Page 1 of 7 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 12 of 74
  1. #1

    Default Fact or Fiction?

    The Ramsey case discussion provides many examples of how unsourced evidentiary claims can grow legs and are suddenly handed around as 'evidence' on the forums with neither an official nor any other credible source given to back them up.

    A classic example of such a myth is the so-called "1 - 5" scale (5 standing for elimination), on which Patsy allegedly came close to elimination, scoring 4.5.

    From Gideon Epstein's depo:


    8 Q. And you understand that from Alex

    9 Hunter's perspective, the sum total of the

    10 handwriting analysis done by the investigation on

    11 Patsy Ramsey was that she was somewhere at about

    12 a 4.5 on a 1 to 5 scale, with 5 being

    13 elimination.

    14 A. (Nods head).

    15 Q. Do you not, sir?

    16 A. That's what he says.

    17 Q. Thus, that from Alex Hunter's

    18 perspective, Patsy Ramsey was not eliminated by

    19 the experts chosen by the district attorney, but

    20 she was close to elimination; correct?

    21 A. That's what he says, yes.


    Now that's interesting.
    For how on earth could Patsy have ended up at 4.5 (with 5 standing for elimination) if this was (as is claimed) the SUM TOTAL of the investigation, i. e. it was the sum total of what the experts "chosen by the DA" had concluded? (wasn't it the BPD who chose the experts?)


    But either way, for Patsy to reach a 4.5 of a 1 - 5 scale is mathematically impossible in view of the fact that Ubowski and Alford came close to identifiying her.

    Speckin could not eliminate her either.

    "The Speckin Lab was ready to testify that there was only an infinitesimal chance that some random intruder would have handwriting characteristics so remarkable similar to those of a parent sleeping upstairs." (ST, hb, p. 200/201)

    Even if one counts in Dusick's analysis: Patsy did not come close to being eliminated. The "sum total" of the investigation did NOT show that in any way. It was more the other way round: she came close to being identified.

    Bottom line: Patsy's alleged 4.5 score on that alleged 1-5 list is a flat-out lie.

  2. #2

    Default

    I have said that for many years, Rashomon. I have addressed it in countless posts, but the Urban Myth of Patsy's 4.5 is still bandied about the internet as if it is solid case evidence.

    The 4.5 is an Alex Hunter fiction. He made up that scale. There is no such thing, and if you read what Ubowski actually said, or read what any of the handwriting analysts actually said about Patsy's handwriting (there is a section at the end of my analysis posted on this page that includes their summaries), not one independent expert said that. In fact, Ubowski said quite the opposite. Furthermore, as Jayelles will attest (because she did independent research on the methods and standards of document examination and handwriting analysis), no such scale exists in those fields. Her posts on the subject are here on FFJ and can be found using the search engine.

  3. #3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by rashomon
    "The Speckin Lab was ready to testify that there was only an infinitesimal chance that some random intruder would have handwriting characteristics so remarkably similar to those of a parent sleeping upstairs." (ST, hb, p. 200/201)
    I have said that for years also, but it's like beating your head against the wall. The ones who do not want to believe it will not believe it.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Somewhere over the rainbow
    Posts
    3,481

    Default

    For those who would believe, no evidence is necessary; for those who would not believe, no evidence is sufficient.

    Alex Hunter is up to his eyeballs in the conspiracy to protect John and Patsy Ramsey from arrest and prosecution. Why should he be asked any of these questions in the first place? What does it matter what Alex Hunter believes about Patsy's writing? Ridiculous.

    "We're not necessarily doubting that God will do the best for us; we are wondering how painful the best will turn out to be." - C.S. Lewis

    MY OPINIONS - DO NOT COPY THEM ANYWHERE ELSE ON THE INTERNET!

  5. #5

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by heymom
    For those who would believe, no evidence is necessary; for those who would not believe, no evidence is sufficient.

    Alex Hunter is up to his eyeballs in the conspiracy to protect John and Patsy Ramsey from arrest and prosecution. Why should he be asked any of these questions in the first place? What does it matter what Alex Hunter believes about Patsy's writing? Ridiculous.

