Coincidences

[MurriFlower]

what I think is most interesting about the "ruthless people" movie plot and the JonBenet case is how SamStone WANTShis wife dead,he does anything he can to make sure she gets killed by the kidnapper....isn't it strange how the R's also did everything the RN told them NOT to do?

Perhaps they'd just taken out a big life insurance policy on her??

 

[eileenhawkeye]

Perhaps they'd just taken out a big life insurance policy on her??

Are you talking about the Ramseys? Or about the movie? I'm pretty sure we would have heard by now if John and Patsy had taken out a big life insurance on JBR.

 

[BOESP]

Just disregard the primary evidence, cause it doesn't fit the theory. LOL, typical RDI.

The ransom note is primary evidence but an untrained individual's interpretation isn't evidence and wouldn't be accepted as such in court; it's opinion and we all have one.

 

[MurriFlower]

The ransom note is primary evidence but an untrained individual's interpretation isn't evidence and wouldn't be accepted as such in court; it's opinion and we all have one.

Well, I made this comment in response to the suggestion that trying to decipher the unknown acronym in the RN is 'time wasting'. Do you agree that this is the right approach? To just disregard something cause it's too hard to work out?

Unless I'm mistaken, this is not a court of law, but a forum where folks express opinions. So we've all heard the opinions of RDI's and their various versions of S.B.T.C, but any IDI suggestions are "untrained interpretations" according to your evaluation.

Now, the 'trained' professionals that have looked at this, what have they come up with that doesn't appear on acronym finder? Has there been some kind of superior intelligence expressed that I've missed??

 

[wonderllama]

Just to be clear, I didn't say to disregard it because it was too hard to work out, I said it was time wasting because it isn't going to lead to the killer...unless it's Maxwell Smart of course.

 

[Ames]

what I think is most interesting about the "ruthless people" movie plot and the JonBenet case is how SamStone WANTShis wife dead,he does anything he can to make sure she gets killed by the kidnapper....isn't it strange how the R's also did everything the RN told them NOT to do?

Yep...just like in the movie. It's "strange" alright....

 

[MurriFlower]

Just to be clear, I didn't say to disregard it because it was too hard to work out, I said it was time wasting because it isn't going to lead to the killer...unless it's Maxwell Smart of course.

Well, it means something to the person who wrote it. We are pretty sure that the person who wrote it either killed/knows who killed JBR. Therefore it's a clue. A clue to the killer. We have precious few in this case, so I don't think we can disregard it for any reason.

 

[SunnieRN]

Just disregard the primary evidence, cause it doesn't fit the theory. LOL, typical RDI.

Got that one backward MF. It is IDI who constantly disregards evidence, tries to excuse away what is known and throws out time wasting, non supported 'theories', meant to place smoke and mirrors around what is ACTUAL evidence. Sorry about that chief!

 

[wonderllama]

Well, it means something to the person who wrote it. We are pretty sure that the person who wrote it either killed/knows who killed JBR. Therefore it's a clue. A clue to the killer. We have precious few in this case, so I don't think we can disregard it for any reason.

Would you believe....that something can mean something to the killer at the time of writing, but perhaps not actually be meaningful in the grand scheme of things?

 

[MurriFlower]

Would you believe....that something can mean something to the killer at the time of writing, but perhaps not actually be meaningful in the grand scheme of things?

Yes, absolutely. There's a possibility that it just came into their head and is completely random or even designed to mislead. Or it could be a clue. The RN is one piece of tangible evidence, so while you think S.B.T.C is a furphy, I'm of the opinion that it may help solve the case. OK??

 

[BOESP]

Murriflower, please see wonderllama's post #605 in answer to your questions to me in post #604.

 

[MurriFlower]

Heyya MF.

Good Post.
The dialogue is interchangeable, typical of scripted rn's.
The JBR rn does have a scripted tone.

