John's Bonus Check

[RedLikeWineAgain]

John Ramsey received a bonus check of $118,117.50. This seems to be a "cleared" amount after taxes. Does anyone know what the original amount (before taxes) might have been?

Am I correct in thinking that no one but the person issuing the check (maybe?) and the person(s) receiving the check would be privy to the amount cleared? So, how would a "foreign faction" know to ask for $118K?

I also do not believe the intruder theory. It just seems to be that this was a very sloppy mistake on part of the Ramseys to ask for the cleared amount of the bonus.

Maybe this has been discussed? I'm new here and it's something I have been wondering about as I looked at crime scene photos.

Hello everyone♥

 

[fr brown]

John Ramsey received a bonus check of $118,117.50. This seems to be a "cleared" amount after taxes. Does anyone know what the original amount (before taxes) might have been?

Am I correct in thinking that no one but the person issuing the check (maybe?) and the person(s) receiving the check would be privy to the amount cleared? So, how would a "foreign faction" know to ask for $118K?

I also do not believe the intruder theory. It just seems to be that this was a very sloppy mistake on part of the Ramseys to ask for the cleared amount of the bonus.

Maybe this has been discussed? I'm new here and it's something I have been wondering about as I looked at crime scene photos.

Hello everyone♥

Not a check. In PMPT, John Douglas is reported to have told Chris Hansen that the bonus was deposited electronically into a 401K and that the crime must have been committed by someone at John's work because Patsy didn't know the amount of this bonus. (Uh-huh, right.) Steve Thomas says that he learned the amount of John's 1995 net bonus when it was written on a slip of paper and handed to him by Ramsey's assistant, and says further that the amount was known to very few people.

I read a recent quote from John Andrew Ramsey saying that this amount was chosen by the intruder to show that he was "smarter than you," which suggests that the Ramseys are not saying that a record of the deposited bonus was hanging around in a desk drawer to be readily found by some rando.

I doubt that the ransom amount was a mistake.

(I read somewhere that the gross amount was around 150K.)

 

[RedLikeWineAgain]

Not a check. In PMPT, John Douglas is reported to have told Chris Hansen that the bonus was deposited electronically into a 401K and that the crime must have been committed by someone at John's work because Patsy didn't know the amount of this bonus. (Uh-huh, right.) Steve Thomas says that he learned the amount of John's 1995 net bonus when it was written on a slip of paper and handed to him by Ramsey's assistant, and says further that the amount was known to very few people.

I read a recent quote from John Andrew Ramsey saying that this amount was chosen by the intruder to show that he was "smarter than you," which suggests that the Ramseys are not saying that a record of the deposited bonus was hanging around in a desk drawer to be readily found by some rando.

I doubt that the ransom amount was a mistake.

(I read somewhere that the gross amount was around 150K.)

Hello:

Thank you for all that information.

Do you recall seeing footage of the Ramsey house after the murder? There was a check lying on a shelf in the house. I couldn't see the amount but I wondered if that was the bonus check.

I went to look for it and here's the video. FF to 1:32.

But if a few people knew the amount of his bonus, wouldn't they be told he received a $150K bonus? Because that's what he was given until the govt took out taxes.

This case drives me to frustration. The more I read about it, the more questions and less answers I have :-((

 

[fr brown]

Hello:

Thank you for all that information.

Do you recall seeing footage of the Ramsey house after the murder? There was a check lying on a shelf in the house. I couldn't see the amount but I wondered if that was the bonus check.

I went to look for it and here's the video. FF to 1:32.

But if a few people knew the amount of his bonus, wouldn't they be told he received a $150K bonus? Because that's what he was given until the govt took out taxes.

This case drives me to frustration. The more I read about it, the more questions and less answers I have :-((

That's not his bonus check. I don't remember details, but I seem to recall it was a few thousand dollars.

Steve Thomas seems to be saying that only a very few people knew John's net bonus. No doubt they were fewer than knew the gross, but that was probably not a crowd either.

 

[fr brown]

I talked to someone who deals with payroll issues for a much larger company than John's. She happened to get a (small) bonus this year so that was convenient. On her most recent advice (ie pay stub) and every advice since she received the bonus, her bonus is listed as one of her year-to-date earnings, but it's the gross amount. I asked her how one would see the net amount. She said she would have to look at the pay code for the bonus, look up how taxes were calculated for that pay code and then do the calculation. (Bonuses are taxed at a different rate and have their own pay code.)

