JonBenet Ramson letter - written before or after + linguistics

[voynich]

Hey I got your post just as I was about to log off, having finished another post.

"If you want to talk about the injuries to JB's vaginal area, you've certainly got the right man"

for this thread, is there anything about those injuries, or anywhere else, that would shed light on the RN or the way Amy was attacked? Is there anything in the RN that would suggest the author knew how JB was injured?

"
Actually, that's what the participants in a CIVIL case CLAIM. When Lin Wood was asked to prove it, he said he would, but he'd have to get the reports from Hal Haddon first. To THIS DAY, Haddon has refused to turn over those reports. Funny, isn't it?"

Why not ask BPD or where did Carnes get this information?

"That's par for the course, though. Many people don't realize it, but there's a LOT (and I mean a lot) of politicking that goes on in these areas. Each one wants to be top-dog. That way they get all of the high-paying contracts."

Would you accept the analysis if it was peer-reviewed?

"I'm not sure. I know of some anecdotal incidents. Just what difference does it make, anyway?"

For one thing JB was alive. I'm not a parent, so I'm not sure I would refer to my daughter or her name, and what would be par for the course.

"Yeah, all short and to the point, not the "kidnapper's manifesto" in this case."

The Leopold and Loeb RN was pretty long, and more importantly, was a murder made to look like a kidnapping. If L&L were not caught and did not give a detailed confession, the length of the RN could cast suspicion on Bobby Frank's dad.

"Glad you asked. (I'm also glad you phrased it that way.) 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."

Interesting. Did the RN author attempt to make it look like Linda's handwriting? 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?

 

[BBB167893]

The rage attacking mother of JBR who 'lost it' suddenly. The impromptu writing of the RN to 'explain why JBR is dead'. None of this adequately explains the injuries or the actions that are implied to have been taken by her killer.

If you have a question, just ask.

Why would PR 'wipe down' JBR in a rage attack scenario? It truly makes no sense.

You're right. It doesn't. Except I don't believe it happened that way. The wiping down, IMO, wasn't done until a fair time after the head blow. Simple, isn't it?

What does make sense is a different motive, that is, a sexual assault on a child makes sense given the evidence. JBR was sexually assaulted, and then murdered so she could not identify her attacker.

I would AGREE with that, but in a MUCH different way than you're thinking!

The RN was probably intended to present a 'cleaner' motive of kidnapping for ransom instead of the base, pedophile crime that the evidence suggests it was.

HOTYH, I can't figure you. All this time, you've been telling us that the RN is legit and that there was NO (NADA) legitimate pedophile interest. I'd sure like to know what changed your mind!

(Incidentally, you didn't answer my question earlier. You said you were going to read some "Michael Kane stuff." How did that go?)

 

[BBB167893]

they would find the note before they found jbr, correct?

that's what i'm saying!

 

[BBB167893]

Given PR's active involvement in JB's dancing and beauty pageants, it's sort out of the ordinary that she would first injure her vagina causing bleeding, staging it as a sexual assault, then wipe her down to unstage it,

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. 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. So let me sum up instead: PR made JB so spectacular in life, she HAD to make her spectacular in death. As for "unstaging" (it really gets my goat whenever someone says something was "unstaged" in this case), one, just how much was she supposed to know about crime scenes anyway? Two, just plain instinct.

then insert the other portion of the paint stick to stage it again.

Where did you get that idea? That's a new one on me.

"They would find the note before they found JBR, correct?" Possibly, your tripwire is new and interesting. I wonder though whether placing it in the bedroom, desk, pillow might be better for this purpose.

No argument!

If the DNA, handwriting 1/5, and linguistic analysis were a match, I wouldn't be having this discussion.

None of us would. But we can't go on "if onlys."

I would be in the RDI camp as a rational evidence based human.

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

So as to not lose myself in too wide a field, if forensic linguistics can definitely exclude PR and JR as authors of RN,

It can't. that I know of.

