JonBenet Ramsey Case

#226
#226
Sandvol said:
Ok, I'll take that as a yes. Awesome. We have two inferences here:

(1) It is more plausible to conclude that whoever wrote the ransom note did not want the police called. (And, we know that because the note said don't call the police or FBI or I'll behead your daughter-by the way that's pretty strong.)
(2) It is more plausible to conclude that whoever wrote the ransom note is the one who committed the murder. (That was excellent by the way because most people conclude the exact opposite.)

All right next question:

Isn't it more plausible to conclude the whoever wrote the ransom note did not intend for the police to obtain the ransom note because it was potentially incriminating?

(Also, I'll get to why the note was written to John in due course we have to take this step by step.)

P.S.-If you really want to come to the correct conclusions when you think through these cases like this you can't be prejudicial. You have to go into it with a completely open mind and follow the inferences no matter where they lead.
Click to expand...
When have you been led away from Patsy? Her child being dead? Her child being dead in her home? Her home NOT being broken into? The note (which Patsy clearly wrote)? 99 percent of Americans would have been tried & convicted on much less.

That note (when included with the 8 missing pages) speaks volumes.
Can you hear it? There was no stranger in their home that night. The male child is unlikely to be the killer. It has to be one the parents. When you finally realize Patsy wrote the note, you can logically infer she caused the incident. Why would she write a note for another persons crime? All that beheading stuff & threats against calling police were window dressing. How many kids were beheaded in Colorado that year? The final point is that the body (needed for a ransom, usually) was still at the house. What fool leaves a ransom note and the collateral that would warrant the ransom payment?

If you can prove someone other than Patsy wrote the note, you can start to disprove her guilt. But if you can't, how do explain her writing.g the note but not doing the crime?

But since it is fairly clear that she DID write the note, is a mute point.

Thanks for the pointers on studying/researching murder cases too. You appear to be a regular Angela Lansbury.... :peace2:
 
#227
#227
Who gained from the child being dead? No one. Makes the whole "murder for profit" angle unlikely. Which then renders the ransom note largely unimportant.

Except for

1) the fact the note was written by Patsy, thereby proving her involvement.
2) The note came from a pad in the house (again, balls of steel for an intruder).
3) The note contains personal information NOT likely to be known outside of the Ramsey household.
4) It was written "to" John.

In this case, the ransom note is nothing more than a ham-handed attempt by Patsy @ a cover up. It was not written to gain a profit.
 
#228
#228
Sandvol said:
Of course you won't or can't answer it. You believe Patsy did it and that's what you believe (based on nothing) and no one or nothing is going to change your mind including facts-period. And, no I don't need to point out where you were rude you know what you wrote and we don't need to go off on any more tangents than you've already taken us on. And, if you are so clever answer the question and point out the flaws in my logic. Otherwise stop discussing a case you know nothing about.
Click to expand...


Look at the facts, Matlock, Patsy obviously did it. It's all right there and you're too clueless to identify any of it. Even Barney Fife could put 2 and 2 together better than you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#230
#230
There's also no way Kristin Shepard shot J.R. Ewing. It was clearly Ray Krebbs, look at the evidence, morons.
 
#232
#232
PimpVol said:
When have you been led away from Patsy? Her child being dead? Her child being dead in her home? Her home NOT being broken into? The note (which Patsy clearly wrote)? 99 percent of Americans would have been tried & convicted on much less.

That note (when included with the 8 missing pages) speaks volumes.
Can you hear it? There was no stranger in their home that night. The male child is unlikely to be the killer. It has to be one the parents. When you finally realize Patsy wrote the note, you can logically infer she caused the incident. Why would she write a note for another persons crime? All that beheading stuff & threats against calling police were window dressing. How many kids were beheaded in Colorado that year? The final point is that the body (needed for a ransom, usually) was still at the house. What fool leaves a ransom note and the collateral that would warrant the ransom payment?

If you can prove someone other than Patsy wrote the note, you can start to disprove her guilt. But if you can't, how do explain her writing.g the note but not doing the crime?

But since it is fairly clear that she DID write the note, is a mute point.

