What we know about Ransom Note

[Laughing]

Laughing,
Sure, but more like an gloss on Kolar's insightful remarks on the forensics, all credit to James, Yay!

Or for those who like classical tropes a sort of rip or midrash Talmudic style, someone will publish a book saying Covid was forecast by the Prophets because ... quote, quote, etc.

.

Surely we could find mention of a plague in some books 20:20!?!?!

We'll be famous, right?She looks like a kid here:

image from reddit.com

 

[EmiliRose]

very interesting

 

[JimL2020]

First, hello all, I am new to this site, but have studied this case for many years now and here is my opinion on the ransom note.

1) no one who is intending to kidnap someone for ransom would first write such a long ransom note, if it is an itruder, they would already have a small quick note wrote, grab the child and get out. If they were going to kill the person (child) they would not have wrote a ransom note. Makes no sense to write a ransom note then kill child and leave them in house. This stinks of cover up
2) While they concluded through handwriting analysis that JR did not author the note they said PR could not be excluded (inconclusive). Inconclusive does not mean PR did not write it or not it only means that there was not enough points to prove she did but there were some points that said she did..inconclusive does not mean she DID NOT.
3) With the information in the ransom note, facts such as amount of ransom and JR bonus, this again stinks of a cover up. I dont know of anyone who would know that amount outside of JR, PR, and anyone at his company that would have the exact amount. To use this type of information points to parents. I certainly would not brag to a random person how much my work bonus was espeically if 180,000 dollars.
4) the note was wrote on paper with a pen found in the house, came from within the house. Anyone who is truly going to do a kidnapping would not stay inside the house to write out a very long detailed ransom note, they would have wrote one before they arrived as not to spend any extra time within the house.

I have never heard of any case where a kidnapper wrote a ransom note at the house, and then killed the victim of the kidnapping and left them in the house with the ransom note. This makes no sense and stinks of a cover up.

 

[UKGuy]

First, hello all, I am new to this site, but have studied this case for many years now and here is my opinion on the ransom note.

1) no one who is intending to kidnap someone for ransom would first write such a long ransom note, if it is an itruder, they would already have a small quick note wrote, grab the child and get out. If they were going to kill the person (child) they would not have wrote a ransom note. Makes no sense to write a ransom note then kill child and leave them in house. This stinks of cover up
2) While they concluded through handwriting analysis that JR did not author the note they said PR could not be excluded (inconclusive). Inconclusive does not mean PR did not write it or not it only means that there was not enough points to prove she did but there were some points that said she did..inconclusive does not mean she DID NOT.
3) With the information in the ransom note, facts such as amount of ransom and JR bonus, this again stinks of a cover up. I dont know of anyone who would know that amount outside of JR, PR, and anyone at his company that would have the exact amount. To use this type of information points to parents. I certainly would not brag to a random person how much my work bonus was espeically if 180,000 dollars.
4) the note was wrote on paper with a pen found in the house, came from within the house. Anyone who is truly going to do a kidnapping would not stay inside the house to write out a very long detailed ransom note, they would have wrote one before they arrived as not to spend any extra time within the house.

I have never heard of any case where a kidnapper wrote a ransom note at the house, and then killed the victim of the kidnapping and left them in the house with the ransom note. This makes no sense and stinks of a cover up.

JimL2020,
Everything you wrote is sound, common sense and points to the parents authoring the note.

Patsy is the prime candidate with John likely tweaking parts of it, i.e. the work bonus, etc, all little hints suggesting someone at his workplace?

The RN is part of a staged crime-scene it was never the crime itself. The parents went on to blame their friends and the housekeeper this functioned alike the RN as a shield to deflect the truth.

Once Lou Smit arrived the case narrative changed from Kidnapper to Intruder as a pedophile with a motive.

.

 

[EmiliRose]

Has anyone figured out this note?

 

[dgfred]

Yes... seems to me UK Guy has.

 

[fr brown]

John would know, as does virtually everybody who has worked in a business environment, that payroll information is meant to be confidential. Only a very small number of management senior to John in rank, a subset of HR people, possibly Ramsey's personal assistant, and some in IT would be privy to the amount of his bonus. (John, of course, would be free to tell anybody he likes.) So who would John be framing? Denise Wolf? He better hope she doesn't have an alibi.

And why does John need to be the one putting the bonus reference in? The amount was on his pay stub. Steve Thomas said Patsy had access to that information.

