The ransom note & Patsy Ramsey, letter by letter.

[Nom de plume]

The killer might have a history of wiretapping personal phones and sending malware emails. Through this method, the killer could know where the Ramseys were going and when. The killer may have a partner that he works with, rather like Leonard Lake and Charles Ng, but more educated. The killers might wait in the house for the parents to go to sleep. This is the one thing that doesn't change for most people, even on Christmas. Eventually the family goes to bed. Then, while one killer commits the crime, the other writes the note. They leave immediately after.

They wouldn't necessarily miss Christmas dinner. From my understanding, JonBenet was missing in the morning and not found until eight hours later. The killers might live many hours away. But, perhaps their families lived several hours closer to the Ramseys. If it took them ten hours to drive and they left immediately after the crime, they could be sharing Christmas dinner and nobody would be the wiser. They might easily say to anyone who questions them, "I had to work," or "I had a term paper that needed finishing."

BBM

1st BBM Why? What's the point of the note?

2nd BBM What??? If "they" left after the crime, sometime between midnight and 2 am 12/26/96, and drove 10 hrs, how in the world are they going to have Christmas dinner with their families? It was the day after Christmas! (Unless they were driving a time machine.) :facepalm:

 

[Anyhoo]

What’s to explain? Mr Ramsey was wrong, but so are the posters who commented as neither note nor so-called practice note were addressed to Mr and Mrs Ramsey.
...

AK

What is your source of information for saying that the so-called practice note was not addressed to Mr and Mrs Ramsey? You must not be looking at the same information that I and many others have, because from what I understand that is exactly the way the author of the RN chose to start it at first before they changed their mind and write the actual RN. Or are you like Scarlett, not wanting to accept even the most basic evidence (like the pineapple in JB's stomach) because it goes against your own theories of what happened? I hope you are not one of those who say we cannot draw any conclusions from anything. We can draw conclusions, and the fact is that by saying what he did during the disposition, JR revealed something: That he knew the way the practice RN started. How did he know that? When did he know that? Don't just dig in your heels and deny there even was a practice RN, as Scarlett does with the pineapple. Only ostriches stick their head in the sand when presented with something they don't want to see.

 

[chlban]

Uberfairy;10116599

]The killer might have a history of wiretapping personal phones and sending malware emails. Through this method, the killer could know where the Ramseys were going and when. The killer may have a partner that he works with, rather like Leonard Lake and Charles Ng, but more educated. The killers might wait in the house for the parents to go to sleep. This is the one thing that doesn't change for most people, even on Christmas. Eventually the family goes to bed. Then, while one killer commits the crime, the other writes the note. They leave immediately after.

So, it's a conspiracy. It isn't one intruder who left not a single trace of himself it was two. Here I thought the JFK assasination got most of the crazy theories. :floorlaugh:

The fantasies are just that, fantasies. A Ramsey killed that child. It probably wasn't planned, at least not in the sense that we tend to think of as planned, but it happened and then there was a cover up by at least one, probably two of the Ramsey's.

I left this thread last month because I could not get past the die hards that defend those horrid people because "loving parents just couldn't do this" in spite of all the cases where so called loving parents have done just such horrid things and in spite of all the evidence.Time to go again. Have fun with your fantasies.

 

[Hexe]

The killer might have a history of wiretapping personal phones and sending malware emails. Through this method, the killer could know where the Ramseys were going and when. The killer may have a partner that he works with, rather like Leonard Lake and Charles Ng, but more educated. The killers might wait in the house for the parents to go to sleep. This is the one thing that doesn't change for most people, even on Christmas. Eventually the family goes to bed. Then, while one killer commits the crime, the other writes the note. They leave immediately after.

So we have here two killers, who prepare their action carefully, wiretapping the phones and hacking the computers of their victims. But, these two meticulous criminals do not bring their own rope, ransom note, duct tape or garrotte. They don't even bring a friggin' flashlight with them. And these two careful planners have no idea how to remove their victim from the house, making all their planning totally useless.

Sorry, but it does not hold the water.

