1. "48 Hours Investigates"
Posted by Kat on Oct-4th-02 at 11:34 PM
The JonBenet Ramsey case.
Did anyone see that hour program, at 8 pm. on CBS?
The investigator that changed his mind was on there. (Lou Smits)
I have to say I always thought the parents were involved, due to profiling experience of past similar crimes. But since other recent cases have now supposed that there may have been an intruder known somewhat to child victim, and had assailant entering a bedroom in the night and carrying off a child, I am finally beginning to wonder. (Also, in the past...Polly Klaas)
They showed the garrot and it was pretty professional looking.
They showed a *scuff* mark on the wall under the basement window, and below that the suitcase that could have been a foothold. Smits actually climbed up and out through the window.
They showed crime scene photo of leaves undisturbed by the other 2 windows but disturbed at the threshold of the middle window, and what he claimed was leaves inside on the basement floor.
They showed a wild-eyed suspect (in custody on another charge) who unflinchingly looked straight at the camera and without blinking said he didn't do it.
Not blinking is supposed to be one of the signs of deception.
This guys childhood friend had turned his name in as a suspect years ago but claims not much was done about his info.
They also showed film of the Ranseys being questioned by police [Edit here: 18 months after the crime] and later by our interviewer.
Since that time, they moved to Alanta to a mansion...now they are moving out to a condo. They said John had not worked in 4 years. ..and Patsey's cancer had returned and she was being treated again. At one point she allowed us to see her bald and with no eyebrows.
It has been 6 years...but I still wonder about the engraving on that headstone that says: Died Dec. 25th. How would they know that to carve that on there?
(Message last edited Oct-6th-02 5:31 AM.)
2. "Re: 48 Hours Investigates"
Posted by rays on Oct-5th-02 at 1:35 PM
In response to Message #1.
I did see the last half (forgot to tune in).
I've always heard (?) that blinking is a sign of lying. So it just goes to show. Truth in the mind of the beholder (based on prior experience?).
Yes, the facts they gave was what I've seen on an earlier show (3 yrs ago?). Foreign DNA on the girls panties seems to indicate an intruder, or something. A tabloid seems to have this as a subject again, making charges that they cannot prove, and can't be disproved.
Remember, there is no law agains libel of the dead in this country.
[Steven Singular (from Denver Colorado?) has written a book on this case. His "Legacy of Deception" was one of the first on the Brown-Goldman murders. He told WHO planted the glove and HOW.]
(Message last edited Oct-5th-02 1:37 PM.)
3. "Re: 48 Hours Investigates"
Posted by Edisto on Oct-5th-02 at 6:36 PM
In response to Message #1.
I watched it with considerable fascination. So not blinking is a sign of deception? (I'm not sure I'd heard that before; I thought "they" used to say blinking was an indication a person was lying.) Well, then, Patsy Ramsey should be in the slammer! She squirmed, fidgeted, waved her arms around, talked tough, but no blinking that I saw. And isn't batting one's eyelashes a part of the whole southern-belle package? (Well, I guess she couldn't bat 'em, cause she hasn't got 'em.) In my opinion, she's a totally bizarre person, wherher she was zonked on medication or not. (Where have I heard that excuse before?) I'm sure she has gone through considerable suffering as a result of her very serious illness, and that's not to be taken lightly, but she just impresses me as completely fake. I've always thought Patsy's illness is a very important part of the plot in this drama. And what's with the inappropriate smile? There she sits, discussing the brutal murder of her little girl, and she's grinning like a Cheshire cat Unbelievable! And yes, I do think they should investigate that creep who lived down the lane too.
4. "Re: 48 Hours Investigates"
Posted by harry on Oct-5th-02 at 7:10 PM
In response to Message #3.
I didn't see that show but I have to agree that there is something about that woman that is not quite right. Like Lizzie, you just don't quite know what to make of her.
