Page 7 of 12 FirstFirst ... 34567891011 ... LastLast
Results 73 to 84 of 142
  1. #73

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fr brown View Post
    Do you use different prepositions from the ones you habitually use? Those aren't the kinds of mistakes I make.

    "Deviation from my instructions" is a phrase in common usage. The only instance of "deviation of my instructions" I've found is in the ransom note.

    I think, Fr. B, that this is a mistake I could make if writing in a hurry. Here's why I believe it happened. The preposition, "of", could be correctly used to convey the same message:

    Any disobedience of my instructions.
    Any disregard of my instructions.

    The word "deviation" probably popped in the author's mind and was used without changing the originally intended preposition. Something, I feel, would be easily done when one is composing on the fly and in a hurry. This author is educated and I think this simply points to the stress that the author was under when composing the letter. A sadistic pervert, with the intent to taunt, would not be under such stress, IMO.

    If this erroneous use of the preposition, "of", occured elsewhere in the letter then I believe it would be significant. Simply my opinion.

  2. #74

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Learnin View Post
    I think, Fr. B, that this is a mistake I could make if writing in a hurry. Here's why I believe it happened. The preposition, "of", could be correctly used to convey the same message:

    Any disobedience of my instructions.
    Any disregard of my instructions.

    The word "deviation" probably popped in the author's mind and was used without changing the originally intended preposition. Something, I feel, would be easily done when one is composing on the fly and in a hurry. This author is educated and I think this simply points to the stress that the author was under when composing the letter. A sadistic pervert, with the intent to taunt, would not be under such stress, IMO.

    If this erroneous use of the preposition, "of", occured elsewhere in the letter then I believe it would be significant. Simply my opinion.
    Neither of those phrases is connected to the case. "Deviat[ion] from my instructions" is connected via Ruthless People. The ransom note appears to be a paraphrase of the demand in that movie with some bells and whistles thrown in. If that's the case, then "deviation" was the original word in mind.

    I'm not claiming that Patsy didn't know the meaning of "of" or "from." For instance, almost everybody says "embarrassed by," but a few people say "embarrassed of." The latter isn't wrong; it's unusual. But the Corpus of Contemporary American English shows no usages of "deviation of" in the ransom note sense. All the examples of that phrase occur in discussions of statistics or medicine (deviation of the iris, for example).

  3. #75

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fr brown View Post
    Neither of those phrases is connected to the case. "Deviat[ion] from my instructions" is connected via Ruthless People. The ransom note appears to be a paraphrase of the demand in that movie with some bells and whistles thrown in. If that's the case, then "deviation" was the original word in mind.

    I'm not claiming that Patsy didn't know the meaning of "of" or "from." For instance, almost everybody says "embarrassed by," but a few people say "embarrassed of." The latter isn't wrong; it's unusual. But the Corpus of Contemporary American English shows no usages of "deviation of" in the ransom note sense. All the examples of that phrase occur in discussions of statistics or medicine (deviation of the iris, for example).
    Do you think the paraphrasing, of movie lines, is a conscious decision on the author's part? Or do you think, in composing, the author was just pulling lines out of the subconscious?

    If it was a conscious act, I always believed it pointed to more of an adolescent authorship. I never could visualize Patsy or John consciously throwing in movie lines unless it would have incriminated a certain individual.

    I need to re-read Cherokee's analysis again.

  4. #76
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    In the Federal Witness Protection Program
    Posts
    1,311

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Learnin View Post
    Do you think the paraphrasing, of movie lines, is a conscious decision on the author's part? Or do you think, in composing, the author was just pulling lines out of the subconscious?

    If it was a conscious act, I always believed it pointed to more of an adolescent authorship. I never could visualize Patsy or John consciously throwing in movie lines unless it would have incriminated a certain individual.

