on the candyrose site and noticed that Fleet W. was the sailing enthusiast. What happened with this person? Was he investigated. He might use terms that way. Not much is said about him other than in that one book they wrote about his strange behavior and then the letters he wrote to Boulder, etc.

I am going to look for a picture of him. The reason I got interested at all in this case was because of a dream I had a few weeks ago, where I was seeing the crime but it was like it was through her eyes and the face that I could see choking her had very distinctive eyes that I cannot seem to get out of my mind. This lead to me seeing what was going on with the case at all. I had NEVER even read all this stuff or even had an interest whatsoever in this case until this dream.

I had a similar dream regarding someone in my hometown about 18 years ago that did pan out exactly as I dreamed it and it was very bothersome then and I have never had another dream that bothered me so until this one with JonBenet. I have never got into anything like this before in my life and was really shocked when I came here and saw all the theories accusing the family of doing this to her. I could be wrong but I really feel like it is someone totally unexpected. I have a hard time believing a lot of this paranormal stuff that I have experienced, but after that first dream and the toll it took on me because I was "in this girls place" so to speak seeing how she died and it in fact became the absolute truth, I just could not ignore another dream like that, therefore bringing me to look into this case for the first time.

I am going to find a way or a person that really understands the paranormal and psychic things to see if there is something to this that is bothering me so much. I have lost sleep over this one dream and I want to know why this has happened to me again and why I dreamed that so vividly.

Go ahead and call me a nut case, but this is true. I don't want these dreams to come, but when it affects me this intensely, I just have to find out why.

 

[Britt]

For example, JAR was a good suspect, but apparently LE studied his alibi, movements, and the timeline from the 25th and found it would be nearly impossible for him to come to Boulder, then return to Atlanta.

But some of his reported movements could have been manipulated, i.e. lied about... I believe a part of the alibi relied on movie ticket stubs, which obviously could've been acquired from someone other than JAR... and the ATM photo was reportedly far from clear, meaning it could've been someone other than JAR... and let's not forget how shielded JAR was from scrutiny because John Ramsey lawyered up that whole part of his family (why???? if they were all in Georgia at the time???) John Ramsey - a pilot with his own plane and all the right connections - could've snuck JAR out of town... oh and where are those phone records again?

And besides, why is it that when it comes to implicating Patsy, the cops did a lousy job (according to nonRDI theorists) and their work can't be trusted... but when it comes to clearing JAR or Burke, the cops' work is not only trusted, they are taken at their word? Are we trusting the cops or not? Did they have good information and evidence or not?

 

[BrotherMoon]

Go ahead and call me a nut case, but this is true. I don't want these dreams to come, but when it affects me this intensely, I just have to find out why.

Your dream had little or nothing to do with the case, it had to do with you. Study yourself.

 

[Show Me]

I agree with Brother Moon, you need to study yourself Twizzler. Something maybe bothering you in your personal life. Libraries and website's have some excellent info on dreams. You may also need to take a break from the case...it's a heartbreaking case and has affected most of us at one time or the other. In seven plus years I have had to step back away from the case, several times.

As far as Fleet White, he was investigated throughly and co-operated with the LE. Only the 3 M's still have a vendetta against Fleet.

Your not Mary, Mame or Morgan or Holly are you?

 

[twizzler333]

I have no idea who Mary, Mame, Morgan or Holly is. What is that about. Honestly, I have seen really much of nothing on Mr. White other than his letters to Boulder and know that he was with Mr. Ramsey when he found JonBenet.

As for studying myself, I cannot imagine what would be bothering me in my personal life. I am a very happy person, have two beautiful twin daughters, a job I really love, beautiful home, had a perfectly wonderful childhood, a fabulous family that I am very close to....not sure what would be bothering me that I don't know about.

It was just this dream, I guess, as it was so vividly real. And then the fact that the other one I had many, many years ago turned out to be exactly to the number as I dreamed it, and I didn't even know this person, other than had seen her twice in my life 8 years prior to the dream. That was what made it so bizarre, the fact that I didn't really know this lady at all. Oh well, it just threw me for a loop especially since I really had not followed this case at all until now. It is just strange, that's all. I am not even sure Fleet was the man in my dream, as I really don't know what he looks like and the face in my dream was distorted, just remember the hair and the eyes, nothing else.

I have nothing to gain by this or by being here other than some ensight into the theories and occasionally some facts that may pass through these forums. I guess I will just keep praying for justice in the case. Thanks for listening.

 

[BrotherMoon]

twizz. By now JonBenet is an archetypal image in the national psyche; the Child Archetype or inner child, with all the accompanying qualities such as purity, innocence, vulnerablilty, potential for growth, instictuality, on and on. Your dream speaks to you having some of the child archetype qualities strangled in your development. Don't worry, it happens to everyone to some degree or another, it's part of normal development, we have to lose some of our childish behaviors to adapt to adult society.