I still believe it was an inside job or with inside help. No kidnapper would ever write a three page ransom note at the site and then leave it there after it would serve no useful purpose. He would leave it there only if he took the body with him. Some suspect that was the case in the Lindbergh kidnapping, that the baby was killed before ever leaving the house.
5. "Re: 48 Hours Investigates"
Posted by Edisto on Oct-5th-02 at 9:19 PM
In response to Message #4.
I guess the thing that bothers me is that Patsy Ramsey's appearance and her manner are at odds. She looks like a sweet "Miss Perfect," which I guess comes out of her background in beauty pageants. She manages to look that way despite having lost her hair and eyebrows. However, she talks pretty much like a street thug. She didn't really use profanity, but in one place she said something like, "I don't give a flippin'..." and then she substituted another word for the one that I thought was coming. Just really strange. However, John Ramsey comes across to me as an okay guy. At least, that would be my impression if he weren't mixed up in this bizarre case.
6. "Re: 48 Hours Investigates"
Posted by Stefani on Oct-5th-02 at 10:00 PM
In response to Message #5.
I also agree there is something not right about Patsy. She seems always drunk or drugged. She is adament that she is innocent. I saw the entire show and it really had me going. They spent one whole hour on the case and only really showed me new stuff at the end (isn't that always the case?). Anyway the creepy sexual predator guy was a convincing culprit, until the police issued a statement saying his DNA was not at the crime scene and he is not considered a suspect. Of course, they could just be saying that so he thinks they are not investigating him.
The best friend of this guy was the one who called the tip line. Seems the weirdo called his friend and in a crying voice told him he had just done something bad to a child. It was very soon after JonBenet was murdered. And he frequented buildings in the alleyway that led to the Ramsey house.
I go back and forth with this case. The most interesting evidence against the parents having done it, pointed out by the detective who is on their side, is that the crime was too violent for a parent to have done. JonBenet was strangled savagely twice, raped with the paint brush handle, and then had her head crushed by a heavy blow. Then she died. Not some accident that was then covered up. She was killed by a sexual predator, he said. There is no evidence that either parent had any of these problems. Like David Westerfield and the Van Damm murder, I bet is was somebody who knew them and her and was used to watching that child.
To change the subject, you MUST ALL GO SEE RED DRAGON. It is stupendous. Scary and perfect. Very close to the book. And the best Hannibal Lector movie yet. Even beats Silence of the Lambs.
7. "Re: 48 Hours Investigates"
Posted by Kat on Oct-6th-02 at 3:22 AM
In response to Message #6.
I don't remember the part about the suspect's DNA not being found. I don't remember them mentioning it.(?)
I do remember the material under the little girls fingernails was her own, as she scratched and clawed at her neck.
So she was throttled a couple of times, and that means a thrill for the killer...not a cover-up by a parent. It seems like someone who knew what they were doing.
Stef, didn't you say the 'Santa" guy that had known the family and lived nearby at the time, has just recently died? (He had also been an early suspect.)
This may sound odd, but from all the FBI profiling books I've read (the popular ones, as in "Pop Profiling", and the use of lie detectors in eliminating suspects), the newest thing an investigator looks at in body language is a flutter of the eyelids. Staring while answering is now considered a sign of deception, and constant blinking is considered a sign of sincerety. Also if a person looks up toward the right? You know, toward the ceiling. (This one I can't quite remember...if it's lying to look UP left--and truthful to look UP right...) (Sorry, no particular source..if I find it tho, you know I'll share...same if I've found I am wrong.)
8. "Re: 48 Hours Investigates"
Posted by Kat on Oct-6th-02 at 5:18 AM
In response to Message #7.
--Stef, I really want to thank you. Because of your post with the added info, I went looking for the show we saw, and found it. This account is almost "Word-for-Word", and yes, it does state that the suspects DNA does not match what's found at the crime scene.
'(CBS) On the cold December night that marked the first anniversary of JonBenet's murder, dozens of mourners showed up for a candlelight vigil outside the Ramsey home. One man in particular caught the eye of detective Lou Smit.