    I need to re-read Cherokee's analysis again.
    Ii don't think it was a deliberate paraphrasing of lines from movies. I think it was simply the author writing what they thought a ransom note SHOULD sound like. Possibly a combination of things they had seen in movies or on TV, what kidnappers theoretically would say, etc. AND they were putting in several "clues" (i.e. suspects)- the SFF (Access Graphics was a Lockheed subsidiary), the bonus amount (alluding to a disgruntled employee or co-worker) and someone with familiarity (use of first names, etc). They tried to cover a lot of territory in that note, that is why it was so long. A REAL note has just one objective- get the money and leave NO clue as to who you are. Certainly you do not describe yourself as a "small foreign faction", even if you ARE one.
    Even terrorists don't claim responsibility until AFTER the fact.
    This is my Constitutionally protected OPINION. Please do not copy or take it anywhere else.

  5. #77

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Learnin View Post
    Do you think the paraphrasing, of movie lines, is a conscious decision on the author's part? Or do you think, in composing, the author was just pulling lines out of the subconscious?

    If it was a conscious act, I always believed it pointed to more of an adolescent authorship. I never could visualize Patsy or John consciously throwing in movie lines unless it would have incriminated a certain individual.

    I need to re-read Cherokee's analysis again.
    There are a lot of paraphrases of memorable movie lines in the note, but though I've seen Ruthless People several times and think it's hilarious, I didn't remember any of the lines from the ransom phone call. It's Mr. Stone's reaction to it that's memorable, as it dawns on him that his dream is coming true.

    I don't know the answer to your question, but I suspect that some of the paraphrased lines from Speed and Dirty Harry were familiar to John even if he really didn't see either movie--as long as Burke did.

    Maybe the following is a version of an earlier ransom demand in a movie or book somewhere. I haven't found it yet.

    "Mr. Stone?

    Listen very carefully. We have kidnapped your wife.

    We have no qualms about killing and will do so at the slightest provocation. Do you understand?

    You are to obtain a new, black American Tourister briefcase, model number 8104. Do you understand?

    In it you will place $500,000 in unmarked, nonsequentially numbered $100 bills. Do you understand?

    Monday morning at 11 a.m., you will proceed with case in hand, to Hope Street Plaza and wait for a phone to ring. You will receive further instructions then. Do you understand?

    You'll be watched at all phases of execution. If anyone is with you or if any action is not carried out to our complete satisfaction, it will be considered an infraction of the rules, and your wife will be killed. Do you understand?

    If you notify the police,your wife will be killed. If you notify the media, she will be killed. If you deviate from our instructions in any way whatsoever, she will be killed. Do you understand?"

  6. #78

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by DeeDee View Post
    Ii don't think it was a deliberate paraphrasing of lines from movies. I think it was simply the author writing what they thought a ransom note SHOULD sound like. Possibly a combination of things they had seen in movies or on TV, what kidnappers theoretically would say, etc. AND they were putting in several "clues" (i.e. suspects)- the SFF (Access Graphics was a Lockheed subsidiary), the bonus amount (alluding to a disgruntled employee or co-worker) and someone with familiarity (use of first names, etc). They tried to cover a lot of territory in that note, that is why it was so long. A REAL note has just one objective- get the money and leave NO clue as to who you are. Certainly you do not describe yourself as a "small foreign faction", even if you ARE one.
    Even terrorists don't claim responsibility until AFTER the fact.
    I tend to agree with you, DeeDee. I think the author was just bringing phrases out of memory just to make it sound like a ransom note. I don't believe it was a deliberate attempt to plagiarize from the movies.

  7. #79

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fr brown View Post
    There are a lot of paraphrases of memorable movie lines in the note, but though I've seen Ruthless People several times and think it's hilarious, I didn't remember any of the lines from the ransom phone call. It's Mr. Stone's reaction to it that's memorable, as it dawns on him that his dream is coming true.

    I don't know the answer to your question, but I suspect that some of the paraphrased lines from Speed and Dirty Harry were familiar to John even if he really didn't see either movie--as long as Burke did.

    Maybe the following is a version of an earlier ransom demand in a movie or book somewhere. I haven't found it yet.

    "Mr. Stone?

    Listen very carefully. We have kidnapped your wife.

    We have no qualms about killing and will do so at the slightest provocation. Do you understand?

    You are to obtain a new, black American Tourister briefcase, model number 8104. Do you understand?

    In it you will place $500,000 in unmarked, nonsequentially numbered $100 bills. Do you understand?

