Why? What was the motive?

[cami]

Sorry but that book sounds like it has zero credibility to me. I am all for psychoanalysis but it sounds like this guy sees some telltale sign in every syllable. That sounds like horse feces to me. Besides, there is absolutely zero evidence that John Ramsey ever molested his daughter.

It's Dr. Hodges isn't it? He wrote, Who will Speak for JonBenet as well. It's psycholinguistics, it's called. I found it fascinating. I don't know how much I agree with it because I am a layperson but it is fascinating to read.

Oh I meant to ask Beesy and I quoted Goody by mistake.

 

[beesy]

It's Dr. Hodges isn't it? He wrote, Who will Speak for JonBenet as well. It's psycholinguistics, it's called. I found it fascinating. I don't know how much I agree with it because I am a layperson but it is fascinating to read.

Oh I meant to ask Beesy and I quoted Goody by mistake.

The book I have is by Dr. Hodges as well. It's the first one he did on the subject, A Mother Gone Bad I'm fascinated with it too. I think it's more the idea of it than the reality though. I love reverse speech too. I like to think 'ooh suppose that's really true"? I know there are forensic linguists who analyze a person's speech pattern, but what Dr. Hodges is doing isn't the same thing.

 

[Goody]

In the books they all state how Darlie was suicidal on May 3rd of that same year she murdered her children. Then 2 days later she got her monthly cycle. Well my question today is suppose she was just plain ole PMSing on June 6th? It's close to the last monthly within a few days and maybe her cycles weren't regular yet since baby Drake.

I am currently reading 'Are You There Alone' Andrea Yates story. One of the things they mention with her is not just PPD (Post-Partum Depression) but PPP (Post-Partum Pyhscosis). Is it possible that Darlie was going thru the same thing maybe not as pyhcatic level as Andrea. (Good god that woman was whacked, total nut bar.) That fact that she wanted more children.:waitasec: Just joking.

It is true Andrea had PPP. She was really, really sick. But Darlie clearly did not. I do think Darlie suffered from PPD though, and the diet pills could have really irritated that condition. It wouldn't surprise me to learn that she had PMS or hormonal troubles that really rattled her. How it all played into what happened that night, we don't know because she hasn't told us what did happen. Was she anger and lost control of her temper, then had to cover up to avoid prosecution? Or was it something she planned, albeit haphazardly, for reasons unknown? It is hard to say without knowing all the facts.

Anyway just wanted to thro another thought. And again I'm sure you guys have talked this one to death but like I stated in another thread, I'm just plum lazy to take a hike thru past posts.

S

That's cool. One us is usually lurking about and can answer questions.

 

[cami]

I think I have figured it out, folks. I was answering a post at CTV when suddenly it was clear as a bell. Right there in front of me all along, but I couldn't quite grasp it.

Here's the gist of it:
Darlie had been on diet pills since March, and not just any diet pills. It was FenPhen which is not recommended for people who only have 20 pounds to lose (like Darlie) and not recommended to be taken for over a month at a time (Darlie was on it for approx 3 months). I think it is safe to assume that it was interferring with her sleep which is why the baby's movements in the crib kept waking her up. On the other hand, it should have kept her from going into a deep sleep, which means she should have easily heard the intruder(s) attack the kids, who were sleeping only a couple of feet from her.

In her police statement she admitted to feeling depressed that night and said that she and Darin had words. How that evolves into a wicked argument, I am not sure. I personally have not believed there was any serious talk of separation. I have thought that was just a last ditch rescue effort the defense had talked Darin into for legal purposes. But now I am thinking I was wrong about that.

Darlie's bestfriend, Basia, testified that Darlie told her she was afraid if they did separate, Darin's mother would take her kids away from her, so my guess is that was Darin's threat that he hung over her head when she threatened to leave him. I also suspect that Sarilda probably critcized Darlie's parenting skills over the years, and maybe there was even a time when they had a little spat and the threat became more real. If not, i can't imagine Darlie taking the threat seriously, so something must have happened to put that fear into her. And according to Basia, it was there alright.

That tells me that Darlie probably felt trapped, unable to leave him, and if she were really, really angry with him over his inability to collect from those who owed him so that she could go on her trips, among other things, she might have reared up with an ultimatum or threat to leave that was countered by a reinforcement of the threat to take the kids (and make her pay child support. Talk about an equalizer!)