"Many times, criminals do return to the scene. And that was on the anniversary. That puts him right there at the Ramsey house a year later," says Smit.
The man was Gary Oliva, 38, a convicted sex offender from Oregon who made frequent trips to Boulder. He has been classified as a paranoid schizophrenic. He was convicted of assaulting another 7-year-old girl in Oregon, and spent time in prison.
Smit is convinced that a pedophile came into the Ramsey home and killed their daughter. "I've probably got 25 good leads. And I probably have another 50 pages of other leads to follow," he says.
Among the files he's keeping on sex offenders in Boulder, Gary Oliva's name stands out. Police said that in 1991, months after he sexually assaulted the little girl, Oliva tried to strangle his mother with a telephone cord. And in December 1996, Oliva, then a fugitive and a homeless drifter, may have been less than a block away from the Ramsey's house.
John Sanegustin and Ollie Gray, the Ramseys' private investigators, say Oliva frequented buildings owned by a local church, which fed homeless people. The buildings were 10 houses away from the Ramsey house.
According to Smit, Oliva called his friend right after the murder, crying, and said he would never be able to go to his house again, because the friend had children.
"The phone call started with him sobbing into the phone," said Michael, the man whom Oliva called. Michael is Oliva's best friend from high school. "He was sobbing on the phone. He related to me that he'd done something horrible." Oliva mentioned he was in Boulder.
The call, Michael says, came just days after the Ramsey murder. Gary told him he had hurt a child. "He was sobbing like you've never heard a grown man sob or cry before in your life. And I knew it was serious. I knew this very serious." So serious that Michael, who lived in a nearby state, called Boulder police.
What made Michael most worried was the cassette tapes the two had exchanged. After high school, Michael and Gary thought a fun way to keep in touch was through audio tapes.
"I'd go to Carl Jr.'s and interview someone, He'd go to the store and interview a macaroon cookie. Stupid stuff," says Michael.
But in 1989, Oliva's tapes, once amusing, changed dramatically. "The tapes started getting darker, more depraved, and sicker, it would turn my stomach," says Michael.
According to Michael, on one tape Oliva pretended he's been left alone to babysit a friend's daughter. According to Michael, Oliva talks about raping a little girl. As the tape continues, Oliva appears to be simulating a rape. On another tape, he talks about hurting a child.
"Some of the things I do like making bacon strips out of little girl, you see, I'm into it, you know," he claims Oliva said.
"These tapes are not a joke. These tapes are not a joke at all," says Michael.
Michael says he left all his information on the Boulder police tip line. "I told them about the cassette tapes. I told them about the phone call. I told them about what I knew."
No one from the police called him and asked to listen to any of those tapes. "I mentioned I had cassette tapes. I mentioned I had hand writing samples. I don't know what it's worth but I thought, here's a lead you might want to follow up on. I know this fellow was in Boulder, Colo., and I called up and told them that."
What did the Boulder police do with the tip? Nothing. According to Lou Smit, the Boulder Police didn't follow up on 95 percent of the more than 3,000 phone tips that came in. In Oliva's case, police didn't investigate him until nearly four years after JonBenet's death, when Oliva was caught with drugs - and a stun gun.
Oliva, who is wanted in Oregon for probation violations, turned himself in to the Boulder police two weeks ago. He claims he never used that stun gun on a child. He says he did not hurt or kill JonBenet.
When asked whether he told his friend he was attracted to little girls, he says: "I don't want to talk about that."
While Oliva says he doesn't remember making the disturbing audiotapes, what he will admit to is an obsession with JonBenet. "I believe that she came to me after she was killed and revealed herself to me. I'd like to see a memorial set up for her. I haven't seen that, anywhere," he says.
As it turns out, 48 Hours Investigates is not the only one interested in Oliva. A Boulder police officer assigned to the Ramsey case was in the room taking notes while Moriarty interviewed Oliva.
