JonBenet Ramson letter - written before or after + linguistics

[voynich]

Hello everyone,

I'll try to reply to everyone, there's a lot of posts since I checked ..... this morning.

"Patsy Ramsey wrote the note. Period. No question. No reasonable argument."

Well the reason I registered here and started this thread is that I took a look at Gerald R. McMenamin, Dongdoo Choi on this and I was piqued. He also comments on the Zodiac killer. I would be interested in what other forensic linguists say. (obviously the hand-writing experts don't agree).

"repeated, innumerable writings, statements, and interviews with the Ramseys which repeat excessively the language in the ransom note."

I would be interested -- it would certainly be relevant to my assessment of McMenamin conclusion.

"Now use some common sense and consider: the obstruction of the Ramseys in the investigation from Day One; "

I do agree their post-murder behavior leaves a lot to be desired.

I see this as a sort of Sherlock Holmes "if we exlude the alternatives what's left however improbable must be the truth" I do feel that if forensic linguists accept McMenamin's conclusion, that Ramseys did not author the RN, this would strongly imply IDI.

"How lucky was this intruder?"

. Zodiac killer was never caught. BTK Dennis Raider was only caught after 20+ years due to arrogance of sending a floppy disk to police. As "lucky" as Amy's rapist -- who lived 2 miles, happened 9 months after, attended the same dance studio, while mother was present and burglar alarm on.

"I happen to think him losing Beth makes it MORE likely to be him."

Melissa Ramsey and Burke both state that JR never abused them, and no was found on JR's computer or home. Is there credible research that losing one daughter, and not molesting a second, makes it more likely a father will molest a third?

"If that truly was the aim (and I believe their bets were hedged again), I'd say their intended target was the housekeeper, Linda Hoffman-Pugh."

Is there anything in the RN that would suggest the RN author tried to mislead investigators to Linda? It's not clear to me how an investigator would read "small foreign faction" and think "Oh the author is trying to get us to think Linda the housekeeper"

"That's asking us to believe a lot."

Not if the allusions to the movies and other famous RN notes are correct.

"Excuse my butting in, but I feel I should take a whack at this.
First of all, "out of the ordinary?" As soon as you find ANYTHING about this case that is ordinary, PLEASE let me know."

I do agree with this!

"Moreover, it would take a long time to give you the full explanation as to why the sexual assault was staged in the first place, but I won't unless you are truly interested."

May I offer a guess? JR was molesting JB, and wanted to cover earlier evidence of molestation with this sexual assault. PR got angry over JB's bed wetting and struck her in the head, cracking it. JR realizing an autopsy would be ordered, needed to help PR cover up with the garrotte and sexual assault so as to throw investigators off the trail of previous chronic sexual abuse.
A Cyril Wecht + Steve Thomas combination theory.

"Where did you get that idea? That's a new one on me."
The remaining broken end of the paint stick was never recovered -- one speculation is that it contained crucial evidence.

"There's just one little problem with that. If that were the case, the intruder would not have staged the scene to LOOK like an intruder."

IDI staged a sexual assault and murder to look like a kidnapping.

"Look, voynich, no one is trying to "beat up" on you. Farthest thing from my mind, anyway. We're just talking here."

Oh I see this as a fascinating mystery like Sherlock Holmes, or even the Voynich mystery.

"why make statements like "Any deviation of my instructions will result in the immediate execution of your daughter. You will also be denied her remains for proper burial.
Isn't that what terrorists (one of many discordant themes in the ransom letter) say?"

"Should you, however, disobey any of our instructions, even slightly, his death will be the penalty. we are prepared to put our threat into execution should we have reasonable grounds to believe that you have committed an infraction of the above instructions."

Leopold and Loeb murdered Bobby Franks not for ransom money but for the thrill of murder. BF was already dead when the letter was written.

"
The two gentlemen watching over your daughter do not particularly like you so I advise you not to provoke them.will result in your daughter being beheaded. she dies 4x. so don't think that killing will be difficult" doesn't sound like undoing the crime, sounds like *doing* the crime.

"I don't think you quite understand what I mean. Psychologically, it is "doing the crime," but "someone else" (the created criminal to match the created crime scene) is doing it. That's as direct as I can put it."

Except that instead of speaking in third person or first person plural, the RN switches to first person singular "I"

"Do you know how often I've been asked those questions? I guess the best way to answer that would be to remind you of the theatrical nature of the Rs, especially PR. It's not just me saying that either. Michael Kane said it best: "it was a very theatrical production and Patsy is a very theatrical person."

I was thinking similar, except that the IDI was doing this as taunting, and that the motive was not kidnapping but murder.

"Glad you asked. Actually, it's not so much the content of the ransom letter as it is a combination of ransom letter content and what PR told the cops AFTER the note was found."

What content would make someone think "Oh it's a false lead to a house keeper?"