So, if it was a script to be read to JR over the phone, (as in Ruthless People) this opens up possibilities for S.B.T.C beyond what we've come to think as a 'signature of the SFF'. You can't picture someone reading out "S.B.T.C" over the phone, so aside from the closing remark that I've suggested of 'sorry 'bout that Chief', we can see it being said in full before the hang up. What else might it stand for??

 

[wonderllama]

Yes, absolutely. There's a possibility that it just came into their head and is completely random or even designed to mislead. Or it could be a clue. The RN is one piece of tangible evidence, so while you think S.B.T.C is a furphy, I'm of the opinion that it may help solve the case. OK??

Oh I understand that of course...I'm just interested in how, after 15 years, the initials SBTC might point to anyone not already considered.

I'm honestly not trying to be annoying here, as I too believe the ransom note is the KEY bit of evidence. I say key, as it is the ONE bit of critical evidence that the killer had control over and it is the ONE bit of critical evidence found remote from the body and the area the body was found.

You know, there's speculation as to whether the flashlight was involved, speculation about whether the bed was slept in etc, but the note....the killer/killer's associate wrote it...no doubt about it.

Now I know you don't buy into the similarities between PR's writing and that of the note, so let's push that to the side.
That leaves the contents.
Now, by leaving the science behind (handwriting), we're left to assume that what is said in the note is correct and legit.

1. "$118,000" - coincidence? The bonus amount? No? Then it's either them or someone they know, or at least someone who knows the amount.

2. "Safe & unharmed" - well, they are either lying or they wrote it before she was killed (given we know they wrote it inside the house).
Now I assume you are of the opinion that they aren't lying, so they must have written it before she was killed.

3. "I will call between 8 and 10am" - they didn't, apparently they had nothing to bargain with and called it off. So why didn't they take the note with them when they left? Maybe left in a hurry I guess, and if they exited through the basement window, they weren't going to be passing by the stairs again. So that's fine?

Except, why leave the ransom note at the beginning of the kidnapping when you're still going to be in the house for a bit? I mean, one assumes that the tying up in the basement took a little while to do, and she was clearly still "with it" when she went down there cos the scream was heard across the road but not upstairs (as you might expect had she screamed in the kitchen (when eating pineapple).

4. "Don't speak to anyone" - well, they've made it pretty clear that they're going to kill her if you deviate from the instructions, but it would probably be hard to know what to do if your natural instinct is to call the police when you're in trouble. No?

5. "Victory!" - it seems they are fighting some sort of crusade? A crusade which will apparently be helped greatly with $118,000.

6. "SBTC" - well...

So what have we gained through simply reading the ransom note at face value?

Well, there are at least three foreign people involved, who want $118,000 to prevail over some sort of obstacle or crusade. They wrote the note in the house, but before JBR was killed, and left it up the staircase.
They clearly didn't mean to kill her...after all, the note is filled with "what if" scenarios designed to scare JR into doing the right thing.
So they accidentally kill her and then leave behind the ransom note, even though it's sort of irrelevant now...but I guess it might be too risky heading back upstairs to the staircase to retrieve it.

Except, they did spend what seems to be a fair bit of time with JBR IN the house didn't they? Enough time for her to have been taken to the basement, tied up, sexually defiled, redressed in an unusual manner.

Why go to the basement though? I mean, from all accounts she seems to have been alive down there (the scream, the urine), so she was alive in the basement....so why be there?

I'm pretty sure the note says it is a kidnapping, so...kidnap already!
Are you suggesting it was just a different way out of the house?
Door not convenient? Certainly it is more convenient that trying to get out through the basement window while carrying a child? An awake child presumably (the scream tells us that). So they were going to either carry her out through the basement window while she was still awake or push her through and climb through themselves?

Look, I'm deviating away from the Ransom Note now, but my point is this...

Taking the ransom note "as read" without accepting the scientific evidence surrounding it (ie: It matches PR's writing) is bound to lead you in a different direction to other people.