The Ramsey investigators had to physically take the evidence to the police before they would even evaluate it.
Why aren't the Boulder police taking these leads more seriously? Police have dismissed Oliva because his DNA doesn't match evidence at the scene. The Ramseys say police have a double standard: While some suspects have been cleared because their DNA doesn't match, they have not been cleared for the same reason.
Just this week, police said Oliva is not a suspect. Sources say his DNA doesn't match evidence at the scene
JonBenet Ramsey would have been 12 years old this year and starting the sixth grade. Instead, she's in a Georgia cemetery, while her brutal killer or killers go free.'
THE REST OF THE STORY:
9. "Re: 48 Hours Investigates"
Posted by Edisto on Oct-6th-02 at 11:07 AM
In response to Message #8.
For sure this guy Oliva wins the creep sweeps, but that doesn't necessarily mean he killed her, I guess. Ever since the sniper began shooting people hereabouts (I live kinda between Montgomery County, MD, and Fredericksburg, VA, where shootings took place), I've been thinking more and more about these groundskeeping crews that are so common in our neighborhood. We have no idea who these people are!
Today's Post had an article about the guy who's suddenly being looked at (again) in the Chandra Levy case. I always wondered about him, at least since they found the body, because his M. O. was so similar. He had been working on a groundskeeping crew, among other jobs.
10. "Re: 48 Hours Investigates"
Posted by Doug on Oct-6th-02 at 6:54 PM
In response to Message #1.
A few years ago, not long after it came out, I read the book "Perfect Murder, Perfect Town" by Lawrence Schiller. It detailed what had happened up to that point in the Ramsey case and investigation. When I finished the book my opinion was, and remains, that the parents "must" have done it but "couldn't" have done it.
I watched the "48 Hours" program on the Ramsey case the other night. The intruder theory deserves much more attention than it seems to have gotten over the years though I don't believe whoever did commit the murder of JonBenet Ramsey was a "stranger."
Another interesting read about the Ramsey case is "JonBenet: Inside the Ramsey Murder Investigation" by Steve Thomas, a former Boulder, CO, police detective. It offers a much different perspective of the case and what might have happened.
11. "Re: 48 Hours Investigates"
Posted by Kat on Oct-7th-02 at 3:04 AM
In response to Message #10.
I think I've read both these books.
Stef gets them hot off the press, borrowed, and lends them to me.
I was very into the Ramsey's being the ones, like the Eisenburgs here in Florida.
But since those older crimes we have seen the *neighbor guy syndrome* or the *casual nearby laborer*, taking children, which seems to be a newish trend. (More newly publisized, of course..is the meaning of That).
BUT, there is still that headstone dated death as the 25th of December. Did the parents just put that for sympathy and effect? Can someone legally put WRONG dates on a headstone if they wanted?
The note is the weirdest and hardest evidence to explain.
To begin a note with : "LISTEN UP", makes it sound as if it were dictated, not just thought of and written down. (This opinion came from one of those books, I think)
12. "Re: 48 Hours Investigates"
Posted by Edisto on Oct-7th-02 at 11:42 AM
In response to Message #11.
I think you can probably put about anything you want on a grave marker, as long as the cemetery permits it. In this case, I guess they had to put a date of some kind, so they just chose the one with the most significance (assuming they didn't know the correct date, which is a big assumption in this case). There's a little Baptist Church graveyard in South Carolina where a large contingent of my relatives are buried. Southern Baptists, in case you don't know, don't believe in drinking what they used to call "beverage alcohol." (So is it OK to drink rubbing alcohol?) Anyway, one of my young cousins was killed in a traffic accident several years ago. His gravestone has a place for a photograph, and the picture shows him with a broad grin and holding a can of Bud. So far as I know, the church didn't even object to that.
(Message last edited Oct-7th-02 11:43 AM.)