    Thanks Koldkase for posting this quote on Topix:

    "Q.(BY MR. WOOD) Burden of Proof 4/17/2000, Greta Van Sustren said to AlexHunter, In the
    Ramsey book Patsy and John Ramsey write that John has been excluded from being the author of the
    note and that Patsy on a one to five scale, five meaning excluded, hit 4.5. Do you endorse those two
    findings?

    Hunter: Well, I think that's close, but I think that this is a mumbo jumbo area."
    Could it be that it was the Ramseys who made up that scale, with Hunter not having the guts to admit that was an invention?

    Imo Hunter's 'mumbo jumbo area' comment was merely a tactical move to discredit ALL handwriting analysis. For Hunter KNEW of course that the majority of experts had come to the conclusion that Patsy in all probability had written the note.
    Last edited by rashomon; March 29, 2008, 5:46 pm at Sat Mar 29 17:46:00 UTC 2008.

  6. #6

    Default

    The top lawyers hired by the BPD all said the Ramseys should be arrested. What would have legally justified an arrest in such a case, considering the Colorado laws?

    PMPT, pb, p. 422:
    "the DA believed that under Colorado law, an accessory could be charged only when a principal was charged."
    But Hunter was obviously wrong, at least according to Schiller's footnote on the same page:

    This is not Colorado law.The successful prosecution of an accessory does not require the charging of a principal.
    Howard v. People, 51 P.2d 594 (1935); Britto v. People P.2d 325(1972)

  7. #7

    Default

    "Q.(BY MR. WOOD) Burden of Proof 4/17/2000, Greta Van Sustren said to AlexHunter, In the
    Ramsey book Patsy and John Ramsey write that John has been excluded from being the author of the
    note and that Patsy on a one to five scale, five meaning excluded, hit 4.5. Do you endorse those two
    findings?

    Hunter: Well, I think that's close, but I think that this is a mumbo jumbo area."
    So Hunter won't even stand by the statement he's supposed to have made. Especially since just three days earlier Thomas said that the Ramseys' hired "experts" came up with it.

    Jayelles and Cherokee aren't the only ones with a problem here. I did a little digging of my own. I talked to a few document examiners. They'd never heard of such a thing.
    They should all drown in lakes of blood. Now they will know why they are afraid of the dark. Now they will learn why they fear the night.

  8. #8
    RiverRat's Avatar
    RiverRat is offline FFJ Sr. Member Extraordinaire (Pictured at Left is Patsy Ramsey)
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    NoneYa Beessness
    Posts
    7,824

    Cool

    Quote Originally Posted by The Punisher
    So Hunter won't even stand by the statement he's supposed to have made. Especially since just three days earlier Thomas said that the Ramseys' hired "experts" came up with it.

    Jayelles and Cherokee aren't the only ones with a problem here. I did a little digging of my own. I talked to a few document examiners. They'd never heard of such a thing.
    Hopefully, this is a sign that we will be seeing more of you around here now that John may be Running again.....there's never enough Punishment in my eyes!
    "Don't play dumb with me, RR! You're no good at it." The Punisher

    "Although no one is anticipating a prompt resolution to this long and much-detoured case, perhaps - just perhaps - might we see one of those moments “when a chance arrow of history scores a perfect bullseye on a deserving target”? Steve Thomas 2009

    "Justice hasn't had a chance so far. Anyone who doesn't have this as their prime goal, we'll have a falling out with." Fleet White - Time Magazine

    "What happens is that evil comes in," Fleet says. "If you don't have truth, all you have are lies, then what comes in is evil. And evil just does its thing. In the Ramsey case, it just did its thing, and it's eaten up so many people."