She said that if the bonus was issued on a separate advice, then the net amount would be listed along with the gross amount but only on that advice.

So bottom line if I understood her correctly: If the bonus was on a separate advice, the net amount would be listed, but only on that particular advice. If the bonus was on the same advice as other earnings, only the gross amount would appear.

So that would have to be one lucky intruder to come across an advice/pay stub with the net amount of his bonus on it.

(The usual caveats apply: it's 2021, different company, etc.)

By his '98 interview, John had decided that the ransom amount's closeness to his net bonus was merely coincidence.

 

[RedLikeWineAgain]

I talked to someone who deals with payroll issues for a much larger company than John's. She happened to get a (small) bonus this year so that was convenient. On her most recent advice (ie pay stub) and every advice since she received the bonus, her bonus is listed as one of her year-to-date earnings, but it's the gross amount. I asked her how one would see the net amount. She said she would have to look at the pay code for the bonus, look up how taxes were calculated for that pay code and then do the calculation. (Bonuses are taxed at a different rate and have their own pay code.)

She said that if the bonus was issued on a separate advice, then the net amount would be listed along with the gross amount but only on that advice.

So bottom line if I understood her correctly: If the bonus was on a separate advice, the net amount would be listed, but only on that particular advice. If the bonus was on the same advice as other earnings, only the gross amount would appear.

So that would have to be one lucky intruder to come across an advice/pay stub with the net amount of his bonus on it.

(The usual caveats apply: it's 2021, different company, etc.)

By his '98 interview, John had decided that the ransom amount's closeness to his net bonus was merely coincidence.

Wow! Thank you so much for taking the time to post all that. I knew that would be the case.

I just don't undersand why this was never brought to the attention of the Ramseys....you know, that the amount was not the gross amount but the cleared amount and how would an intruder be privy to such information. I'm sure manipulative John would have calmly said "I don't know" and it wouldn't have been taken any further. Amazing how that works. One thing I have come to accept and that is that there are very few incredible coincidences in this life....and that would be some incredible coincidence. Lucky guess, huh?! UGH!

I really hope I live to see justice in this case.

 

[fr brown]

Wow! Thank you so much for taking the time to post all that. I knew that would be the case.

I just don't undersand why this was never brought to the attention of the Ramseys....you know, that the amount was not the gross amount but the cleared amount and how would an intruder be privy to such information. I'm sure manipulative John would have calmly said "I don't know" and it wouldn't have been taken any further. Amazing how that works. One thing I have come to accept and that is that there are very few incredible coincidences in this life....and that would be some incredible coincidence. Lucky guess, huh?! UGH!

I really hope I live to see justice in this case.

in '97 John knew that the ransom demand was close to the net amount of his bonus because he says so. He thinks that the net amount of his bonus will appear on every pay stub/advice (and would thus be easily discoverable by an intruder). By '98, he has thought better of it and has decided that any similarity to his net bonus is a coincidence and the ransom amount is likely related to Psalm 118, which was a brainstorm of Father Rol's and has no relationship to anything.

 

[RedLikeWineAgain]

in '97 John knew that the ransom demand was close to the net amount of his bonus because he says so. He thinks that the net amount of his bonus will appear on every pay stub/advice (and would thus be easily discoverable by an intruder). By '98, he has thought better of it and has decided that any similarity to his net bonus is a coincidence and the ransom amount is likely related to Psalm 118, which was a brainstorm of Father Rol's and has no relationship to anything.

These people are nuts! Truly warped minds. And yet they have gotten away with it.

 

[fr brown]

These people are nuts! Truly warped minds. And yet they have gotten away with it.

I think the evidence suggests that Patsy tried to frame John (and maybe a colleague of John's) for the murder. Viewed through this prism, it looks less nuts than inspired.

Thanks for making me think about the difficulty of lighting on John's net bonus by accident. I guess John Andrew is suggesting that the intruder came across the gross amount of John's bonus, and being familiar with the rate at which bonuses are taxed, did the multiplication and came up with the ransom demand, thereby demonstrating what a smartypants he is.

I think the explanation is simpler: Patsy was familiar with the amount deposited into their 401K and knew that John and very few others could be expected to know it.