13. "Re: 48 Hours Investigates"
Posted by Doug on Oct-7th-02 at 7:56 PM
In response to Message #11.
Does anyone know what date of death is shown on JonBenet Ramsey's death certificate?
14. "Re: 48 Hours Investigates"
Posted by Kat on Oct-7th-02 at 8:21 PM
In response to Message #13.
That's a good question, and I bet that document was pictured in the Enquirer/Globe/Examiner/Star--one of them at least.
I thought I had saved all the issues pertaining to JonBenet's death that first year, but I can't find them anywhere.
I would think they put Dec. 26th, because they would claim they couldn't pin the time down so long after death.
But, Edisto, if someone put made up dates on headstones, wouldn't that throw evryone's genealogy research out the window?
15. "Re: 48 Hours Investigates"
Posted by Edisto on Oct-7th-02 at 8:55 PM
In response to Message #13.
Have you checked the many Internet sites on the case? I did a perfunctory check tonight and couldn't find a copy of the death certificate. I may have found a clue as to why. John Ramsey had an older daughter who died in a car accident several years before JonBenet was killed. While the investigation into JonBenet's case was going on, authorities moved to "seal" the death certificate of the older daughter, Beth. (There had been some talk of John Ramsey's having sexually abused Beth.) Possibly the same thing was done with JonBenet's. I did find a copy of her autopsy report and was at first startled to see that it listed a date and time of death of 26 December at something after 1:00 in the afternoon. That's got to be an "official" time, since it's after the body was discovered in the basement. It may be the time that she was actually pronounced dead. Hmmmm...is that also the time used on the death certificate? I wonder. I actually thought one of my several books on the case had a copy of the death certificate. I haven't been able to find all of the books. Will look again.
(Message last edited Oct-7th-02 8:59 PM.)
16. "Re: 48 Hours Investigates"
Posted by Edisto on Oct-7th-02 at 9:10 PM
In response to Message #14.
It certainly might throw people's genealogy research off, although I doubt if a difference of one day is going to do much harm. Think of all the people who lie about their ages for various reasons. Actresses in particular are infamous for shaving years off. Do you think their true ages appear on their headstones? Rebello has an example in fact. Page 353 shows Bridget's gravestone in Mt. Olivet Cemetery in Montana. It has a year of birth: 1869. Is that correct? We know there was all sorts of confusion about Bridget's age, so it probably isn't.
17. "Re: 48 Hours Investigates"
Posted by Kat on Oct-8th-02 at 1:22 AM
In response to Message #16.
Oh, yea, actresses.
Thanks for those two intriguing posts!
18. "Re: 48 Hours Investigates"
Posted by diana on Oct-11th-02 at 7:00 PM
In response to Message #15.
I was looking around the web for JonBenet's death certificate and I ran into this site. (No death certificate, though.) It presents an interesting solution to the crime that doesn't involve the Ramseys. Unfortunately the print is blue on black -- and consequently very hard to read -- but worth struggling through, I think.
There are also some excellent pictures related to the Julia Wallace case of the 1930's that I had never seen before. Can't remember who else on the board is interested in this case besides me. But an intriguing idea about who might really have committed that particular murder is put forward here as well.
19. "Re: 48 Hours Investigates"
Posted by Kat on Oct-12th-02 at 2:47 AM
In response to Message #18.
That was a good find and very interesting...thanks.
I could only read 1/2 of it for now...it is quite extensive.
I captured to disc the pics.
Now, see a weird phenomenom (sp?)
Here is the famous photo of JonBenet. I am "Attaching" it rather than displaying it outright, for privacy purposes.
If one wishes to click on the attachment please notice:
Cover her eyes with the length of your finger.
She now looks 21....
Has this girl had *plastic* surgery?
(Message last edited Oct-12th-02 2:48 AM.)
20. "Re: 48 Hours Investigates"
Posted by kimberly on Oct-22nd-02 at 3:13 PM
In response to Message #18.
