Who killed JonBenet Ramsay?
The Complete Mystery of Madeleine McCann™ :: Other Crimes and Mysteries :: Crime, corruption and conspiracy theories
Page 1 of 9 • Share
Page 1 of 9 • 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 
Who killed JonBenet Ramsay?
by Guest 11.07.10 12:25
As this case is strikingly similar to the Madeleine case it may be interesting to take a good look and discuss this.
JonBenét Ramsey
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaJump to: navigation, search
JonBenét Ramsey
Born JonBenét Patricia Ramsey
August 6, 1990(1990-08-06)
Atlanta, Georgia, U.S.A.
Died December 25, 1996 (aged 6)
Boulder, Colorado, U.S.A.
Resting place Saint James Episcopal Cemetery
Marietta, Georgia, U.S.A.
33°57′18″N 84°33′23″W / 33.95501°N 84.55637°W / 33.95501; -84.55637
Parents Patsy and John Ramsey
JonBenét Patricia Ramsey (August 6, 1990 – December 25, 1996) was an American child whose murder at age 6 attracted extensive media coverage. Such coverage often focused on her participation in child beauty pageants, her parents' affluence and various unusual aspects of the case as well as questions regarding police handling of the case. She was found dead in the basement of her parents' home in Boulder, Colorado, nearly eight hours after she was reported missing. The case is notable for both its longevity and the media interest it has generated. After several grand jury hearings, the case is still unsolved. In February 2009, the Boulder Police Department took the case back from the district attorney and re-opened the investigation.[1]
Contents [hide]
1 Life
2 Murder case
2.1 Police investigation
2.2 Crime scene
2.3 Later developments
2.3.1 Letter from District Attorney
2.3.2 New District Attorney
3 Suspicion
4 Defamation lawsuits
5 References
6 External links
[edit] Life
JonBenét Ramsey was born in Atlanta, Georgia, but the family relocated when she was nine months old. Her first name is a blend of her father's first and middle names, John Bennett; her middle name is the first name of her mother, the late Patricia "Patsy" Ramsey. JonBenét was enrolled by her mother in a variety of different beauty pageants in several states. Patricia Ramsey funded some of the contests in which JonBenét participated, rock climbing, violin lessons and other activities.
JonBenét is buried in Saint James Episcopal Cemetery in Marietta, Georgia, next to her mother who died of cancer in 2006, and her half-sister Elizabeth Pasch Ramsey, who died in a 1992 car accident at the age of 22.
[edit] Murder case
Text of the ransom note
Mr. Ramsey
Listen carefully! We are a group of individuals that represent a small foreign faction. We do respect your bussiness [sic] but not the country that it serves. At this time we have your daughter in our posession [sic]. She is safe and unharmed and if you want her to see 1997, you must follow our instructions to the letter.
You will withdraw $118,000.00 from your account. $100,000 will be in $100 bills and the remaining $18,000 in $20 bills. Make sure that you bring an adequate size attache to the bank. When you get home you will put the money in a brown paper bag. I will call you between 8 and 10 am tomorrow to instruct you on delivery. The delivery will be exhausting so I advise you to be rested. If we monitor you getting the money early, we might call you early to arrange an earlier delivery of the money and hence a [sic] earlier delivery pick-up of your daughter.
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. Speaking to anyone about your situation, such as Police, F.B.I., etc., will result in your daughter being beheaded. If we catch you talking to a stray dog, she dies. If you alert bank authorities, she dies. If the money is in any way marked or tampered with, she dies. You will be scanned for electronic devices and if any are found, she dies. You can try to deceive us but be warned that we are familiar with law enforcement countermeasures and tactics. You stand a 99% chance of killing your daughter if you try to out smart [sic] us. Follow our instructions and you stand a 100% chance of getting her back. You and your family are under constant scrutiny as well as the authorities. Don't try to grow a brain John. You are not the only fat cat around so don't think that killing will be difficult. Don't underestimate us John. Use that good southern common sense of yours. It is up to you now John!
Victory!
S.B.T.C.
Original textAccording to the testimony of Patsy Ramsey, on December 26, 1996, she discovered her daughter missing after finding a two and a half-page ransom note on the kitchen staircase, demanding $118,000 for the safe return of her daughter, which was almost the exact value of a bonus her husband received earlier that year.[1] Despite specific instructions in the ransom note that police and friends not be contacted, she telephoned the police and called family and friends. The local police conducted a cursory search of the house but did not find any obvious signs of a break-in or forced entry. The note suggested that the ransom collection would be monitored and JonBenét would be returned as soon as the money was obtained. John Ramsey made arrangements for the availability of the ransom, which a friend, John Fernie, picked up that morning from a local bank.
[edit] Police investigation
In the afternoon of the same day, Boulder Police Detective Linda Arndt asked Fleet White, a friend of the Ramseys, to take John Ramsey and search the house for "anything unusual."[2] John Ramsey and two of his friends started their search in the basement. After first searching the bathroom and "train room", the two went to a "wine cellar" room where Ramsey found his daughter's body covered in a white blanket. She was also found with a nylon cord around her neck, her wrists tied above her head, and duct tape covering her mouth.[2]
The police were later claimed by observers to have made several critical mistakes in the investigation, such as not sealing off the crime scene and allowing friends and family in and out of the house once a kidnapping was reported.[2]
Critics of the investigation have since claimed that officers also did not sufficiently attempt to gather forensic evidence before or after JonBenét's body was found, possibly because they immediately suspected the Ramseys in the killing.[2] Some officers holding these suspicions reported them to local media, who began reporting on January 1 that the assistant district attorney thought "it's not adding up"; the fact that the body of the girl was found in her own home was considered highly suspicious by the investigating officers.[2] The results of the autopsy revealed that JonBenét was killed by strangulation and a skull fracture. A garrote made from a length of tweed cord and the broken handle of a paintbrush had been used to strangle her; her skull had suffered severe blunt trauma; there was no evidence of conventional rape, although sexual assault could not be ruled out. The official cause of death was asphyxiation due to strangulation associated with craniocerebral trauma.
[edit] Crime scene
The bristle end of the paint brush was found in a tub of Patsy Ramsey's art supplies, but the bottom third was never located despite extensive searching of the house by law enforcement in subsequent days.[3] Experts noted that the construction of the garrote required a special knowledge of knots. Autopsy also revealed that JonBenét had eaten pineapple only a few hours before the murder.[4] Photographs of the home, taken the day JonBenét's body was found, show a bowl of pineapple on the kitchen table with a spoon in it,[4] and police reported finding Patsy's and JonBenet's nine-year-old brother Burke Ramsey's fingerprints on it.[5] However, both Patsy and John claim not to remember putting this bowl on the table or feeding pineapple to JonBenét.[4][5] (The Ramseys had always maintained that Burke had slept through the entire episode, until awakened several hours after the police arrived.) While it was reported that no footprints led to the house on snow-covered ground, other reporters found that snow around the doors of the house was cleared away.[6] Police reported no signs of forced entry, although a basement window that had been broken and left unsecured before Christmas, along with other open doors, were not reported to the public until a year later.[6]
[edit] Later developments
In December 2003, forensic investigators extracted enough material from a mixed blood sample found on JonBenét's underwear to establish a DNA profile.[7] The DNA belongs to an unknown male. The DNA was submitted to the FBI's Combined DNA Index System (CODIS), a database containing more than 1.6 million DNA profiles, mainly from convicted felons. The sample has yet to find a match in the database, although it continues to be checked for partial matches on a weekly basis, as are all unmatched samples.[citation needed]
Later investigations also discovered that there were more than 100 burglaries in the Ramseys' neighborhood in the months before JonBenét's murder, and that 38 registered sex offenders were living within a two-mile (3 km) radius of the Ramseys' home—an area that encompasses half the population of the city of Boulder—but that none of the sex offenders had any involvement in the murder.[8]
On August 16, 2006, 41-year-old John Mark Karr, a former schoolteacher, confessed to the murder while being held on child pornography charges from Sonoma County, California. Authorities reportedly tracked him down using the Internet after he sent e-mails regarding the Ramsey case to Michael Tracey, a journalism professor at the University of Colorado.[9] Once apprehended, he confessed to being with JonBenét when she died, stating that her death was an accident. When asked if he was innocent, he responded, "No."
However, Karr's DNA did not match that found on JonBenét Ramsey's body. On August 28, 2006, prosecutors announced that no charges would be filed against him for the murder of JonBenét Ramsey.[10][11][12] In early December 2006, Department of Homeland Security officials reported that federal investigators were continuing to explore whether Karr had been a possible accomplice in the killing.
No evidence has ever come to light that placed the then-married Alabama resident Karr near Boulder during the Christmas 1996 crime. Evidence linking Karr to the killing is highly circumstantial in nature. For instance, handwriting samples taken from Karr were said to match the ransom note. In particular, his technique for writing the letters E, T and M were described by the media as being very rare.
Brought in on the case in the aftermath, economist and crisis consultant Randall Bell notes in his book Strategy 360:
“ We might never know if the Ramsey parents were involved in their daughter's murder because of the negligent contamination of the crime scene. Likewise, if John and Patsy Ramsey were not involved, they have suffered irreparable harm from this investigation.[13] ”
[edit] Letter from District Attorney
On July 9, 2008, the Boulder District Attorney's office announced that as a result of newly developed DNA sampling and testing techniques, the Ramsey family members are no longer considered suspects in the case.[14][15] In light of the new DNA evidence, Boulder County District Attorney Mary Lacy gave a letter[16] to John Ramsey the same day, officially apologizing to the Ramsey family:
"This new scientific evidence convinces us...to state that we do not consider your immediate family, including you, your wife, Patsy, and your son, Burke, to be under any suspicion in the commission of this crime.
... The match of Male DNA on two separate items of clothing worn by the victim at the time of the murder makes it clear to us that an unknown male handled these items. There is no innocent explanation for its incriminating presence at three sites on these two different items of clothing that JonBenét was wearing at the time of her murder. ... To the extent that we may have contributed in any way to the public perception that you might have been involved in this crime, I am deeply sorry. No innocent person should have to endure such an extensive trial in the court of public opinion, especially when public officials have not had sufficient evidence to initiate a trial in a court of law. ... We intend in the future to treat you as the victims of this crime, with the sympathy due you because of the horrific loss you suffered. ... I am aware that there will be those who will choose to continue to differ with our conclusion. But DNA is very often the most reliable forensic evidence we can hope to find and we rely on it often to bring to justice those who have committed crimes. I am very comfortable that our conclusion that this evidence has vindicated your family is based firmly on all of the evidence, ..." [16][17]
[edit] New District Attorney
In January 2009 Stan Garnett, the new Boulder County D.A., stated he planned to take a fresh look at the case. On February 2, 2009, Boulder police Chief Mark Beckner announced that Garnett was turning the case over to his agency, and that his team would resume investigating the homicide. "Some cases never get solved, but some do," Beckner said. "And you can't give up."[1]
[edit] Suspicion
Case speculation by experts, media and the parents has supported different hypotheses. For a long time, the local police supported the hypothesis that her mother Patricia Ramsey injured her child in a fit of rage after the girl had wet her bed on the same night, and then proceeded to kill her either in rage or to cover up the original injury. According to a Colorado Bureau of Investigation report, "There are indications that the author of the ransom note is Patricia Ramsey," but they could not definitely prove this assertion.[18]
Another hypothesis was that John Ramsey had been sexually abusing his daughter and murdered her as a cover. The Ramseys' son Burke, who was nine at the time of JonBenét's death, was also targeted by speculation, and asked to testify at the grand jury hearing.[19] In 1999, the Governor of Colorado, Bill Owens, told the parents of JonBenét Ramsey to "quit hiding behind their attorneys, quit hiding behind their PR firm."[20] Police suspicions were initially concentrated almost exclusively on the members of the Ramsey family, although the girl's parents had no prior signs of aggression in the public record.
The Ramseys have consistently held that the crime was committed by an intruder. They hired John E. Douglas, former head of the FBI's Behavioral Science Unit, to examine the case. While retained by the Ramsey family, he concluded that the Ramseys were not involved in the murder. He also concluded that it was unlikely that anyone would resolve the case. He detailed his arguments in his 2001 book, The Cases That Haunt Us. Lou Smit, a seasoned detective who came out of retirement to assist Boulder authorities with the case in early 1997, originally suspected the parents, but after assessing all the evidence that had been collected, also concluded that an intruder had committed the crime.[21] While no longer an official investigator on the case, Smit continues to work on it.