I accept that the writing is a pretty flippin' good match for PR, the style is a good match for PR, the phrasing is a good match for PR, the annotations are a good match for PR, and thus the contents of the letter take on a different meaning...that of a load of old cobbler's...but still good at revealing clichés...as well as being filled with "tells" pointing at PR - as stated.

So resolving the SBTC issue might well be important in your line of examination, but a step back from that, where the evidence tells me otherwise...I'm of the opinion it isn't.

 

[MurriFlower]

wonderllama, I think this is one of the best posts from an RDI that I've read, so I thank you for your input and good manners.

Oh I understand that of course...I'm just interested in how, after 15 years, the initials SBTC might point to anyone not already considered.

I see what you are saying, but has everyone really considered all the options? If you take seriously my suggestion that it was not a Ransom Note, but a script to be read over the phone, as in the Ruthless People clip, then I think it changes entirely how we've looked at the RN previously? To say that after 15 years nothing new can be found is like assuming that there will never be a cure for the common cold. Just because there never has doesn't mean there never will.

I'm honestly not trying to be annoying here, as I too believe the ransom note is the KEY bit of evidence. I say key, as it is the ONE bit of critical evidence that the killer had control over and it is the ONE bit of critical evidence found remote from the body and the area the body was found.

Well, that's something we agree on. But we also agree that it was a fake, there was no kidnapping nor do I believe there was ever one intended.

You know, there's speculation as to whether the flashlight was involved, speculation about whether the bed was slept in etc, but the note....the killer/killer's associate wrote it...no doubt about it.

Absolutely. Here we discuss panties, pineapple, dolls, Barbie nightgowns, wet patches on the floor. Whether any of these are important as far as the murder is concerned is mere speculation. BUT the RN is absolutely of prime importance because as you say, there is no doubt that it was part of the crime.

Now I know you don't buy into the similarities between PR's writing and that of the note, so let's push that to the side.

Yeah good. You can say the same about JMK's writing BTW.

That leaves the contents.
Now, by leaving the science behind (handwriting), we're left to assume that what is said in the note is correct and legit.

1. "$118,000" - coincidence? The bonus amount? No? Then it's either them or someone they know, or at least someone who knows the amount.

The bonus was actually not the round $118,000 we are led to believe, it was in fact $118117.50 and was his bonus for 1995, and I believe was received earlier in 1996 (can't find the exact month now). So, it was not the Christmas Bonus, we've been assuming.

Take into account also, the detail on how it was to be paid, and think about what that might mean - $100,000 in $100's and $18,000 in $20's. It seems like the $18,000 was 'spending money' or 'wages' and the $100,000 was to be put aside or needed to be more 'compact' for one transaction.

2. "Safe & unharmed" - well, they are either lying or they wrote it before she was killed (given we know they wrote it inside the house).
Now I assume you are of the opinion that they aren't lying, so they must have written it before she was killed.

We don't exactly know it was written inside the house, just that it was written with a pad and pen found in the house, and presumably belonging to the house. It is possible that the pad and pen were taken, the note written, and both returned. The absence of some other pages (seen in imprints) is interesting. Just as an aside, LHP had some of these same notepads in her house.

It goes without saying that I think it was written before she was killed. I've heard various RDI theories about PR writing it after JBR's death to deflect blame, and while possible, it seems unlikely. Just the time it required and the detail it contained doesn't indicate someone who just murdered her child accidentally or in a rage. However, I don't want to debate this as it is inevitably fruitless.

3. "I will call between 8 and 10am" - they didn't, apparently they had nothing to bargain with and called it off. So why didn't they take the note with them when they left? Maybe left in a hurry I guess, and if they exited through the basement window, they weren't going to be passing by the stairs again. So that's fine?

Well, thinking along the lines that they planned just to hide her and then phone with the instructions (read the RN) we can assume that the intention was that they would call the Rs before morning or maybe even before midnight. They weren't expecting JR to have the money before 8am, but if he did, they could call earlier to let him know where she was. Yep, they left in a hurry alright, wouldn't you if you had just murdered someone, when all you intended was a bit of a 'sting'?