"It would help if I knew what voynich meant when he said "hiding." I leaped before I looked."

Doing a Susan Smith -- tossing JB's body into an unknown location.

"huh? I wouldn't be able to, but it is an assuring kinda protective statement."
Would you say the language is male or female?

"Hey, don't forget about the identical tear pattern from the pad of paper, the one that matches PR as it was 'her pad'. That's the stumper for me."
That does look incriminating to PR.

"shoot .... "as a rational evidence based human" I thought there was only one direction, that which the touch dna results now takes us? but what avenues does it really close?"

If Ramseys are excluded as author of RN, is RDI still viable?

"cool. I'll check the link out." hey what did you think? I wish Gerald R. McMenamin could also comment on JB RN.

"

Stairs are better for intruder than bedroom, pillow, or desk. The parents could read the note in JBR's bedroom and the intruder(s) wouldn't even know it, which wouldn't be a tripwire. They could call 911 from upstairs and the perps wouldn't know it happened."

That's interesting. Not something I would think of --- Is there a movie or book where the IDI' might have gotten the idea?

Within an RDI why would PR or JR place the RN there as opposed to the bedroom or kitchen counter?

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

That's interesting. Not something I would think of --- Is there a movie or book where the IDI' might have gotten the idea?

Maybe.



Its a fairly simple scenario, really, in IDI: The parents are in the house, presumably sleeping, WHILE the perps have JBR in the basement. Surely, they're not going to wait for a parent to stumble down the basement stairs unannounced. Its not a great stretch of the imagination that one intruder could've been sitting in the kitchen watching the front stairs.

 

[BBB167893]

Hello everyone,

I'll try to reply to everyone, there's a lot of posts since I checked ..... this morning.

You have to expect that around here.

"Patsy Ramsey wrote the note. Period. No question. No reasonable argument."

Well the reason I registered here and started this thread is that I took a look at Gerald R. McMenamin, Dongdoo Choi on this and I was piqued. He also comments on the Zodiac killer. I would be interested in what other forensic linguists say. (obviously the hand-writing experts don't agree).

No prob. I'm sure that Messrs. McMenamin (who I have heard of) and Choi are tops in there field. The only thing I've been trying to say is that in THIS case, you can't afford to go off half-cocked. I too would be very interested in what other forensic linguists say. But that's a story in and of itself. The Boulder DA doesn't seem to hold forensic linguistics in high regard. Chief Beckner, on the other hand, mentioned it in the February press conference. Also, there has only been one official linguistic analysis, and it seems the DA threw the baby out with the bathwater when it went against him.

"repeated, innumerable writings, statements, and interviews with the Ramseys which repeat excessively the language in the ransom note."

That was the next point I was going to bring up.

I would be interested -- it would certainly be relevant to my assessment of McMenamin conclusion.

Voynich, there used to be a website that was devoted to just such a comparison--Sarah's site. Sadly, it's no longer around, which is a tremendous loss for everyone, in my opinion. So we're basically stuck with having to rebuild it from scratch. I guess the best places to start would be www.jonbenetindexguide.com and www.acandyrose.com

"Now use some common sense and consider: the obstruction of the Ramseys in the investigation from Day One; "

I do agree their post-murder behavior leaves a lot to be desired.

That's putting it mildly.

I see this as a sort of Sherlock Holmes "if we exlude the alternatives what's left however improbable must be the truth"

That's exactly how I feel. But I always heard it "once you have eliminated the impossible, that which remains, however improbable, must be the truth."

I do feel that if forensic linguists accept McMenamin's conclusion, that Ramseys did not author the RN, this would strongly imply IDI.

Very possibly. But at present, I don't see that happening. Not necessarily because it can't happen, but only because forensic linguistics doesn't seem to be high on the investigation's priority list.

"How lucky was this intruder?"

. Zodiac killer was never caught.BTK Dennis Raider was only caught after 20+ years due to arrogance of sending a floppy disk to police. As "lucky" as Amy's rapist -- who lived 2 miles, happened 9 months after, attended the same dance studio, while mother was present and burglar alarm on.

Luck extends the other way, as well.

"I happen to think him losing Beth makes it MORE likely to be him."

Melinda Ramsey and Burke both state that JR never abused them, and no was found on JR's computer or home.

I know all of that. But as I said, there's a difference between a true pedophile and a situational molester. I actually talk about this at length in my book (as yet unpublished).

Is there credible research that losing one daughter, and not molesting a second, makes it more likely a father will molest a third?

If you mean from a scientific standpoint, I would have to say no. Well, more specifically, if there IS such research, I know nothing of it. From a PERSONAL research standpoint, it gets a bit more interesting.

"If that truly was the aim (and I believe their bets were hedged again), I'd say their intended target was the housekeeper, Linda Hoffman-Pugh."

