S.B.T.C - JonBenet case. [WSPoster's therory]

[Callan]

Just like to apologise, for stating that I would post at 3.00pm. Being from the UK, I did not know that it was a special day. I shall post at 2.:hand: 00pm instead.

 

[Toltec]

I have many theories on the SBTC acronym....but I believe Nedra got it right because she was so quick to answer when questioned on the meaning:

Son of a Bi**ch Tom Carson.

Makes sense if the Ramseys were going the route of the "inside job".

As you know, Tom Carson was the Chief Financial Officer at Access. He would know the amount of John's bonus...$118,000...and he would be one to say "Fat Cat".

This note was obviously written to point to an employee at Access Graphics. Tom Carson was not liked by the Ramseys and Paughs.

 

[Ames]

I have many theories on the SBTC acronym....but I believe Nedra got it right because she was so quick to answer when questioned on the meaning:

Son of a Bi**ch Tom Carson.

Makes sense if the Ramseys were going the route of the "inside job".

As you know, Tom Carson was the Chief Financial Officer at Access. He would know the amount of John's bonus...$118,000...and he would be one to say "Fat Cat".

This note was obviously written to point to an employee at Access Graphics. Tom Carson was not liked by the Ramseys and Paughs.

I had forgotten about that. Didn't she say that John used to use the initials SBTC when the kids were around, when he was referring to Tom??

 

[TallCoolOne]

First of all, the posting that you are talking about, was put was put on CourtTV on Wednesday. The reason that it was put here, was because for some reason, it removed on the following Friday. If you don't take my word for it, contact member 'Herlock H'. I asked him if he had any idea why this occured.

Secondly, the reason that I make a 'big announcement' is mainly to re-check everything, so that I do not make myself look silly, by not checking the facts first. You should to try it yourself one day!

By the way, even if I did have two posts on different sites that were the same, what is your problem with that? The way that I see it, by doing that, there are more people to see it, which at the end of the day - is the whole point. I mean, you came over here didn't you? Unfortunately.

No, I think you came over here, unfortunately, as you say.

 

[JMO8778]

Yeah, I think so. They wouldn't have done anything to draw attention to them on purpose, I don't think. Refresh my memory....S was for scarf, b was for bracelet (right?), what was T for? C was for crown, right? Or was the T for tiara? I just can't remember. But, I still think that it was a coincidence.

c was for cat,Sister socks was left with her.t was for tiara,yes.

 

[JMO8778]

http://www.statementanalysis.com/ramseynote/


You guys may have already seen this before, but if not....its very interesting...and if SO...its worth reading again.

yes,that's a good one..that's what started me thinking they were guilty ! but even bf seeing an analysis,that note tipped me off,it's just so stupid.

 

[Ames]

c was for cat,Sister socks was left with her.t was for tiara,yes.

Yeah....that's right. THANK YOU. I think that C for cat....aka Sister Socks...was grasping at straws. I would think that if each initial SBTC...stood for something in her casket...that the S would have stood for sister socks....and they scarf could have just been left out all together. Unless, of course, it was buried to bury evidence.

 

[Ames]

yes,that's a good one..that's what started me thinking they were guilty ! but even bf seeing an analysis,that note tipped me off,it's just so stupid.

LOL...yeah, I know.

 

[JMO8778]

Yeah....that's right. THANK YOU. I think that C for cat....aka Sister Socks...was grasping at straws. I would think that if each initial SBTC...stood for something in her casket...that the S would have stood for sister socks....and they scarf could have just been left out all together. Unless, of course, it was buried to bury evidence.

there was something about someone retrieved the 'wrong' sister socks,and the right one was found..so i wonder why she had 2 of them,and why would the other be the 'right' one?

 

[angelwngs]

Anothr thought..

BC - Before Christ, before children, Bolder Colorado

ST- abbreviation for Saint

The ransom note did seem to attempt to deflect anger away from John Ramsey. Rather it tried to point anger toward the government.

Also, the person writing the note did seem to show too much compassion toward John Ramsey in both the instructions to bring something large in which to carry the money and by instructing him to be well rested.

