Sunday, July 11, 2010

JonBenet: Did the Ramseys Confess?



Did the Ramseys confess?


Let's look at the JonBenet Ramsey case, using both statement analysis of the ransom note.

I. Early Impressions.

II. Ransom Note Analysis


III. Behavior of parents

IV. "and hence"

V. Did the Ramseys Confess?

------------------------------------------------------------------

I intend to show that the ransom note is the key to this case, and will assert who I believe is the author of the note.

I. Early Impressions.

I remember, with still stark clarity, the night I was watching the news when the story broke.

I was sitting with my daughter on my lap; she playing with a doll, while I watched the news. Christmas fatigue had set in, and I was tired, but suddenly became alert with shock when I saw a picture of JonBenet Ramsey.

"What the heck?"

It shocked me to see a little girl, blonde hair, and almost exactly my little girl's age, dressed like a sexed up sleezy Las Vegas showgirl. "Pedophile " immediately came to mind. I asked myself "What kind of parents would dress up their child like that?", knowing how inappropriately dressed she was.

The Ramseys were quickly portrayed as normal, howbeit, wealthy people.

There is nothing normal about dressing up a 6 year old to look like a sexy Las Vegas showgirl. This tells me that this family is disfunctional.

A parent who allows his 6 year old girl to appear "sexy" is twisted, no matter how much the pageants are shown to us on TV.

Over the years, we've become almost desensitized to the pictures of JonBenet Ramsey dressed like that; bleached hair, fake teeth, etc, on a SIX YEAR OLD. The subject of sex is introduced into the case by the Ramseys.

II. The Ransom Note.

Statement Analysis shows that the Ramsey note is fake. It is designed to cover a homicide.

JonBenet Ramsey Ransom Note

Police and the Ramseys both said that they believed that whoever wrote the note is likely the killer.

I agree.

The police ruled out John Ramsey as its author. They were unable to rule out Patsy Ramsey.

Police analysis of the note ruled out extortion (ransom) as motive. But does it tell us more? If the ransom note was legitimate, it would clear the Ramseys for they would not seek to extort money from themselves.

Here is the note itself with analysis to follow.

"Mr. Ramsey.
Listen carefully! We are a group of individuals that represent
a small foreign faction. We respect your bussiness
but not the country that it serves. At this time we have
your daughter in our posession. 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 earlier
delivery pickup 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 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."


The note is 36 lines long; extreme for a ransom note. Norm is short demand with instructions (3-5 lines).
The length of the note is the first clue that it is fake. Investigators point out that writing for this long shows no fear of discovery, including a practice note. I agree. However, in SCAN, the length of the note also shows anxiety.

Anxiety is seen as the length is an attempt to persuade.

A ramson note will read: "We have your daughter. $500,000 gets her back alive. Get cash and we will contact you. Do not call police or she will die."

But in this note, we have lengthy discussion, with too many details showing us that it is an attempt to persuade the reader of something. Since JonBenet IS missing, there is no reason to persuade the reader that this is a real kidnapping.

Instead, the length of the note reveals that the author is attempting to persuade, howbeit foolishly, that this REALLY is a kidnapping. They go so far that it becomes ridiculous and transparent as a fake in order to cover up a homicide. The time the author took is obviously not cause for anxiety; but the stress of attempting to convince the reader that this is not a fake is obvious.


"We are a group of individuals."

This is a strange expression that makes no sense. It begins with "we" (plural) so we should expect to see consistency throughout.

What exactly is a "group of individuals?" Every group is comprised of individuals. That's what makes it a group. Why the need to state this in a kidnapping? Neither police nor analysts are able to make sense of it; as it is an indicator of deception.


Mr. Ramsey.
Listen carefully!


With a child missing, I don't think it is necessary to call for attention. Indicator of deception.

We are a group of individuals that represent
a small foreign faction.


Another indicator of deception. People from other countries are foreign only to us, not to themselves. This is an indication that the author wants to deceive readers into thinking that JonBenet has been taken by those who live outside of the United States, which would wildly broaden the investigation to include foreign countries. In fact, it causes the investigation to narrow the investigation; not broaden it, by its obvious attempt to influence the focus AWAY from Boulder, CO.




There are crossed out words. A kidnapper would not likely make mistakes about business or intentions. Then we have spelling errors.

Two common words "business" and "possessions" are misspelled, which may suggest a lower education level of the "group of individuals" that are "foreign" but then the author goes on to spell words correctly like, "attache" and included the accent mark!

This is another indicator of deception as the mistakes were intentional. The author misspelled some, but forgot to misspell others.