Thanks for the pointers on studying/researching murder cases too. You appear to be a regular Angela Lansbury.... :peace2:
Click to expand...

Can you prove Patsy did write the note?
 
#234
#234
Can anybody answer this question?

Isn't it more plausible to conclude the whoever wrote the ransom note did not intend for the police to obtain the ransom note because it was potentially incriminating?
 
#235
#235
Sandvol said:
Of course you won't or can't answer it. You believe Patsy did it and that's what you believe (based on nothing) and no one or nothing is going to change your mind including facts-period. And, no I don't need to point out where you were rude you know what you wrote and we don't need to go off on any more tangents than you've already taken us on. And, if you are so clever answer the question and point out the flaws in my logic. Otherwise stop discussing a case you know nothing about.
Click to expand...

I could answer it, I just see no point in entertaining you further. If you had paid attention to anything I've said then you'd know I never said I was sure Patsy did it. What I've been saying this entire time is that someone in that house killed her. It could be any of the three that were in there and it could have gone down any number of ways. Sitting around speculating as to what happened and guessing as to what the exact details were is a waste of time. If I've said anything regarding Patsy it's that she was involved in some way. You can't point out where I was rude because I wasn't. Everything I said with regard to that specific post was fair and true.
 
#236
#236
Sandvol said:
Thank you Dr. Weezer.
Click to expand...

After reading more of your posts, I've become more convinced you should really seek therapy. This is not meant to be offensive, though you'll probably take it that way. You are clearly obsessed with your belief the father did it. Maybe he did, maybe he didn't, but how you can assert so forcibly that he did working on nothing but speculation is boggling. And yes, what you have is speculation. Experts you're quoting, facts you claim to be in evidence, you did none of the investigation yourself. You're basing your assumptions off of other people's work.

I'm confused what it is you are trying to accomplish. Do you want people to say you could be right? If so, then yes, you could be right. But you could also be wrong. Nothing you present is concrete.

Honestly, the only thing your continuing belligerence is accomplishing is convincing everyone you have possible father issues. And no, that is not a diagnosis, just an observation, using the same investigative tools you yourself have been using.
 
#237
#237
Sandvol said:
Can you prove Patsy did write the note?
Click to expand...
Can't be excluded. Her writing is quite similar. In some "provable" instances, it's an exact match for her writing.

Sandvol said:
Please tell me what the facts are.
Click to expand...
The facts are they were faced with one hell of a predicament. They could not get rid of the body. So their story had to include the body being @ home. But if the body is still in the bedroom, it can't be a kidnapping situation. No kidnapping, no ransom note. So someone moved the baby to the basement.

The facts are there was a clean up of where the child was struck. But the Ramsey's claim intruder. So did he clean up the scene? Of course not, because he does not exist.

The Ramsey's shouldn't have cleaned up the scene. To really seem like an intruder there should have been an area where a struggle took place. They want you to believe that a guy snuck in, did the crime, hung out for awhile and wrote a 2 1/2 page diatribe and then disappeared into the Colorado night, as quietly as he arrived. All without leaving a trace. Not a speck. That is not plausible. But since the scene was cleaned up, he had to have cleaned it up, because the Ramsey's never said they did.

The intruder theory requires believing in the implausible when you look @ the facts of the case. The fact is, you can't put a stranger in the house that night. Fact is, kidnappers don't normally kill their victim before giving themselves a chance to get paid. It is a fact that whoever wrote the note had direct personal knowledge about John's personal finances & had handwriting that was very similar to Patsy's. And it is a fact that the writer used Patsy's note pad to write the note.





Sandvol said:
Can anybody answer this question?

Isn't it more plausible to conclude the whoever wrote the ransom note did not intend for the police to obtain the ransom note because it was potentially incriminating?
Click to expand...
**** No!! Because Patsy wrote the note FOR the police to see. If the police don't see the note, you are dealing with a clear cut case of homicide by someone in the house (meaning family because there was no intruder).

The only way it is plausible to think the note writer didn't want the police to see the note is if an intruder did write the note (and commited the crime). But since it is not plausible to think anyone other than Patsy wrote the note it is not plausible that the note was not meant to be seen by law enforcement. The note is the only thing between the Ramsey's and capital murder. The body was strung up in their basement. How do they explain a (their) cold dead baby in a (their) damn basement? The note is all Patsy could come up with. And again, if the police don't see it, capital murder, of your own child. Death penalty.
 