The invitation on the ground outside the patio door, the invitation that Patsy said she tucked away in the kitchen, is the indicator of someone casting suspicion on a present or former work colleague. Whether or not this person might be thought to be aware of John's bonus, I don't know. Can't see why John would want to throw suspicion on this person. Patsy might.

 

[fr brown]

I think one of the problems people have is acknowledging that sexual abuse of female minors by women does actually occur (though it's probably rarely done by the woman alone). And it's true that JonBenet's killer doesn't have to be the molester (if JonBenet was indeed molested before that night) but lacking evidence to the contrary it's more parsimonious to assume it's one and the same.

There was actually a case not too far from me some years ago. A young woman, a Sunday school teacher and a single mother, bludgeoned a young girl who had come over to play, strangled her with a cord and raped her with a rolling pin. She then put the girl's body in a suitcase and threw it in an irrigation pond. Iirc, the woman used Xanax and was a closet schizophrenic. Looking at her, you would never know there was anything wrong. So there are a few parallels, including the Xanax.

We know that Patsy's defense was exploring an insanity defense for her. I have no reason to think that was true for John or Burke.

 

[UKGuy]

I think one of the problems people have is acknowledging that sexual abuse of female minors by women does actually occur (though it's probably rarely done by the woman alone). And it's true that JonBenet's killer doesn't have to be the molester (if JonBenet was indeed molested before that night) but lacking evidence to the contrary it's more parsimonious to assume it's one and the same.

There was actually a case not too far from me some years ago. A young woman, a Sunday school teacher and a single mother, bludgeoned a young girl who had come over to play, strangled her with a cord and raped her with a rolling pin. She then put the girl's body in a suitcase and threw it in an irrigation pond. Iirc, the woman used Xanax and was a closet schizophrenic. Looking at her, you would never know there was anything wrong. So there are a few parallels, including the Xanax.

We know that Patsy's defense was exploring an insanity defense for her. I have no reason to think that was true for John or Burke.

fr brown,
An insanity defense would never fly for Patsy, she was too clever and erudite, check her interviews and TV appearances, who would believe she was insane?

IMO the case cannot be PDI, as Patsy, despite the having the time and opportunity, failed to get the staging correct.

Think: size-12's, Burke's long johns, pineapple snack residue, practice RN notes left behind, her fibers left all over JonBenet, answering the door in the previous nights clothes, etc.

Patsy was staging the crime-scene to save someone else.

.

 

[UKGuy]

John would know, as does virtually everybody who has worked in a business environment, that payroll information is meant to be confidential. Only a very small number of management senior to John in rank, a subset of HR people, possibly Ramsey's personal assistant, and some in IT would be privy to the amount of his bonus. (John, of course, would be free to tell anybody he likes.) So who would John be framing? Denise Wolf? He better hope she doesn't have an alibi.

And why does John need to be the one putting the bonus reference in? The amount was on his pay stub. Steve Thomas said Patsy had access to that information.

The invitation on the ground outside the patio door, the invitation that Patsy said she tucked away in the kitchen, is the indicator of someone casting suspicion on a present or former work colleague. Whether or not this person might be thought to be aware of John's bonus, I don't know. Can't see why John would want to throw suspicion on this person. Patsy might.

fr brown,
What you say about limited access to John's payroll data must apply in reverse if it were Patsy who added it, independently of John knowing.

i.e. he would know Patsy must have authored the note, regardless whether he recognized the handwriting?

Also the bonus reference was not explicit, it was likely just added to lay a false trail, the R's knew it could lead nowhere.

If the case is PDI, which is possible. With Patsy whacking JonBenet and faking a sexual assault using the paintbrush, to simulate an intruder assault.

So what was Patsy doing all night: Sitting watching TV, wearing the same clothes she wore to the White's?

She had access to a washing machine and tumble dryer to cleanup all the forensic evidence relating to clothing, she never bothered, why?

.

 

[EmiliRose]

This note definitely had a hidden meaning. This needs to be analyzed. A lot can be said about a person in terms of writing style. I tell you as a former writer. by the way, if you need writing services, I recommend looking at a review of some of these services at BestWritersOnline The guys are real professionals, each of them has their own unique writing style.

 

[margarita25]

This note certainly had a hidden meaning. It needs to be analyzed. There is a lot to say about a person in terms of the style of writing.

“hence”...

 

[Tobiano8th]

PR lawyers examined "insanity defense"?

To the poster who wrote, plz cite a source

Here's a Q: did each of the D's have their own lawyer?

 

[Tobiano8th]

Washing machine and clothing comment is interesting

Maybe it's as simple as PR was out of her mind and didn't think of them

Would multiple washing leave no trace?

I assume BPD didn't check PR outfit for evidence

As I said, interesting Q on washing machine not used

 

[Tobiano8th]

The see a misclick earlier... Did all 3 R's have lawyers?

 

[UKGuy]

The see a misclick earlier... Did all 3 R's have lawyers?

Tobiano8th,
Yes, do a search engine search and they should all come up, Burke Ramsey's lawyer wanted him declared not a suspect, etc.

Most of PR and JR's extended family also had legal representation, so when BPD investigators turned up to interview them, they just said speak to our legal guys.

JR had the legal representation side of the case all sown up as early as the same day JonBenet was discovered.

He had likely been advised as to what might be coming down the line?

.

 

[UKGuy]

Washing machine and clothing comment is interesting

Maybe it's as simple as PR was out of her mind and didn't think of them

Would multiple washing leave no trace?

I assume BPD didn't check PR outfit for evidence

As I said, interesting Q on washing machine not used

Tobiano8th,
The Washing machine and clothing comment should alert folks that the case is not what it seems on the surface.

Patsy, effectively has all night to wash away forensic evidence, even use bottled bleach as a last resort.

Yet nothing appears to happen other than a redressing, some of which Patsy says she did?

Millionaire pageant mom dresses her daughter in underwear intended for her older niece and her brother's long johns complete with front opening, all to stage a crime-scene, really?

It took her all night to dream that up?

Would multiple washing leave no trace?

Just one wash using a modern biological soap powder or cube would do the job.

Look at it this way: the case is PDI, Patsy wants to create a normalized domestic crime-scene that looks like JonBenet has been snatched from her bed.

She produces the above after a few hours thinking about it.

Does all this add up?

.

 

[Holmesewp]

I really fell as if no evidence ever was done properly how $$$ can pay off everyone there in tht town to many people know truth and rather fell guilt rest lives than get proven to much jealousy envy do new autopsy or at this point would it even do justice sad

 

[mrspeele]

If JBR was murdered by an intruder, why was the ransom note in pristine condition without any creases or folds? If the note was written before the murder, it seems unlikely the murderer would leave it out in plain sight, on a desk or bench while he snatched JBR from her bed, carried her down several flights of stairs, carried out the crime then come back upstairs to lay out the note before leaving the house. If he wrote the note before the murder, would he have carried the note while he carried JBR downstairs? In that case the note would have been crumpled. So that either means (A) the ransom note was written before the murder and left out in plain sight while he crept through the house, snatched her from her bed, carried her down to the basement risking being caught red handed or someone waking up during the night and finding the note Or (B) the ransom note was written after the murder, leaving himself vulnerable to being caught writing a lengthy letter after having murdered a 6 year old child. I doubt a murderer would hang around the crime scene leaving himself vulnerable to being caught after murdering JBR by coming back up stairs to write the ransom note. He would have wanted to get out as quickly as possible. The more i think about it, there would be no benefit to the murderer to potentially expose himself by wasting time writing a 3 page note and walking to the middle of the house out in plain view to leave the note on the stairs. It doesn't make sense.

No intruder. No way. Whatever hsppened

 

[proust20]

Other than motive, the time frame of the crime is the major difficulty in the case. PDI provides the most succinct succession of events. She kills JB, stages the WC scene and pens the RN. Obviously, she would have been occupied, to say the least. (Perhaps, this has to do with the exhausting delivery and the need to rest up contained in the RN?) Doing the laundry just may not have seemed important, given the enormity of the undertaking. Besides, PR was clever to wear last night's outfit to greet LE, as this could explain fiber transfers, once the house had been contaminated. The same with JR and his contamination of the body. Part of the staging involved the R's intentionally calling over a crowd to make sure nothing could be conclusive.
Some pieces of evidence have never been found, as best we know. Getting rid of them would have taken planning. Could PR have managed everything by herself? As discussed here previously, the messiness and errors of the staging could be due to more than one R taking part in it, with do-overs occurring during the course of the night.
If PR is covering for BR, the timeline stretches out a bit.