With such contradictory evidence, a grand jury failed to indict the Ramseys or anyone else in the murder of JonBenét. Not long after the murder, the parents moved to a new home in Atlanta. Two of the lead investigators in the case resigned, one because he believed that the investigation had incompetently overlooked the intruder hypothesis, and the other because he believed that the investigation had failed to successfully prosecute the Ramseys.[3] Even so, remaining investigators are still trying to identify a possible suspect. Patricia "Patsy" Ramsey died after a battle with ovarian cancer on June 24, 2006, at the age of 49.
[edit] Defamation lawsuits
Several defamation lawsuits have ensued since JonBenét's murder. Lin Wood was the plaintiff's attorney for John and Patsy Ramsey and their son Burke, and has prosecuted defamation claims on their behalf against St. Martin's Press, Time, Inc., The Fox News Channel, American Media, Inc., Star, The Globe, Court TV and The New York Post. John and Patsy Ramsey were also sued in two separate defamation lawsuits arising from the publication of their book, The Death of Innocence, brought by two individuals named in the book as having been investigated by Boulder police as suspects in JonBenét's murder. The Ramseys were defended in those lawsuits by Lin Wood and three other Atlanta attorneys, James C. Rawls, Eric P. Schroeder, and S. Derek Bauer, who obtained dismissal of both lawsuits including an in-depth decision by U.S. District Court Judge Julie Carnes that the evidence in the murder case overwhelmingly pointed to an intruder having committed the crime.[citation needed]
In November 2006, Rod Westmoreland, a friend of JonBenét Ramsey's father, filed a defamation suit[22] against Keith Greer, who posted a message on an Internet forum using the pseudonym "undertheradar". Greer had accused Westmoreland of participating in the kidnapping and murder.[23] Greer has defended his statement.[24]
[edit] References
1.^ a b c "Boulder police take back Ramsey case", Colorado Daily, February 2, 2009
2.^ a b c d e "Murder of JonBenét Ramsey". Tru TV Crime Library. http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/notorious_murders/famous/ramsey/index_1b.html. Retrieved 2008-07-09.
3.^ a b JonBenét: Anatomy of a Cold Case - Court TV
4.^ a b c Hickey, Eric. Encyclopedia of Murder and Violent Crime.
5.^ a b "Searching: The Interrogation Tapes". 48 Hours (CBS News). http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/10/01/48hours/main523875.shtml. Retrieved 2008-07-11.
6.^ a b "Murder of JonBenét Ramsey". Tru TV Crime Library. http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/notorious_murders/famous/ramsey/evidence_2.html. Retrieved 2008-07-09.
7.^ JonBenet: DNA Rules Out Parents, Will New Evidence Lead To A Break In This Murder Case? - CBS News
8.^ Erin Moriarty, JonBenét: DNA Rules Out Parents, 26 March 2005.
9.^ "No Forensic Evidence Currently Links John Karr to JonBenét Murder". Crime Library. August 17, 2006. http://www.crimelibrary.com/news/original/0806/1703_ramsey_arrest_john_karr.html.
10.^ No DNA match, no JonBenet charges
11.^ "not the source of the DNA found"
12.^ D.A.'s Motion to Quash Arrest Warrant
13.^ Bell, Randall. Strategy 360. http://www.Strategy360.com.
14.^ Mary T. Lacy, District Attorney (2008-07-09). "Ramsey Press Release". District Attorney's Office, Twentieth Judicial District, Boulder, Colorado. http://www.bouldercounty.org/newsroom/templates/?a=1256&z=13. Retrieved 2008-07-09.
15.^ "New DNA samples clear family in JonBenet Ramsey case". USA Today. 2008-07-08. http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2008/07/report-new-dna.html. Retrieved 2009-07-23.
16.^ a b Mary T. Lacy, District Attorney (2008-07-09). "Letter from DA to John Ramsey" (PDF). District Attorney's Office, Twentieth Judicial District, Boulder, Colorado. http://www.bouldercounty.org/newsroom/articlefiles/1256-Letter_to_John_Ramsey.pdf. Retrieved 2008-07-09.
17.^ http://www.9news.com/pdfs/ramseyDA.pdf
18.^ http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=875&dat=19970904&id=SdQLAAAAIBAJ&sjid=M1YDAAAAIBAJ&pg=6638,205639
19.^ The JonBenet Ramsey Investigation
20.^ Warning on JonBenet speculation
21.^ Rocky Mountain News article
22.^ Man Sues Over JonBenet Murder Claim - November 9, 2006
23.^ JonBenet Ramsey Case Encyclopedia wiki / Legal Issues Surrounding JBR Case
24.^ JonBenet Ramsey Case Encyclopedia wiki / undrtheradar biosketch
[edit] External links
Colorado portal
Biography portal
RockyMountainNews.com - Exclusive interviews, one of the largest archives of JonBenét Ramsey coverage in the world
Complete Ramsey Case File from "Court TV"
Denver AM 670 KLTT Talk Show Case Theory
DenverPost's evidence list linking Patsy Ramsey
JonBenet - Crime Library
The Smoking Gun - JonBenet Ramsey Case Documents
JonBenét Ramsey at Find a Grave
Crime Magazine: The Murder of JonBenét Ramsey
I have recently found this which is very interesting: the actual ransom note, and comments on it
Statement Analysis
by Mark McClish
JonBenet Ramsey Ransom Note
Posted July 9, 2001
Click here for an update on this case.
A key piece of evidence in solving this murder is the ransom note. The police as well as the Ramseys believe that whoever wrote the note is probably the killer. If the police can match the handwriting in the ransom note to a suspect's handwriting, the case is solved. The problem has been they have not found a match. Even without a positive match, the ransom note is still the key to solving this crime.
Using Statement Analysis we can examine this ransom note and determine if it is a legitimate ransom note. Was it the intention of the writer to extort money from the Ramseys, or was the note written as a ploy after JonBenet was killed? Determining the veracity of the ransom note is important. If the note is legitimate, then we know we have a kidnapping that went bad. This would exclude the Ramseys as possible suspects. Why would they kidnap their own child and demand money from themselves? If the note is fraudulent, then we know this was a murder made to look like a kidnapping. Anyone could be a possible suspect. Let's examine the ransom note left at the Ramsey residence. I have added the numbers in the left hand column to make it easier to reference while analyzing it.
1. "Mr. Ramsey.
2. Listen carefully! We are a group of individuals that represent
3. a small foreign faction. We xx respect your bussiness
4. but not the country that it serves. At this time we have
5. your daughter in our posession. She is safe and unharmed and
6. if you want her to see 1997, you must follow our instructions to
7. the letter.
8. You will withdraw $118,000.00 from your account. $100,000 will be
9. in $100 bills and the remaining $18,000 in $20 bills. Make sure
10. that you bring an adequate size attache to the bank. When you get
11. home you will put the money in a brown paper bag. I will call you
12. between 8 and 10 am tomorrow to instruct you on delivery. The
13. delivery will be exhausting so I advise you to be rested. If we
14. monitor you getting the money early, we might call you early to
15. arrange an earlier delivery of the money and hence a earlier
16. delivery pickup of your daughter.
17. Any deviation of my instructions will result in the immediate
18. execution of your daughter. You will also be denied her remains
19. for proper burial. The two gentlemen watching over your daughter
20. do not particularly like you so I advise you not to provoke them.
21. Speaking to anyone about your situation, such as Police, F.B.I.,
22. etc., will result in your daughter being beheaded. If we catch you
23. talking to a stray dog, she dies. If you alert bank authorities, she
24. dies. If the money is in any way marked or tampered with, she dies.
25. You will be scanned for electronic devices and if any are found, she
26. dies. You can try to deceive us but be warned that we are familiar
27. with Law enforcement countermeasures and tactics. You stand a 99%
28. chance of killing your daughter if you try to out smart us. Follow
29. our instructions and you stand a 100% chance of getting her back.
30. You and your family are under constant scrutiny as well as the
31. authorities. Don't try to grow a brain John. You are not the only
32. fat cat around so don't think that killing will be difficult. Don't
33. underestimate us John. Use that good southern common sense of yours.
34. It is up to you now John!
35. Victory!
36. S.B.T.C."
One of the first things we notice is that this is a very long ransom note. Most ransom notes are short and to the point. "We have your kid and she is safe. It will cost you $400,000 to get her back. Do not call the police. We will be contacting you." This ransom note was written on three pieces of paper. This is our first clue this note may be bogus.
As we read the ransom note, we find it doesn't make much sense. Line #2, "We are a group of individuals." What exactly does the writer mean by "group of individuals?" Every group is comprised of individuals. That's what makes it a group. Is the writer telling us despite being a group, they maintain their individuality? Most of the year they live separate lives, but everyone once in a while they come together as a group?
1. "Mr. Ramsey.
2. Listen carefully! We are a group of individuals that represent
3. a small foreign faction. We xx respect your bussiness
4. but not the country that it serves.
The writer also states in lines #2 and #3 that they "represent a small foreign faction." The use of the word "foreign" doesn't make sense. Even if to us they are foreigners, they wouldn't call themselves foreigners. They are not foreigners to themselves. They would tell us, "We are the Islamic Jihad." Remember you can learn a lot if you ask yourself how you would state something. Then compare your statement with the suspect's statement. If you went to Iran and kidnapped someone, it is doubtful you would leave a note stating you are a foreigner.
The writer goes on to say in lines #3 and #4, "We respect your bussiness but not the country that it serves." Are we to believe that JonBenet was kidnapped and then murdered because someone has a hatred for the United States? Most people would agree this crime is not an international incident.
1. "Mr. Ramsey.
2. Listen carefully! We are a group of individuals that represent
3. a small foreign faction. We xx respect your bussiness
4. but not the country that it serves.
In line #3, the writer crossed out the beginning of a word. It appears that the first letter was a "d" and the second letter possibly an "o." The writer may have started to write "We don't respect your business" but then changed it to "We respect your business." A kidnapper who already has his mind set would probably not make this mistake.
The writer misspells two common words in lines #4 and #5, "business" and "possessions." However, the writer correctly spells the words "deviation" and "attache" even including the accent on the word "attache." This leads us to believe the writer purposefully misspelled these two words to try to make it look like an uneducated person or a foreigner wrote this note. The two misspellings occur in the first paragraph. After that, the writer uses correct grammar except for using the article "a" when he should have written "an." This is further indication the misspellings were done on purpose. The writer showed his true writing skills and forgot to misspell words throughout the note.
1. "Mr. Ramsey.
2. Listen carefully! We are a group of individuals that represent
3. a small foreign faction. We xx respect your bussiness
4. but not the country that it serves. At this time we have
5. your daughter in our posession. She is safe and unharmed and
6. if you want her to see 1997, you must follow our instructions to
7. the letter.
In lines #4 and #5, the writer tells us "...we have your daughter in our possession." Remember that the shortest way to say something is the best way to state it. A true kidnapper would have said, "We have your daughter." The words "in our possession" are understood and unnecessary. This wordiness shows us that someone was trying to make this look like a kidnapping.
The writer states in line #8, "You will withdraw $118,000.00 from your account." The kidnapper may know the Ramseys are wealthy, but how does the writer know they have $118,000 in their account. Most kidnappers would simply state "get the money." They don't care where you get it from just get it.
8. You will withdraw $118,000.00 from your account. $100,000 will be
9. in $100 bills and the remaining $18,000 in $20 bills. Make sure
10. that you bring an adequate size attache to the bank.
The amount of $118,000 is a relatively small amount of money. Kidnappers are greedy. A true kidnapper would demand much more money.
The phrase "your account" is very interesting. First, as I previously mentioned a kidnapper would not tell you from where to obtain the money. If the kidnapper did, the writer would probably use the phrase "the bank." Secondly, if Patsy Ramsey was the author of this note, then we can see how in targeting the note towards her husband, she would use the phrase "your account" vs "my account."
In line #10, the writer tells the Ramseys to "bring an adequate size attache to the bank." Most kidnappers are not going to remind you to bring an adequate size case to hold the money. Likewise in line #13, it is doubtful that a kidnapper will tell you "to be rested" because the delivery process will be exhausting.