Is there anything in the RN that would suggest the RN author tried to mislead investigators to Linda? It's not clear to me how an investigator would read "small foreign faction" and think "Oh the author is trying to get us to think Linda the housekeeper"

As I said, voynich, it wasn't the note itself that led that direction. It was all the stuff AFTERWARDS.

"That's asking us to believe a lot."

Not if the allusions to the movies and other famous RN notes are correct.

Again, at this point, that's all assumptions.

"Excuse my butting in, but I feel I should take a whack at this.
First of all, "out of the ordinary?" As soon as you find ANYTHING about this case that is ordinary, PLEASE let me know."

I do agree with this!

My point exactly! That's the problem with trying to make sense of what is to us "normal" people, senseless: logic only takes you so far.

"Moreover, it would take a long time to give you the full explanation as to why the sexual assault was staged in the first place, but I won't unless you are truly interested."

May I offer a guess? JR was molesting JB, and wanted to cover earlier evidence of molestation with this sexual assault. PR got angry over JB's bed wetting and struck her in the head, cracking it. JR realizing an autopsy would be ordered, needed to help PR cover up with the garrotte and sexual assault so as to throw investigators off the trail of previous chronic sexual abuse.
A Cyril Wecht + Steve Thomas combination theory.

Not bad! Not bad at all! That pretty much describes my personal theory (whether anyone agrees is another story), a few nuances notwithstanding.

"Where did you get that idea? That's a new one on me."
The remaining broken end of the paint stick was never recovered -- one speculation is that it contained crucial evidence.

I know that. My only thing was that this was the first time I'd ever heard it suggested that JB was penetrated more than once.

"There's just one little problem with that. If that were the case, the intruder would not have staged the scene to LOOK like an intruder."

IDI staged a sexual assault and murder to look like a kidnapping.

I don't think you quite understand what I mean.

"Look, voynich, no one is trying to "beat up" on you. Farthest thing from my mind, anyway. We're just talking here."

Oh I see this as a fascinating mystery like Sherlock Holmes, or even the Voynich mystery.

(English accent): Elementary, my dear voynich!

"

The two gentlemen watching over your daughter do not particularly like you so I advise you not to provoke them.will result in your daughter being beheaded. she dies 4x. so don't think that killing will be difficult" doesn't sound like undoing the crime, sounds like *doing* the crime.

"I don't think you quite understand what I mean. Psychologically, it is "doing the crime," but "someone else" (the created criminal to match the created crime scene) is doing it. That's as direct as I can put it."

Except that instead of speaking in third person or first person plural, the RN switches to first person singular "I"

I am aware of that. I think Tadpole summed it up well:

"cuz in the PRDI, it's all in PR head ... she was trippin'."

Allow me to elaborate on that, voynich: are you at all familiar with method acting? I am. I am a trained actor (no BS), and that's one of the tricks of method acting: get into the character's head. But it's still just playing a role.

(Incidentally, the switch to "I" is seen by the profilers as a slip-up.)

"Do you know how often I've been asked those questions? I guess the best way to answer that would be to remind you of the theatrical nature of the Rs, especially PR. It's not just me saying that either. Michael Kane said it best: "it was a very theatrical production and Patsy is a very theatrical person."

I was thinking similar, except that the IDI was doing this as taunting, and that the motive was not kidnapping but murder.

Not when you look at the big picture (MY OPINION).

"Glad you asked. Actually, it's not so much the content of the ransom letter as it is a combination of ransom letter content and what PR told the cops AFTER the note was found."

What content would make someone think "Oh it's a false lead to a house keeper?"

Well, as for the content itself, it would be those little family sayings like "good Southern common sense." AFTERWARDS, it would be PR telling the cops that she thought a woman wrote it and just happening to mention the housekeeper's name as someone who had a key...

"It would help if I knew what voynich meant when he said "hiding." I leaped before I looked."

Doing a Susan Smith -- tossing JB's body into an unknown location.

Mm, I should have figured. Okay, that I can work with. To that end, I can only say two things: one, taking her body out of the house was a considerable risk. Everyone in that town knew their car. Two, and perhaps more to the point, I don't think they could bear to do that. Remember what I said about JB having a death as spectacular as her life? I quote from PMPT, regarding the CASKU assessment:

the killer cared about the victim and wanted her to be found. He or she did not want JonBenet outside in the dead of winter in the middle of the night.

"shoot .... "as a rational evidence based human" I thought there was only one direction, that which the touch dna results now takes us? but what avenues does it really close?"

If Ramseys are excluded as author of RN, is RDI still viable?

Only if my brother's theory is the correct one. But again, that's a MAJOR "if."

"Stairs are better for intruder than bedroom, pillow, or desk. The parents could read the note in JBR's bedroom and the intruder(s) wouldn't even know it, which wouldn't be a tripwire. They could call 911 from upstairs and the perps wouldn't know it happened."