    Monday morning at 11 a.m., you will proceed with case in hand, to Hope Street Plaza and wait for a phone to ring. You will receive further instructions then. Do you understand?

    You'll be watched at all phases of execution. If anyone is with you or if any action is not carried out to our complete satisfaction, it will be considered an infraction of the rules, and your wife will be killed. Do you understand?

    If you notify the police,your wife will be killed. If you notify the media, she will be killed. If you deviate from our instructions in any way whatsoever, she will be killed. Do you understand?"
    It looks like to me that the ransom note author was well acquainted with this Ruthless People movie. That ransom note reads a lot like the conversation you quoted above.

  8. #80
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    8,381

    Default

    It doesn't matter what "they" THE RAMSEYS were doing to sidetrack the police with the ransom note and staging and whatever else they came up with, they succeeded. Until someone comes up with some unique investigation tactics we'll never know more than we know right now.

    No news of any interviews with Burke Ramsey has appeared in the headlines; however, if John Ramsey's cage has been rattled just a little bit about the thought of his son, Burke being interviewed, I feel good about that!
    elle: The RST can't handle the truth!
    Just my opinion.

  9. #81

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Learnin View Post
    It looks like to me that the ransom note author was well acquainted with this Ruthless People movie. That ransom note reads a lot like the conversation you quoted above.
    But why should they be so similar? None of the ransom demand lines in Ruthless People are memorable in themselves whereas there are a couple of lines in the movie I've remembered for 20+ years, to wit "Nice butt....Your dance card is going to be full every night [in prison]." Even though I've seen it several times over the years, it never occurred to me that Ruthless People was connected to the case until it was pointed out on a website somewhere.

    But similar they are, even though the ransom note appears to have been tweaked away from the original by numerous additions and changes like provocation -> provoke and deviate -> deviation.

    Lou Smit's idea that a sociopath would study up on Ruthless People to learn how to conduct a kidnapping is ridiculous because the kidnappers in the movie are utterly inept and tender-hearted.

    And even if Patsy had viewed the movie recently, it's unlikely she'd remember the details of the ransom demand. My reluctant conclusion is that when Patsy realized she needed to write a ransom note, she cued up Ruthless People and fast forwarded to the ransom demand, which is early in the movie. Possibly her early attempts resembled the movie version so closely that she was motivated to rewrite many times. There are nine pages in the middle of the pad missing before the "practice" note.

    (I realize that this hypothesis hinges on Patsy owning a copy of the movie.)

  10. #82

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by fr brown View Post
    But why should they be so similar? None of the ransom demand lines in Ruthless People are memorable in themselves whereas there are a couple of lines in the movie I've remembered for 20+ years, to wit "Nice butt....Your dance card is going to be full every night [in prison]." Even though I've seen it several times over the years, it never occurred to me that Ruthless People was connected to the case until it was pointed out on a website somewhere.

    But similar they are, even though the ransom note appears to have been tweaked away from the original by numerous additions and changes like provocation -> provoke and deviate -> deviation.

    Lou Smit's idea that a sociopath would study up on Ruthless People to learn how to conduct a kidnapping is ridiculous because the kidnappers in the movie are utterly inept and tender-hearted.

    And even if Patsy had viewed the movie recently, it's unlikely she'd remember the details of the ransom demand. My reluctant conclusion is that when Patsy realized she needed to write a ransom note, she cued up Ruthless People and fast forwarded to the ransom demand, which is early in the movie. Possibly her early attempts resembled the movie version so closely that she was motivated to rewrite many times. There are nine pages in the middle of the pad missing before the "practice" note.

    (I realize that this hypothesis hinges on Patsy owning a copy of the movie.)
    "But why should they be so similar?" Million dollar question, Fr. B.

    Let me ask you a question before I make a few observations.
    I've never seen this particular movie. What kind of a person would this movie appeal to? Was it a comedy?

    I agree with you about Smit's comment. No one, IMO, would have to study up on how to conduct a kidnapping. A kidnapper knows what they want, how to get it, and makes it short and sweet as possible. This wasn't a darned kidnapping.