 

[RedLikeWineAgain]

I think the evidence suggests that Patsy tried to frame John (and maybe a colleague of John's) for the murder. Viewed through this prism, it looks less nuts than inspired.

Thanks for making me think about the difficulty of lighting on John's net bonus by accident. I guess John Andrew is suggesting that the intruder came across the gross amount of John's bonus, and being familiar with the rate at which bonuses are taxed, did the multiplication and came up with the ransom demand, thereby demonstrating what a smartypants he is.

I think the explanation is simpler: Patsy was familiar with the amount deposited into their 401K.

I had no idea that there was a discussion about the gross amount of the bonus check. I'm glad I brought it up. It's bothered me.

So I'm guessing you're leaning toward Patsy being the killer? Are you thinking she did it by accident and spent all night writing the ransom note while John slept? And that John is not aware that Patsy killed JonBenet? But why frame John? John was the golden goose. If she lost the golden goose, the'd lose her socialite lifestyle. She didn't have a job. Would love your theory of what happened.

Didn't they have separate attorneys? Or am I confusing that with another case?

Once I saw the 2016 documentary The Case of JonBenet Ramsey, I started to believe it was Burke. It all made sense. But I'm now not 100% sure of that anymore.

 

[fr brown]

I had no idea that there was a discussion about the gross amount of the bonus check. I'm glad I brought it up. It's bothered me.

So I'm guessing you're leaning toward Patsy being the killer? Are you thinking she did it by accident and spent all night writing the ransom note while John slept? And that John is not aware that Patsy killed JonBenet? But why frame John? John was the golden goose. If she lost the golden goose, the'd lose her socialite lifestyle. She didn't have a job. Would love your theory of what happened.

Didn't they have separate attorneys? Or am I confusing that with another case?

Once I saw the 2016 documentary The Case of JonBenet Ramsey, I started to believe it was Burke. It all made sense. But I'm now not 100% sure of that anymore.

Maybe she was afraid he was planning to be someone else's golden goose. Revenge? Self-protection?

I think she spent a long time on the ransom note, but I think its complexity demonstrates pre-planning. Patsy must have been an unusual person.

 

[UKGuy]

I think the evidence suggests that Patsy tried to frame John (and maybe a colleague of John's) for the murder. Viewed through this prism, it looks less nuts than inspired.

Thanks for making me think about the difficulty of lighting on John's net bonus by accident. I guess John Andrew is suggesting that the intruder came across the gross amount of John's bonus, and being familiar with the rate at which bonuses are taxed, did the multiplication and came up with the ransom demand, thereby demonstrating what a smartypants he is.

I think the explanation is simpler: Patsy was familiar with the amount deposited into their 401K and knew that John and very few others could be expected to know it.

fr brown,

I think the explanation is simpler: Patsy was familiar with the amount deposited into their 401K and knew that John and very few others could be expected to know it.

Yes, patently Patsy has to know, but did she ask John as she authored the RN, or pluck it from the air?

Also you have John backing up Patsy's claims regarding the RN, along with her version of events, e.g. John in his underpants, what about the scream heard from the basement?

So if the case is PDI why was John defending Patsy, why not cave and fling her to the wolves, after all it appears, according to your theory, that she was willing to see him face Murder In The First Degree charges and potential life behind bars or a Death Sentence?

Here is another example where John unwisely attempts to defend Patsy, where we know from Patsy's own mouth in one of the BPD interviews, she states she wrapped the gifts in the basement along with a story about Burke's birthday and how his gifts were secreted in the wine-cellar.

June 1998 John Ramsey Interrogation by Lou Smit and Mike Kane

20 JOHN RAMSEY: Well Patsy had gotten a bunch
21 of gifts at FAO Schwartz up in New York in early
22 December, some of which were for them were for
23 Burke's birthday, which was in January. She didn't
24 know they were in the closet exactly,

Once again you have John defending Patsy postmortem. This implies only John knows there were gifts placed into the wine-cellar, i.e. because he put them there, who else?

So if the case is PDI, why is John bothering to defend Patsy when he can just point the finger at Patsy and get on with his life?

.

 

[RedLikeWineAgain]

I always got the impression that John and Patsy composed the ransom note together. Patsy took pen to it, possibly with her left hand. I think Patsy lived in a fantasy world and tried to both imitate and emulate what she saw in movies. But I can't see her coming up with the lines from Dirty Harry and other action movies. I think those probably came from John.