 

[DeeDee249]

So we have here two killers, who prepare their action carefully, wiretapping the phones and hacking the computers of their victims. But, these two meticulous criminals do not bring their own rope, ransom note, duct tape or garrotte. They don't even bring a friggin' flashlight with them. And these two careful planners have no idea how to remove their victim from the house, making all their planning totally useless.

Sorry, but it does not hold the water.

Not to mention, it can be PROVEN if their computers were actually hacked and phones were tapped. We know these did not happen.

 

[Anti-K]

Actually, I'd say the same CAN be said for the Ramseys. I fully believe they thought themselves exempt from scrutiny. They were, after all, victims in all of this (at least that's how they intended it to go).

I can see them thinking such a thing if they were innocent, but if they did actually commit and try to cover up this crime then I don’t see how they could not at least consider that their handwriting would be looked at.
...

AK

 

[Anti-K]

BBM. Wrong.

"A search of the house uncovered the legal pad — complete with a ‘practice’ ransom note addressed to Mr and Mrs Ramsey..."

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/a...net-Ramseys-death-finally-bring-answers-.html

I believe the story that you linked to is incorrect, although iirc this is also how the practice note was described in PMPT. Thomas (p. 31) and Douglas (The Cases That Haunt Us; p. 281) describe the practice note as being “Mr. and Mrs. I” where “I” is thought ot be the beginning of the letter R.
...

AK

 

[Anti-K]

What is your source of information for saying that the so-called practice note was not addressed to Mr and Mrs Ramsey? You must not be looking at the same information that I and many others have, because from what I understand that is exactly the way the author of the RN chose to start it at first before they changed their mind and write the actual RN. Or are you like Scarlett, not wanting to accept even the most basic evidence (like the pineapple in JB's stomach) because it goes against your own theories of what happened? I hope you are not one of those who say we cannot draw any conclusions from anything. We can draw conclusions, and the fact is that by saying what he did during the disposition, JR revealed something: That he knew the way the practice RN started. How did he know that? When did he know that? Don't just dig in your heels and deny there even was a practice RN, as Scarlett does with the pineapple. Only ostriches stick their head in the sand when presented with something they don't want to see.

My source is the Thomas book; p. 31:

<quote>
The case was breaking wide open on two different fronts. About the same time Ramsey found the body of his daughter, a detective discovered what would mark a turning point in the investigation, the existence of a possible practice ransom note in a tablet belonging to Patsy Ramsey.

<snip>
[Kithcart] flipped through the [notepad] bearing the word Patsy and, in the middle, noticed a page with a partial salutation written by a black felt-tip pen.

Mr. and Mrs. I

The single vertical line seemed as if it could be the downstroke that would start the capital letter R.
<unquote>

Another sources is Douglas/Olshaker&#8217;s The Cases That Haunt Us; p. 281:

<quote>
&#8220;As he was going through Patsy&#8217;s pad, Kithcart noticed something extraordinary, toward the middle of the tablet, a few words were written on a page in black, felt-tip pen: &#8220;Mr. and Mrs.,&#8221; along with a single downstroke that could have been the beginning of a capital R. the paper appeared the same as the one on which the ransom note was written. Apparently, this was a first draft, and after consideration, the writer had decided to address the note to Mr Ramsey only.
<unquote>
...

AK

 

[Hexe]

My source is the Thomas book; p. 31:

<quote>
The case was breaking wide open on two different fronts. About the same time Ramsey found the body of his daughter, a detective discovered what would mark a turning point in the investigation, the existence of a possible practice ransom note in a tablet belonging to Patsy Ramsey.

<snip>
[Kithcart] flipped through the [notepad] bearing the word Patsy and, in the middle, noticed a page with a partial salutation written by a black felt-tip pen.

Mr. and Mrs. I

The single vertical line seemed as if it could be the downstroke that would start the capital letter R.
<unquote>

Another sources is Douglas/Olshaker’s The Cases That Haunt Us; p. 281:

<quote>
“As he was going through Patsy’s pad, Kithcart noticed something extraordinary, toward the middle of the tablet, a few words were written on a page in black, felt-tip pen: “Mr. and Mrs.,” along with a single downstroke that could have been the beginning of a capital R. the paper appeared the same as the one on which the ransom note was written. Apparently, this was a first draft, and after consideration, the writer had decided to address the note to Mr Ramsey only.
<unquote>
...