8. You will withdraw $118,000.00 from your account. $100,000 will be
9. in $100 bills and the remaining $18,000 in $20 bills. Make sure
10. that you bring an adequate size attache to the bank. When you get
11. home you will put the money in a brown paper bag. I will call you
12. between 8 and 10 am tomorrow to instruct you on delivery. The
13. delivery will be exhausting so I advise you to be rested. If we
14. monitor you getting the money early, we might call you early to
15. arrange an earlier delivery of the money and hence a earlier
16. delivery pickup of your daughter.
Line #13 and #14 the writer states, "If we monitor you getting the money early...." The word "monitor" implies a continual surveilance. This is further emphasized in line #30 when the writer states, "You and your family are under constant scrutiny...." The kidnapper would have us believe that they are continually watching the Ramsey family which is highly unlikely.
In line #19, we have an unnecessary word, "over."
17. Any deviation of my instructions will result in the immediate
18. execution of your daughter. You will also be denied her remains
19. for proper burial. The two gentlemen watching over your daughter
Unnecessary words are words that can be taken out of the sentence, and yet the sentence still makes sense. The writer could have stated, "The two gentlemen watching your daughter." By including the extra word, the writer is including extra information. What is the difference between watching someone and watching over someone? The best example I can think of is in reference to God. If I say that God is watching over me, I visualize God keeping his distance. He sees me, but he also see the entire world at the same time. He can see me because I am part of the world. While He is watching over me He is also watching over others. The word "over" means God is spreading His watchful eye upon the earth. However, if I say that God is watching me it becomes more personal. Even though He can see the entire world, He is focusing His attention on me. Another example would be if a friend asked you to "watch over" his house while he was out of town. In this case, he probably wants you to stop by every once in a while and make sure everything is okay. Maybe you will pick up his mail and water his plants. However, if he asked you to "watch" his house he probably wants you to housesit. He wants you to be there where you can keep a close eye on things.
In a kidnapping, the kidnappers should be "watching" the abductee. They will want to keep a close eye on her. They want to make sure she doesn't escape or alert someone that she needs help. They will want to make sure she doesn't harm herself if her being alive is dependent upon them receiving the ransom. When the writer of the ransom note said they were "watching over" JonBenet, the writer was telling us they were not keeping a close eye on her. There are only two reasons why you would not closely watch your hostage: 1. If you knew for certain she was alright and could not escape; 2. If you knew she was dead. Since a dead body isn't going anywhere, it is something you "watch over." Based on the language used, it appears the writer knew JonBenet was dead when writing the ransom note.
Line #19 continues on stating "The two men watching over your daughter do not particularly like you...." When we look at a copy of the ransom note, we find the writer originally wrote "....do particularly like you...." The word "not" was then written above the space between the words "do" and "particularly." A line was then drawn indicating the word "not" should be inserted between these two words. A true kidnapper would not make the mistake of saying these gentlemen do like you.
17. Any deviation of my instructions will result in the immediate
18. execution of your daughter. You will also be denied her remains
19. for proper burial. The two gentlemen watching over your daughter
20. do not particularly like you so I advise you not to provoke them.
The sentence "The two gentlemen watching over your daughter do not particularly like you so I advise you not to provoke them" is not very aggressive language. This would indicate that a woman wrote this note. Other statements in the ransom note such as "I advise you to be rested" also show a feminine touch.
Saying that JonBenet will be "beheaded" in line #22 is very unusual. In the United States, we generally do not talk about beheading people. This was put in the note to make it look like a "foreign faction" was behind this kidnapping.
21. Speaking to anyone about your situation, such as Police, F.B.I.,
22. etc., will result in your daughter being beheaded. If we catch you
23. talking to a stray dog, she dies. If you alert bank authorities, she
24. dies. If the money is in any way marked or tampered with, she dies.
25. You will be scanned for electronic devices and if any are found, she
26. dies.
In lines #13 and #30, the writer said the Ramseys were being monitored and under constant scrutiny. Yet, in line #22 the writer contradicts this when he or she writes "if we catch you talking." This would indicate the family is not under constant scrutiny.
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.
The note is addressed to "Mr. Ramsey." However, towards the end of the note Mr. Ramsey becomes "John." The writer refers to Mr. Ramsey as "John" three times in lines #31 - #34. If this was a foreign faction, they would continually use the term "Mr. Ramsey." Referring to him by his first name is too personal for an unknown kidnapper.
30. You and your family are under constant scrutiny as well as the
31. authorities. Don't try to grow a brain John. You are not the only
32. fat cat around so don't think that killing will be difficult. Don't
33. underestimate us John. Use that good southern common sense of yours.
34. It is up to you now John!
35. Victory!
36. S.B.T.C."
There are no synonyms in Statement Analysis. Every word or name means something different even if it is only slightly different in meaning. A truthful person will usually be consistent in their language and not change their language by using synonyms unless their is a justification for the change. Deceptive people will sometimes use synonyms because they are making up the story and are not speaking from the heart. If the writer saw John Ramsey as being "Mr. Ramsey", then he should always refer to him as "Mr. Ramsey." When the writer changed the language and called him "John" it is an indication the story is deceptive.
The note is signed "S.B.T.C" There is no period after the letter "C." When writing we end a thought by placing a period at the end of the sentence. Not using a period tells us the writer intentionally stopped writing. There may be conflict at this point in the story. The writer may have more information that was purposely withheld.
After re-examining a copy of the ransom note, I believe there is a period after the letter "C." It looks like the period was placed so close to the "C" that it bled into the letter.
There has been a lot of speculation as to what the letters S.B.T.C. mean. The one that makes some sense to me is "Saved By The Cross." This is because the Ramseys profess to have faith in God and because word "Victory" precedes the initials S.B.T.C. As all Christians know, it is through Christ's sacrifice on the cross that we have "victory" over death.
In examining the pronouns, we find this crime was not committed by a group. If you are writing for a group, then your language will reflect there are several people involved. Throughout the ransom note, the writer uses the plural pronouns "we," "us" and "our" because the writer wants to give the impression that a group is responsible for the kidnapping. In lines #2 - #5 we find the statements, "We are a group of individuals." "We respect your business." "We have your daughter." In line #6 the writer states, "You must follow our instructions." In line #28, "Follow our instructions." However, in line #17 we have, "Any deviation of my instructions." If this was a group effort, the writer would have a group mentality and would consistently use the plural pronouns. Look at line #11 and line #14, "I will call you" vs "We might call you." People's words will betray them. The truth will slip out and in this case we can easily see it in the pronouns. We see deception in this ransom note with the changing pronouns. This kidnapping was not the work of a terrorist group. One person, probably a woman, wrote this ransom note. One person and perhaps an accomplice committed this crime.
As you can see there is a lot of deception in this ransom note. The writer's own words tell us this ransom note was not written with the intent to obtain money. Since the ransom note was written as a ruse, we can conclude this was not a kidnapping that turned into a murder, but a murder made to look like a kidnapping. This means we cannot exclude the Ramseys as possible suspects. Let's look at what evidence ties John and Patsy Ramsey to the ransom note.
1. The ransom note was written on a pad of paper that was in the Ramsey's residence. Likewise, the pen that was used to write the note also came from their residence.
2. The killer placed a nylon cord made into a garrote around JonBenet's neck and strangled her. A broken paintbrush belonging to Patsy Ramsey was used to make the garrote.
3. While handwriting analysis shows that John Ramsey did not write the ransom note, Patsy Ramsey could not be completely eliminated as the writer.
4. Certain words in the ransom note such as "instruction" "monitor" "execution" "scanned" "electronic" and "device" are computer terms. At the time of JonBenet's death, John Ramsey was president of Access Graphics a computer distribution company.
5. The kidnapper demanded $118,000 from the Ramseys. This is a very unusual amount. Most people would ask for a much larger amount. There is a reason why the writer chose $118,000. Even John Ramsey agrees that the number 118 is significant to the killer. It has been reported that in 1996 John Ramsey received a bonus of $118,000. Is this a coincidence? When the writer had to think of a number, $118,000 was on his mind.
13. delivery will be exhausting so I advise you to be rested. If we
14. monitor you getting the money early, we might call you early to
15. arrange an earlier delivery of the money and hence a earlier
16. delivery pickup of your daughter.
6. In lines #13 - 16, the writer states, "If we monitor you getting the money early, we might call you early to arrange an earlier delivery of the money and hence a earlier pickup of your daughter." The word "hence" is a formal way of saying "therefore." The writer starts out the ransom note misspelling words giving the appearance he is uneducated. However, his educational level begins to show when he uses words such as "hence."
The word "hence" is not a very common word. When was the last time you used that word in a sentence? Chances are you have not used it this week. We should look to see if this word appears in any writings of John or Patsy Ramsey. Well, it does. On December 14, 1997, the First United Methodist Church in Boulder, Colorado held a memorial service for JonBenet. In the program, there was "A Christmas Message from the Ramsey Family." This message was also posted on the Ramsey family's web site. In the message, we find the statement, "Had there been no birth of Christ, there would be no hope of eternal life, and, hence, no hope of ever being with our loved ones again."
7. The word "hence" is a transition word. You do not have to use the word "and" with it. For example, "The arcade was closed, hence, I spent my money at the mall." The writer of the ransom note used the phrase "and hence." In their Christmas Message, the Ramseys used this exact same phrase. "Had there been no birth of Christ, there would be no hope of eternal life, and, hence, no hope of ever being with our loved ones again."
In their book, The Death of Innocence, Patsy Ramsey addresses the use of the phrase "and hence."
"Actually, I have no idea why we used that phrase. Maybe we'd seen it so many times in reading the ransom note - and having to write it over and over again for the police - that it became a part of our subconscious vocabulary. Who Knows? Then again, maybe people everywhere use the phrase ‘and hence' everyday of the week, because it's a normal part of the English language."
Like I said, when was the last time you used that phrase? It is not part of the normal English vocabulary. Patsy Ramsey does not tell us why they used that phrase. She only says "maybe" it is because they saw it in the ransom note and had to write it several times for the police. She then asked a question, "Who knows?" She is trying to sweep this under the carpet as if it is no big deal. However, this is a very big deal. We have the same phrase that is in the ransom note, appearing in their writings.
On October 12, 2000, the Ramsey's did a webcast interview with Newseum (www.newsuem.org). In the interview, John Ramsey makes the following statement:
"The justice system is a government organization. And hence, should be looked at with some degree of skepticism."
8. Many Ramsey supporters believe the Ramseys did subconsciously adopt the phrase "and hence" found in the ransom note. Okay. I will admit it is possible. But lets take a closer look at the phrase "and hence." When we look at the original ransom note we find the writer had crossed out a word.
13. delivery will be exhausting so I advise you to be rested. If we
14. monitor you getting the money early, we might call you early to
15. arrange an earlier delivery of the money and hence a earlier
16. delivery pickup of your daughter.
The writer started to say that upon receiving the money he would "deliver" JonBenet to her parents. He then realized that a kidnapper would not deliver the hostage but would tell the authorities where she could be found. Therefore, he changed it to "pick-up." It is doubtful that a kidnapper would make this mistake.
More importantly, an examination of the author's writing style shows us that whatever comes before the phrase "and hence" comes after the phrase "and hence."
13. delivery will be exhausting so I advise you to be rested. If we
14. monitor you getting the money early, we might call you early to
15. arrange an earlier delivery of the money and hence a earlier
16. delivery pickup of your daughter.
We see the same writing style in the Ramsey's Christmas message.
"Had there been no birth of Christ, there would be no hope of eternal life, and, hence, no hope of ever being with our loved ones again."
So, the Ramsey supporters would have us believe that the Ramseys not only adopted the word "hence" they also adopted the phrase "and hence" and they also adopted the killer's writing style! Possible but not probable.
For a complete Statement Analysis of the JonBenet Ramsey murder, get the book
I Know You Are Lying
Detecting Deception Through Statement Analysis
JonBenét Ramsey
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaJump to: navigation, search
JonBenét Ramsey
Born JonBenét Patricia Ramsey
August 6, 1990(1990-08-06)
Atlanta, Georgia, U.S.A.
Died December 25, 1996 (aged 6)
Boulder, Colorado, U.S.A.