"...we have your daughter in our possession."

Here we have extra words which give us extra information. Why not write "we have your daughter"??

"in our possession" is unnecessary and exhibits that the author is attempting to persuade.




"You will withdraw $118,000.00 from your account."

This amount is low for a kidnapping of someone wealthy. The amount entered the mind of the author as it was written. Again we have extra words "from your account" which indicate deception. But the amount itself is significant. Not only is it low for a kidnapping, but we learned that it was about the amount that John Ramsey received in a bonus that year. This is how it came into the mind of the author; who could have chosen ANY number. If we are reasonable about this, and we go in the same denomination levels as the author, we could say that between $100,000 and $250,000 (not unreasonable for someone wealthy), the odds become interesting.

The author used the denomination in thousands. Therefore, between $100,000 and $250,000, there are how many possibilities to choose from? Alone this gives us a choice of 132 different numbers. The author chose the number, out of 132 choices, that matched John Ramsey's bonus.

The number was in the mind of the author of the note. Not $100,000 or an even number, but the strange, "$118,000". This is an indication of deception; some say to link Ramsey's company to the homicide, but I think it was a mistake by the author, as it was in the author's mind, under duress, and it was written.

It ties the author of the ransom note to knowledge of John Ramsey's bonus.


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.


This shows that JonBenet was not kidnapped. But does it show something else?

The language chosen is important. The extra details, unnecessary to a ransom note, speak to us.


"Get the money from the bank" would be simpler. Yet, even a small word sheds light.

Get it from "your" account.

This is unnecessary, but perhaps now reflects back to the author's relationship to the owner of the account.

A kidnapper would not tell them where to get the money. The kidnapper would not care.

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". Did the Ramseys have separate accounts?


"bring an adequate size attache to the bank."

The education of the author is obvious. Common greedy kidnappers don't demand low amounts of money and don't care for the preparation of the money; and likely don't use a word like "attache" unless they are from upper middle class or above. The author also tells Mr. Ramsey to be "well rested". Huh?

This shows that the author cares for Mr. Ramsey.


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 earlier
delivery pickup of your daughter.


Here we have strange instructions, including a benefit that may be realized: an earlier "delivery". This sounds like business language and not a kidnapping. It sounds like the author has experience in mail order, and business. But we have a phrase here that would later become a sore point for Patsy Ramsey:

"and hence".



, "If we monitor you getting the money early...."

This tells us that the author is watching the family.

Later, the author repeats it, but changes the wording.


"You and your family are under constant scrutiny."

The author is using words that tell us that the author is watching the family; i.e., is close. Remember a strong principle in Statement Analysis 90% or more of lies contain truth. Even the words used to deceive are CHOSEN for a reason


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


More indicators of deception. We have a pronoun change from the plural to the singular. "my" instructions. Also, we have polite terminology regarding JonBenet. Who would call a dead child by the respectful terms of "remains"? Cruel, calloused, greedy kidnappers wish to strike fear and terror in the hearts of their victims. They don't ask for small amounts; they demand much. They don't make special bonus delivery options; in fact, they don't "deliver" anyone; if the child would be found alive, the child would be abandoned somewhere; not "delivered" anywhere. Kidnappers would not advise a father of a missing child to get "rest" as if a father could sleep. But "remains"? But it would have to be someone with emotional attachment to JonBenet Ramsey in order to call her dead body "remains". It is not the wording of a heartless kidnapper, nor would they, who wish to strike fear in others, describe themselves as "gentlemen". "Gentlemen" does not sound scary. The author is giving some culture to the kidnappers, including the use of an attache and the refined implication of "gentlemen". Later, in interviews, we would look at the language of John Ramsey and Patsy Ramsey to see how she described the "kidnapper" or "killer" of JonBenet to see if there is anything common with the language here.

We also have the religious element to the simple word "over". Extra words are those in which can be removed while the sentence still makes sense. The kidnappers were not watching Mr. Ramsey's daughter, they were watching "over" her. This is a Biblical concept regarding God watching "over" His people, even though He may be "watching" the whole world. It is soft, and reflects care of JonBenet. Again, not the words of cold blooded killers who kill for money. It is personal language. It is often employed at funerals, where the deceased is said to be watching over us, or that an angel is watching over a deceased child.
But there is more.

This is an indicator that the author of the note knew that JonBenet was already dead.

Mark McClish made this point well when he said that if you are a kidnapper and you have your hostage and were in charge of watching the hostage you would "watch over" the hostage:


"1. If you knew for certain she was alright and could not escape; it is like "keeping an eye on her" rather than carefully guarding her;
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. "

I concur.