The 'do' which was scratched through may have been the word do rather than the beginning of the word don't or do not and another unnecessary word telling the repeated style of speaking of the writer...in using unnecessary wording.

 

[Dru]

I would add another thought to the ransom analysis....I believe the author was trained as a writer from the crossout of the word "delivery." Writers are taught not to repeat the same word in the same sentence if avoidable. IMHO, the writer of the note was trained to edit his/her own writing.

Also, the use of the editor's carat on the second page indicates a trained writer/editor:
http://www.acandyrose.com/12251996ransompage2.gif

Can somebody help me with this?

I was an English major, and took a few communications classes, one of which was in journalism (feature writing).

Both as an English major and in the journalism class I learned to use a caret, or ^, to indicate that something was left out and needed to be inserted. Then you would write the missing word above the line if there was room, or to the side if there wasn't.

But in the RN an inverted caret, or 'v' is used, and the word 'not' written above the line. The inverted caret is generally used only to add a missing apostrophe; the caret is inverted to make it clear that you want to add an apostrophe and not a comma.

Now, PR was a journalism major who went on to work in advertising/public relations, right? So she should have instinctively used a caret, not an inverted caret, to add the word 'not' to the RN.

So, did she think she'd written 'dont' without the apostrophe, add the inverted caret, and then realize she'd only written 'do'? Or was she always confused about which caret to use? Or did her particular school use the inverted caret for additions of words as well as apostrophes?

Or did someone who wasn't a trained writer/editor write the RN, and use the inverted caret in an attempt to frame PR?

 

[DeeDee249]

I don't think if someone wrote the note to frame PR they would have known whether PR was taught certain ways of using the caret or what method her school taught. That would assume that when LE got the note to read, that they also would know what method of using the caret was taught at the school PR went to. While some of the mistakes in that note (like spelling bussiness,etc.) could be deliberate, I think others are just that- mistakes.

 

[Dru]

I don't think if someone wrote the note to frame PR they would have known whether PR was taught certain ways of using the caret or what method her school taught. That would assume that when LE got the note to read, that they also would know what method of using the caret was taught at the school PR went to. While some of the mistakes in that note (like spelling bussiness,etc.) could be deliberate, I think others are just that- mistakes.

DeeDee, I agree. I can't think of any reason anyone would use that caret to frame PR; however, I also can't think of any real reason why a trained journalist would use an inverted caret to add the word "not" when she would be much more familiar with the correct proofreading symbol.

I do tend to think PR wrote the RN. But why the 'wrong' caret, then?

 

[UKGuy]

Can somebody help me with this?

I was an English major, and took a few communications classes, one of which was in journalism (feature writing).

Both as an English major and in the journalism class I learned to use a caret, or ^, to indicate that something was left out and needed to be inserted. Then you would write the missing word above the line if there was room, or to the side if there wasn't.

But in the RN an inverted caret, or 'v' is used, and the word 'not' written above the line. The inverted caret is generally used only to add a missing apostrophe; the caret is inverted to make it clear that you want to add an apostrophe and not a comma.

Now, PR was a journalism major who went on to work in advertising/public relations, right? So she should have instinctively used a caret, not an inverted caret, to add the word 'not' to the RN.

So, did she think she'd written 'dont' without the apostrophe, add the inverted caret, and then realize she'd only written 'do'? Or was she always confused about which caret to use? Or did her particular school use the inverted caret for additions of words as well as apostrophes?

Or did someone who wasn't a trained writer/editor write the RN, and use the inverted caret in an attempt to frame PR?

Dru,
If I was Patsy faking a ransom note, possibly authored by a foreign national, then the use of caret's would not be considered, not unless I was dumb enough to think this was how others penned their demand notes.

Its my practise to use an inverted caret, or 'v' in the space between words, or as above, with the missing phrase scribbled above the inverted caret.

Then again possibly the inverted caret, or 'v' is simply a miswritten apostrophe?

.