Stay with the theme though in your study of this case. The Unconscious or Objective Psyche is the source of dream, symbol and myth and is a source of Patsy's psychosis. Your strangling experience in childhood was apparently mild, Patsy's more severe and of course JonBenet's was extreme but they all follow the same basic pattern of the denial of identity development of children by parental figures. You may be a natural empath. Try putting yourself in Patsy's place, learn about her life and how she was strangled by Nedra and how that led to Patsy co-opting JonBenet's life. As cute as JB was, it is Patsy Paugh Ramsey that is by far the most interesting personality in the case.

 

[vicktor]

But some of his reported movements could have been manipulated, i.e. lied about... I believe a part of the alibi relied on movie ticket stubs, which obviously could've been acquired from someone other than JAR... and the ATM photo was reportedly far from clear, meaning it could've been someone other than JAR... and let's not forget how shielded JAR was from scrutiny because John Ramsey lawyered up that whole part of his family (why???? if they were all in Georgia at the time???) John Ramsey - a pilot with his own plane and all the right connections - could've snuck JAR out of town... oh and where are those phone records again?

And besides, why is it that when it comes to implicating Patsy, the cops did a lousy job (according to nonRDI theorists) and their work can't be trusted... but when it comes to clearing JAR or Burke, the cops' work is not only trusted, they are taken at their word? Are we trusting the cops or not? Did they have good information and evidence or not?

Britt, To decide what happened among the various people involved, you need to use common sense, consider the facts as reported, look at what LE did, and maybe use a hunch. With JAR it looks like the police went to Atlanta and did some basic checking. They talked to his friends, checked on the ATM abili, checked airline schedules to and from Boulder, and whatever else they could do to verify to their satisfaction if he could have done it or not. It was not hi-tech analysis, but simple yes and no questions. They stated he was not considered a suspect. I. E. they took the info and answers and arrived at a conclusion they felt was 100% accurate, and stated he was not a suspect. You posed 4 possibilities as devil's advocate to suggest JAR might be involved. If they are taken together, the odds that it happened that way, with LE not finding out about any of it are so high as not to be in the realm of possibility. Conspiracy theories are inviting and interesting but in reality they don't happen.

 

[K777angel]

I still think S.B.T.C stands for "Saved By the Cross." Patsy, who penned the note, was trying desperately to hold onto the Christian belief that when Jesus was crucified, the sins of humankind (of True Believers, anyway) would be forgiven, and that the person who killed JonBenet (Burke, imo) would not end up in Hell, nor would the persons who staged the coverup (John and herself, imo).

IMO

I respectfully disagree Ivy. From start to finish the note writer (Patsy) was in a lying mode. A deceptive mode. From stating that the note was from a "foreign faction" to ending it (right by the SBTC) with "Victory."
She was trying the whole time to BE a member of a "foreign faction" and tried writing the note as she thought a foreign terrorist/kidnapper would write it.
Signing it with a TRUE acronym (i.e. "saved by the cross") does not go along with the rest of the mindset and purpose of the note IMO.

I do not believe that the signature is any more true than the first line of the note that. I think at the point she FINALLY decided to stop writing that war and peace of ransom notes - she needed something cryptic to sign off with and simply made up the acronym with random letters.
I do not think they mean anything at all.

It would only mean something if the entire note was for real. IMO

 

[Ivy]

K777angel, you may very well have something there. I remember some time back when Twilight (yoohoo, Twi, where are you?) posted her theory as to how Patsy selected the letters SBTC...but I don't recall it exactly, do you? Anyone?

imo

 

[iron]

hello all. this topic interests me in that you hate to see someone get away with the murder of a child. i've read a lot of what you all at this forum (and others as well as other sources of evidence) and "saved by the cross" makes the most sense to me.
1. according to all the experts - patsy either cannot be eliminated as the writer or is probably the writer. there may be others who can't be eliminated, but were any others in the house? looking at comparisons my self, i would wager she was the writer.
2. patsy's has got some unconventional spiritual beliefs with some roots in christianity (listen to her talk about her faith and tackling cancer etc...)
3. researchers have written about the significance of sbtc (that expression) to certain sects of christianity (fundamentalists maybe, can't remember) which i think relate to forgiveness of sin (again don't remember the specifics)
4. patsy makes some foolish and/or inappropriate comments at times and is simply not above doing something stupid like signing off with something that has real significance to an otherwise blatantly phoney ransom note

in my mind, patsy (with input from others) wrote the note and the closing represents her warped belief that somehow whatever she did (at minimum covering up an accidental death) is ok because she is saved by the cross -- and thus has victory over her own involvement

just thought i'd throw in a couple of cents.