"The two men watching over your daughter do not particularly like you...."

Since we know, by this time, that the note is a fake, we look for the words themselves to reveal things about the author.
Photocopies of the note show the writer originally wrote
"....do particularly like you...."

Then, the author added "not" above it, with a line to show where it belonged.

A true kidnapper would not make the mistake of saying these gentlemen do like you to John Ramsey.

This may suggest that if Patsy wrote the note, terrible conflictions about her marriage to John boiled over while this note was being constructed.



The two gentlemen watching over your daughter
do not particularly like you so I advise you not to provoke them.


This may be the boiling point between the author and John Ramsey, if indeed, Patsy was the author. The author is warning Mr. Ramsey not to provoke the author. Did the parents have reason to protect one another? The language is not strong.

Mark McClish also wrote: "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."


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.


"beheaded" is likely an attempt to sway investigators back towards the "foreigners" as beheading is something more associated with the Middle East.

Notice "she dies" is not future, but present. "She will die" if you speak to the police, etc, would be expected. This indicates that the author knew that JonBenet was dead when this was written.

You and your family are under constant scrutiny as well as t
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."


We now have a change in address.

Mr. Ramsey is now "John"; which is personal. We look for justification of a change; because without it, it indicates deception. The foreigners would have kept the same title but here reveals that the author knows John personally. Further references strengthen this assertion that the author knows John personally, including the "southern common sense" . This is not something a forienger would state.

We also have what appears to be references to popular movies; "don't try to grow a brain".

The author knows John Ramsey intimately, including knowledge of his year end bonus at this time.

"SBTC" has been discussed at length, and could be Saved By The Cross, which is fitting to the Ramsey's religious belief, while others have pointed out that John was supposedly trained at the military base.

The author of the note is not attempting to receive money, but to persuade. The deception indicators are consistent throughout, and it would appear that the note was written by a single person, not a group as the author wishes to portray. The author of the note is not foreign, nor uneducated. The author wishes us to believe that he or she is from another country, and cannot spell common words. The author has a sensitive side towards JonBenet, and indicated knowledge that JonBenet was already dead. The author of the note knows John Ramsey personally, including not only the details of his bonus, but likely has watched the same movies as John, and has spoken to him about his "southern common sense" (or the author's "southern common sense" as this phrase is IN the vocabulary of the author.


III. The behavior of the parents.

The parents resisted interviews and polygraphs. Period.

When a child is missing or murdered, innocent parents react a certain way and guilty parents react another way.

Innocent parents do everything they can to find the killer and demand the highest penalty possible. They do not desribe the killer in polite terms. Innocent parents take polygraphs as quickly as police can offer them. Desiree Young, mother of missing 7 year old Kyron Horman has shown what an innocent parent looks like.

For whatever reason parents have for not cooperating within MOMENTS of the crime, makes little difference. Innocence is demanding.

When someone has been falsely accused of child molestation, no high priced attorney in the world can stop him from saying "I didn't do it!" from his housetop. It is a boldness and confidence that is only found in innocent people.

What evidence suggests the Ramseys?

We know the Ransom note is a fake. We know that their post crime behavior is indicative of guilt.

We know that the ransom note was written on a pad of paper that was in the Ramsey's home as was the pen that was used. The length of time it would take suggests no fear of being discovered.

The garrote used had a broken paintbrush used. The paintbrush belonged to Patsy Ramsey.

Handwriting analysis cleared John Ramsey as the writer, but did not clear Patsy Ramsey.

Words within the note reflect language often used in computer technology, the business that John Ramsey was in and showed an educated author. Words such as:
"instruction" "monitor" "execution" "scanned" "electronic" and "device" are computer terms. John Ramsey was president of Access Graphics computer company.

IV. "and hence" from "I Know You Are Lying" by Mark McClish

This is an unusual usage and one that we are looking at separately. "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."

Here again is Mark McClish on this phrase. His entire analysis and commentary can be found in the terrific book "I Know You Are Lying":

"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."

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."

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.


END OF ENTRY


I believe that John and Patsy Ramsey are responsible for the death of JonBenet Ramsey and the subsequent coverup. That another DNA was found does not clear anyone in this highly publicized but now cold case.

From the creepy sexualized appearance of a little girl, to the interviews that they finally gave to the police, the evidence points to the Ramseys.

The interviews themselves, under Statement Analysis, only show the guilt of the Ramseys.

So, how did JonBenet die?