This site has a fairly bad story on Lizzie, they also
have this one on Jonbenet Ramsey. I haven't paid much
attention to this case, this one has Patsy
accidentally injuring her & then she panics & kills her.
21. "Re: 48 Hours Investigates"
Posted by rays on Oct-26th-02 at 4:38 PM
In response to Message #19.
I'm not a physician. Plastic surgery was invented during WW II to deal with all the burned and disfigured faces from fire. (There is a reference to this in the 1970 film "Battle of Britain".)
I think no one would do plastic surgery on a child because of the future growth. It would be more likely to retouch the photograph?
22. "Re: 48 Hours Investigates"
Posted by Kat on Oct-27th-02 at 3:43 AM
In response to Message #21.
I think this young girl was in the public eye in Person every bit as much as in photo's. She would have to Match her photos.
I speculated that she had had surgery because at the time of the crime I had read that she had in Enquirer/Globe/Star/Examiner...(All lumped together...don't know which one)--at Patsey's instigation and that JonBenet had wanted to.
23. "Re: 48 Hours Investigates"
Posted by Doug on Nov-2nd-02 at 1:24 PM
In response to Message #22.
The recent 48 Hours program and the discussion on this thread prompted me to read another book on the Ramsey case, which I finished a few days ago. The book is called "Presumed Guilty" by Stephen Singular and the author presents an interesting overview of the investigation of the case and another theory as to what might have happened.
24. "Re: 48 Hours Investigates"
Posted by rays on Nov-2nd-02 at 1:57 PM
In response to Message #23.
Very Good. Can you write a short review? Does he blame anyone?
I only read his "Legacy of Deception".
25. "Re: 48 Hours Investigates"
Posted by Doug on Nov-2nd-02 at 3:34 PM
In response to Message #24.
In the book "Presumed Guilty" the author, Stephen Singular, explores the possibility of a child pornography connection to Jon Benet Ramsey's death. He theorizes that she was taken from the house on Christmas night 1996 to be photographed and "something" happened. Apparently Singular tried to prevail on investigators on both sides of the case to look at this angle but with not much success, at least up to the time he wrote the book. "Presumed Guilty" was published in 1999 and Singular did his own interviews and research in 1997 and 1998.
26. "Re: 48 Hours Investigates"
Posted by Kat on Nov-2nd-02 at 11:04 PM
In response to Message #25.
Did the perp enter the house thru the basement window or was it someone already hiding in the house? Someone they knew casually, or a stranger/predator?
Did you find the time of death info you were looking for? (That bothersome date on that gravestone...)
27. "Re: 48 Hours Investigates"
Posted by Doug on Nov-3rd-02 at 4:05 PM
In response to Message #26.
Kat, I saw no information about the date on Jon Benet Ramsey's death certificate in "Presumed Guilty."
The author, Stephen Singular, advances a theory near the end of the book that John Ramsey, while not a fan of child beauty pageants, wanted to support his wife and daughter in this activity because Patsy Ramsey, who had been a Miss West Virginia, was ambitious for Jon Benet and Jon Benet enjoyed participating in the contests. The author suggests that arrangements were "innocently" made for a photographer to take pictures of Jon Benet for beauty pageant and/or promotional purposes and something went terribly wrong at some point either around or during the photo session, resulting in Jon Benet's death.
At least two questions come up in my mind about this theory. One is why choose late Christmas night for a photo shoot with a young child? The other question is would Jon Benet's parent, in this case John Ramsey, allow a photographer to take the child out of his presence in the middle of the night to be photographed, even for legitimate purposes?
28. "Re: 48 Hours Investigates"
Posted by Kat on Nov-4th-02 at 2:53 AM
In response to Message #27.
Is that all the author's hanging a theory on? Seems pretty flimsey, as you pointed out the weaknesses.
Was the note explained?
29. "Re: 48 Hours Investigates"
Posted by kimberly on Nov-13th-02 at 12:04 PM
In response to Message #28.