    My gut feeling, if Patsy is the author, is that she was pulling these words out of her subconscious. If this is the case, however, it would mean that the movie made no small impression upon her and that she watched it more than once.

    or:
    If she was trying to frame LHP (and I believe this is a very good possibility), might she have known this was a movie which the Hoffman-Pugh's liked a great deal? Maybe they owned it and LHP talked about it and got Patsy to watch it.

    or:
    Was an adolescent or young adult helping Patsy (John) with the wording? Was she talking with someone on the phone?

  11. #83

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Learnin View Post
    "But why should they be so similar?" Million dollar question, Fr. B.

    Let me ask you a question before I make a few observations.
    I've never seen this particular movie. What kind of a person would this movie appeal to? Was it a comedy?

    I agree with you about Smit's comment. No one, IMO, would have to study up on how to conduct a kidnapping. A kidnapper knows what they want, how to get it, and makes it short and sweet as possible. This wasn't a darned kidnapping.

    My gut feeling, if Patsy is the author, is that she was pulling these words out of her subconscious. If this is the case, however, it would mean that the movie made no small impression upon her and that she watched it more than once.

    or:
    If she was trying to frame LHP (and I believe this is a very good possibility), might she have known this was a movie which the Hoffman-Pugh's liked a great deal? Maybe they owned it and LHP talked about it and got Patsy to watch it.

    or:
    Was an adolescent or young adult helping Patsy (John) with the wording? Was she talking with someone on the phone?
    The movie is a comedy starring Bette Midler, Danny Devito, Judge Reinhold and Helen Slater. It's rated "R." It was already 10 years-old by the time of the murder. Patsy might own it, especially if she was a Bette Midler fan.

    I don't think that the wording of the ransom demand is memorable enough to have been committed to memory, but when Patsy was fishing around for a template she might have thought about it. The kidnapping was genuine in the movie.

    I don't think an adolescent helped compose the note or that she was on the phone with anyone composing it. Steve Thomas said that there's evidence of a practice note before the "practice" note. I think Patsy spent the missing nine pages getting the note to sound just right. Try doing that with a child at your elbow or while you're on the phone.

    A large part of the movie is devoted to Sam Stone pulling the wool over the cops' eyes because he's actually delighted that his wife's been kidnapped. He puts his hand over his eyes and peeks over it at one point to see how the cops are reacting.

  12. #84
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    8,381

    Default

    Don't you think the Ramseys could have wandered into the room where this movie was being watched at the White's on Christmas night? Don't hear you guys discussing this one at all(?). I think the idea would have already been in Patsy's head then having just come from the Whites(?) Surely those who watched it may have discussed it.

    http://www.acandyrose.com/crimescene-ransomnote.htm

    Movie "In the Nick of Time"

    1999 February 18 - Lawrence Schillers book "Perfect
    Murder, Perfect Town

    Page 225:

    "On the night JonBenet was murdered, the movie 'Nick of Time' aired at 7:30 P.M. on a Boulder cable channel. The story centers on an unarmed political faction that kidnaps a six-year-old girl. The victim is told, "Listen to me very carefully.' Bill Cox, who was staying with Fleet and Priscilla White, told the police he remembered watching the movie that night."
    elle: The RST can't handle the truth!
    Just my opinion.



Similar Threads

  1. Risk vs. Benefit and the Ransom Note
    By Learnin in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: October 6, 2009, 5:41 pm, Tue Oct 6 17:41:14 UTC 2009
  2. A Real Ransom Note & Kidnapping
    By RiverRat in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: March 14, 2007, 8:11 am, Wed Mar 14 8:11:13 UTC 2007
  3. Ransom note fingerprints
    By Barbara in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: June 6, 2004, 11:29 pm, Sun Jun 6 23:29:17 UTC 2004
  4. The trail of the ransom note
    By MJenn in forum Justice for JonBenet Discussion - Public Forum
    Replies: 45
    Last Post: May 16, 2002, 11:21 pm, Thu May 16 23:21:17 UTC 2002
  5. Ramsey Case Ransom Note
    By Dunvegan in forum Evidence Files: Ramsey murder case
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: November 14, 2001, 4:49 pm, Wed Nov 14 16:49:17 UTC 2001

Posting Permissions

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