#242
#242
PimpVol said:
Can't be excluded. Her writing is quite similar. In some "provable" instances, it's an exact match for her writing.

That is what the "experts" concluded. However, they also stated that she probably didn't write the note.

The facts are they were faced with one hell of a predicament. They could not get rid of the body. So their story had to include the body being @ home. But if the body is still in the bedroom, it can't be a kidnapping situation. No kidnapping, no ransom note. So someone moved the baby to the basement.

The fact is there was a clean up of where the child was struck.

The only fact is there was a clean-up of the child since she had no external hemorrhaging. Also, possibly a clean-up of the flashlight since it appeared to be wiped down.

But the Ramsey's claim intruder. So did he clean up the scene? Of course not, because he does not exist.

The Ramsey's shouldn't have cleaned up the scene. To really seem like an intruder there should have been an area where a struggle took place. They want you to believe that a guy snuck in, did the crime, hung out for awhile and wrote a 2 1/2 page diatribe and then disappeared into the Colorado night, as quietly as he arrived. All without leaving a trace. Not a speck. That is not plausible. But since the scene was cleaned up, he had to have cleaned it up, because the Ramsey's never said they did.

The intruder theory requires believing in the implausible when you look @ the facts of the case. The fact is, you can't put a stranger in the house that night. Fact is, kidnappers don't normally kill their victim before giving themselves a chance to get paid. It is a fact that whoever wrote the note had direct personal knowledge about John's personal finances & had handwriting that was very similar to Patsy's. And it is a fact that the writer used Patsy's note pad to write the note.




**** No!! Because Patsy wrote the note FOR the police to see. If the police don't see the note, you are dealing with a clear cut case of homicide by someone in the house (meaning family because there was no intruder).

So she wrote the note for the police so she could incriminate herself?

The only way it is plausible to think the note writer didn't want the police to see the note is if an intruder did write the note (and commited the crime). But since it is not plausible to think anyone other than Patsy wrote the note it is not plausible that the note was not meant to be seen by law enforcement. The note is the only thing between the Ramsey's and capital murder. The body was strung up in their basement. How do they explain a (their) cold dead baby in a (their) damn basement? The note is all Patsy could come up with. And again, if the police don't see it, capital murder, of your own child. Death penalty.
Click to expand...

That doesn't really make a lot of sense. Patsy killed her child and sexually assaulted her and then wrote a ransom note with her own pen and paper about a kidnapping that wasn't and then called the police and mentioned the ransom note to throw off the police? But, hey, I really appreciate you giving some thought about the case because I find it very intriguing. Your theory is more plausible than some I've seen. Since she went to all the trouble to write the ransom note and John must have been helping her why didn't they get rid of the body before calling the police or at least attempt to get rid of the body? Surely you don't think they thought they could just hide it in the house? To me the note would be direct evidence linking them to capital murder if it could be proven one or the other wrote the note. To me it would be more plausible to believe the note writer didn't want the note to be seen by the police and believed there was a good chance that it wouldn't be seen otherwise why leave the note?
 
Last edited:
#243
#243
"The only way it is plausible to think the note writer didn't want the police to see the note is if an intruder did write the note (and commited the crime). But since it is not plausible to think anyone other than Patsy wrote the note it is not plausible that the note was not meant to be seen by law enforcement. The note is the only thing between the Ramsey's and capital murder. The body was strung up in their basement. How do they explain a (their) cold dead baby in a (their) damn basement? The note is all Patsy could come up with. And again, if the police don't see it, capital murder, of your own child. Death penalty."

Let's backtrack. From your paragraph above you believe Patsy wrote the ransom note to stage a phony kidnapping? Is that correct?
 
Last edited:
#249
#249
rmsmith said:
Sandy is Robert Stack!

View attachment 72808
Click to expand...

Or Jessica Fletcher

MURDER-SHE-WROTE_l__131024070610.jpg
 
New Posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

Advertisement



Back
Top