Has anyone ever seen this case:
I don't remember ever hearing about it & was totally
shocked reading what this poor girl had to endure.
30. "Re: 48 Hours Investigates"
Posted by harry on Nov-13th-02 at 2:37 PM
In response to Message #29.
Wow Kinmberly, that's pretty gory indeed! I had never heard of it either.
Can you believe one of those girls is out on parole already? Seems like it should have been a death penalty case. It certainly was premeditated. I'd be glad to pull the switch on all 4 of them.
31. "Re: 48 Hours Investigates"
Posted by kimberly on Nov-13th-02 at 4:23 PM
In response to Message #30.
I read this story & I just about fell over, it is hard to top in
it's brutality. I don't know how anyone could have
faced those girls in court & not exploded on them. What
must it be like for her parents to live with knowing
what she went thru? That was just too much when they
opened the trunk & all she could say was "Mommy" my god!
32. "Re: 48 Hours Investigates"
Posted by harry on Nov-13th-02 at 6:01 PM
In response to Message #31.
There's another website for more on this crime:
It really bugs me that one of these animals is out on parole already.
33. "Re: 48 Hours Investigates"
Posted by Susan on Nov-13th-02 at 11:40 PM
In response to Message #31.
All I kept on think as I read this was what animals! How could someone do something like that, what has become of today's youth that this is how low they think of another's life!
I also thought, why weren't these girls going after the girlfriend who had strayed, it takes two to tango. Ugggh, what sickos! But, thank you for the link, Kimberly.
34. "Re: 48 Hours Investigates"
Posted by kimberly on Nov-14th-02 at 12:11 AM
In response to Message #32.
Did you see the jail babes links? Who aspires to date convicted
criminals? Is that like Americans who always wanted to marry royalty? I know it is slim pickings in the dating pool, but anyone else in the
world is better than these savages. And that was a savage killing.
What does good behavior mean? What about the behavior that got
them there? Does that not count?
35. "Re: 48 Hours Investigates"
Posted by Doug on Nov-30th-02 at 6:43 PM
In response to Message #28.
Stephen Singular in his book "Presumed Guilty" includes a short chapter dealing with the ransom note. He suggests that the writer of the note tried to imitate Patsy Ramsey's handwriting. He theorizes that the purpose of the note may have been to "throw off" someone other than the authorities. I believe Singular is implying that John Ramsey created the note to fool Patsy Ramsey. However, I don't understand why John would try to fool his wife in this way while at the same time imitating her handwriting!
36. "Re: 48 Hours Investigates"
Posted by Kat on Dec-1st-02 at 3:39 AM
In response to Message #35.
EEkk That's complicated.
I still think the truest thing about that note is that it WAS dictated.
"Listen Carefully" as a salutation implies this.
I just finished a Stephen Singular book 2 nights ago, so it's odd that you brought that up now. I had forgotten that we were discussing him. His name sounded familiar while I was reading
his Charmed To Death, 1995, Pinnacle Books. [Cool Coincidence!]
That was pretty good. It was also complicated but he made sense of the woman's varied and sundry background--a "black widow."
I don't know why he sounds like he's *reaching* here in the Ramsey case. You'd think throwing off the authorities would be JOB ONE with any perp.
This is a quote from the web-site Diana provided. ( If I recall correctly, it Seems that the authorities thought grammatical similarities also existed between the note and Patsey Ramsey...)
"I have analysed the 'ransom note' left at the Ramsey's home by the killer, and noted several strong matches regarding grammar, phrasing and style between the note and the wording of Fleet White's letter of January 16, 1998 to the Daily Camera. The phrase: 'At this time' immediately caught my eye. The phrase 'At this time' starts the third sentence of the ransom note: 'At this time we have your daughter in our possession.' I do not believe Fleet White acted alone. I am certain that his wife Priscilla aided and abetted him."
(Message last edited Dec-1st-02 4:07 AM.)
12 October, 2003