In such a framework, difficult to explain trace evidence like fibers could be explained as transfer and contamination. (Of course if DNA, handwriting and linguistic analysis were a match to PR, along with fiber and trace evidence, case closed).

If only.

Well, let me leave you with this. True, there was no lead-pipe cinch match to her, but there very rarely ever is. She came the closest, and according to the document examiners I've talked to, that's usually all you can go by.

In the RDI, what would Burke know about the murder, esp the rage-attack?

Possibly.

I understand the psychological theory that PR wrote the note, in some theories with JR dictating. JB is not mentioned due to a psychological "distancing". Ok fine.

That sums it up.

""It's a classic dissociation technique, a way to distance oneself from it. Except the ransom letter (LETTER) was most likely an attempt to undo the crime in the writer's mind (per CASKU). A person in such a predicament would probably not want to think about doing the same to BR.""

But if they wanted to psychologically distace themselves from what they did and what happened, and they kept her body b/c they wanted a proper burial and they had "proprietary interest" in the victim,

All of which I believe happened.

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?

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.

If RDI to stage crime scene wrote the RN, why not short and simple "We have your daughter. We want $1 million. Will call tomorrow at 10am for instructions. Do not call police or FBI" -- if they were going to stage it, why self-incriminate with their own writing material and paper (as opposed to disposing of them) and with longer writing (so there can be better odds for handwriting/linguistic match)?

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."

Two other facts -- several pages were torn from the notepad and never recovered. If RDI the RN, why not tear those pages off, toss them in a dump and burn them, and start over with something much shorter?

Time consideration for one. We don't know how long it took to do everything.

It's potentially significant that it appeared there was a false start that starts "Mr and Mrs I"

Perhaps more than you know.

If IDI wrote it, it would appear one purpose of RN is to send a message and stick it to John, to show he knows John, and took sadistic joy in killing her and torturing them.

I can see that. Heck, I used to be IDI.

 

[BBB167893]

Hey I got your post just as I was about to log off, having finished another post.

"If you want to talk about the injuries to JB's vaginal area, you've certainly got the right man"

for this thread, is there anything about those injuries, or anywhere else, that would shed light on the RN or the way Amy was attacked? Is there anything in the RN that would suggest the author knew how JB was injured?

I get you. That's why I said "if." In truth, it really doesn't fit into this thread, I'll grant you. In the strictest sense, I'd have to say no. But, at the same time, I think it's helpful to remember the difference between a ransom kidnapper and a pedophile kidnapper and how the ransom letter doesn't seem to match up with what was done to JB herself. It's like two separate crimes.

"Actually, that's what the participants in a CIVIL case CLAIM. When Lin Wood was asked to prove it, he said he would, but he'd have to get the reports from Hal Haddon first. To THIS DAY, Haddon has refused to turn over those reports. Funny, isn't it?"

Why not ask BPD or where did Carnes get this information?

Why NOT ask them indeed! The plaintiff did try to acquire the police file, but was turned down by the DA's office (and you have to wonder why). So that was a no go. As for Carnes, she got this "information" from Wood himself, who (as far as I know) got it from Lou Smit, using strictly preliminary reports (again, as far as I know) that were written early on in the investigation. Hope that helps.

"That's par for the course, though. Many people don't realize it, but there's a LOT (and I mean a lot) of politicking that goes on in these areas. Each one wants to be top-dog. That way they get all of the high-paying contracts."

Would you accept the analysis if it was peer-reviewed?

That's a tough question, voynich. And before you say I'm dodging the question, I should point out that a lot of the politicking I mentioned is group-orientied, not just on an individual basis. I realize you probably wanted a straight-up yes or no answer, but I honestly can't give you one.

"I'm not sure. I know of some anecdotal incidents. Just what difference does it make, anyway?"

For one thing JB was alive. I'm not a parent, so I'm not sure I would refer to my daughter or her name, and what would be par for the course.

Well, then you and I are in the same boat. I'm childless myself. But, as with so much in this case, it's more of a macro-view issue.