  9. #9

    Default

    I just wrote this at topix, and since it's how I feel about the "1 to 5 point scale" that doesn't actually exist, I'm just going to re-post it here because I can't say it any clearer:

    koldkase
    Athens, GA Reply »


    Meanwhile, back to the topic at hand: I am going to pretend that those of you defending Patsy's handwriting samples and exemplars as "not" indictating she wrote the note HAVE at least looked closely at them and compared them yourselves.(If not, ACandyRose has lots of them at her site, and FFJ's Cherokee has a thread at the top of the JBR forum thread page which is excellent. Whether you agree or not, and she does not claim to be an expert, she has done in depth study of the topic as a hobby and can certainly instruct most of us in how the experts do it--comparing the ransom note to Patsy's known writings.)

    I guess the point I want to make is this: When handwriting comparisons are made, usually it is to catch some forgery or confirm a document is authentic. Ransom notes are few and far between, really, if you think about it. So the FACTS are that Patsy was in the home and was JonBenet's mother, that the note was written on Patsy's pad with her pen, added to the fact that THERE ARE SO MANY SIMILARITIES BETWEEN HER HANDWRITING AND THE NOTE, well it all together holds more weight with ME than if some stranger was giving the same handwriting "results" with the experts in question.

    Considering the COINCIDENCES you'd HAVE to be talking about IF it were some STRANGER intruder who just happened to use her pad and pen, wrote the note using her linguistic characteristics, AND managed to show so many SIMILARITIES in handwriting, even WHILE TRYING TO DISGUISE HIS HANDWRITING...WAY too many coincidences for me to believe.

    The ONLY argument I can see for the IDIs to make in the face of such evidence is the "intruder" was INTENTIONALLY trying to forge Patsy's handwriting on the note. To make THAT argument, so many problems arise it's simply not something I find credible, considering all the other evidence against the Ramseys.

    "University of Colorado Law Professor Paul Campos declared the letter a 'reckless exoneration.' He went on to state, 'Everyone knows that relative immunity from criminal conviction is something money can buy.
    Apparently another thing it can buy is an apology for even being suspected of a crime you probably already would have been convicted of committing if you happened to be poor.'"
    FF: WRKJB?

    ~~~~~~~
    Bloomies underwear model:
    3 Dimensional

    ~~~~~~
    My opinions, nothing more.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    In the Federal Witness Protection Program
    Posts
    1,311

    Default

    So anyone believing that the "intruder" forged PR's handwriting on the RN would have to believe that in addition to ALL of the other things the intruder had the time to do the IDI can add spending time searching for and practicing PRs handwriting. And if they were a SFF (as some believe) how would they know whose handwriting they were looking at.
    Incredible. Just incredible.
    This is my Constitutionally protected OPINION. Please do not copy or take it anywhere else.

  11. #11

    Default Judge Carnes' Pro-Ramsey Spin

    I looked up what Judge Carnes said in her ruling about the ransom note authorship and nearly fell out of my chair reading such a blatant distortion of case facts:

    During the investigation, the Boulder Police Department and Boulder County District Attorney's Office consulted at least six handwriting experts. (SMF 1 191; PSMF 1 191.) All of these experts consulted the original Ransom Note and original handwriting exemplars from Mrs. Ramsey. (SMF 205; PSMF , 205.) Four of these experts were hired by the police and two were hired by defendants. (SMF , 191; PSMF , 191.) All six experts agreed that Mr. Ramsey could be eliminated as the author of the Ransom Note. (SMF 194; PSMF 194.)
    For Carnes tells a flat - out LIE here by stating: "All six experts agreed that Mr. Ramsey could be eliminated as the author of the Ransom Note".

    The opposite was true: none of these experts could eliminate her - not even those hired by the Ramseys. At least this is what it says in Steve Thomas' book.

    It looks like Carnes was spoon-fed Ramsey-favorable info by their lawyer team and did not bother to check out the orignal documented record herself.

    Those were the four experts Carnes was referring to (text from Carnes' ruling):


    [LE's experts]:

    Richard Dusick of the U.S. Secret Service concluded that there was "no evidence to indicate that Patsy Ramsey executed any of the questioned material appearing on the Ransom Note."

    Chet Ubowski of the Colorado Bureau of Investigation concluded that the evidence fell short of that needed to support a conclusion that Mrs. Ramsey wrote the note.