Resting place Saint James Episcopal Cemetery
Marietta, Georgia, U.S.A.
33°57′18″N 84°33′23″W / 33.95501°N 84.55637°W / 33.95501; -84.55637
Parents Patsy and John Ramsey
JonBenét Patricia Ramsey (August 6, 1990 – December 25, 1996) was an American child whose murder at age 6 attracted extensive media coverage. Such coverage often focused on her participation in child beauty pageants, her parents' affluence and various unusual aspects of the case as well as questions regarding police handling of the case. She was found dead in the basement of her parents' home in Boulder, Colorado, nearly eight hours after she was reported missing. The case is notable for both its longevity and the media interest it has generated. After several grand jury hearings, the case is still unsolved. In February 2009, the Boulder Police Department took the case back from the district attorney and re-opened the investigation.[1]
Contents [hide]
1 Life
2 Murder case
2.1 Police investigation
2.2 Crime scene
2.3 Later developments
2.3.1 Letter from District Attorney
2.3.2 New District Attorney
3 Suspicion
4 Defamation lawsuits
5 References
6 External links
[edit] Life
JonBenét Ramsey was born in Atlanta, Georgia, but the family relocated when she was nine months old. Her first name is a blend of her father's first and middle names, John Bennett; her middle name is the first name of her mother, the late Patricia "Patsy" Ramsey. JonBenét was enrolled by her mother in a variety of different beauty pageants in several states. Patricia Ramsey funded some of the contests in which JonBenét participated, rock climbing, violin lessons and other activities.
JonBenét is buried in Saint James Episcopal Cemetery in Marietta, Georgia, next to her mother who died of cancer in 2006, and her half-sister Elizabeth Pasch Ramsey, who died in a 1992 car accident at the age of 22.
[edit] Murder case
Text of the ransom note
Mr. Ramsey
Listen carefully! We are a group of individuals that represent a small foreign faction. We do respect your bussiness [sic] but not the country that it serves. At this time we have your daughter in our posession [sic]. She is safe and unharmed and if you want her to see 1997, you must follow our instructions to the letter.
You will withdraw $118,000.00 from your account. $100,000 will be in $100 bills and the remaining $18,000 in $20 bills. Make sure that you bring an adequate size attache to the bank. When you get home you will put the money in a brown paper bag. I will call you between 8 and 10 am tomorrow to instruct you on delivery. The delivery will be exhausting so I advise you to be rested. If we monitor you getting the money early, we might call you early to arrange an earlier delivery of the money and hence a [sic] earlier delivery pick-up of your daughter.
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. Speaking to anyone about your situation, such as Police, F.B.I., etc., will result in your daughter being beheaded. If we catch you talking to a stray dog, she dies. If you alert bank authorities, she dies. If the money is in any way marked or tampered with, she dies. You will be scanned for electronic devices and if any are found, she dies. You can try to deceive us but be warned that we are familiar with law enforcement countermeasures and tactics. You stand a 99% chance of killing your daughter if you try to out smart [sic] us. Follow our instructions and you stand a 100% chance of getting her back. You and your family are under constant scrutiny as well as the authorities. Don't try to grow a brain John. You are not the only fat cat around so don't think that killing will be difficult. Don't underestimate us John. Use that good southern common sense of yours. It is up to you now John!
Victory!
S.B.T.C.
Original textAccording to the testimony of Patsy Ramsey, on December 26, 1996, she discovered her daughter missing after finding a two and a half-page ransom note on the kitchen staircase, demanding $118,000 for the safe return of her daughter, which was almost the exact value of a bonus her husband received earlier that year.[1] Despite specific instructions in the ransom note that police and friends not be contacted, she telephoned the police and called family and friends. The local police conducted a cursory search of the house but did not find any obvious signs of a break-in or forced entry. The note suggested that the ransom collection would be monitored and JonBenét would be returned as soon as the money was obtained. John Ramsey made arrangements for the availability of the ransom, which a friend, John Fernie, picked up that morning from a local bank.
[edit] Police investigation
In the afternoon of the same day, Boulder Police Detective Linda Arndt asked Fleet White, a friend of the Ramseys, to take John Ramsey and search the house for "anything unusual."[2] John Ramsey and two of his friends started their search in the basement. After first searching the bathroom and "train room", the two went to a "wine cellar" room where Ramsey found his daughter's body covered in a white blanket. She was also found with a nylon cord around her neck, her wrists tied above her head, and duct tape covering her mouth.[2]
The police were later claimed by observers to have made several critical mistakes in the investigation, such as not sealing off the crime scene and allowing friends and family in and out of the house once a kidnapping was reported.[2]
Critics of the investigation have since claimed that officers also did not sufficiently attempt to gather forensic evidence before or after JonBenét's body was found, possibly because they immediately suspected the Ramseys in the killing.[2] Some officers holding these suspicions reported them to local media, who began reporting on January 1 that the assistant district attorney thought "it's not adding up"; the fact that the body of the girl was found in her own home was considered highly suspicious by the investigating officers.[2] The results of the autopsy revealed that JonBenét was killed by strangulation and a skull fracture. A garrote made from a length of tweed cord and the broken handle of a paintbrush had been used to strangle her; her skull had suffered severe blunt trauma; there was no evidence of conventional rape, although sexual assault could not be ruled out. The official cause of death was asphyxiation due to strangulation associated with craniocerebral trauma.
[edit] Crime scene
The bristle end of the paint brush was found in a tub of Patsy Ramsey's art supplies, but the bottom third was never located despite extensive searching of the house by law enforcement in subsequent days.[3] Experts noted that the construction of the garrote required a special knowledge of knots. Autopsy also revealed that JonBenét had eaten pineapple only a few hours before the murder.[4] Photographs of the home, taken the day JonBenét's body was found, show a bowl of pineapple on the kitchen table with a spoon in it,[4] and police reported finding Patsy's and JonBenet's nine-year-old brother Burke Ramsey's fingerprints on it.[5] However, both Patsy and John claim not to remember putting this bowl on the table or feeding pineapple to JonBenét.[4][5] (The Ramseys had always maintained that Burke had slept through the entire episode, until awakened several hours after the police arrived.) While it was reported that no footprints led to the house on snow-covered ground, other reporters found that snow around the doors of the house was cleared away.[6] Police reported no signs of forced entry, although a basement window that had been broken and left unsecured before Christmas, along with other open doors, were not reported to the public until a year later.[6]
[edit] Later developments
In December 2003, forensic investigators extracted enough material from a mixed blood sample found on JonBenét's underwear to establish a DNA profile.[7] The DNA belongs to an unknown male. The DNA was submitted to the FBI's Combined DNA Index System (CODIS), a database containing more than 1.6 million DNA profiles, mainly from convicted felons. The sample has yet to find a match in the database, although it continues to be checked for partial matches on a weekly basis, as are all unmatched samples.[citation needed]
Later investigations also discovered that there were more than 100 burglaries in the Ramseys' neighborhood in the months before JonBenét's murder, and that 38 registered sex offenders were living within a two-mile (3 km) radius of the Ramseys' home—an area that encompasses half the population of the city of Boulder—but that none of the sex offenders had any involvement in the murder.[8]
On August 16, 2006, 41-year-old John Mark Karr, a former schoolteacher, confessed to the murder while being held on child pornography charges from Sonoma County, California. Authorities reportedly tracked him down using the Internet after he sent e-mails regarding the Ramsey case to Michael Tracey, a journalism professor at the University of Colorado.[9] Once apprehended, he confessed to being with JonBenét when she died, stating that her death was an accident. When asked if he was innocent, he responded, "No."
However, Karr's DNA did not match that found on JonBenét Ramsey's body. On August 28, 2006, prosecutors announced that no charges would be filed against him for the murder of JonBenét Ramsey.[10][11][12] In early December 2006, Department of Homeland Security officials reported that federal investigators were continuing to explore whether Karr had been a possible accomplice in the killing.
No evidence has ever come to light that placed the then-married Alabama resident Karr near Boulder during the Christmas 1996 crime. Evidence linking Karr to the killing is highly circumstantial in nature. For instance, handwriting samples taken from Karr were said to match the ransom note. In particular, his technique for writing the letters E, T and M were described by the media as being very rare.
Brought in on the case in the aftermath, economist and crisis consultant Randall Bell notes in his book Strategy 360:
“ We might never know if the Ramsey parents were involved in their daughter's murder because of the negligent contamination of the crime scene. Likewise, if John and Patsy Ramsey were not involved, they have suffered irreparable harm from this investigation.[13] ”
[edit] Letter from District Attorney
On July 9, 2008, the Boulder District Attorney's office announced that as a result of newly developed DNA sampling and testing techniques, the Ramsey family members are no longer considered suspects in the case.[14][15] In light of the new DNA evidence, Boulder County District Attorney Mary Lacy gave a letter[16] to John Ramsey the same day, officially apologizing to the Ramsey family:
"This new scientific evidence convinces us...to state that we do not consider your immediate family, including you, your wife, Patsy, and your son, Burke, to be under any suspicion in the commission of this crime.
... The match of Male DNA on two separate items of clothing worn by the victim at the time of the murder makes it clear to us that an unknown male handled these items. There is no innocent explanation for its incriminating presence at three sites on these two different items of clothing that JonBenét was wearing at the time of her murder. ... To the extent that we may have contributed in any way to the public perception that you might have been involved in this crime, I am deeply sorry. No innocent person should have to endure such an extensive trial in the court of public opinion, especially when public officials have not had sufficient evidence to initiate a trial in a court of law. ... We intend in the future to treat you as the victims of this crime, with the sympathy due you because of the horrific loss you suffered. ... I am aware that there will be those who will choose to continue to differ with our conclusion. But DNA is very often the most reliable forensic evidence we can hope to find and we rely on it often to bring to justice those who have committed crimes. I am very comfortable that our conclusion that this evidence has vindicated your family is based firmly on all of the evidence, ..." [16][17]
[edit] New District Attorney
In January 2009 Stan Garnett, the new Boulder County D.A., stated he planned to take a fresh look at the case. On February 2, 2009, Boulder police Chief Mark Beckner announced that Garnett was turning the case over to his agency, and that his team would resume investigating the homicide. "Some cases never get solved, but some do," Beckner said. "And you can't give up."[1]
[edit] Suspicion
Case speculation by experts, media and the parents has supported different hypotheses. For a long time, the local police supported the hypothesis that her mother Patricia Ramsey injured her child in a fit of rage after the girl had wet her bed on the same night, and then proceeded to kill her either in rage or to cover up the original injury. According to a Colorado Bureau of Investigation report, "There are indications that the author of the ransom note is Patricia Ramsey," but they could not definitely prove this assertion.[18]
Another hypothesis was that John Ramsey had been sexually abusing his daughter and murdered her as a cover. The Ramseys' son Burke, who was nine at the time of JonBenét's death, was also targeted by speculation, and asked to testify at the grand jury hearing.[19] In 1999, the Governor of Colorado, Bill Owens, told the parents of JonBenét Ramsey to "quit hiding behind their attorneys, quit hiding behind their PR firm."[20] Police suspicions were initially concentrated almost exclusively on the members of the Ramsey family, although the girl's parents had no prior signs of aggression in the public record.
The Ramseys have consistently held that the crime was committed by an intruder. They hired John E. Douglas, former head of the FBI's Behavioral Science Unit, to examine the case. While retained by the Ramsey family, he concluded that the Ramseys were not involved in the murder. He also concluded that it was unlikely that anyone would resolve the case. He detailed his arguments in his 2001 book, The Cases That Haunt Us. Lou Smit, a seasoned detective who came out of retirement to assist Boulder authorities with the case in early 1997, originally suspected the parents, but after assessing all the evidence that had been collected, also concluded that an intruder had committed the crime.[21] While no longer an official investigator on the case, Smit continues to work on it.
With such contradictory evidence, a grand jury failed to indict the Ramseys or anyone else in the murder of JonBenét. Not long after the murder, the parents moved to a new home in Atlanta. Two of the lead investigators in the case resigned, one because he believed that the investigation had incompetently overlooked the intruder hypothesis, and the other because he believed that the investigation had failed to successfully prosecute the Ramseys.[3] Even so, remaining investigators are still trying to identify a possible suspect. Patricia "Patsy" Ramsey died after a battle with ovarian cancer on June 24, 2006, at the age of 49.
[edit] Defamation lawsuits
Several defamation lawsuits have ensued since JonBenét's murder. Lin Wood was the plaintiff's attorney for John and Patsy Ramsey and their son Burke, and has prosecuted defamation claims on their behalf against St. Martin's Press, Time, Inc., The Fox News Channel, American Media, Inc., Star, The Globe, Court TV and The New York Post. John and Patsy Ramsey were also sued in two separate defamation lawsuits arising from the publication of their book, The Death of Innocence, brought by two individuals named in the book as having been investigated by Boulder police as suspects in JonBenét's murder. The Ramseys were defended in those lawsuits by Lin Wood and three other Atlanta attorneys, James C. Rawls, Eric P. Schroeder, and S. Derek Bauer, who obtained dismissal of both lawsuits including an in-depth decision by U.S. District Court Judge Julie Carnes that the evidence in the murder case overwhelmingly pointed to an intruder having committed the crime.[citation needed]
In November 2006, Rod Westmoreland, a friend of JonBenét Ramsey's father, filed a defamation suit[22] against Keith Greer, who posted a message on an Internet forum using the pseudonym "undertheradar". Greer had accused Westmoreland of participating in the kidnapping and murder.[23] Greer has defended his statement.[24]
[edit] References
1.^ a b c "Boulder police take back Ramsey case", Colorado Daily, February 2, 2009
2.^ a b c d e "Murder of JonBenét Ramsey". Tru TV Crime Library. http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/notorious_murders/famous/ramsey/index_1b.html. Retrieved 2008-07-09.
3.^ a b JonBenét: Anatomy of a Cold Case - Court TV
4.^ a b c Hickey, Eric. Encyclopedia of Murder and Violent Crime.
5.^ a b "Searching: The Interrogation Tapes". 48 Hours (CBS News). http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2002/10/01/48hours/main523875.shtml. Retrieved 2008-07-11.
6.^ a b "Murder of JonBenét Ramsey". Tru TV Crime Library. http://www.trutv.com/library/crime/notorious_murders/famous/ramsey/evidence_2.html. Retrieved 2008-07-09.
7.^ JonBenet: DNA Rules Out Parents, Will New Evidence Lead To A Break In This Murder Case? - CBS News
8.^ Erin Moriarty, JonBenét: DNA Rules Out Parents, 26 March 2005.
9.^ "No Forensic Evidence Currently Links John Karr to JonBenét Murder". Crime Library. August 17, 2006. http://www.crimelibrary.com/news/original/0806/1703_ramsey_arrest_john_karr.html.
10.^ No DNA match, no JonBenet charges
11.^ "not the source of the DNA found"
12.^ D.A.'s Motion to Quash Arrest Warrant
13.^ Bell, Randall. Strategy 360. http://www.Strategy360.com.
14.^ Mary T. Lacy, District Attorney (2008-07-09). "Ramsey Press Release". District Attorney's Office, Twentieth Judicial District, Boulder, Colorado. http://www.bouldercounty.org/newsroom/templates/?a=1256&z=13. Retrieved 2008-07-09.
15.^ "New DNA samples clear family in JonBenet Ramsey case". USA Today. 2008-07-08. http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2008/07/report-new-dna.html. Retrieved 2009-07-23.
16.^ a b Mary T. Lacy, District Attorney (2008-07-09). "Letter from DA to John Ramsey" (PDF). District Attorney's Office, Twentieth Judicial District, Boulder, Colorado. http://www.bouldercounty.org/newsroom/articlefiles/1256-Letter_to_John_Ramsey.pdf. Retrieved 2008-07-09.
17.^ http://www.9news.com/pdfs/ramseyDA.pdf
18.^ http://news.google.com/newspapers?nid=875&dat=19970904&id=SdQLAAAAIBAJ&sjid=M1YDAAAAIBAJ&pg=6638,205639
19.^ The JonBenet Ramsey Investigation
20.^ Warning on JonBenet speculation
21.^ Rocky Mountain News article
22.^ Man Sues Over JonBenet Murder Claim - November 9, 2006
23.^ JonBenet Ramsey Case Encyclopedia wiki / Legal Issues Surrounding JBR Case
24.^ JonBenet Ramsey Case Encyclopedia wiki / undrtheradar biosketch
[edit] External links
Colorado portal
Biography portal
RockyMountainNews.com - Exclusive interviews, one of the largest archives of JonBenét Ramsey coverage in the world
Complete Ramsey Case File from "Court TV"
Denver AM 670 KLTT Talk Show Case Theory
DenverPost's evidence list linking Patsy Ramsey
JonBenet - Crime Library
The Smoking Gun - JonBenet Ramsey Case Documents
JonBenét Ramsey at Find a Grave
Crime Magazine: The Murder of JonBenét Ramsey
I have recently found this which is very interesting: the actual ransom note, and comments on it
Statement Analysis
by Mark McClish
JonBenet Ramsey Ransom Note
Posted July 9, 2001
Click here for an update on this case.
A key piece of evidence in solving this murder is the ransom note. The police as well as the Ramseys believe that whoever wrote the note is probably the killer. If the police can match the handwriting in the ransom note to a suspect's handwriting, the case is solved. The problem has been they have not found a match. Even without a positive match, the ransom note is still the key to solving this crime.
Using Statement Analysis we can examine this ransom note and determine if it is a legitimate ransom note. Was it the intention of the writer to extort money from the Ramseys, or was the note written as a ploy after JonBenet was killed? Determining the veracity of the ransom note is important. If the note is legitimate, then we know we have a kidnapping that went bad. This would exclude the Ramseys as possible suspects. Why would they kidnap their own child and demand money from themselves? If the note is fraudulent, then we know this was a murder made to look like a kidnapping. Anyone could be a possible suspect. Let's examine the ransom note left at the Ramsey residence. I have added the numbers in the left hand column to make it easier to reference while analyzing it.
1. "Mr. Ramsey.
2. Listen carefully! We are a group of individuals that represent
3. a small foreign faction. We xx respect your bussiness
4. but not the country that it serves. At this time we have
5. your daughter in our posession. She is safe and unharmed and
6. if you want her to see 1997, you must follow our instructions to
7. the letter.
8. You will withdraw $118,000.00 from your account. $100,000 will be
9. in $100 bills and the remaining $18,000 in $20 bills. Make sure
10. that you bring an adequate size attache to the bank. When you get
11. home you will put the money in a brown paper bag. I will call you
12. between 8 and 10 am tomorrow to instruct you on delivery. The
13. delivery will be exhausting so I advise you to be rested. If we
14. monitor you getting the money early, we might call you early to
15. arrange an earlier delivery of the money and hence a earlier
16. delivery pickup of your daughter.
17. Any deviation of my instructions will result in the immediate
18. execution of your daughter. You will also be denied her remains
19. for proper burial. The two gentlemen watching over your daughter
20. do not particularly like you so I advise you not to provoke them.
21. Speaking to anyone about your situation, such as Police, F.B.I.,
22. etc., will result in your daughter being beheaded. If we catch you
23. talking to a stray dog, she dies. If you alert bank authorities, she
24. dies. If the money is in any way marked or tampered with, she dies.
25. You will be scanned for electronic devices and if any are found, she
26. dies. You can try to deceive us but be warned that we are familiar
27. with Law enforcement countermeasures and tactics. You stand a 99%
28. chance of killing your daughter if you try to out smart us. Follow
29. our instructions and you stand a 100% chance of getting her back.
30. You and your family are under constant scrutiny as well as the
31. authorities. Don't try to grow a brain John. You are not the only
32. fat cat around so don't think that killing will be difficult. Don't
33. underestimate us John. Use that good southern common sense of yours.
34. It is up to you now John!
35. Victory!
36. S.B.T.C."
One of the first things we notice is that this is a very long ransom note. Most ransom notes are short and to the point. "We have your kid and she is safe. It will cost you $400,000 to get her back. Do not call the police. We will be contacting you." This ransom note was written on three pieces of paper. This is our first clue this note may be bogus.
As we read the ransom note, we find it doesn't make much sense. Line #2, "We are a group of individuals." What exactly does the writer mean by "group of individuals?" Every group is comprised of individuals. That's what makes it a group. Is the writer telling us despite being a group, they maintain their individuality? Most of the year they live separate lives, but everyone once in a while they come together as a group?
1. "Mr. Ramsey.
2. Listen carefully! We are a group of individuals that represent
3. a small foreign faction. We xx respect your bussiness
4. but not the country that it serves.
The writer also states in lines #2 and #3 that they "represent a small foreign faction." The use of the word "foreign" doesn't make sense. Even if to us they are foreigners, they wouldn't call themselves foreigners. They are not foreigners to themselves. They would tell us, "We are the Islamic Jihad." Remember you can learn a lot if you ask yourself how you would state something. Then compare your statement with the suspect's statement. If you went to Iran and kidnapped someone, it is doubtful you would leave a note stating you are a foreigner.
The writer goes on to say in lines #3 and #4, "We respect your bussiness but not the country that it serves." Are we to believe that JonBenet was kidnapped and then murdered because someone has a hatred for the United States? Most people would agree this crime is not an international incident.
1. "Mr. Ramsey.
2. Listen carefully! We are a group of individuals that represent
3. a small foreign faction. We xx respect your bussiness
4. but not the country that it serves.
In line #3, the writer crossed out the beginning of a word. It appears that the first letter was a "d" and the second letter possibly an "o." The writer may have started to write "We don't respect your business" but then changed it to "We respect your business." A kidnapper who already has his mind set would probably not make this mistake.
The writer misspells two common words in lines #4 and #5, "business" and "possessions." However, the writer correctly spells the words "deviation" and "attache" even including the accent on the word "attache." This leads us to believe the writer purposefully misspelled these two words to try to make it look like an uneducated person or a foreigner wrote this note. The two misspellings occur in the first paragraph. After that, the writer uses correct grammar except for using the article "a" when he should have written "an." This is further indication the misspellings were done on purpose. The writer showed his true writing skills and forgot to misspell words throughout the note.
1. "Mr. Ramsey.
2. Listen carefully! We are a group of individuals that represent
3. a small foreign faction. We xx respect your bussiness
4. but not the country that it serves. At this time we have
5. your daughter in our posession. She is safe and unharmed and
6. if you want her to see 1997, you must follow our instructions to
7. the letter.
In lines #4 and #5, the writer tells us "...we have your daughter in our possession." Remember that the shortest way to say something is the best way to state it. A true kidnapper would have said, "We have your daughter." The words "in our possession" are understood and unnecessary. This wordiness shows us that someone was trying to make this look like a kidnapping.
The writer states in line #8, "You will withdraw $118,000.00 from your account." The kidnapper may know the Ramseys are wealthy, but how does the writer know they have $118,000 in their account. Most kidnappers would simply state "get the money." They don't care where you get it from just get it.
8. You will withdraw $118,000.00 from your account. $100,000 will be
9. in $100 bills and the remaining $18,000 in $20 bills. Make sure
10. that you bring an adequate size attache to the bank.
The amount of $118,000 is a relatively small amount of money. Kidnappers are greedy. A true kidnapper would demand much more money.
The phrase "your account" is very interesting. First, as I previously mentioned a kidnapper would not tell you from where to obtain the money. If the kidnapper did, the writer would probably use the phrase "the bank." Secondly, if Patsy Ramsey was the author of this note, then we can see how in targeting the note towards her husband, she would use the phrase "your account" vs "my account."
In line #10, the writer tells the Ramseys to "bring an adequate size attache to the bank." Most kidnappers are not going to remind you to bring an adequate size case to hold the money. Likewise in line #13, it is doubtful that a kidnapper will tell you "to be rested" because the delivery process will be exhausting.
8. You will withdraw $118,000.00 from your account. $100,000 will be
9. in $100 bills and the remaining $18,000 in $20 bills. Make sure
10. that you bring an adequate size attache to the bank. When you get
11. home you will put the money in a brown paper bag. I will call you
12. between 8 and 10 am tomorrow to instruct you on delivery. The
13. delivery will be exhausting so I advise you to be rested. If we
14. monitor you getting the money early, we might call you early to
15. arrange an earlier delivery of the money and hence a earlier
16. delivery pickup of your daughter.
Line #13 and #14 the writer states, "If we monitor you getting the money early...." The word "monitor" implies a continual surveilance. This is further emphasized in line #30 when the writer states, "You and your family are under constant scrutiny...." The kidnapper would have us believe that they are continually watching the Ramsey family which is highly unlikely.
In line #19, we have an unnecessary word, "over."
17. Any deviation of my instructions will result in the immediate
18. execution of your daughter. You will also be denied her remains
19. for proper burial. The two gentlemen watching over your daughter
Unnecessary words are words that can be taken out of the sentence, and yet the sentence still makes sense. The writer could have stated, "The two gentlemen watching your daughter." By including the extra word, the writer is including extra information. What is the difference between watching someone and watching over someone? The best example I can think of is in reference to God. If I say that God is watching over me, I visualize God keeping his distance. He sees me, but he also see the entire world at the same time. He can see me because I am part of the world. While He is watching over me He is also watching over others. The word "over" means God is spreading His watchful eye upon the earth. However, if I say that God is watching me it becomes more personal. Even though He can see the entire world, He is focusing His attention on me. Another example would be if a friend asked you to "watch over" his house while he was out of town. In this case, he probably wants you to stop by every once in a while and make sure everything is okay. Maybe you will pick up his mail and water his plants. However, if he asked you to "watch" his house he probably wants you to housesit. He wants you to be there where you can keep a close eye on things.
In a kidnapping, the kidnappers should be "watching" the abductee. They will want to keep a close eye on her. They want to make sure she doesn't escape or alert someone that she needs help. They will want to make sure she doesn't harm herself if her being alive is dependent upon them receiving the ransom. When the writer of the ransom note said they were "watching over" JonBenet, the writer was telling us they were not keeping a close eye on her. There are only two reasons why you would not closely watch your hostage: 1. If you knew for certain she was alright and could not escape; 2. If you knew she was dead. Since a dead body isn't going anywhere, it is something you "watch over." Based on the language used, it appears the writer knew JonBenet was dead when writing the ransom note.
Line #19 continues on stating "The two men watching over your daughter do not particularly like you...." When we look at a copy of the ransom note, we find the writer originally wrote "....do particularly like you...." The word "not" was then written above the space between the words "do" and "particularly." A line was then drawn indicating the word "not" should be inserted between these two words. A true kidnapper would not make the mistake of saying these gentlemen do like you.
17. Any deviation of my instructions will result in the immediate
18. execution of your daughter. You will also be denied her remains
19. for proper burial. The two gentlemen watching over your daughter
20. do not particularly like you so I advise you not to provoke them.
The sentence "The two gentlemen watching over your daughter do not particularly like you so I advise you not to provoke them" is not very aggressive language. This would indicate that a woman wrote this note. Other statements in the ransom note such as "I advise you to be rested" also show a feminine touch.
Saying that JonBenet will be "beheaded" in line #22 is very unusual. In the United States, we generally do not talk about beheading people. This was put in the note to make it look like a "foreign faction" was behind this kidnapping.
21. Speaking to anyone about your situation, such as Police, F.B.I.,
22. etc., will result in your daughter being beheaded. If we catch you
23. talking to a stray dog, she dies. If you alert bank authorities, she
24. dies. If the money is in any way marked or tampered with, she dies.
25. You will be scanned for electronic devices and if any are found, she
26. dies.
In lines #13 and #30, the writer said the Ramseys were being monitored and under constant scrutiny. Yet, in line #22 the writer contradicts this when he or she writes "if we catch you talking." This would indicate the family is not under constant scrutiny.
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.
The note is addressed to "Mr. Ramsey." However, towards the end of the note Mr. Ramsey becomes "John." The writer refers to Mr. Ramsey as "John" three times in lines #31 - #34. If this was a foreign faction, they would continually use the term "Mr. Ramsey." Referring to him by his first name is too personal for an unknown kidnapper.
30. You and your family are under constant scrutiny as well as the
31. authorities. Don't try to grow a brain John. You are not the only
32. fat cat around so don't think that killing will be difficult. Don't
33. underestimate us John. Use that good southern common sense of yours.
34. It is up to you now John!
35. Victory!
36. S.B.T.C."
There are no synonyms in Statement Analysis. Every word or name means something different even if it is only slightly different in meaning. A truthful person will usually be consistent in their language and not change their language by using synonyms unless their is a justification for the change. Deceptive people will sometimes use synonyms because they are making up the story and are not speaking from the heart. If the writer saw John Ramsey as being "Mr. Ramsey", then he should always refer to him as "Mr. Ramsey." When the writer changed the language and called him "John" it is an indication the story is deceptive.
The note is signed "S.B.T.C" There is no period after the letter "C." When writing we end a thought by placing a period at the end of the sentence. Not using a period tells us the writer intentionally stopped writing. There may be conflict at this point in the story. The writer may have more information that was purposely withheld.
After re-examining a copy of the ransom note, I believe there is a period after the letter "C." It looks like the period was placed so close to the "C" that it bled into the letter.
There has been a lot of speculation as to what the letters S.B.T.C. mean. The one that makes some sense to me is "Saved By The Cross." This is because the Ramseys profess to have faith in God and because word "Victory" precedes the initials S.B.T.C. As all Christians know, it is through Christ's sacrifice on the cross that we have "victory" over death.
In examining the pronouns, we find this crime was not committed by a group. If you are writing for a group, then your language will reflect there are several people involved. Throughout the ransom note, the writer uses the plural pronouns "we," "us" and "our" because the writer wants to give the impression that a group is responsible for the kidnapping. In lines #2 - #5 we find the statements, "We are a group of individuals." "We respect your business." "We have your daughter." In line #6 the writer states, "You must follow our instructions." In line #28, "Follow our instructions." However, in line #17 we have, "Any deviation of my instructions." If this was a group effort, the writer would have a group mentality and would consistently use the plural pronouns. Look at line #11 and line #14, "I will call you" vs "We might call you." People's words will betray them. The truth will slip out and in this case we can easily see it in the pronouns. We see deception in this ransom note with the changing pronouns. This kidnapping was not the work of a terrorist group. One person, probably a woman, wrote this ransom note. One person and perhaps an accomplice committed this crime.
As you can see there is a lot of deception in this ransom note. The writer's own words tell us this ransom note was not written with the intent to obtain money. Since the ransom note was written as a ruse, we can conclude this was not a kidnapping that turned into a murder, but a murder made to look like a kidnapping. This means we cannot exclude the Ramseys as possible suspects. Let's look at what evidence ties John and Patsy Ramsey to the ransom note.
1. The ransom note was written on a pad of paper that was in the Ramsey's residence. Likewise, the pen that was used to write the note also came from their residence.
2. The killer placed a nylon cord made into a garrote around JonBenet's neck and strangled her. A broken paintbrush belonging to Patsy Ramsey was used to make the garrote.
3. While handwriting analysis shows that John Ramsey did not write the ransom note, Patsy Ramsey could not be completely eliminated as the writer.
4. Certain words in the ransom note such as "instruction" "monitor" "execution" "scanned" "electronic" and "device" are computer terms. At the time of JonBenet's death, John Ramsey was president of Access Graphics a computer distribution company.
5. The kidnapper demanded $118,000 from the Ramseys. This is a very unusual amount. Most people would ask for a much larger amount. There is a reason why the writer chose $118,000. Even John Ramsey agrees that the number 118 is significant to the killer. It has been reported that in 1996 John Ramsey received a bonus of $118,000. Is this a coincidence? When the writer had to think of a number, $118,000 was on his mind.
13. delivery will be exhausting so I advise you to be rested. If we
14. monitor you getting the money early, we might call you early to
15. arrange an earlier delivery of the money and hence a earlier
16. delivery pickup of your daughter.
6. In lines #13 - 16, the writer states, "If we monitor you getting the money early, we might call you early to arrange an earlier delivery of the money and hence a earlier pickup of your daughter." The word "hence" is a formal way of saying "therefore." The writer starts out the ransom note misspelling words giving the appearance he is uneducated. However, his educational level begins to show when he uses words such as "hence."
The word "hence" is not a very common word. When was the last time you used that word in a sentence? Chances are you have not used it this week. We should look to see if this word appears in any writings of John or Patsy Ramsey. Well, it does. On December 14, 1997, the First United Methodist Church in Boulder, Colorado held a memorial service for JonBenet. In the program, there was "A Christmas Message from the Ramsey Family." This message was also posted on the Ramsey family's web site. In the message, we find the statement, "Had there been no birth of Christ, there would be no hope of eternal life, and, hence, no hope of ever being with our loved ones again."
7. The word "hence" is a transition word. You do not have to use the word "and" with it. For example, "The arcade was closed, hence, I spent my money at the mall." The writer of the ransom note used the phrase "and hence." In their Christmas Message, the Ramseys used this exact same phrase. "Had there been no birth of Christ, there would be no hope of eternal life, and, hence, no hope of ever being with our loved ones again."
In their book, The Death of Innocence, Patsy Ramsey addresses the use of the phrase "and hence."
"Actually, I have no idea why we used that phrase. Maybe we'd seen it so many times in reading the ransom note - and having to write it over and over again for the police - that it became a part of our subconscious vocabulary. Who Knows? Then again, maybe people everywhere use the phrase ‘and hence' everyday of the week, because it's a normal part of the English language."
Like I said, when was the last time you used that phrase? It is not part of the normal English vocabulary. Patsy Ramsey does not tell us why they used that phrase. She only says "maybe" it is because they saw it in the ransom note and had to write it several times for the police. She then asked a question, "Who knows?" She is trying to sweep this under the carpet as if it is no big deal. However, this is a very big deal. We have the same phrase that is in the ransom note, appearing in their writings.
On October 12, 2000, the Ramsey's did a webcast interview with Newseum (www.newsuem.org). In the interview, John Ramsey makes the following statement:
"The justice system is a government organization. And hence, should be looked at with some degree of skepticism."
8. Many Ramsey supporters believe the Ramseys did subconsciously adopt the phrase "and hence" found in the ransom note. Okay. I will admit it is possible. But lets take a closer look at the phrase "and hence." When we look at the original ransom note we find the writer had crossed out a word.
13. delivery will be exhausting so I advise you to be rested. If we
14. monitor you getting the money early, we might call you early to
15. arrange an earlier delivery of the money and hence a earlier
16. delivery pickup of your daughter.
The writer started to say that upon receiving the money he would "deliver" JonBenet to her parents. He then realized that a kidnapper would not deliver the hostage but would tell the authorities where she could be found. Therefore, he changed it to "pick-up." It is doubtful that a kidnapper would make this mistake.
More importantly, an examination of the author's writing style shows us that whatever comes before the phrase "and hence" comes after the phrase "and hence."
13. delivery will be exhausting so I advise you to be rested. If we
14. monitor you getting the money early, we might call you early to
15. arrange an earlier delivery of the money and hence a earlier
16. delivery pickup of your daughter.
We see the same writing style in the Ramsey's Christmas message.
"Had there been no birth of Christ, there would be no hope of eternal life, and, hence, no hope of ever being with our loved ones again."
So, the Ramsey supporters would have us believe that the Ramseys not only adopted the word "hence" they also adopted the phrase "and hence" and they also adopted the killer's writing style! Possible but not probable.
For a complete Statement Analysis of the JonBenet Ramsey murder, get the book
I Know You Are Lying
Detecting Deception Through Statement Analysis
Guest- Guest
Who killed JonBenet Ramsey?
by Tony Bennett 11.07.10 13:28
I've studied this case in some detail.
I would make the following brief observations.
In recent surveys, around 40% of Americans believe one of the Ramseys killed JonBenet, with around a further 40% unsure. Very few believe the now-'official' view that it wasn't the Ramseys but some other third person/kidnapper/abductor.
The Ramseys' case is that the abductor entered the house (without trace!), killed JonBenet and then wrote out a ransom note. If you believe that, you'll believe anything!
A journalist wrote a book about the case saying, basically: 'It was the Ramseys wot done it'. He was successfully sued for libel by Mr Ramsey.
Mr Ramsey had high-level connections, expensive lawyers, friends in government etc.
I feel certain that Mr Ramsey was part of an elite child sexual abuse ring.
I can't decide whether JohBenet was killed by a sudden ouburst of temper by one of the Ramseys OR was killed during a group paedophile session.
I am sorry to put this on the forum but that is honestly where my analysis of the case takes me.
I would make the following brief observations.
In recent surveys, around 40% of Americans believe one of the Ramseys killed JonBenet, with around a further 40% unsure. Very few believe the now-'official' view that it wasn't the Ramseys but some other third person/kidnapper/abductor.
The Ramseys' case is that the abductor entered the house (without trace!), killed JonBenet and then wrote out a ransom note. If you believe that, you'll believe anything!
A journalist wrote a book about the case saying, basically: 'It was the Ramseys wot done it'. He was successfully sued for libel by Mr Ramsey.
Mr Ramsey had high-level connections, expensive lawyers, friends in government etc.
I feel certain that Mr Ramsey was part of an elite child sexual abuse ring.
I can't decide whether JohBenet was killed by a sudden ouburst of temper by one of the Ramseys OR was killed during a group paedophile session.
I am sorry to put this on the forum but that is honestly where my analysis of the case takes me.
Tony Bennett- Researcher
- Posts : 16921
Activity : 24787
Likes received : 3749
Join date : 2009-11-25
Age : 77
Location : Shropshire
Re: Who killed JonBenet Ramsay?
by Guest 11.07.10 13:32
Well Tony, that ransom note analysis is certainly very interesting. Just when I was having doubts regarding my original thoughts, it has re-inforced them again.
Guest- Guest
Re: Who killed JonBenet Ramsay?
by soulthief 11.07.10 13:37
so what scenario does anyone have to fit the evidence? Because although I see they look and acted guilty and the evidence seems to pint to them, why would they? What would make a parent kill a child in such a horrific manner?
soulthief- Posts : 695
Activity : 725
Likes received : 6
Join date : 2010-07-07
Location : where ever I lay my hat -
Re: Who killed JonBenet Ramsay?
by Jill Havern 11.07.10 13:43
soulthief wrote:What would make a parent kill a child in such a horrific manner?
Ask this 'mother'
____________________
PeterMac's FREE e-book
Gonçalo Amaral: The truth of the lie
CMOMM & MMRG Blog
MAGA 
MBGAA wise man once said:
"Be careful who you let on to your ship,
because some people will sink the whole ship
just because they can't be the Captain."
Jill Havern- Captain, Chief Faffer, Forum Owner
- Posts : 30930
Activity : 43742
Likes received : 7756
Join date : 2009-11-25
Location : Parallel universe -
Rainbow- Posts : 472
Activity : 476
Likes received : 2
Join date : 2010-03-13
Location : The Picket Fence
Re: Who killed JonBenet Ramsay?
by soulthief 11.07.10 19:43
Bit different JKH Baby p she didnt intend his death at that moment, the death of JBR was intentional at that precise moment..baby p, makes my stomach lurch, awful.jkh wrote:soulthief wrote:What would make a parent kill a child in such a horrific manner?
Ask this 'mother'
soulthief- Posts : 695
Activity : 725
Likes received : 6
Join date : 2010-07-07
Location : where ever I lay my hat -
Re: Who killed JonBenet Ramsay?
by Rainbow 11.07.10 20:06
Just horrific,that poor baby.Yet his torturers will get out,be given new identities,house,job et al and they say crime doesnt pay bleurggghhh. 
Rainbow- Posts : 472
Activity : 476
Likes received : 2
Join date : 2010-03-13
Location : The Picket Fence
Re: Who killed JonBenet Ramsay?
by Rainbow 11.07.10 20:20
Tony Bennett wrote:I've studied this case in some detail.
I would make the following brief observations.
In recent surveys, around 40% of Americans believe one of the Ramseys killed JonBenet, with around a further 40% unsure. Very few believe the now-'official' view that it wasn't the Ramseys but some other third person/kidnapper/abductor.
The Ramseys' case is that the abductor entered the house (without trace!), killed JonBenet and then wrote out a ransom note. If you believe that, you'll believe anything!
A journalist wrote a book about the case saying, basically: 'It was the Ramseys wot done it'. He was successfully sued for libel by Mr Ramsey.
Mr Ramsey had high-level connections, expensive lawyers, friends in government etc.
I feel certain that Mr Ramsey was part of an elite child sexual abuse ring.
I can't decide whether JohBenet was killed by a sudden ouburst of temper by one of the Ramseys OR was killed during a group paedophile session.
I am sorry to put this on the forum but that is honestly where my analysis of the case takes me.
There was an unidentified boot print found and foreign DNA.
What makes you think John Ramsey was part of an abuse ring?????
Do you think Patsy Ramsey was there during the paedophile session?
IIRC you,in a previous post somewhere on here,stated JonBenet wasnt found for 2 weeks when in actual fact she was found Boxing Day ie next day.Where did that info come from?
TIA
Rainbow- Posts : 472
Activity : 476
Likes received : 2
Join date : 2010-03-13
Location : The Picket Fence
Re: Who killed JonBenet Ramsay?
by Rainbow 17.09.10 17:13
I had hoped there might have been more discussion on this case as it is also one I have followed and been very interested in.Anyone?
Rainbow- Posts : 472
Activity : 476
Likes received : 2
Join date : 2010-03-13
Location : The Picket Fence
Re: Who killed JonBenet Ramsay?
by Judge Mental 17.09.10 17:19
Rainbow wrote:The Ramseys have been exonerated.
In they eyes of whom?
One is aware of hundreds, if not thousands of criminals who have been freed from the courts but not freed from the suspicions of the public.
Tell us another one Rainbow.
Drat! You have me on 'ignore' now, so will no longer be able to read my posts
Judge Mental- Posts : 2762
Activity : 2960
Likes received : 2
Join date : 2010-03-17
Age : 87
Location : Chambers
Re: Who killed JonBenet Ramsay?
by Judge Mental 17.09.10 17:24
Rainbow wrote:I had hoped there might have been more discussion on this case as it is also one I have followed and been very interested in.Anyone?
Alas, you have me on 'ignore' or else one would have been able to wax lyrical on the subject with you, and drawn many comparisons with regard to the help afforded them by prominent people.
Judge Mental- Posts : 2762
Activity : 2960
Likes received : 2
Join date : 2010-03-17
Age : 87
Location : Chambers
Re: Who killed JonBenet Ramsay?
by Rainbow 17.09.10 17:33
A moderator cannot be put on ignore unfortunately,not even one whose sole purpose seems to be to goad a fellow poster.
Rainbow- Posts : 472
Activity : 476
Likes received : 2
Join date : 2010-03-13
Location : The Picket Fence
Re: Who killed JonBenet Ramsay?
by Judge Mental 17.09.10 17:56
Rainbow wrote:A moderator cannot be put on ignore unfortunately,not even one whose sole purpose seems to be to goad a fellow poster.
Actually, one's sole purpose is to find out what really happened to Madeleine, in order that one may salvage what is left of one's marriage after having spent the past three and a half years trying to glean information about a case which is like no other one has ever seen.
You may find this difficult to believe, but one really does not intend to goad anybody, least of all yourself.
One openly admits that one has major problems with fence-sitters, but only because one cannot believe any sensible free-thinking adult could possibly sit upon a fence for so many years, when there is a wealth of information out there which should be a deciding factor for any fence-sitter to come down on one side or the other.
Give your fence a good dose of creosote this time around, as one fears we are in for a prolonged damp time. Sitting on wet spongey wood all the time may very well cause haemorrhoids, and believe me they can become so painful that they can seriously interfere with your golf swing, not to mention getting in and out of one's car.
Judge Mental- Posts : 2762
Activity : 2960
Likes received : 2
Join date : 2010-03-17
Age : 87
Location : Chambers
Re: Who killed JonBenet Ramsay?
by baconbutty 17.09.10 18:03
Her brother once whacked her with a golf club. At the time it was passed off as accidental.
IMHO he's in the frame for it, with the parents doing all the staging to make it look like a paedo crime. Possibly their chosen course of action to avoid losing their remaining child.
Also IMHO the longest ever ransom note in history could only have been written by Patsy -- on her own notepad with her own pen -- and left on the staircase she came down every morning.
It has also been suggested that the 'foreign DNA' might be traced as far back as someone involved in the underwear manufacturing process in the far east, which is where that particular brand was made.
IMHO he's in the frame for it, with the parents doing all the staging to make it look like a paedo crime. Possibly their chosen course of action to avoid losing their remaining child.
Also IMHO the longest ever ransom note in history could only have been written by Patsy -- on her own notepad with her own pen -- and left on the staircase she came down every morning.
It has also been suggested that the 'foreign DNA' might be traced as far back as someone involved in the underwear manufacturing process in the far east, which is where that particular brand was made.
baconbutty- Posts : 365
Activity : 351
Likes received : 0
Join date : 2009-11-27
Re: Who killed JonBenet Ramsay?
by Judge Mental 17.09.10 18:13
baconbutty wrote:Her brother once whacked her with a golf club. At the time it was passed off as accidental.
IMHO he's in the frame for it, with the parents doing all the staging to make it look like a paedo crime. Possibly their chosen course of action to avoid losing their remaining child.
Also IMHO the longest ever ransom note in history could only have been written by Patsy -- on her own notepad with her own pen -- and left on the staircase she came down every morning.
It has also been suggested that the 'foreign DNA' might be traced as far back as someone involved in the underwear manufacturing process in the far east, which is where that particular brand was made.
@ baconbutty
One is most pleased to see somebody else who knows their onions, and one will relish watching Rainbow getting into a pickle over this case as well.
The ransom note was a most foolish display of going that one step too far in trying to point the investigation away from the home. Rather like the McCanns alluding to the bedroom shutters in Madeleine's case.
Judge Mental- Posts : 2762
Activity : 2960
Likes received : 2
Join date : 2010-03-17
Age : 87
Location : Chambers
Re: Who killed JonBenet Ramsay?
by Rainbow 17.09.10 22:54
baconbutty wrote:Her brother once whacked her with a golf club. At the time it was passed off as accidental.
IMHO he's in the frame for it, with the parents doing all the staging to make it look like a paedo crime. Possibly their chosen course of action to avoid losing their remaining child.
Also IMHO the longest ever ransom note in history could only have been written by Patsy -- on her own notepad with her own pen -- and left on the staircase she came down every morning.
It has also been suggested that the 'foreign DNA' might be traced as far back as someone involved in the underwear manufacturing process in the far east, which is where that particular brand was made.
Handwriting analysis is a very imprecise science with some experts claimig Patsy wrote it and others that she didnt.
No there were thoughts at one time that a wayward sneeze in the knicker making factory in Asia may have been the cause of the DNA in the underwear but this DNA was found by Bode Laboratories doing a new search called Touch DNA,this identified DNA as being SKIN cells and were found in the leggings she was wearing not the underwear.This DNA has not been matched to anyone so far.
Rainbow- Posts : 472
Activity : 476
Likes received : 2
Join date : 2010-03-13
Location : The Picket Fence
Re: Who killed JonBenet Ramsay?
by littlepixie 17.09.10 23:25
If the leggings were new why would there not be skin cells from the person who made them, packed them, unpacked them, displayed them and sold them. Why was there no skin cells or DNA of Maddie in 5A or in her shorts, trainers, socks, knickers etc in PDL?
littlepixie- Posts : 1346
Activity : 1392
Likes received : 15
Join date : 2009-11-29
Re: Who killed JonBenet Ramsay?
by Rainbow 18.09.10 0:27
Sorry I shoul d have also added ^^^ that the touch DNA matched DNA in spots of blood in her underwear and under her nails so could not have been from packers etc.Touch DNA is invisible to the eye and it was obtained from the leggings by scraping.
Rainbow- Posts : 472
Activity : 476
Likes received : 2
Join date : 2010-03-13
Location : The Picket Fence
Re: Who killed JonBenet Ramsay?
by Guest 18.09.10 9:51
Woman claims to have new evidence in Ramsey murder
Julie Hayden Reporter
8:35 PM MDT, September 13, 2010
DENVER - Nearly 14 years after six year old JonBenet Ramsey was murdered in her Boulder home, the murder mystery remains one of the hottest cold cases in the country.
And now a Boulder woman wants Boulder Police to refocus on her former boyfriend, former Boulder journalist Chris Wolf.
Jacqueline Brungardt took samples of individual letters from journals and papers of Wolf's and compared them to the ransom note found in the Ramsey home.
Brungardt claims when you overlay words like "arrange", "attaché", "adequate", "withdraw" and "exhausting" there are striking similarities.
She also notes there are also similarities to the way the letter "t" connects to the letter "o".
Brungardt says she hired an independent handwriting expert who concludes that Wolf wrote the ransom note.
She adds she became suspicious of Wolf from the beginning due to his bizarre and obsessive behavior about the murder case.
Brungardt says she reported all this to the Boulder Police, but they are ignoring her and she wants them to take another look at Wolf.
But police have said that Wolf was thoroughly investigated years ago and ruled out as a suspect.
Police say they took an official handwriting sample from Wolf and a law enforcement handwriting expert concluded he did not write the ransom note.
Also, they state that Wolf's DNA did not match DNA found at the scene.
The case continues to draw interest, nearly 14 years after the December 26, 1996 murder.
Boulder DA Stan Garnett said they get two to three tips a week that they forward to the Boulder Police Department. And that the JonBenet mystery remains an open, active investigation.
http://www.kdvr.com/news/kdvr-jonbenet-evidence-txt,0,3917350.story
ETA 2 videos to watch in the link above which I can't copy
Guest- Guest
Re: Who killed JonBenet Ramsay?
by baconbutty 18.09.10 10:55
Hmm ... Wolf was fingered by his girlfriend at the time (Brungardt aka Dilson).
He was thoroughly investigated and eliminated and his writing was analysed by police graphologists.
The Ramseys and Smit (an apologist and advocate of the paedophile theory) also declared him a suspect in their book after Brungardt/Dilson contacted them (presumably having got nowhere with the cops). Methinks she is a woman on a mission, even to this day. Possibly because he left her alone on Christmas night.
Anyhoo, it looks like Boulder police have dismissed this one.
http://www.9news.com/news/article.aspx?storyid=152745&catid=188
The clincher for me is this --
Chris Wolf was a journalist with a master's degree in journalism. By instinct and training he would redraft, edit and pare down anything he wrote.
There is no way on earth he would have written that rambling, incoherent and disjointed ransom note which Patsy 'found' on the stairs.
He was thoroughly investigated and eliminated and his writing was analysed by police graphologists.
The Ramseys and Smit (an apologist and advocate of the paedophile theory) also declared him a suspect in their book after Brungardt/Dilson contacted them (presumably having got nowhere with the cops). Methinks she is a woman on a mission, even to this day. Possibly because he left her alone on Christmas night.
Anyhoo, it looks like Boulder police have dismissed this one.
http://www.9news.com/news/article.aspx?storyid=152745&catid=188
The clincher for me is this --
Chris Wolf was a journalist with a master's degree in journalism. By instinct and training he would redraft, edit and pare down anything he wrote.
There is no way on earth he would have written that rambling, incoherent and disjointed ransom note which Patsy 'found' on the stairs.
baconbutty- Posts : 365
Activity : 351
Likes received : 0
Join date : 2009-11-27
Rainbow- Posts : 472
Activity : 476
Likes received : 2
Join date : 2010-03-13
Location : The Picket Fence
Re: Who killed JonBenet Ramsay?
by aiyoyo 18.09.10 16:17
Nearly 15 years later the police are still investigating this case with no sign of abating.
More than half the american populations believe her parents were responsible if survey is to be believed.
It just goes to show that so long as the case remains unsolved her parents will never ever be exonerated in the public eyes, especially since circumstantial evidence is so against them, and dna found does not match any of the criminal records on police database. So did the phantom intruder exist?
This case bears plenty similarities to mccanns. One prominent one being the ramseys also refused to take polygraph. They'd connections and used expensive lawyers from the word 'GO'.
The freaky ransom demanding the exact amount of mr ramsey bonus money is akin to kate mccann's cadaverine infused pants of ganga.
Any similarity is when john ramsey arrived at the wine cellar, he claimed he knew it immediately she was in there and he'd found her. Spookily familiar to km who knew immediately they'd taken her because the shutter was lifted.
I feel her parents hands in the murder, with JR being the strongest suspect of the two, because of the sexual abuse aspect.
More than half the american populations believe her parents were responsible if survey is to be believed.
It just goes to show that so long as the case remains unsolved her parents will never ever be exonerated in the public eyes, especially since circumstantial evidence is so against them, and dna found does not match any of the criminal records on police database. So did the phantom intruder exist?
This case bears plenty similarities to mccanns. One prominent one being the ramseys also refused to take polygraph. They'd connections and used expensive lawyers from the word 'GO'.
The freaky ransom demanding the exact amount of mr ramsey bonus money is akin to kate mccann's cadaverine infused pants of ganga.
Any similarity is when john ramsey arrived at the wine cellar, he claimed he knew it immediately she was in there and he'd found her. Spookily familiar to km who knew immediately they'd taken her because the shutter was lifted.
I feel her parents hands in the murder, with JR being the strongest suspect of the two, because of the sexual abuse aspect.
aiyoyo- Posts : 9610
Activity : 10084
Likes received : 326
Join date : 2009-11-28
Re: Who killed JonBenet Ramsay?
by baconbutty 18.09.10 19:38
Yep, HUGE amount of similarities.
Sadly the Ramseys were cynically prepared to label many people as suspects in their bid to take the heat off themselves -- strangers, acquaintances, employees and friends alike. They 'threw them under the bus', as the Americans say.
Interesting comment here (the bolds are mine):
http://www.bardachreports.com/articles/v_19971000.html
"Fleet White phoned the Paugh house and said he wanted to come by and speak with John. When the Whites arrived, they were led into the sunroom, where Ramsey, his brother, Jeff, and Don Paugh were waiting. According to an insider, Ramsey sat down next to Priscilla and began to pat her arm as if to calm her down as her husband pelted him with questions: "Why do you need all these attorneys? Why aren't you cooperating with the police?" His distress mounting, he declared, "I don't understand what you are doing." Priscilla later told friends that she had told John that going on CNN was a big mistake.
Nedra would later tell police that White was "a wild man and a lunatic." Ramsey would inform friends that "the worm had turned." According to a D.A. source, Ramsey told his lawyers and the D.A. that he regarded Fleet White, whom he had often identified as his best friend, as a prime suspect in JonBenet's murder.
In the ensuing weeks, the Ramsey team spread the word that the Whites were not to be trusted. Pam Griffin was among those who carried the message. "This man has a dark side," she told me over the phone. Pressed to explain how Fleet White could have possibly killed JonBenet, she said, "I don't think Fleet White with his two hands murdered that child. I just think he knows something." (The Whites declined to comment for this story.)
The Whites were the first of what one police investigator termed "the throwaway friends." Anyone suspected of the vaguest disloyalty to the Ramseys soon showed up on a list they gave to the police. "Ramsey panicked and started throwing all his friends under the bus," says radio host Peter Boyles, "beginning with his best friend." Jeff Merrick, Mike Glynn, and Jim Marino were all horrified to learn that Ramsey had placed them on his suspect list. All of them were questioned by detectives and asked to give blood and/or hair samples. Later they learned that Haddon's team had identified them to police as 'disgruntled former employees." Access employees were told that anyone who spoke with the press without permission would be fired."
Tapas People -- Be afraid. Be very afraid.
Sadly the Ramseys were cynically prepared to label many people as suspects in their bid to take the heat off themselves -- strangers, acquaintances, employees and friends alike. They 'threw them under the bus', as the Americans say.
Interesting comment here (the bolds are mine):
http://www.bardachreports.com/articles/v_19971000.html
"Fleet White phoned the Paugh house and said he wanted to come by and speak with John. When the Whites arrived, they were led into the sunroom, where Ramsey, his brother, Jeff, and Don Paugh were waiting. According to an insider, Ramsey sat down next to Priscilla and began to pat her arm as if to calm her down as her husband pelted him with questions: "Why do you need all these attorneys? Why aren't you cooperating with the police?" His distress mounting, he declared, "I don't understand what you are doing." Priscilla later told friends that she had told John that going on CNN was a big mistake.
Nedra would later tell police that White was "a wild man and a lunatic." Ramsey would inform friends that "the worm had turned." According to a D.A. source, Ramsey told his lawyers and the D.A. that he regarded Fleet White, whom he had often identified as his best friend, as a prime suspect in JonBenet's murder.
In the ensuing weeks, the Ramsey team spread the word that the Whites were not to be trusted. Pam Griffin was among those who carried the message. "This man has a dark side," she told me over the phone. Pressed to explain how Fleet White could have possibly killed JonBenet, she said, "I don't think Fleet White with his two hands murdered that child. I just think he knows something." (The Whites declined to comment for this story.)
The Whites were the first of what one police investigator termed "the throwaway friends." Anyone suspected of the vaguest disloyalty to the Ramseys soon showed up on a list they gave to the police. "Ramsey panicked and started throwing all his friends under the bus," says radio host Peter Boyles, "beginning with his best friend." Jeff Merrick, Mike Glynn, and Jim Marino were all horrified to learn that Ramsey had placed them on his suspect list. All of them were questioned by detectives and asked to give blood and/or hair samples. Later they learned that Haddon's team had identified them to police as 'disgruntled former employees." Access employees were told that anyone who spoke with the press without permission would be fired."
Tapas People -- Be afraid. Be very afraid.
baconbutty- Posts : 365
Activity : 351
Likes received : 0
Join date : 2009-11-27
Re: Who killed JonBenet Ramsay?
by littlepixie 18.09.10 19:41
How anyone could have inflicted the injuries that Jonbenet had on their own child or any child is beyond belief.
I often wonder how mothers who dress up their daughters competitively like Jonbenet's mother did see their daughters. Do they seem them as individual human beings or just property to show off.
I often wonder how mothers who dress up their daughters competitively like Jonbenet's mother did see their daughters. Do they seem them as individual human beings or just property to show off.
littlepixie- Posts : 1346
Activity : 1392
Likes received : 15
Join date : 2009-11-29
Re: Who killed JonBenet Ramsay?
by aiyoyo 18.09.10 19:49
I doubt the mccanns will throw their tapas buddies under the bus......
.........simply because their buddies are the ones holding more dirt on them.
They should be lucky that their tapas friends didnt thrown them under the bus!
The mccanns wouldnt be pushing their luck that way with their friends........too risky imo.
.........simply because their buddies are the ones holding more dirt on them.
They should be lucky that their tapas friends didnt thrown them under the bus!
The mccanns wouldnt be pushing their luck that way with their friends........too risky imo.
aiyoyo- Posts : 9610
Activity : 10084
Likes received : 326
Join date : 2009-11-28
Re: Who killed JonBenet Ramsay?
by Rainbow 18.09.10 20:30
aiyoyo wrote:Nearly 15 years later the police are still investigating this case with no sign of abating.
More than half the american populations believe her parents were responsible if survey is to be believed.
It just goes to show that so long as the case remains unsolved her parents will never ever be exonerated in the public eyes, especially since circumstantial evidence is so against them, and dna found does not match any of the criminal records on police database. So did the phantom intruder exist?
This case bears plenty similarities to mccanns. One prominent one being the ramseys also refused to take polygraph. They'd connections and used expensive lawyers from the word 'GO'.
The freaky ransom demanding the exact amount of mr ramsey bonus money is akin to kate mccann's cadaverine infused pants of ganga.
Any similarity is when john ramsey arrived at the wine cellar, he claimed he knew it immediately she was in there and he'd found her. Spookily familiar to km who knew immediately they'd taken her because the shutter was lifted.
I feel her parents hands in the murder, with JR being the strongest suspect of the two, because of the sexual abuse aspect.
It hardly matters though does it what the public believe,it is what the law believes that counts.....I expect even if video existed showing a total stranger committing the crime some people would STILL think the Ramseys dun it!!
The Ramseys did take and pass a polygraph privately with a since discredited Ed Gleb.......make of that what you will!
Well John Ramsey was right...he HAD found her.
Rainbow- Posts : 472
Activity : 476
Likes received : 2
Join date : 2010-03-13
Location : The Picket Fence
Re: Who killed JonBenet Ramsay?
by Guest 18.09.10 20:37
Very interesting video - listen carefully to the answer or not as the case may be. It seems they had another child die before and had set up a foundation for her too. Does anyone know anything about this first child?? A daughter Beth who died in 1992.
[youtube]
[youtube]