AK

So there wasn't a full salutation, so what? Are we supposed to believe that the bored intruder started writing a letter to his friends? That could have been only an opening of the ransom note, nothing else. Adressed to Mr. and Mrs. Ramsey.

 

[Anyhoo]

My source is the Thomas book; p. 31:

<quote>
The case was breaking wide open on two different fronts. About the same time Ramsey found the body of his daughter, a detective discovered what would mark a turning point in the investigation, the existence of a possible practice ransom note in a tablet belonging to Patsy Ramsey.

<snip>
[Kithcart] flipped through the [notepad] bearing the word Patsy and, in the middle, noticed a page with a partial salutation written by a black felt-tip pen.

Mr. and Mrs. I

The single vertical line seemed as if it could be the downstroke that would start the capital letter R.
<unquote>

Another sources is Douglas/Olshaker’s The Cases That Haunt Us; p. 281:

<quote>
“As he was going through Patsy’s pad, Kithcart noticed something extraordinary, toward the middle of the tablet, a few words were written on a page in black, felt-tip pen: “Mr. and Mrs.,” along with a single downstroke that could have been the beginning of a capital R. the paper appeared the same as the one on which the ransom note was written. Apparently, this was a first draft, and after consideration, the writer had decided to address the note to Mr Ramsey only.
<unquote>
...

AK

You have me confused. How does what you quoted support your earlier statement that the practice RN does not start with "Mr. and Mrs. Ramsey"? Even though they did not finish the word "Ramsey", to me and others it is obvious they were writing that. In fact, John Ramsey himself confirmed that is what they were writing in his disposition testimony. Whatever point you are trying to make I have missed, so what are you trying to say?

 

[Mama2JML]

You have me confused. How does what you quoted support your earlier statement that the practice RN does not start with "Mr. and Mrs. Ramsey"? Even though they did not finish the word "Ramsey", to me and others it is obvious they were writing that. In fact, John Ramsey himself confirmed that is what they were writing in his disposition testimony. Whatever point you are trying to make I have missed, so what are you trying to say?

This is what he's trying to say:

What’s to explain? Mr Ramsey was wrong, but so are the posters who commented as neither note nor so-called practice note were addressed to Mr and Mrs Ramsey.
...

AK

...and he's right.

 

[Anyhoo]

This is what he's trying to say:

...and he's right.

What was Mr. Ramsey wrong about? About the practice ransom note starting with "Mr and Mrs Ramsey"? If so, why would he say that? How would he even know about the so-called practice ransom note? And even though the writer did not finish their sentence, it is what they intended to write that is important here. You don't want to admit this?

 

[TroyinTX]

John Ramsey wasn't simply "wrong." It was a slip of the most revealing kind. By the time he gave this interview, that ransom note had been reprinted and analyzed more times than imaginable. This was a KEY piece of evidence in HIS child's murder. I highly doubt he just simply "forgot" how the ransom note was addressed. He slipped. And it was very apparent what the "practice" ransom note was going to say in terms of its salutation.

 

[Hexe]

This is what he's trying to say:

...and he's right.

No, he's not. The practice ransom note started with "Mr. and Mrs. Ramsey" salutation, albeit unfinished. The finished one did not. John told that the ransom note was adressed to them both, him and Patsy. Now, if he was not aware of the practice note we can assume he made a mistake, that was one fat coincidence. Or it was not a coincidence at all...

 

[Anyhoo]

No, he's not. The practice ransom note started with "Mr. and Mrs. Ramsey" salutation, albeit unfinished. The finished one did not. John told that the ransom note was adressed to them both, him and Patsy. Now, if he was not aware of the practice note we can assume he made a mistake, that was one fat coincidence. Or it was not a coincidence at all...

That was certainly no coincidence. My question is: Did Mr. Ramsey actually say this on 12-26-96 or did he not say that and simply say he did when the disposition was taken? Of course we have no record of what was actually said on 12-26, but either way to deny the way the RN was previously being started is ludicrous to me, just as trying to deny the substance found in JB's stomach was the pineapple from the refrigerator is ludicrous when it was matched "down to the rind". People who want to question the most basic of evidence reveal they have an ulterior motive and agenda, that being to not accept anything which goes against their own theory.

 

[Anti-K]

It may well be true that the &#8220;l&#8221; was the beginning of the letter &#8220;R&#8221; and that this was the aborted beginning of &#8220;Ramsey;&#8221; I am not disputing that; but, just because we believe that the author was going to write Ramsey doesn&#8217;t mean that he did write Ramsey. In fact, he didn&#8217;t; he wrote &#8220;Mr. and Mrs. l&#8221;

Foreign Faction, Kolar; p. 93: &#8220;During his examination of Patsy Ramsey&#8217;s notepad, Kithcart made a startling discovery. As he thumbed through the pad, looking at the handwriting, he noted what appeared to be the start of another ransom note. The words started out at the top of the page, as the addressing of a name would be written, &#8216;Mr. and Mrs. l&#8217;&#8221;

Kolar, Thomas and Douglas all state that &#8220;Mr. and Mrs. l&#8221; was written on the so-called practice note. This very clearly supports my claim that the so-called practice note does not start with "Mr. and Mrs. Ramsey;" it starts with, &#8220;Mr. and Mrs. l&#8221;

These quotes from Kolar, Thomas and Douglas also support my claim that &#8220;Mr Ramsey was wrong, but so are the posters who commented as neither note nor so-called practice note were addressed to Mr and Mrs Ramsey.&#8221;

Mr Ramsey made the statement in question in 2001. Even I knew about the so-called practice note, and how it started, in 2001.
....

AK

 

[Anti-K]

This is from Mr Ramsey&#8217;s deposition in the Wolf lawsuit:
Q. When you were looking at the ransom note, was there anything in the language of the ransom note that struck you as peculiar?

A. The whole thing was peculiar. We were addressed as "Mr. and Mrs. Ramsey," and then they switched to "John" personally.

Mr Ramsey is wrong, the ransom note starts &#8220;Mr. Ramsey.&#8221; He could not have been &#8220;accidentally&#8221; referring to the so-called practice note as it starts with &#8220;Mr. and Mrs. l&#8221;

...

I don&#8217;t know when this first became public knowledge, but my Thomas book is a First Edition: April 2000. That&#8217;s 18 months before Mr Ramsey&#8217;s deposition.
...

AK

 

[Hexe]

This is from Mr Ramsey’s deposition in the Wolf lawsuit:
Q. When you were looking at the ransom note, was there anything in the language of the ransom note that struck you as peculiar?

A. The whole thing was peculiar. We were addressed as "Mr. and Mrs. Ramsey," and then they switched to "John" personally.

Mr Ramsey is wrong, the ransom note starts “Mr. Ramsey.” He could not have been “accidentally” referring to the so-called practice note as it starts with “Mr. and Mrs. l”

What was intended to be "Mr. And Mrs. Ramsay". It's unfinished, not adressed to mysterious Mr. and Mrs I. :facepalm:

 

[cherisa]

What was intended to be "Mr. And Mrs. Ramsay". It's unfinished, not adressed to mysterious Mr. and Mrs I. :facepalm:

However, it's not a fact. It's Thomas and Koler's opinion, that is was a so called practice note, right? May not have even been that. We don't know for sure, but we can speculate and speculate we will.

 

[Mama2JML]

This is from Mr Ramsey’s deposition in the Wolf lawsuit:
Q. When you were looking at the ransom note, was there anything in the language of the ransom note that struck you as peculiar?

A. The whole thing was peculiar. We were addressed as "Mr. and Mrs. Ramsey," and then they switched to "John" personally.

Mr Ramsey is wrong, the ransom note starts “Mr. Ramsey.” He could not have been “accidentally” referring to the so-called practice note as it starts with “Mr. and Mrs. l”

...

I don’t know when this first became public knowledge, but my Thomas book is a First Edition: April 2000. That’s 18 months before Mr Ramsey’s deposition.
...

AK

BBM

An article, 'Practice' note found, was published in the 01.08.97 issue of the Daily Camera.