    Leonard Speckin, a private forensic document examiner, concluded that differences between the writing of Mrs. Ramsey's handwriting and the author of the Ransom Note prevented him from identifying Mrs. Ramsey as the author of the Ransom Note, but he was unable to eliminate her.

    Edwin Alford, a private forensic document examiner, states the evidence fell short of that needed to support a conclusion that Mrs. Ramsey wrote the note.

    [Ramsey experts]:

    Lloyd Cunningham, a private forensic document examiner hired by defendants, concluded that there were no significant similar individual characteristics shared by the handwriting of Mrs. Ramsey and the author of the Ransom Note, but there were many significant differences between the handwritings.

    Howard Rile concluded that Mrs. Ramsey was between "probably not" and "elimination," on a scale of whether she wrote the Ransom Note.
    According to what an IDI on another JBR board said, these would have been the only experts who would have been able to testify had this case gone to trial. Fact or fiction?

    I'd also like to find out more about what exactly these handwriting experts stated and compare it to the version Carnes gave.

    For this same IDI claims that Dusick, the expert hired by LE through Beckner and Cunningham, one of the Ramseys' experts, could eliminate Patsy as the writer. But this would contradict info acccording to which Patsy could not be eliminated by any of those six experts.

    Additional info on Dusick's and Cunningham's analysis would be much appreciated.

  12. #12

    Default

    Looking in my files:

    http://denver.rockymountainnews.com/...1016jonn.shtml

    Ramsey grand jury hears writing expert
    Analyst had concluded child's mother possible author of ransom note
    By Charlie Brennan
    Rocky Mountain News Staff Writer
    ________________________________________
    BOULDER -- The grand jury considering evidence in the JonBenet Ramsey murder investigation apparently heard testimony Thursday from the handwriting expert who concluded the child's mother could have written the ransom note.
    Colorado Bureau of Investigation handwriting analyst Chet Ubowski arrived early in the afternoon at the Boulder County Justice Center, where he was met by grand jury prosecutor Michael Kane.
    Reporters are not allowed inside the building to see who actually walks into the grand jury room.
    According to search warrants previously unsealed in the case, Ubowski said Patsy Ramsey could not be excluded as author of the 21/2-page ransom note she claimed to find early Dec. 26, 1996.
    Ubowski also determined that the note was written on paper from a white legal pad that belonged to the Ramseys.
    Ubowski's analysis excluded 6-year-old JonBenet's father, John Ramsey, as a possible author of the note.
    It was Ubowski's analysis that triggered a second search of the Ramseys' vacation home in Charlevoix, Mich., more than two months after JonBenet's death, seeking unrehearsed samples of Patsy Ramsey's writing.
    District Attorney Alex Hunter has characterized the ransom note as one of the most important pieces of physical evidence with which investigators have to work.
    JonBenet Ramsey was discovered in the basement of her family's Boulder home the day after Christmas 1996, about seven hours after her parents reported she had been kidnapped.
    The ransom note was found on a back stairway of their residence, the Ramseys told police. It purported to be from individuals representing a "small, foreign faction" and demanded $118,000 for the safe return of JonBenet.
    Kidnappers never attempted to collect that money. The child's body was found by her father secreted in a small basement room with duct tape over her mouth and a garrote tightened around her neck. An autopsy showed she had suffered blunt trauma to her skull.
    Police say John and Patsy Ramsey remain suspects. The Ramseys have repeatedly vowed they are innocent.
    October 16, 1998

    "University of Colorado Law Professor Paul Campos declared the letter a 'reckless exoneration.' He went on to state, 'Everyone knows that relative immunity from criminal conviction is something money can buy.
    Apparently another thing it can buy is an apology for even being suspected of a crime you probably already would have been convicted of committing if you happened to be poor.'"
    FF: WRKJB?

    ~~~~~~~
    Bloomies underwear model:
    3 Dimensional

    ~~~~~~
    My opinions, nothing more.



Similar Threads

  1. Fact or Fiction?
    By Barbara in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: January 1, 2005, 6:07 pm, Sat Jan 1 18:07:08 UTC 2005

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •