What we know about Ransom Note

[capps]

There was a reason for the ranson note.
The perp did not want to leave,letting JR to think this could have been done by just anyone (crazy person in the area,pedophile stalking JonBenet, etc.) The ransom note was covert enough to let JR know,maybe not exactly who did it,but narrowed it down.
The "inner" information: $118,000(JR's bonus),southern common sense(used jokingly by JR's inner circles),fat cat(his wealth,business),SBTC(JR's military service),Victory(possibly a word that was used often during JR's annual Regatta races in Chicago). These were all covert messages,that led JR to believe this was an "inside job". I believe the rest was "filler" to sound like a "standard" ransom note.
IMO ... I think the person who wanted revenge for JR is a powerful, important person,who would not personally kill JonBenet,but paid off someone,who knows someone,who would.I also believe,JR has a good idea of who this person is ...and for reasons we don't know ... he's not talking.

It wasn't the money ... it wasn't JonBenet ... it was a message to John.

 

[K777angel]

The RN stands in opposition to what actually happened to JBR.

The RN was placed on a traffic path separating the basement from the bedrooms.

This gives the RN the appearance of a block or diversionary tactic. IOW there was never a kidnapping for ransom.

The single intruder with a premeditated plan that involved the basement is going to have perceived threats beforehand. One of those threats is going to be a parent entering the basement unannounced. Another of those threats is going to be the parents calling the police while the intruder is still in the neighborhood.

IMO the ransom note was never used for its intended purpose, since the parents never came downstairs until morning. Even then, the ransom note effectively delayed a house search for hours.

The parents called 911 and reported a kidnapping. During the morning hours, the police were looking for a girl matching JBR's description. Without the note, the police would have been looking for a murder suspect.

SIDI makes more sense than RDI because in RDI you have to believe that the parents called 911 hours earlier than prescribed by the ransom note they themselves wrote. You also have to believe that they invited local LE and FBI to a scene where they willingly left handwriting and capital murder evidence lying around.

Ok, so just WHEN was that note placed on those steps???
This is a very important point. And no one ever answers how it fits into their intruder theory. Because it's ridiculous when you think about it.

This supposed intruder would have gone upstairs to grab JonBenet.
Obviously he did not place the note BEFORE he went up the stairs or he would have stepped on it on the way down as he was carrying JonBenet! It was not stepped on nor crinkled in any way.

And of course he could not have carried the note UP with him and held on to the note while juggling JonBenet in his arms too as he wrestled her out of her bed and down the stairs.

And do you really think he would have just LEFT the note lying around downstairs somewhere as he went up to pick up JonBenet? LOL! And then he did what - lay her down on the floor after they walked downstairs - then walk over, pick up the 3 pages and then go spread them out on the stair step and then go back over and pick up JonBenet??? It's silly to even contemplate. (And then we are supposed to believe he decides to STAY in the house even longer and go downstairs to the basement! Why didn't he just LEAVE?)

Or - do you think he had the 3 pages of note downstairs and went back upstairs into the main house just to place the note somewhere? After he's just beat and killed a child in the house?? Of course not.

So WHEN do you intruder theorists think those 3 pages of note were placed on those stairs?? Which one of the above occured? It has to be one of them.

~ There was no intruder. ~

 

[tipper]

Well if I'd been doing it I would have waited til I was sure everyone was asleep. Put the note on the stairs - either stepped over that step (or to one side or the other of the note) - gone up, gotten JonBent and carried her down the front stairs. Why is that complicated?

 

[Camper]

Capps wrote, "IMO ... I think the person who wanted revenge for JR is a powerful, important person,who would not personally kill JonBenet,but paid off someone,who knows someone,who would.I also believe,JR has a good idea of who this person is ...and for reasons we don't know ... he's not talking.

It wasn't the money ... it wasn't JonBenet ... it was a message to John.

The person who wanted revenge who knew all of the private expressions used was in my opinion the same person who was dressed down for abusing JonBenet on 12/23/96, when the 911 call was made. I believe JR dressed down his 20'ish son maybe even used the dictionary to explain incest, perhaps even threatened to remove him from his will, perhaps had refused some BIG want for some money to BUY something like a new car becuz this young person knew about the bonus figure, and knew the money was available for his WANT whatever it might have been. Mix some alcohol into the scenario and you have a prime suspect, all of which is my opinion based on published information about the case.

I do believe that JR as the man of the family, IF IF he had not been dressing down a perp the evening of 12/23/96 would have answered his own front door to the Boulder Police officer, in response to the 911 call. IF memory serves me the dictionary in question was found in the master bedroom, please someone correct me IF my memory of where the dictionary was found is incorrect.

The 23rd may have in fact been the day that the person told JonBenet that she would have a secret visit from Santa Claus AFTER Christmas.

I also believe this is the person that JR was so eager to leave Boulder the morning of the 26th saying he had some important matters to attend to in Atlanta. Perhaps the $8,000 that may have been asked for was deducted mentally from the bonus and the 110,000 was the remaining amount of the bonus asked for in the ransom note.




.

 

[Rupert]

There was a reason for the ranson note.
The perp did not want to leave,letting JR to think this could have been done by just anyone (crazy person in the area,pedophile stalking JonBenet, etc.) The ransom note was covert enough to let JR know,maybe not exactly who did it,but narrowed it down.
The "inner" information: $118,000(JR's bonus),southern common sense(used jokingly by JR's inner circles),fat cat(his wealth,business),SBTC(JR's military service),Victory(possibly a word that was used often during JR's annual Regatta races in Chicago). These were all covert messages,that led JR to believe this was an "inside job". I believe the rest was "filler" to sound like a "standard" ransom note.
IMO ... I think the person who wanted revenge for JR is a powerful, important person,who would not personally kill JonBenet,but paid off someone,who knows someone,who would.I also believe,JR has a good idea of who this person is ...and for reasons we don't know ... he's not talking.

It wasn't the money ... it wasn't JonBenet ... it was a message to John.

I have come to the point (after about 3 years reading diverse theories) and think it was either the above planned revenge or a rage accident.

Of course it was a phony RN and could have been left anytime after to cause diversion. That is common to both IDI and RDI. What is different is this: I think it would have been written before if it was IDI. It would of course been written after if it was RDI.

Is there a CLUE somewhere that it was written either before or after?

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Ok, so just WHEN was that note placed on those steps???
This is a very important point. And no one ever answers how it fits into their intruder theory. Because it's ridiculous when you think about it.

I don't think its very significant when or how the single intruder managed to place the note. I certainly wouldn't put it past his ability to manage that minor detail when you consider the other things he did.

Its a little odd from my POV why the garrote would be seen here as used in any other way than it has been used throughout history, as a quiet control and kill weapon.

The quieting effect of the garrote and the diverting effect of the ransom note (during the morning, police were looking for a 6 year old girl instead of a murder suspect) adds up to a single intruder with some training or experience.

Maybe the perp really is "familiar with law enforcement countermeasures and tactics," and familiar with criminal tactics also.

This is one advantage of IDI over RDI: the killer can take on a standard bad-guy criminal sex-offender child-killer stereotyped profile, instead of force-fitting the Ramsey's into that mold (lol) because its easier, or they happened to be nearby at the time.

 

[Rupert]

This is one advantage of IDI over RDI: the killer can take on a standard bad-guy criminal sex-offender child-killer stereotyped profile, instead of force-fitting the Ramsey's into that mold (lol) because its easier, or they happened to be nearby at the time.

I quite concur with that, unless someone counselled them over the phone on how to write the RN and make it look like a standard bad guy. I understand the phone records were not retrieved and that caused Steve Thomas a real concern. However, I also think that counselling over the phone is a stretch. It's just hard for me to imagine any parent going to that length of cover-up.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

I quite concur with that, unless someone counselled them over the phone on how to write the RN and make it look like a standard bad guy. I understand the phone records were not retrieved and that caused Steve Thomas a real concern. However, I also think that counselling over the phone is a stretch. It's just hard for me to imagine any parent going to that length of cover-up.

The idea that whoever killed JBR needed outside help to sound more criminal is contradicted by the murder itself. The criminality of the ransom note was present in the murder, and the criminality of the murder was expressed in the ransom note. An appalling criminality was present in equal measure in both.

 

[Rupert]

The idea that whoever killed JBR needed outside help to sound more criminal is contradicted by the murder itself. The criminality of the ransom note was present in the murder, and the criminality of the murder was expressed in the ransom note. An appalling criminality was present in equal measure in both.

Fair enough. Both were brutal and I really went down the road on that theme before: RN to heart drawn magazine with Ricochet frame set-up, to hiding JonBenet right under their noses as in Rope/Leopold/Loeb. Leaving a brown paper bag with a "rope" ("you will put the money in a brown paper bag"). It all looks so vindictive. A perp who is rotten to the core.

"We do respect your bussiness, but not the country that it serves." Thanks for the business, but we hate you and your daughter. Sounds like someone who FLIPPED out. Someone who knew how to tie rope around a dowel.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Fair enough. Both were brutal and I really went down the road on that theme before: RN to heart drawn magazine with Ricochet frame set-up, to hiding JonBenet right under their noses as in Rope/Leopold/Loeb. Leaving a brown paper bag with a "rope" ("you will put the money in a brown paper bag"). It all looks so vindictive. A perp who is rotten to the core.

"We do respect your bussiness, but not the country that it serves." Thanks for the business, but we hate you and your daughter. Sounds like someone who FLIPPED out. Someone who knew how to tie rope around a dowel.

"This phrasing and words like 'attache' are uncommon in ransom notes. They suggest to Richards an educated writer, perhaps familiar with the world of business."

--Newsweek Magazine, 1997.

Familiar with the world of business enough to use the word attache, yet misspells the word business?

 

[Rupert]

Familiar with the world of business enough to use the word attache, yet misspells the word business?

I think the spelling was intentional and considered various ideas:

we respect your
bussiness = kissiness (your love for your daughter) and
bussiness = business, thanks for hiring us
bussiness = ability to set square sails (busses)

but not the country that it serves
= we don't like your daughter or we don't like the country (anarchist)
= John's square sail boat was called Miss America

Stop Bombing Thirdworld Countries certainly goes with "country that it serves".

 

[Zman]

I have come to the point (after about 3 years reading diverse theories) and think it was either the above planned revenge or a rage accident.

Of course it was a phony RN and could have been left anytime after to cause diversion. That is common to both IDI and RDI. What is different is this: I think it would have been written before if it was IDI. It would of course been written after if it was RDI.

Is there a CLUE somewhere that it was written either before or after?

Well my opinion is after.
The cross out of the word delivery and replacement with pickup tells me two things.
1. The author was thinking about what he was writing not just rushing a "fake" letter. To me this correction has a purpose.
2. That it was written after the murder because it refers to the actual way JBR would have to be...well for lack of a better word retrieved.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Well my opinion is after.
The cross out of the word delivery and replacement with pickup tells me two things.
1. The author was thinking about what he was writing not just rushing a "fake" letter. To me this correction has a purpose.
2. That it was written after the murder because it refers to the actual way JBR would have to be...well for lack of a better word retrieved.

I'll disagree, because the single intruder had opportunity to write the note and make corrections to it during the time alone in the house.

Afterward would contradict reason, since a single intruder wouldn't have either the composure to write or the willingness to remain in the house.

 

[Zman]

I'll disagree, because the single intruder had opportunity to write the note and make corrections to it during the time alone in the house.

Afterward would contradict reason, since a single intruder wouldn't have either the composure to write or the willingness to remain in the house.

Well, I try not to make up my own opinoin about what the intruder would or would not do. I try to look at whats presented to me.

The RN does not contain "corrections" it contains a single correction.
Only one. One word out of them all was chosen to be changed.
Why?
No one has ever even tried to answer that question as many times as I've brought it up.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Well, I try not to make up my own opinoin about what the intruder would or would not do. I try to look at whats presented to me.

The RN does not contain "corrections" it contains a single correction.
Only one. One word out of them all was chosen to be changed.
Why?
No one has ever even tried to answer that question as many times as I've brought it up.

The RN has at least three corrected mistakes:

• scribbled out word in the first paragraph,
• scribbled out delivery
• added <not between do and particularly

The question I have is who would misspell bussiness (sic) but still use the word attache?

 

[BlueCrab]

The question I have is who would misspell bussiness?

A child?

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

A child?

You modified my quote when you deleted part of the sentence and then moved the question mark. Please don't modify my quotes, BC. Here's the whole quote:

The question I have is who would misspell bussiness (sic) but still use the word attache?

Children dont use the word attache.

 

[Camper]

I would suspect that corrections were made as to the content of the ransom note, because so many pages are missing from the legal pad.

The 'final' draft has just one physical correction. By then, imop, the writer had tired of doing 'overs'.

Who would mispell bussiness? Answer, a bad speller. Bad spellers come in all ages.



.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

I would suspect that corrections were made as to the content of the ransom note, because so many pages are missing from the legal pad.

The 'final' draft has just one physical correction. By then, imop, the writer had tired of doing 'overs'.

Who would mispell bussiness? Answer, a bad speller. Bad spellers come in all ages.



.

Rereading the note I see four corrections, not one.

1. Scribbled out word in the first paragraph.
2. Scribbled out delivery.
3. The word 'denied' has overstriked (underlying) letters.
4. <not> is written as a correction, over and above 'do' and 'particularly'

 

[Zman]

Rereading the note I see four corrections, not one.

1. Scribbled out word in the first paragraph.
2. Scribbled out delivery.
3. The word 'denied' has overstriked (underlying) letters.
4. <not> is written as a correction, over and above 'do' and 'particularly'

Only one of these is a actual change of a word in which we see the first choice and then the choice of replacement. #2



#4 does not correct a word rather it adds one.It changes meaning but simply shows the writer forgets the word "not". Maybe worried about spelling the next word "particularly".
#3 may have been just trouble spelling "denied" altought I guess we don't know because unlike #2 we can't tell the first word choice.
#1 corrects no other word. Was he writing "we do respect your...." and wrote don't by accident.

Of them all #2 still bothers me most.

One thing they all show is the writer was thinking about each word and re-reading what was written. Not rushing a meaningless fake ransome note.