Within an RDI why would PR or JR place the RN there as opposed to the bedroom or kitchen counter?

As far as THIS RDI goes, force of habit, for one reason. LHP said PR was known to leave objects such as purses in that spot so she could remember them.

 

[eleven]

SD -

I would be interested in why you believe that a "situational child molester" is so vastly different from a "pedophile".

Pedophiles
A pedophile, simply put, is someone who gets sexually aroused at the thought/sight of children in sexual situations. Pedophiles commit their child molestations based on, among other things, their ability to molest and get away with it......in other words, often their crimes are "situational". Crimes of opportunity. They tend to spend a lot of time pre-planning so as NOT to get caught. They will curb their desire if they know they will caught, and it will be curbed until they can do the deed at a time and place that lessens the chances of being caught. Pedophiles are, in essence, very situational.

Child Molester
A child molester, simply put, is someone who gets sexually aroused at the thought/sight of children in sexual situations. Child molesters commit their crimes based on their ability to molest and get away with it---i.e., very situational.

Certainly, there is much more psychology involved, but I would really like to know why you feel there is such a difference between a pedophile and a "situational" child molester. Both commit their crimes based on opportunity, so both can be considered situational. Take out the word "situational" and you are left with child molesters and pedophiles. One and the same. You would be hard pressed to find any child sexual abuse experts to dispute that.

 

[BBB167893]

SD -

I would be interested in why you believe that a "situational child molester" is so vastly different from a "pedophile".

Because, eleven, their motivations are different. Pedophiles are directly aroused by children, for reasons we can only speculate about. Possibly cross-wiring of the brain. Moreover, they can't help themselves. The urges don't go away.

Situationals are not drawn to children per se. They commit their heinous acts because the child is the closest thing they have to their true desire, a substitute for an adult object of affection.

Pedophiles
A pedophile, simply put, is someone who gets sexually aroused at the thought/sight of children in sexual situations. Pedophiles commit their child molestations based on, among other things, their ability to molest and get away with it......in other words, often their crimes are "situational". Crimes of opportunity. They tend to spend a lot of time pre-planning so as NOT to get caught. They will curb their desire if they know they will caught, and it will be curbed until they can do the deed at a time and place that lessens the chances of being caught. Pedophiles are, in essence, very situational.

Not entirely true. SOME pedophiles may regard one target as higher-risk than another, but the urges are still there, and they don't go away. Pedophiles, by and large, will keep going until they die or get caught. They just can't help themselves.

Child Molester
A child molester, simply put, is someone who gets sexually aroused at the thought/sight of children in sexual situations. Child molesters commit their crimes based on their ability to molest and get away with it---i.e., very situational.

I feel you do not understand what I mean.

Certainly, there is much more psychology involved,

You got that right.

but I would really like to know why you feel there is such a difference between a pedophile and a "situational" child molester.

I just explained it to you: because of their motivations.

Both commit their crimes based on opportunity, so both can be considered situational.

It's not a question of opportunity. That's where I think the mistake is made. It's a question of motive, not opportunity.

Take out the word "situational" and you are left with child molesters and pedophiles. One and the same. You would be hard pressed to find any child sexual abuse experts to dispute that.

Actually, I wouldn't. Pedophiles and child molesters are not one and the same. Pedophile is a psychological term; child molester is a legal one. Simply put, a pedophile is someone who has organic (that is internal) urges to commit sexual acts on children. A child molester is one who acts on those urges.

Glad I could help.

 

[rashomon]

The biggest clue in the note is where the perp says he will call tomorrow. Tomorrow would have been the 27th, with the Ramseys reading it on the morning of the 26th. I don't think that was the intent------the intent was after they read the note, JR was suppose to get the money, and the perp would call between 8 and l0 on the 26th. Saying "tomorrow" indicates the note was written on the 25th.

Not necessarily. The stager of the scene could have been sitting there, writing the bogus note well past midnight (in the early hours of Dec 26th), thinking of "tomorrow" as "when the night is over", in the morning.

 

[DeeDee249]

Maybe.



Its a fairly simple scenario, really, in IDI: The parents are in the house, presumably sleeping, WHILE the perps have JBR in the basement. Surely, they're not going to wait for a parent to stumble down the basement stairs unannounced. Its not a great stretch of the imagination that one intruder could've been sitting in the kitchen watching the front stairs.

What about that scream? A lot took place after that scream, and it happened at midnight. Nobody could assume for certain that parents asleep (even 3 floor up) or a sibling asleep (2 floors up) would not hear it and come running. Intruder committing this in the same house where the parents are. Not when it would have been so easy to get her our of the house. No climbing out that basement window needed. Just run out one of the many doors.

 

[JMO8778]

If I'm not mistaken,I just wanted to point out that the truth of the matter is,the results of JR's computer searches were never released.