Except, why leave the ransom note at the beginning of the kidnapping when you're still going to be in the house for a bit? I mean, one assumes that the tying up in the basement took a little while to do, and she was clearly still "with it" when she went down there cos the scream was heard across the road but not upstairs (as you might expect had she screamed in the kitchen (when eating pineapple).

I suppose there is a possibility that the RN was correct and there was more than one person involved (3?). So if the plan went pear shaped and she screamed loudly, you might imagine the one in the upstairs scarpering quick smart.

4. "Don't speak to anyone" - well, they've made it pretty clear that they're going to kill her if you deviate from the instructions, but it would probably be hard to know what to do if your natural instinct is to call the police when you're in trouble. No?

Yes, I think most of us have agreed that we'd call the cops regardless. Most of us agree that the RN sounds phoney. It would have, if RDI, been better for the Rs to have obeyed their own instructions, and waited till at least 10am to call the cops. I don't think them dialling 911 there and then adds to suspicion, if anything it detracts.

5. "Victory!" - it seems they are fighting some sort of crusade? A crusade which will apparently be helped greatly with $118,000.

Precisely. Victory over whom or what?? The country (USA?). The R's? JR? Who was it needed to be conquored? How would getting $118,000 be a victory? This is the mystery.

6. "SBTC" - well...

Explains the victory perhaps?

So what have we gained through simply reading the ransom note at face value?

We've thought outside the square for once.

Well, there are at least three foreign people involved, who want $118,000 to prevail over some sort of obstacle or crusade.

Not exactly. We have three 'individuals' who are representing some small foreign faction. They need not be foreigners. Nor do they need to be members of the SFF. The may have simply been paid to do a job. Maybe the $18,000 was for them and the $100,000 for whoever engaged them.

They wrote the note in the house, but before JBR was killed, and left it up the staircase.

Yes, it's as if someone was sitting on the stairs while the other(s) were downstairs with JBR, reading the RN spread out on the stairs and that person just upped and left. What would cause this? Fear?

They clearly didn't mean to kill her...after all, the note is filled with "what if" scenarios designed to scare JR into doing the right thing.

Yes, I think that's probably correct. He was to be so scared he would get the money, sit by the phone waiting for instructions, deliver the cash and never call the cops. How unlikely is that? Everything was planned except it didn't go according to the script.

So they accidentally kill her and then leave behind the ransom note, even though it's sort of irrelevant now...but I guess it might be too risky heading back upstairs to the staircase to retrieve it.

Jumped up and ran out the door. No 1 heard the scream or maybe no 2 ran up the stairs saying "*****, he's killed her, lets get outta here!"

Except, they did spend what seems to be a fair bit of time with JBR IN the house didn't they? Enough time for her to have been taken to the basement, tied up, sexually defiled, redressed in an unusual manner.

Well half an hour would cover the time spent with JBR maybe less.

Why go to the basement though? I mean, from all accounts she seems to have been alive down there (the scream, the urine), so she was alive in the basement....so why be there?

I'm pretty sure the note says it is a kidnapping, so...kidnap already!
Are you suggesting it was just a different way out of the house?
Door not convenient? Certainly it is more convenient that trying to get out through the basement window while carrying a child? An awake child presumably (the scream tells us that). So they were going to either carry her out through the basement window while she was still awake or push her through and climb through themselves?

No, let's look at the three. One left upstairs to keep watch. Two downstairs. Tie her up, gag her, wrap her in the blanket, put her in the crawl space. One goes crazy and attacks the kid, bashes, strangles and defiles her. The other one takes off, scared to death, puts a chair in front of the door to stop the mad one from killing him too, exits with the upstairs guy out one of the doors (butler's door wasn't locked). Mad one instantly regrets, re-dresses, covers and exits. I doubt it was via basement window, but maybe it was considered and found to be too difficult, or just used to look out. I think there was another exit because there would be a door under the crawl space to access utilities under the house.

Look, I'm deviating away from the Ransom Note now, but my point is this...

Taking the ransom note "as read" without accepting the scientific evidence surrounding it (ie: It matches PR's writing) is bound to lead you in a different direction to other people.

I accept that the writing is a pretty flippin' good match for PR, the style is a good match for PR, the phrasing is a good match for PR, the annotations are a good match for PR, and thus the contents of the letter take on a different meaning...that of a load of old cobbler's...but still good at revealing clichés...as well as being filled with "tells" pointing at PR - as stated.

So resolving the SBTC issue might well be important in your line of examination, but a step back from that, where the evidence tells me otherwise...I'm of the opinion it isn't.

I think S.B.T.C is important, because of the RN having been written before the crime this gives some indication of the writer and/or motive. It wasn't just put there to give us something to think about.

Sorry, can't do anymore today, already spent too much time on this.

 

[MurriFlower]

The bonus was actually not the round $118,000 we are led to believe, it was in fact $118117.50 and was his bonus for 1995, and I believe was received earlier in 1996 (can't find the exact month now). So, it was not the Christmas Bonus, we've been assuming.

I can't edit but I just wanted to add that I've now found the month the $118,117.50 bonus was paid, and it was in February 1996. If it was a Christmas Bonus, then it was the previous (1995) Christmas.


Likely the amount is just another coincidence. But one that appears to give the RN writer intimate knowledge that may not exist.

 

[eileenhawkeye]

If John's bonus had been exactly 100k, and the RN had asked for 100k, then I would be less suspicious. But 118k is a more precise amount, which makes me believe it's more than just a coincidence that the RN money and bonus amount matched.

 

[MurriFlower]

If John's bonus had been exactly 100k, and the RN had asked for 100k, then I would be less suspicious. But 118k is a more precise amount, which makes me believe it's more than just a coincidence that the RN money and bonus amount matched.

Maybe, but it could have nothing to do with JR's bonus, but rather is a number that means something to the RN author (debt, wage, etc). It also wasn't 'recently received' as is often quoted. Nor does it seem it was a 'Christmas Bonus', having been paid in February 1996.

I think it's an example of a clue that's been twisted to fit into the theory. I wonder how many more of those exist?

 

[Ames]

Maybe, but it could have nothing to do with JR's bonus, but rather is a number that means something to the RN author (debt, wage, etc). It also wasn't 'recently received' as is often quoted. Nor does it seem it was a 'Christmas Bonus', having been paid in February 1996.

I think it's an example of a clue that's been twisted to fit into the theory. I wonder how many more of those exist?

Don't know...let's ask an IDI.

 

[SunnieRN]

Link:http://www.acandyrose.com/s-evidence-ransom-vs-bonus.htm


ST: John, this $118,000, is that a, do you believe that to be tied to your 95 bonus paid in 96?
JR: Well, that’s, I mean that occurred to me later as I started to think about what that number meant, and I thought, gee that might have been the net amount of my bonus. I didn’t even know that until we had, we went back and looked. And that was paid in February of 96, and was $118,223 or something like that. And I think that’s a plausible place where that number could have come from, and it certainly showed up in every pay stub of mine from then on, through the rest of the year. It was deferred compensation, so separate out of your gross pay. The only other logical theory that I’ve heard is this one that apparently you found a small book or a bible with some verses circled. And Father Rol also said I heard that 18th Palms was a very vengeful Psalms. And those are the two logical theories I’ve heard for that number.

Ka-chow, you're a year late. The bonus amount was Johns 1995 bonus, not 1996 bonus. As you can see, it was on all of Johns checks after February. I am sure Patsy also knew the amount.

 

[SunnieRN]

Don't know...let's ask an IDI.

Oh, and even though I am not IDI, I am getting adept at noticing how information gets skewed. This record is now straight.