 

[Callan]

As stated, what I am posting here has been touched upon before by someone, but was never [as far has I know] been fully investigated.

That particular person was seemingly convinced, that the person who wrote the ransom note, was a bank worker. Their main basis for this, being the fact that the word 'bring' was used, instead of the obvious one of 'take'. They believed that the writer simply slipped up and put him or herself [in their mind] at the location of the ransom money collection - the bank! This is given more credence, by the film 'Ransom' which had premiered in Boulder, at the end of November that year. There are things that happened in this film, which also occured in JonBenet's murder. Two examples being, the puzzlement of the father [Gibson] as to why - considering how much he was worth - the ransom money was such a small amount. Also, the following threat of the kidnapper:

''I will kill him! ... I will kill him! ... I will kill him!''

The threat in the ransom note:

''she dies! ... she dies! ... she dies!''


Finally on the subject of the bank worker therory, take a look at part of a police interview, between John Ramsey and Lou Smit, on June 24th 1998.
John Ramsey is shown a photograph of the basement where JonBenet was found [never released to the public, I don't think] which shows a chair placed directly outside the door to the train room. There is no logical reason as to why this was done, other than as some kind of clue left by the murderer. It is generally accepted that certain things were done at the crime scene, to indicate that the murderer was playing some sort of game. So what could this particular part of the 'game' be about? Well this is the only thing that I can think of. If you have an appointment at a bank to see someone, such as, for an example, a manager - you will usually wait outside the office for your appointment time ... sat on a chair.


Now let us turn to the subject of Patsy Ramsey. I believe that I can now conclusively show that she was NOT the author of the ransom note. I am able to do this, not by any analysis [although I have done this and found nothing to show that she wrote it] but the use of just ONE word in the note and this word is the same one that I have already talked about ... 'bring'.

I will now get straight to the point:

April 30th 1997

Patsy Ramsey is being questioned by Steve Thomas and Tom Trujillo.

''... he was quite ill with some respiratory stuff and I was taking groceries and dinners and ...''

''... wrapped for taking stuff to the lake ...''

''... presents together to take up there and ...''


Some people say that the word 'bring' was used instead of 'take' because some people change the way words are used, depending on where they were bought up. Patsy Ramsey was I believe bought up in one of these place. If we accept that the word 'bring' was therefore used in this context, then that is damning evidence against her, were it not for the fact that she used these words:

taking - taking - take

in her answers to questions.


To finish, there can now be ONLY two possible answers, the first, is that the murderer was a bank worker, or secondly, the word 'bring' was used out of context, by someone bought up in a particular region. Either way - it was NOT Patsy Ramsey!

 

[Solace]

angelwngs,

Damn! How come I never thought of that?


.

The note was written BEFORE the writer even knew about Steve Thomas.

 

[angelwngs]

The note was written BEFORE the writer even knew about Steve Thomas.

Not necessarily...

Steve Thomas signed on at Boulder Colorado PD in 1991 and quickly made a name for himself....

 

[Solace]

Not necessarily...

Steve Thomas signed on at Boulder Colorado PD in 1991 and quickly made a name for himself....

I understand that - but it is a very very far fetched theory. Highly unlikely and probably not at all. What about Foster's theory on Psalm 118 (I think it is that one). He felt that SBTC were the first letters of the four lines of a verse connected with that. I also thought the Bible was open to that page. Am I wrong?

 

[JMO8778]

O my word....sounds like something Jams would say @@...well,like I posted bf,ppl can see what the truth is,and I for one am not fooled.PATSY wrote the dang note,and JOHN helped her !

Soloce,I am not talking about you,even though I posted right below you're post,as I'm sure you figured out.
I just get sick of the game players,IMO,they are no better than the killers themselves,if they knowingly spread false info and try to twist the truth by playing manipulating games.

 

[coloradokares]

Not necessarily...

Steve Thomas signed on at Boulder Colorado PD in 1991 and quickly made a name for himself....

I have to express my thoughts .?!?!?!?!?!?!?!? Steve thomas did not kill Jon Benet what is it your suggesting??