 

[JMO8778]

I think 'tomorrow' in the note referred to the 27th.
Patsy,being the author,pictured herself coming down the stairs the morning of the 26th,picking up the note,and reading it..'tomorrow' was the 27th.

IMO,at least initially,the note was written to help buy themselves some time.I don't think they expected LE to stay,once just a simple precursory search of the house had been done.Remember,orders were 'treat them as victims,not as suspects'..so don't look too hard...or too much,at the parents.

 

[Tadpole12]

Hi voynich.

Is there anything in the RN that would suggest the RN author tried to mislead investigators to Linda? It's not clear to me how an investigator would read "small foreign faction" and think "Oh the author is trying to get us to think Linda the housekeeper"

hmmm ..... not within the note, IMO specifically, but maybe, following the RDI scenario, they were aware of some connection that could be made.

But elements of the 'staging' could be linked to LHP, BR's army knife which she had hidden from view, the laundry room connection, she knew how to access the basement room, knew about the cowboy theme tree, ..... ?

She made the Ramsey's suspect list.

"There's just one little problem with that. If that were the case, the intruder would not have staged the scene to LOOK like an intruder."
IDI staged a sexual assault and murder to look like a kidnapping.

Ramsey's suggested 'known' intruder, did such.

Oh I see this as a fascinating mystery like Sherlock Holmes, or even the Voynich mystery.

Voynich mystery ..... voyalles?.

"I don't think you quite understand what I mean. Psychologically, it is "doing the crime," but "someone else" (the created criminal to match the created crime scene) is doing it. That's as direct as I can put it."

Except that instead of speaking in third person or first person plural, the RN switches to first person singular "I".

Assume a character ...... or .... like a personna for a thrill kill.

Assume a character for the purpose of creative writing .... creative liscence!

"That does look incriminating to PR.

Oh, ya.

"If Ramseys are excluded as author of RN, is RDI still viable?"

They may have been individually excluded, but what if they coauthored the rn?

"Stairs are better for intruder than bedroom, pillow, or desk. The parents could read the note in JBR's bedroom and the intruder(s) wouldn't even know it, which wouldn't be a tripwire. They could call 911 from upstairs and the perps wouldn't know it happened."

That's interesting. Not something I would think of --- Is there a movie or book where the IDI' might have gotten the idea?

IDI .... to place the Ramsey's within range of hearing their approach?
Could also imagine that bringing the Ramsey's to an area where their activity could be observed from outside, lights to be observed on in that floor.

"Within an RDI why would PR or JR place the RN there as opposed to the bedroom or kitchen counter?

To suggest the ... a direction of traffic, down the stairs to outside.
Theatrical staging ... events move fluidly from one scene to another.

 

[Tadpole12]

I don't know about earrings, but LHP told PR she was having some money problems and asked for the $2000 loan. Yes, she had knowledge of the house and family- she came nearly every day to clean up after them. But there is not one shred of forensic evidence to link her to the crime or body. Not a fiber or hair of hers found on or near JBR. Not a print on the paintbrush, garrote, pineapple bowl, or the clothes JBR was wearing. Nothing.
Remember she was the first person the Rs tried to implicate. She was an easy target. She had a key- she knew the house. She was easy to blame. After all, she was SO beneath their socioeconomic status, wasn't she? No high-priced lawyers for HER. They figured she'd be easy to bulldoze into being blamed for it. She must have been so hurt. She was devastated over what happened to JBR, then to realize that the family you thought you knew so well (and they you) would try to implicate her in this. And BTW, for all IDI who talk about "no prior behavior" LHP also had no prior behavior for abusing/killing a child.
Yet JR scrambled to hire lawyers for his entire family, even his ex-wife, who was not even in Colorado at the time. Why? She knew something. That's why. What? Well, we will probably never know, but one thing she had to know was whether her son JAR was actually with HER that night or whether he was with his father in Boulder. THAT'S why she needed a lawyer.

Hi DeeDee.
TY fot the input, as always, cohesive.

I was reading about poor LHP, how she shook uncontrollably for hours, believing JBR had been beheaded.

http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senate/6502/primer/primer4_time.html

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif][SIZE=+0]7:00 pmDetectives Fred Patterson and Greg Idler arrived at the home of the Ramsey's housekeeper Linda Hoffman-Pugh and spent three hours interviewing her.[/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif][/FONT]


http://extras.denverpost.com/news/jon0216.htm
- The night JonBenét's body was found, Detectives Fred Patterson and Greg Idler knocked on the door of the Ramseys' housekeeper, Linda Hoffmann-Pugh. Patsy had told police her housekeeper had a key to the house and major money problems. When told the girl had been murdered, Hoffmann-Pugh screamed and couldn't stop shaking.

