The ransom note & Patsy Ramsey, letter by letter.

[Smelly Squirrel]

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.

How many other comparison charts have you seen?

 

[vlpate]

How many other comparison charts have you seen?

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.

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

I mean comparisons to other potential suspects.

 

[vlpate]

I mean comparisons to other potential suspects.

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.

 

[BBB167893]

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.

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

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

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.

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

 

[Whaleshark]

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.

 

[vlpate]

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

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.

 

[vlpate]

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.

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....

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

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

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.

Did she make a later report?

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

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.

 

[Rallihanna]

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

 

[BBB167893]

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?

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?

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.

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

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

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

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.

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.

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.)

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

Based on what? How did you calculate those odds?

 

[BBB167893]

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

She's 100% sure now.

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

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,

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?

Occam's Razor, for one thing.

 

[weeble]

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.

 

[DeeDee249]

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.

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.

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

She's 100% sure now.

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.

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.

Can you give some sourcing for your account?

 

[Smelly Squirrel]

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.

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

 

[erinleigh]

http://www.statementanalysis.com/ramseynote/

 

[BBB167893]

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

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.

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.

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.

It's tough, all right.

Can you give some sourcing for your account?

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?