"Glad you asked. (I'm also glad you phrased it that way.) 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."

Interesting. Did the RN author attempt to make it look like Linda's handwriting?

Um, not as such. But when PR said that it looked like a woman's handwriting, one can certainly draw the inference.

Are there details in the RN that attempted to frame Linda (i.e would she know $118 bonus)

If memory serves, she WOULD have known about it, and a few of those other references I mentioned. But, more on that in a moment.

What specific content in the RN did PR imagine would lead investigators to Linda?

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.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

What do you think putting her in the basement was?

Well, THATS interesting. One minute RDI calls it staging, an attempt to show something. The next minute its concealment, an attempt to hide something. Which is it?

 

[BBB167893]

Well, THATS interesting. One minute RDI calls it staging, an attempt to show something. The next minute its concealment, an attempt to hide something. Which is it?

Sorry. I should have been more specific. I mean hiding it from themselves, at least temporarily. The staging was the permanent aspect of it.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

-- if they were going to stage it, why self-incriminate with their own writing material and paper (as opposed to disposing of them) and with longer writing (so there can be better odds for handwriting/linguistic match)?

Very good question. Similar to this: Why call 911 hours earlier than the RN that they themselves wrote allowed them to? They could've gotten rid of the pineapple bowl with their fingerprints on it.

Or this: Why identify the crime as a kidnapping, inviting the FBI in addition to BPD? Why have a RN in the first place? They had the sexual assault staged scene.

RDI has quick and easy answers to these and many more paradoxical questions that riddle almost all RDI theories. The idea that anyone continues to suspect the R's is ridiculous, given handwriting evidence couldn't produce an ABFDE consensus on a match, despite 2 1/2 pages of evidence! That is in addition to the absolute absurdity of the idea that a household member, neighbor, friend, or employee would ever put pen to paper in the first place.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Sorry. I should have been more specific. I mean hiding it from themselves, at least temporarily. The staging was the permanent aspect of it.

Thats talking in circles. Hiding JBR from themselves and staging JBR to mislead LE are mutually opposing concepts.

 

[BBB167893]

Thats talking in circles. Hiding JBR from themselves and staging JBR to mislead LE are mutually opposing concepts.

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

RDI has quick and easy answers to these and many more paradoxical questions that riddle almost all RDI theories.

Speaking for myself, there's nothing "quick" or "easy" about them. It took me several years.

The idea that anyone continues to suspect the R's is ridiculous, given 2 1/2 pages, or 1500 characters of handwriting evidence that STILL couldn't produce an ABFDE consensus on a match

What is ridiculous is the idea that there WOULD BE a "consensus," given all the dueling egos and politicking I mentioned!

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

What is ridiculous is the idea that there WOULD BE a "consensus," given all the dueling egos and politicking I mentioned!

Ad hominem argument.

 

[BBB167893]

Ad hominem argument.

The heck it is! I was not attacking anyone. Merely pointing out an aspect of the profession that is often overlooked.

 

[KoldKase]

Patsy Ramsey wrote the note. Period. No question. No reasonable argument. All anyone who is objective has to do is compare her exemplars with the ransom note, not to mention the repeated, innumerable writings, statements, and interviews with the Ramseys which repeat excessively the language in the ransom note.

To believe Patsy didn't write the note, you have to believe someone who did wanted to implicate her and therefore did a bang up job of copying her handwriting and linguistic style, knew lots of personal facts and habits of the family, and put all of this on Patsy's own pad with her own pen either while the Ramseys were out for a few hours that night or after murdering JonBenet. Then that person put the pad back, the pen back, hid the ransom note and himself/themselves in the home while the Ramseys went about getting two children to bed, getting the final packing done for an early morning trip, then got themselves ready for bed, read and went to sleep.

All without one cell leading to this brilliant stranger who managed this and remained undetected for 12 years in the most famous modern child murder in the last fifty years. Even with a million dollar reward offered for info leading to him/them. How lucky was this intruder?