Over the years, I have heard many theories. John Douglas strongly cleared John Ramsey, but not Patsy. He did so on the basis of how horrific the crime was, and John did not have a history of criminal behavior, therefore, in John Douglas' view, John Ramsey would not have "graduated" to this elevation of criminal behavior, without first having escalated along the way.

Ann Rule wrote to me that she believed John killed her.

Lou Smits bet his career on the intruder theory.

This case cost people their jobs, careers, and even health.

Steve Thomas was so certain that Patsy did it, and John was part of the coverup that he resigned in protest.

But, why does the Ransom Note appear to have cooperation between both of them?

This is puzzling.

I go back to sexual abuse.

Bed wetting happens.

It is also a red flag for abuse; just one indicator that we look at. Kids that are sexually abused often wet themselves, mess themselves, and have a preoccupation with their own waste. Many kids that are not assaulted wet their beds and grow out of it. However: Most kids that are sexually assaulted wet their beds.

Infections.

JonBenet was at the pediatricians so often that it surprised me that, at least to my knowledge, the pediatrician did NOT make a referal to Child Protective Services. She had chronic infections. Why was this NOT a red flag to the doctor?

Likely due to the wealth and status of the family.

I think both parents were involved in this death. They had information on each other that caused them to work together in a coverup.

I think Patsy wrote the note, with John's help.

I think that JonBenet likely suffered an injury and someone lost his or her temper and rather than seek medical attention, panicked. Her death was not likely intentional; the cover up was.

I think JonBenet, sexualized in inappropriate outfits, was likely a victim of sexual abuse in her family or by someone close to the family. It may have been by her father, which, had Patsy killed her accidentally, would have caused him to have to participate in the coverup because Patsy would have told investigators otherwise.

I think the coverup began because the family either feared that they would not have been believed, or that they felt pressure by their status in the community and engaged in a coverup to protect themselves. They likely feared losing Burke, their son.

They were quick to get lawyers, and were quick to make demands on the conditions of the polygraphs and interviews. Innocent parents react immediately to do anything to find the killer. In the interviews, the Ramseys language suggests their guilt, as future analysis will show.


V. Did the Ramseys confess?

Avinoam Sapir, the genius behind the science of Statement Analysis, is responsible for the greatest collection of data in linguistics. He taught the FBI's , Dr. Susan Adams, Statement Analysis, who then went on to teach many others; and so on.

His web site is www.lsiscan.com

He teaches that confessions are often found in the books that the guilty party writes AFTER the crime, in order to proclaim innocence. He said that it is usually found in small details but often in the pronouns. Pronouns show ownership.

He teaches that "guilt" is assigned by a pronoun. An innocent person won't accept ownership of guilt because they are not guilty.

OJ Simpson wrote, "for those of you who believe in my guilt..." taking ownership of guilt.

In the interviews that John and Patsy Ramsey gave to Larry King and to Barbara Walters, inconsistencies are found, as well as indicators of deception.

For instance:

John said that the intruder came into the home during the 5-6 hours that they were out. Later he wrote that the intruder came in while they slept.

The interviews show much and will be dealt with in future articles, but the language shows us their knowledge.

In wanting to confront Det. Linda Arndt, he wanted to ask her what it was like looking at a man who was just "told his 6 year daughter is dead" and see what she knew.

Who "told" John that his 6 year old daughter was dead? I thought he had found her and felt that she was already cold and stiff.

This is why defense attorneys do everything they can to keep their mouths shut.

He told us, like others who have been killed, that he will search for the killer "for the rest of his life"; which is an indication that the person knows who did it. This is an important phrase to study and it is commonly heard. (OJ would spend the rest of his life, not playing golf, but searching for the "real" killer)>

John Ramsey wrote and said that people and reporters saw "our guilt" or took an impression that "supposedly showed our guilt" several times.

He takes ownership of the guilt and shares it with Patsy. This is something that is not seen in the innocent.

I believe that JonBenet had been molested for an extended period of time. I also believe that she likely died unintentionally, even pushed down the stairs, or hit too hard, as others have said.

I believe both John and Patsy Ramsey were involved and worked together in, what has been so far, a successful coverup. I think it was an accident gone bad and that both parents staged a crime scene.

In upcoming articles, we will go through their television interview transcripts and using the same principles of Statement Analysis we've used on other cases, will show that John and Patsy Ramsey were deceptive in these interiews; not just inconsistent, but deceptive. We have already seen that the Ransom Note is a fake, even though, in the interviews with both Larry King and Barbara Walters, the Ramseys insisted that this was a kidnapping 'gone bad'.

It will then be up to you to decide why it is that they were deceptive.