So now we have a very angry Darlie, nervous and rattled by a dangerous diet drug (it was taken off the market for several years) feeling trapped and rebellious, suffering from depression with her back up against the wall. Darlie and Darin both have big egos which is pretty obvious by their testimonies and the lifestyle they chose. It is easy to see them in a power struggle. Plus all these things coming together at once could have pushed her into an emotional corner and made her come out fighting. "I'll show him. If he thinks he can trap me like this, I will take his power away him. He can't hold the kids over my head if they don't exist anymore."

That is over simplified but you can surely get the feel of the rage that might have been churning around in her. I don't think it was the first time she thought of it. I think she'd thought of it whenever he made her feel he was the one in control and there was nothing she could do about it. I think her thinking about it was part of the PPD she suffered with within the last six months. Her suicide attempt was her last effort at getting Darin's attention, in getting him to understand he really really needed to help her more. But he didn't get it and no sooner did the moment pass than he was back to life as usual, doing his thing and abandoning her (in her mind), leaving all the work at home up to her. (I don't think she appreciated the work he did that paid for all she had. I think she felt he was weak and not aggressive/ambitious enough.)

I think they both saw the kids as a couple of anchors around their necks preventing them from the lifestyle they felt they deserved. But the kids also became weapons that the parents used against each other. Many feuding parents do that but these took it to the extreme, I think.

Anyway, their egos collided that night in a big power struggle and she simply decided to take the power he held over her away from him by erasing the boys. Drake might have been killed too if he had been downstairs with her. And that might also explain why Darin feels so guilty about it. I just don't know though if it explains why he is still tied to her almost ten years later. That is a bit hard to swallow.

Anyway she wouldn't be the first woman to kill her children to prevent someone else from raising them, esp her ex. With Darlie and Darin though I think it was more about power and control than it was prevention. If she hadn't been arrested, she could have walked away but I don't think that is what she really wanted. I think what she really wanted was to control Darin, to take away the control she felt he had over her. Once the kids were gone, she would have the power in the relationship, not Darin. And not his mother.

So what do you think? Is this why she did it?

Goody, the more I read this, the more I believe you are spot on with your evaluation.

 

[cami]

The book I have is by Dr. Hodges as well. It's the first one he did on the subject, A Mother Gone Bad I'm fascinated with it too. I think it's more the idea of it than the reality though. I love reverse speech too. I like to think 'ooh suppose that's really true"? I know there are forensic linguists who analyze a person's speech pattern, but what Dr. Hodges is doing isn't the same thing.

Oh I know he's not analyzing a speech pattern, he's using the ransom note to try and associate the subconscious thoughts to the written word, freudian slips in print if you will --"thoughtprints" as he calls them. Basically, he's saying that Patsy wrote the note and her subconscience is prompting her to leave clues in the note that she committed the crime and why. I found it very interesting, pretty bizarre though. All those strange associations with sex.

ooops note to self: read the entire thread before posting.

 

[beesy]

Oh I know he's not analyzing a speech pattern, he's using the ransom note to try and associate the subconscious thoughts to the written word, freudian slips in print if you will --"thoughtprints" as he calls them. Basically, he's saying that Patsy wrote the note and her subconscience is prompting her to leave clues in the note that she committed the crime and why. I found it very interesting, pretty bizarre though. All those strange associations with sex.

ooops note to self: read the entire thread before posting.

Yepper, that sometimes helps. Glad you figured it out so I didn't have to explain all of THAT again.

 

[deanws]

ANDREA YATES HUSBAND SHOULD BE BEHHIND BARS RIGHT ALONG WITH HER.. sorry-- i know ot..

I think he does too. That guy is a loser.

 

[Goody]

Oh I know he's not analyzing a speech pattern, he's using the ransom note to try and associate the subconscious thoughts to the written word, freudian slips in print if you will --"thoughtprints" as he calls them. Basically, he's saying that Patsy wrote the note and her subconscience is prompting her to leave clues in the note that she committed the crime and why. I found it very interesting, pretty bizarre though. All those strange associations with sex.

ooops note to self: read the entire thread before posting.

I think the freudian slips probably do occur but I am not so sure I buy the way he points them out. From what you guys say, he takes some pretty big leaps. I think an amateur would make little mistakes that stand out to police, but I don't think the writer of that note wanted to be caught, etc. Am I making any sense?

 

[dasgal]

There was no motive. It was a tantrum.

 

[j2mirish]

There was no motive. It was a tantrum.

oh my dasgal---- what a PERFECT --PERFECT statement- that truly fits.

 

[HeartofTexas]

That ransom note is probably one of the most laughable things I've ever read. Some writers described it as the "War and Peace" of ransom notes, due to its extreme length. And I love "the small foreign faction" part... what group refers to itself as a small foreign faction? And what foreign faction considers itself small? And please tell me, if it was a foreign faction, how they planned to divvy up $119,000 between all of the members. Why not ask for a million or so, in order for all of the "faction" to get a reasonable amount of money. There's so much wrong with the ransom note that it boggles the imagination. What ransom note writer would bother to refer to something as an "attache" case... or mention who it liked and who it didn't. And who, for goodness sake, would take the time to sit down in someone else's house to write such a lengthy note? Why not just quickly scribble "give me a million or I'll kill your daughter". And just one last question... why would someone write such an elaborate ransom note ONLY to forget to take the child they're supposedly kidnapping? The whole thing is beyond preposterous.

 

[beesy]

I think the freudian slips probably do occur but I am not so sure I buy the way he points them out. From what you guys say, he takes some pretty big leaps. I think an amateur would make little mistakes that stand out to police, but I don't think the writer of that note wanted to be caught, etc. Am I making any sense?

I think Patsy made a really big slip-up in an interview. I can't remember which interview it's in, but she said something like "there are only 2 people on this earth who know who did this"....pause...."and that's the killer and someone he might have told". That is a strange statement. Think about it: wouldn't you just say "only the killer knows"? She said "only 2 people", like maybe John and her? She seemed to catch herself, smoothly though, and added "someone he might have told". So why does she only say 2 people? The killer could have told 50 people, why would she think the killer has only told 1 person....that's always troubled me

 

[beesy]

That ransom note is probably one of the most laughable things I've ever read. Some writers described it as the "War and Peace" of ransom notes, due to its extreme length

The most ridiculous ransom letter known to mankind. Wasn't it 4 or 5 pages? Kidnapper surely took a great risk sitting around writing that note on some of Patsy's personal stationary. Hodges even pointed out that the margins are correct, 4 spaces to the left. The punctuation is all correct. And we've talked about misspellings.

.

And I love "the small foreign faction" part... what group refers to itself as a small foreign faction? And what foreign faction considers itself small? And please tell me, if it was a foreign faction, how they planned to divvy up $119,000 between all of the members. Why not ask for a million or so, in order for all of the "faction" to get a reasonable amount of money. There's so much wrong with the ransom note that it boggles the imagination.

It's crazy. What's interesting to me is why did Patsy choose that amount of money. She knew, of course, that was John's xmas bonus. Was she trying to direct LE to someone he closely worked with?
[

QUOTE]What ransom note writer would bother to refer to something as an "attache" case... or mention who it liked and who it didn't. And who, for goodness sake, would take the time to sit down in someone else's house to write such a lengthy note? Why not just quickly scribble "give me a million or I'll kill your daughter"

Typically a kidnapper will say something like "we will contact you later to discuss our demands". This kidnapper already mentioned putting the money in an attache case, which is, like you said, in and of itself stupid. I think it's important also that killer points out they like the company, but don't like some of the things John has done. I see this as possibly they were trying not to make a bad mark on the business(bussiness)

, which might cause some problems for the company, i.e. their income.

And just one last question... why would someone write such an elaborate ransom note ONLY to forget to take the child they're supposedly kidnapping? The whole thing is beyond preposterous

"Hey Fred, ever get the feeling you've forgotten something, like leaving the coffee pot on, or maybe that little girl we killed"
"Yeah, Buddy, but I double-checked everything, we're cool."

 

[Goody]

There was no motive. It was a tantrum.

Are you talking about Darlie? If so, I can't say I am ready to accept that theory, but I do agree that it is certainly a possibility. If it was a tantrum and Darin turned around and supported her thru it anyway, it paints a pretty shallow pic of both of them.

 

[Goody]

That ransom note is probably one of the most laughable things I've ever read. Some writers described it as the "War and Peace" of ransom notes, due to its extreme length. And I love "the small foreign faction" part... what group refers to itself as a small foreign faction? And what foreign faction considers itself small? And please tell me, if it was a foreign faction, how they planned to divvy up $119,000 between all of the members. Why not ask for a million or so, in order for all of the "faction" to get a reasonable amount of money. There's so much wrong with the ransom note that it boggles the imagination. What ransom note writer would bother to refer to something as an "attache" case... or mention who it liked and who it didn't. And who, for goodness sake, would take the time to sit down in someone else's house to write such a lengthy note? Why not just quickly scribble "give me a million or I'll kill your daughter". And just one last question... why would someone write such an elaborate ransom note ONLY to forget to take the child they're supposedly kidnapping? The whole thing is beyond preposterous.

You are sooooooo right, Heart. A dead body is better than no victim at all. It makes no sense to spend all that time creating so much drama and then dropping it just because the victim dies before he can get her out of the house. Sounds more like the plot in an old gothic novel.

 

[Goody]

I think Patsy made a really big slip-up in an interview. I can't remember which interview it's in, but she said something like "there are only 2 people on this earth who know who did this"....pause...."and that's the killer and someone he might have told". That is a strange statement. Think about it: wouldn't you just say "only the killer knows"? She said "only 2 people", like maybe John and her? She seemed to catch herself, smoothly though, and added "someone he might have told". So why does she only say 2 people? The killer could have told 50 people, why would she think the killer has only told 1 person....that's always troubled mehttp://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/39.gif

Yep, that is a good one, bees, and she did cover it well, took the sting out of it, so to speak. But it still stands out as one of the oddities that go against her.

 

[Goody]

. It's crazy. What's interesting to me is why did Patsy choose tht amount of money. She knew, of course, that was John's xmas bonus. Was she trying to direct LE to someone he closely worked with?
[Typically a kidnapper will say something like "we will contact you later to discuss our demands". This kidnapper already mentioned putting the money in an attache case, which is, like you said, in and of itself stupid. I think it's important also that killer points out they like the company, but don't like some of the things John has done. I see this as possibly they were trying not to make a bad mark on the business(bussiness)http://us.i1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/i/mesg/emoticons7/71.gif, which might cause some problems for the company, i.e. their income.
"Hey Fred, ever get the feeling you've forgotten something, like leaving the coffee pot on, or maybe that little girl we killed"
"Yeah, Buddy, but I double-checked everything, we're cool."

I think they wanted to point the finger at someone from John's work. It would be harder to trace all his business associates, former employees, etc than their personal lives. And they wanted the attention directed away from them. What better way to do that than create an unknown business enemy? Someone close enough to know what his bonus was, someone motivated to play head games with him, etc. But it read like a Tom Clancy novel...isn't he the one who does those foreign intrigue, spy thrillers??

 

[dasgal]

Are you talking about Darlie? If so, I can't say I am ready to accept that theory, but I do agree that it is certainly a possibility. If it was a tantrum and Darin turned around and supported her thru it anyway, it paints a pretty shallow pic of both of them.

Hi Goody,
Yes, I was talking about Darlie. After looking at this thing for nearly a decade, and very intensly so for half or more of that, it is the only thing that DOES fit. At least in my opinion.

 

[Goody]

Hi Goody,
Yes, I was talking about Darlie. After looking at this thing for nearly a decade, and very intensly so for half or more of that, it is the only thing that DOES fit. At least in my opinion.

I've looked at it a couple of ways. One, that she lost her temper and killed Devon, then was stuck with trying to figure out how to cover it up.

Or, two, it was planned in advance, just not very well. That could encompass your tantrum or it could include both parents, maybe put new meaning in the word entreapeneur.

I am still at the drawing board though. Nothing fits ALL of the evidence and just about anything you can think up seems to fit at least some of it. The only thing I am sure of is that Darlie is guilty of this crime. I don't know where Darin fits in or why (his behavior afterwards is also very suspicious) and I don't know what Dana knows. Nor Mercedes, who I truly wish would speak up truthfully.

 

[dasgal]

I'm curious as to why you think she killed Devon in a tantrum.....