After she settled down, she was asked to print some words on a sheet of paper - Mr. Ramsey, attache, beheaded and the number $118,000 (unknown to her, all phrases in the ransom note) - but Linda was too upset to write, assuming JonBenét had been beheaded. - Police talked to the Pughs for three hours, according to the book. "Had Linda ever witnessed any signs of sexual abuse in the Ramsey household? Had JonBenét ever wet the bed? Had Linda seen semen, blood or anything unusual on the child's bed? On anyone else's bed? Hoffmann-Pugh would know for sure she was a suspect when the police returned the next day to search her house and fingerprint her. At a local doctor's office, she cried as the police yanked strands of hair from her head and she gave blood samples."

 

[Tadpole12]

Hi SD,

(Well, as for the content itself, it would be those little family sayings like "good Southern common sense." AFTERWARDS, it would be PR telling the cops that she thought a woman wrote it and just happening to mention the housekeeper's name as someone who had a key... .)

Right, LHP intimate knowledge of the Ramseys....
and the nature of the rn, feeble disguise of character, intimate details ... and access to the home .... staff of the Ramsey's .... classic motive, resentful and oportunistic trusted staff member seeks revenge.

(Incidentally, the switch to "I" is seen by the profilers as a slip-up.)*

(As far as THIS RDI goes, force of habit, for one reason. LHP said PR was known to leave objects such as purses in that spot so she could remember them.**

* **Yep ... the devil is in the details.

 

[Tadpole12]

I think 'tomorrow' in the note referred to the 27th.
Patsy,being the author,pictured herself coming down the stairs the morning of the 26th,picking up the note,and reading it..'tomorrow' was the 27th.

IMO,at least initially,the note was written to help buy themselves some time.I don't think they expected LE to stay,once just a simple precursory search of the house had been done.Remember,orders were 'treat them as victims,not as suspects'..so don't look too hard...or too much,at the parents.

Hi JMO.

Ya, that's it exactly, the RDI scenario, the scene only played out till intermission ..... What would have been the second act?

 

[JMO8778]

Hi JMO.

Ya, that's it exactly, the RDI scenario, the scene only played out till intermission ..... What would have been the second act?

good question... I don't think they planned on LE setting up shop and parking in their house till the next day..so that they would have 24 hrs to stall LE..or at least to make it appear to them that the perp/s had found out they had called LE,and so...they had made good on their promise.remember another night would've passed..darkness again (I bet the R's would've once again left the outdoors lights off..).
the repeated threats in the note warning not to talk to LE were twofold,IMO.. to stall LE/keep them away..don't let them be seen near the house!! but,yet they DID call 9111...sooooo...JB ended up dead.as promised.
'if we catch you talking to so much as a stray dog..'..what a desperate line!! they really wanted to keep LE away!! .. buy themselves more time..
so LE would have come back the next day,by 8 am,and would have set up their equipment and waited for the call that would never come.and when it didn't come,at some point,the house would have been searched again..and JB would have eventually been found.

calling the friends over....that was in case JB was found..they needed witnesses around...friends who would attest to their character.
had LE not hung around,I bet they would've quickly dissipated.

 

[Tadpole12]

good question... I don't think they planned on LE setting up shop and parking in their house till the next day..so that they would have 24 hrs to stall LE..or at least to make it appear to them that the perp/s had found out they had called LE,and so...they had made good on their promise.remember another night would've passed..darkness again (I bet the R's would've once again left the outdoors lights off..).
the repeated threats in the note warning not to talk to LE were twofold,IMO.. to stall LE/keep them away..don't let the been seen near the house!! but,yet they DID call 9111...sooooo...JB ended up dead.as promised.
'if we catch you talking to so much as a stray dog..'..what a desperate line!! they really wanted to keep LE away!! .. buy themselves more time..
so LE would have come back the next day,by 8 am,and would have set up their equipment and waited for the call that would never come.and when it didn't come,at some point,the house would have been searched again..and JB would have eventually been found.

Hey JMO ...
ya, very interesting speculation. No further action needed by the Ramsey's, Just their reaction to police presence and ransom demands, then the eventual discovery of JBR's body. If 'tomorrow' was the 27th, the 'extortion' would have played through, with deadly results.

 

[Ames]

Hi DeeDee.
TY fot the input, as always, cohesive.

I was reading about poor LHP, how she shook uncontrollably for hours, believing JBR had been beheaded.

http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Senate/6502/primer/primer4_time.html

[FONT=Times New Roman, Times, serif][SIZE=+0]7:00 pmDetectives Fred Patterson and Greg Idler arrived at the home of the Ramsey's housekeeper Linda Hoffman-Pugh and spent three hours interviewing her.[/SIZE][/FONT]


http://extras.denverpost.com/news/jon0216.htm
- The night JonBenét's body was found, Detectives Fred Patterson and Greg Idler knocked on the door of the Ramseys' housekeeper, Linda Hoffmann-Pugh. Patsy had told police her housekeeper had a key to the house and major money problems. When told the girl had been murdered, Hoffmann-Pugh screamed and couldn't stop shaking.

After she settled down, she was asked to print some words on a sheet of paper - Mr. Ramsey, attache, beheaded and the number $118,000 (unknown to her, all phrases in the ransom note) - but Linda was too upset to write, assuming JonBenét had been beheaded. - Police talked to the Pughs for three hours, according to the book. "Had Linda ever witnessed any signs of sexual abuse in the Ramsey household? Had JonBenét ever wet the bed? Had Linda seen semen, blood or anything unusual on the child's bed? On anyone else's bed? Hoffmann-Pugh would know for sure she was a suspect when the police returned the next day to search her house and fingerprint her. At a local doctor's office, she cried as the police yanked strands of hair from her head and she gave blood samples."

I posted an article on a thread either here, or over at FFJ...about how Linda believes that Patsy did it. I will try and dig it up.

Here is one but, its not the one that I posted earlier...this is interesting. LHP on the Peter Boyle Show.
http://thewebsafe.tripod.com/02151999peterboylesshow-pb.htm


Peter Boyles Show - Monday, February 15, 1999

"Boyles - Monday"
Posted by Byron on 07:27:00 2/15/99
Include Original Message on Reply

Wow. I actually was able to access the forum, which I wasn't when the Boyles show started. Needless to say, he's talking case the entire show, and Craig Silverman has already been on.

Caller - I just wanted to verify what Barbara Fernie said about the pry marks.

PB - This is Linda Hoffman Pugh. You can now talk about the case?

LHP - I can't talk about the GJ, but I can talk about this point.

PB - Have you read the Newsweek piece?

LHP - No.

PB - At the home of John and Barbara Fernie, Patsy stood up and offered condolences. (Talking about Pam abd Patsy and dehydration and that PR knew who killed JBR - missed most of it) Let me read what NW has to say about you. They had brought several thick books about crime-scene photos, they showed her a pic of JBR's thermal blanket, it had stains on it, they showed her a pic of JBR's bed, looking at the comforter, the bed looked barely disturbed

LHP - That was my feeling, that the blanket was in the dryer. I think the blanket wasn't on her bed that night. I don't think a stranger would know where the blanket was. the R's didn't even have a hamper, they just left clothes lying around.

PB - Only you and PR knew it was in there. How do you feel about how the R's are trying to put the blame on you?

LHP - It hurts a lot.

PB - YOu were extremely loyal to her.

LHP - I don't believe the intruder theory at all. That door they're talking about was like that for months.

PB - Haddon was either uninformed or was lying to protect his client.

LHP - That door was like that for months before JBR was murdered.

PB - What has changed in your mind in the last 28 months.

LHP - The R's have lied about numerous things. They've lied about the door, they lied about the knife, they lied about the Swiss army knife. I put in the cupboard myself.

PB - What do you know about bed-wetting? LHP is with us, and she is significant. Is the noose tightening?

(PB's intro was very intense. He talked about the Newsweek, Ramsey Mountain News connection to Schiller, but felt that based upon the excerpts, the Schiller book is objective. He talked about Miss Kit, and how she is quoted talking about the dance routines and her part in teaching them, he said everybody needs to pick up this issue, he had Silverman on discussing the case, he speculated that maybe the lawyers are in Atlanta preparing the R's for GJ testifying or possibly preparing them for indictment (the latter Silverman thinks is unlikely) etc. LOTS was talked about, but combining my lack of sleep and the frustration of trying to access the forum, I didn't hear it all)


2. "cont"
Posted by Byron on 07:40:42 2/15/99
Include Original Message on Reply

PB - How did they treat bedwetting?

LHP - It didn't come up much, but every time I came in the sheets were already off the bed.

PB - How was PR dealing with it, was she getting more frustrated?

LHP - There's no way JR could be a father and not know about it.

PB - You know at least of three lies. Why would the R's come out with the pry marks as evidence of an intruder. They knew about the Swiss army knife. People need to hear this, particularly the people who believe, for whatever the hell reason, well I don't know why they believe it...

LHP - I asked PR for a loan. I think she must have, because the police asked me about it.

PBn - She says you owe her money.

LHP - She owes ME money.

PB - I asked her about the front door. PR told me all the doors were locked. They also attempted to make your husband a suspect as well.

LHP - He had only been in the house four times. One time to fix closet doors, and one time to put up Christmas lights. Everybody who knows us knows we didn't kill JBR. I have never hurt a child and never would. I loved the whole family.

PB - What is Burke like?

LHP - He's a real quiet little boy.

PB - What have you come away with in this?

LHP - We've been hurt. I loved Patsy so much, I would have done anything for her.

PB - You know she knows you didn't do this. She's trying to set somebody up. This doesn't have anything to do with you, and she must be going through her own personal hell.

LHP - I really cared about her. (crying) I don't believe the blanket was on the bed. There were only two people who knew...

PB - What about the little room?

LHP - I never even went inside of the room. I opened the door once.

PB - Did Schiller come and talk to you?

LHP - Yes, he did.

PB - This is all coming to a head. I spoke with Chuck Green, and thinks so as well.

 

[Ames]

http://www.greeleytribune.com/article/20030617/NEWS/306170002

Evans woman haunted by JonBenet case





Mike Peters


Share on Facebook Email Print Comment Recommend




Not only the Ramsey family's lives changed on Christmas 1996, when JonBenét was murdered.

The life of their housekeeper, Linda Hoffman-Pugh, now an Evans resident, began rolling downhill just hours after JonBenét's body was found.

"Patsy Ramsey named me as a suspect right away," the still-angry Hoffman-Pugh said last week. "Boulder police showed up at my house that night."

Police questioned Hoffman-Pugh, her husband and daughter, but Hoffman-Pugh didn't know until later that she was a suspect in what may be the most publicized murder in Colorado history.

At the time of the murder of 6-year-old JonBenét, Hoffman-Pugh had worked as a housekeeper for the Ramsey family for 14 months.

Hoffman-Pugh lived in Fort Lupton at the time, with her husband, Mervin Pugh, and their then-13-

year-old daughter, Ariana. They shared a combined family from previous marriages. Linda had five grown children, Mervin four.

Since the murder, the fam-

ily's life has been overturned.

Hoffman-Pugh had no job after the murder, and her daughter had lost a friend, JonBenét, because the two girls played together much of the time. The family's income came mainly from delivering the Greeley Tribune in Fort Lupton.

After a best-selling book, "Perfect Murder, Perfect Town," by Lawrence Schiller was released in 1998, Hoffman-Pugh discovered she was named as a suspect in the case.

She sued.

The case, filed in 2001, went on for a year, with Hoffman-Pugh working with her attorneys in Atlanta, where the Ramseys had moved after the murder, and in New York. She'd thought of writing a book about the case and her grand jury testimony in Boulder, but instead, decided to go with the lawsuit.

"We thought we had a good case," Hoffman-Pugh said. "They accused me directly of murdering that little girl."

But the $50 million libel suit was dismissed in 2002 by an Atlanta judge. Despite a ruling to open her grand jury testimony the Pughs came out with nothing except what Hoffman-Pugh felt was a libelous accusation.

Since that time, the family moved to Evans, Mervin lost his job, Linda was in a traffic accident and has been adjudged 65 percent disabled for the rest of her life. She said that because of other children's taunts about the Ramsey case, Ariana couldn't continue in school. For a couple of years, Hoffman-Pugh home-schooled her. Ariana hasn't been able to finish school.

The family still delivers the newspaper and struggles with the thought that Hoffman-Pugh was named a murder suspect.

Now, after nearly seven years, Linda still believes Patsy Ramsey murdered JonBenét. "I don't think there will ever be an arrest in this case, but maybe, before she dies, Patsy will admit it.

"I know I would like to find out before I die."

So Linda and her family are struggling now, waiting for the finalization of a lawsuit filed against the man who crashed into her car. But it's not the accident that occupies her thoughts most of the time.

"JonBenét's case still haunts my family," Hoffman-Pugh said. "I still look back over my shoulder when we're out at night."

"Whatever Happened To" is a weekly series of stories designed to revisit people and issues in the headlines years ago. To suggest a story, contact managing editor Randy Bangert at 352-0211, Ext. 234, or [email protected].

 

[voynich]

Hi Y'all,

I plan to reply at length hopefully sooner. I do want to say this

The heck it is! I was not attacking anyone.

Use that good Southern Sense of yours --

"Peace is a lie--there is only passion

Through passion I gain strength

Through strength I gain power

Through power I gain victory

Through victory my chains are broken"

I sense much darkness in you.

 

[JMO8778]

I am not sure what your agenda is,Voynich,but I do personally consider SD to be JonBenet's hero as well..right up there with Steve Thomas,and I'm sure a lot of others do,too.

 

[JMO8778]

Is there anything in the RN that would suggest the author knew how JB was injured?

yes.."beheaded"..points to neck and head...as JB's injuries were.the author knew she was already dead when the note was written,and what injuries she had as well.

Are there details in the RN that attempted to frame Linda (i.e would she know $118 bonus) What specific content in the RN did PR imagine would lead investigators to Linda?

Patsy mentioned LHP right away.
Since she cleaned the house,it would not be illogical to think she might could have stumbled across a paycheck stub or financial pprs or something.IMO that's what Patsy was counting on..that possibility.