Now use some common sense and consider: the obstruction of the Ramseys in the investigation from Day One; the lies and inconsistencies in their "story" told to LE, in their book, in interviews...any time they opened their mouths; plus that they "claim" they withheld critical evidence from LE for five years, knowing by their own admittance it was critical evidence long before they turned it over--the "package of Bloomies"; plus all the forensic evidence putting Patsy's fibers entwined in the knots of the garrote, John's fibers in the genital area where the child was wiped down, Patsy's paintbrush; the staging--duct tape added to the mouth AFTER the murder, wiped down and redressed; fake ransom note--even the Ramseys admit that much.

NO INTRUDER.

The only question is which of the Ramseys did what, IMO.

 

[Tadpole12]

Hiya, voynich.

If you want to see Gerald R. McMenamin in a video discussing foresnic linguistic analysis with the Zodiac and Arthur Allen, click
http://www.zodiacmovie.com/ "enter the site" "linguistic analysis"

the statement analysis Mark McClish states "Four times the writer uses the phrase "she dies." (Lines #23 - #26) The problem is the writer should be speaking in the future tense; "she will die." This is a strong indication the writer knew JonBenet was dead when the ransom note was written."

Unless the author was quoting or referencing Dirty Harry, one sentence and one she dies alone maybe, but given that they are strung together in sequence, it becomes more likely.

cool. I'll check the link out.

"Why would PR 'wipe down' JBR in a rage attack scenario?"

Given PR's active involvement in JB's dancing and beauty pageants, it's sort out of the ordinary that she would first injure her vagina causing bleeding, staging it as a sexual assault, then wipe her down to unstage it, then insert the other portion of the paint stick to stage it again.

Not all abusers keep their children hidden from social activities.

Well, within all the PRDI scenarios, whether it's that corporal punishment angle, religious fervor, rage, premeditated act, PR character varies from PR as a Cybil type character to improperly medicated psychotic PR to PR as JR's accomplice .... regardless of specifics, the impetus for every act upon that poor child would be to obliterate evidence of previous sexual contact, any type of penetration and to possibly cover up bruising to the neck.

Maybe the wiping occured before the staging, or it was just part of presentation. RDI or IDI either way the perp did not want to see, or to have JBR seen that way.

One thing I can note about PR is appearance was important.
Her well groomed appearance. Comments by those that knew her that she never wore the same outfit twice, she modified her daughters appearance to an unnatural theatrical look,

she was said to have artistic flare .... BUT
The photos of their home, their sanctuary, What a disorganized clutter ... all that money and no substantial taste .... not just unorganized, but piles of cheap looking stuff ... looks like some areas are barely passable. Home environment out of control, even with maid service.

Just one of PR lack of control issues.

"They would find the note before they found JBR, correct?" Possibly, your tripwire is new and interesting. I wonder though whether placing it in the bedroom, desk, pillow might be better for this purpose.

no, because the trip wire note brings the Ramsey's down the stairs, down one story to be heard. On the pillow would be the best spot. But then the 'post 911 call action' would not have been centered in the kitchen.

"What gender would you assign this text? "Allow us to assure you that he is at present well and safe. You need fear no physical harm for him. we can assure you that you son will be safely returned to you."

huh? I wouldn't be able to, but it is an assuring kinda protective statement.

"The author continues using the first person singular pronoun, but the most important factor in this sentence is the concern expressed for John’s welfare. No hardened criminal, vagrant or “foreign faction” would care if John was “rested” or not. The concern is a subconscious revelation of the author’s personality, which is nurturing, and therefore, according to probability, female.

In Mel Gibson's movie Ransom (1996) the ransom note cautions that the deliver will be exhausting, and advises the father to be well rested. An alternative explanation is the author of the RN had seen Ransom and it gave him ideas about what sort of content he wanted to include in the letter. This is strengthened by other apparent movie references.."

interesting observation.

""If the DNA, handwriting 1/5, and linguistic analysis were a match, I wouldn't be having this discussion. I would be in the RDI camp as a rational evidence based human. The reverse is true. So I look at it as a scientist presented with two theories of RDI and IDI and which is better supported. So as to not lose myself in too wide a field, if forensic linguistics can definitely exclude PR and JR as authors of RN, and some of Gerald R. McMenamin is peer reviewed journals, that doesn't leave much for RDI since whoever wrote RN killed or associate of the JB killer. In such a framework, difficult to explain trace evidence like fibers could be explained as transfer and contamination. (Of course if DNA, handwriting and linguistic analysis were a match to PR, along with fiber and trace evidence, case closed).

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?

In the RDI, what would Burke know about the murder, esp the rage-attack?

I understand the psychological theory that PR wrote the note, in some theories with JR dictating. JB is not mentioned due to a psychological "distancing". Ok fine.

""It's a classic dissociation technique, a way to distance oneself from it. Except the ransom letter (LETTER) was most likely an attempt to undo the crime in the writer's mind (per CASKU). A person in such a predicament would probably not want to think about doing the same to BR.""

But if they wanted to psychologically distace themselves from what they did and what happened, and they kept her body b/c they wanted a proper burial and they had "proprietary interest" in the victim, 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. 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.

If RDI to stage crime scene wrote the RN, why not short and simple "We have your daughter. We want $1 million. Will call tomorrow at 10am for instructions. Do not call police or FBI" -- if they were going to stage it, why self-incriminate with their own writing material and paper (as opposed to disposing of them) and with longer writing (so there can be better odds for handwriting/linguistic match)?

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

Two other facts -- several pages were torn from the notepad and never recovered. If RDI the RN, why not tear those pages off, toss them in a dump and burn them, and start over with something much shorter?

It's potentially significant that it appeared there was a false start that starts "Mr and Mrs I"

If IDI wrote it, it would appear one purpose of RN is to send a message and stick it to John, to show he knows John, and took sadistic joy in killing her and torturing them.

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.

 

[Tadpole12]

Glad you asked. (I'm also glad you phrased it that way.) 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.

Hey SD. I forget now, but was it LHP that had arranged for the iirc $2000 loan, advance on earnings, from PR?

LHP; she knew the layout of the home, and so many other things about the Ramseys, she did have that intimate knowledge .... she proclaimed PR to be the killer.

 

[BBB167893]

Hey SD. I forget now, but was it LHP that had arranged for the iirc $2000 loan, advance on earning, from PR?

Yup.

LHP; she knew the layout of the home, and so many other things about the Ramseys, she did have that intimate knowledge

Yup.

.... she proclaimed PR to be the killer.

Yup!

 

[Tadpole12]

Hi Hotyh.

Here's a interesting news article re beheading & fantasy, delusions:
http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/03/31/sibling.stabbings/

 

[DeeDee249]

Hey SD. I forget now, but was it LHP that had arranged for the iirc $2000 loan, advance on earnings, from PR?

LHP; she knew the layout of the home, and so many other things about the Ramseys, she did have that intimate knowledge .... she proclaimed PR to be the killer.

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.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Possibly, your tripwire is new and interesting. I wonder though whether placing it in the bedroom, desk, pillow might be better for this purpose.

Probably not.

Stairs are far better for intruder to place the RN than bedroom, pillow, or desk. This is because the R's could find and read the note in JBR's bedroom without the intruder(s) even knowing it. The R's could call 911, also without the intruder(s) knowing.

Placing the RN in the bedroom wouldn't be a tripwire at all.

 

[JMO8778]

the parents could also step all over it in the dark and render it totally unreadable.a real perp would not take that chance.

it was also never on the stairs to begin with...that makes no sense.none at all.to be placed on the stairs,a perp would have to put it in front of him and step over it,or go up the stairs then turn around and put it there,or put it there after carrying JB down the stairs..in which case he would have to lay her down,and then deal w the note.