Patsy put a lot of effort into appearances. I remember reading how she felt insecure in how John viewed her and she got plastic surgery as a result (I think her chin was reshaped). I'm not sure if John caused her to be that way or if those insecurities would exist independent of John. I lean more towards it being independent of John.

Patsy was used to being judged....literally. I think she saw John and all the wealth as a cup for her hard work on her appearance and ability to make everything seem perfect. So, she had better keep it that way, right? (or John might be someone else's golden goose, right? LOL)

But...yikes...when so much of your focus and time is on your appearance and on appearances in geneal, other (more important) things are being neglected (I wonder what those were?).

John didn't pay a lot of attention to his appearance. I don't get the impression his security is tied to how he looks. I think he is more performance oriented, avaricious, and likely mercenary. I do think he feels he's entitled to having any woman he desires because he can buy her (he's the golden goose). Patsy was bought. I think they are/were 2 very shallow people whose marriage was probably just as shallow.

I could go on and on about my impression of these 2 people but I think I've said enough for now.

But to get back to my first point of them composing the ransom note together, I now ask myself what or who were they trying to protect. And how and why did JonBenet die. What went on in that house when they got home from such a happy event (Christmas party)? *Most* people would be in a good mood. Or possibly exhausted---and when you're exhausted, your patience can become very thin. Or was there jealousy involved? Sibling rivalry? I just don't know.

 

[fr brown]

I always got the impression that John and Patsy composed the ransom note together. Patsy took pen to it, possibly with her left hand. I think Patsy lived in a fantasy world and tried to both imitate and emulate what she saw in movies. But I can't see her coming up with the lines from Dirty Harry and other action movies. I think those probably came from John.

Patsy put a lot of effort into appearances. I remember reading how she felt insecure in how John viewed her and she got plastic surgery as a result (I think her chin was reshaped). I'm not sure if John caused her to be that way or if those insecurities would exist independent of John. I lean more towards it being independent of John.

Patsy was used to being judged....literally. I think she saw John and all the wealth as a cup for her hard work on her appearance and ability to make everything seem perfect. So, she had better keep it that way, right? (or John might be someone else's golden goose, right? LOL)

But...yikes...when so much of your focus and time is on your appearance and on appearances in geneal, other (more important) things are being neglected (I wonder what those were?).

John didn't pay a lot of attention to his appearance. I don't get the impression his security is tied to how he looks. I think he is more performance oriented, avaricious, and likely mercenary. I do think he feels he's entitled to having any woman he desires because he can buy her (he's the golden goose). Patsy was bought. I think they are/were 2 very shallow people whose marriage was probably just as shallow.

I could go on and on about my impression of these 2 people but I think I've said enough for now.

But to get back to my first point of them composing the ransom note together, I now ask myself what or who were they trying to protect. And how and why did JonBenet die. What went on in that house when they got home from such a happy event (Christmas party)? *Most* people would be in a good mood. Or possibly exhausted---and when you're exhausted, your patience can become very thin. Or was there jealousy involved? Sibling rivalry? I just don't know.

Wow! I see you've got a fully formed theory so I'm not going to try to dissuade you. (It's kind of like the Kennedy assassination that way.)

I'll just say I think there are indications that John slept through the night. That's what Steve Thomas thought (and no doubt still thinks).

Merry Christmas!

 

[RedLikeWineAgain]

Thank you! Merry Christmas to you, too!!

I really don't have much of a theory of what happened. I just have my opinions on Patsy and John as individuals and their marriage.

I invite everyone to talk about their theories. I don't see it as dissuading me. Believe me...there is so much to learn from this case and I don't know a whole lot about it. And some of the things that I probably did know long ago, I have since forgotten.

I did get the impression that they both composed the ransom note but I could be wrong. I'm open to hearing someone eles's take on it. That's how things get solved, right? By looking at every angle. I think that's the best way to approach this. Look at it through one angle, see where it leads and if it is logical and then look at it through another angle, see where it leads and it it is logical...and so forth and so on. Time consuming but I think it is best to work this way. Anything that I think might have happened is not set in stone. I wasn't there...know what I mean? So I have to be open to hearing another take on it.

Looking at it through a different lens, and perhaps building on your theory, what if Patsy did compose it on her own? Maybe she wanted to give it more of a masculine tone and thought of the lines from Dirty Harry and other action movies that maybe she watched with John (or maybe she liked those movies herself). Maybe?

I'd love to hear what you and others think about it. I'm open to seeing other perspectives.

 

[fr brown]

Thank you! Merry Christmas to you, too!!

I really don't have much of a theory of what happened. I just have my opinions on Patsy and John as individuals and their marriage.

I invite everyone to talk about their theories. I don't see it as dissuading me. Believe me...there is so much to learn from this case and I don't know a whole lot about it. And some of the things that I probably did know long ago, I have since forgotten.

I did get the impression that they both composed the ransom note but I could be wrong. I'm open to hearing someone eles's take on it. That's how things get solved, right? By looking at every angle. I think that's the best way to approach this. Look at it through one angle, see where it leads and if it is logical and then look at it through another angle, see where it leads and it it is logical...and so forth and so on. Time consuming but I think it is best to work this way. Anything that I think might have happened is not set in stone. I wasn't there...know what I mean? So I have to be open to hearing another take on it.

Looking at it through a different lens, and perhaps building on your theory, what if Patsy did compose it on her own? Maybe she wanted to give it more of a masculine tone and thought of the lines from Dirty Harry and other action movies that maybe she watched with John (or maybe she liked those movies herself). Maybe?

I'd love to hear what you and others think about it. I'm open to seeing other perspectives.

Personally, I think that method could lead to not being able to see the forest for the trees. I am more inclined to go step-by-step without too many assumptions about personality and with a minimum of mind-reading.

But you'll find people here who will be more than happy to discuss every possible angle. Let the games begin!

 

[RedLikeWineAgain]

i

Personally, I think that method could lead to not being able to see the forest for the trees. I am more inclined to go step-by-step without too many assumptions about personality and with a minimum of mind-reading.

But you'll find people here who will be more than happy to discuss every possible angle. Let the games begin!

It could. I'm a person who likes a lot of possibilities and a lot of choices. When I go to the snowball stand in the summer (I'm from New Orleans), the longer the list of flavors, the happier I am :-D Some people get overwhelmed by too many choices. Could it result in not being able to see the forest for the trees? Possibly. Possibly not. It's definitely more time consuming but I think it's good not to have tunnel vision, know what I mean? This stems from the line of work that I do. And it also stems probably in a larger degree from my personality type. When I am stumped on something, I almost always consult with someone who works from a different theoretical framework than do I. It helps me to see other possibilities. I prefer to work in a group, rather than alone. And I'm not talking about "groupthink"(I loathe groupthink). No, I'm talking about people from different angles coming together and becoming synergistic. Again, personal preference. Considering too many things could possibly result in getting lost. But that's where people like you come in.....to corral people like me back to the tree :-D

Anyway....hope you have a Merry Christmas.

 

[InstantProof]

My ideas lately are that Patsy did it all while John slept- I don't think she directly tried to frame him, but rather she blames him for her actions, and put just enough in there for him to read between the lines. Maybe the 118k bonus was, for some reason, a source of contention for Patsy. Might be a useful exercise to omit what RN lines came from movies and see what is left.

 

[RedLikeWineAgain]

My ideas lately are that Patsy did it all while John slept- I don't think she directly tried to frame him, but rather she blames him for her actions, and put just enough in there for him to read between the lines. Maybe the 118k bonus was, for some reason, a source of contention for Patsy. Might be a useful exercise to omit what RN lines came from movies and see what is left.

Hey there and Merry Christmas.

What about the garrote? Do you think it's possible she created it on her own? I can't imagine her even knowing anything about it unless she had a Navy background. By any chance, did her father have a Navy or military background? I know her paintbruch was used.

What do you think happened? Do you think it was an accident or intentional?

 

[InstantProof]

Hey there and Merry Christmas.

What about the garrote? Do you think it's possible she created it on her own? I can't imagine her even knowing anything about it unless she had a Navy background. By any chance, did her father have a Navy or military background? I know her paintbruch was used.

What do you think happened? Do you think it was an accident or intentional?

Hi, Merry Christmas. I'm no expert on this case and my ideas are always revolving so I don't have any set theory. Looking at Patsy lately, I think pre-meditation makes more sense in a PDI scenario. Christmas day of all days? Everything is set for dramatic effect and friends are called over which suggests to me a cry for help/ attention.

I've read that the garrote wasn't complicated. If she was crafty, I think it would be easy enough.