Cherokee's Thread/Analysis

Cherokee, you wrote:

Yep, and, but for us pesky GUTTAH SCUM, it was a done deal. But they enlisted jams to deal with us. Another bad move on their part, I might add. I can't tell you how many posts I have written because all those distortions and BS and spinspinspin and LIESLIESLIES inspired me to fight for the little girl whose ENTIRE family and community deserted her in her hour of most need.

 

You are amazing, Chero. You have answered most of my questions about the thought processes in the ransom note already. Brilliant.

I long ago said that I thought one main purpose of the ransom note was to enable the Ramseys to get away from the house and out of town, into the arms of their lawyers, before LE could really get a chance to figure out which end was up. Once the body was found, which I think Patsy expected to happen pronto, with all the cops and friends looking everywhere, I figured the note was their "excuse" as "victims" to hightail it. Terrorists after them and all.... I still do.

But I never could figure out what exactly all the details meant to the writer. I have always thought that somehow, the writer had a reason for every nuance, etc. People don't just throw stuff out there at random without any train of thought unless they're psychotic.

Now I see how the note was planned out.

 

Thank you once again Cherokee for your wonderful analysis.
I sincerely hope they are being read by LE everywhere.

100% denial!

 

Do we have any actual psychologists/psychiatrists coming to this forum? It has always seemed to me that the note and the staging dramatically reveals a sociopathic mind (Patsy's), but I'm just a dumb engineer. Cherokee's gotten to the heart of the note, where it actually tells us what was going on.

Another thing I think about when I read the note (now I read it backwards!) - the timeline. How long did it take to write? Was it written at 5 am? 1 am? Did she write it and then touch up her makeup and then call the cops?

I do think it's most logical that the note was writtten after the staging, because it refers to the staging. (By the way kidnappers don't write notes after they kill the captive.) I also think it was written after a couple of hours of panic and accusations died down. Probably they went through denial/anger/bargaining/depression/acceptance before they got it together to write the note. In the Ramseys' case, their natural shallowness helped them to go through these stages fast eough to cover themselves.

I could do this all weekend, instead of cleaning up the yard!

 

I agree with everything you are saying here, Wombat. I remember sitting down four years ago, when I first got involved in this case, and copying the first page, just to see how long it would take me, and it took me 10 minutes, but this was me copying something that was already written in a printed style, but it gave me an approximate time, that Patsy may have sat there over an hour writing two pages and a half, planning what she was going to say, and pausing here and there; disguising her printing, this may have taken a bit longer. She couldn't just run through it.

I'm thinking you're a smart engineer, not a dumb one when your mind is working like this, so there!

You're right about Cherokee getting to the heart of this ransom note. She's done a fabulous job.

 

Use of the word 'bring'

I think it's important to point this out, because I haven't seen anyone else mention it:

Southernisms aside, the use of the word 'bring' would be absolutely correct if the writer of the note was going to be with John when he went to the bank (or of course, if they would be at the bank when he arrived).

*goes back to lurking*

Oh, Cherokee, fantastic analysis by the way!

 

Exactly. And I think the original plan was to get completely out of Boulder to Atlanta by private plane. When John's call to his pilot was overheard by LE, and he was told they couldn't fly out, the Ramseys did the next best thing. They left the house quickly to stay with friends, going straight into the loving bosom of their well-connected and well-heeled lawyers. At that point, they were so completely protected and out of reach to LE, they might as well have been in a "foreign" country.

 

Thanks, Elle. And yes, denial and rationalization are the two main psychological coping tools in the Ramsey arsenal. Without them, they'd have to face the reality of what they've done ... not only to JonBenet, but to everyone they've used and thrown under the bus in the past nine years.

 

The poster, "Barbara," is a psychologist. She even teaches classes on the subject. She and I used to post at WS about different aspects of the Ramsey case, and I know she lurks here ... coming out to post once in a while. I'd love to hear from her more often. I'm sure she'd be happy to answer any questions you have.

Hey Barbara, I just volunteered you.

 

Thank you, Scarifier.

I tried to address your point in my analysis, but I obviously did not make it clear enough. Thanks for pointing that out. I'll try again. First, here's what I said:

"From the writer’s assumed point of reference, John would be at his house to go to the bank. Therefore, John would “take†not “bring†an attache to the bank, unless the “foreign faction†writer was already at the bank when composing the note. That is not likely."

I mentioned the fact that "bring" would be correct if the writer would be at the bank when John arrived, but I didn't specifically talk about the possiblity of the writer accompanying John to the bank since there were no instructions for that to happen.

Once again, it all comes back to point of reference, doesn't it?

Where would the kidnapper (writer) be when John was going to the bank for the money? They wouldn't be at the bank, and they wouldn't be with John, so the verb "bring" was misused according to standard English grammar, but not according to standard regional use in some places in the US, specifically the South.

 

Oh no, you were perfectly clear - sorry, I think it's me who should have explained my point better!

I suppose I was really expanding on your comment about point of reference, because if we assume that Patsy was the author of the note then in her mind 'bring' could have been correct from her own point of reference (although not from the assumed point of reference of the imaginary kidnappers). It struck me as I read your analysis so thought I should share. It's a very thought provoking piece of work! You've got me thinking about all sorts of things again.

 

About how long it took to write the note...good question.

I think one thing we don't really know is what was written on the missing pages of the notepad. All we know is that one had "Mr and Mrs R" on it. (What "intruder" is going to address a ransom note to BOTH the Ramseys, then change his mind? "Oops, I don't want Patsy to think I'm mad at her! Scratch that!") But the other 4 missing pages (I think) that were never found could have had much more on them. I guess my point is that this note could have gone through another draft before it ended up as the note we saw.

Cherokee, in your analysis you wrote:

I have to tell you, Cherokee, that I have speculated about those lines where the words are repeated and scratched out, from one page to the next. It just struck me as possible that the writer might be COPYING the "final" note from an original first draft. If you look at how the words are so similar in phrasing, I did consider that maybe the writer was copying and got distracted and started copying the SAME PHRASE AGAIN, then realized it and improvised and crossed out one word and wrote "pickup" in its place, continuing on, rather than starting over. Maybe just a dumb idea. But in that section, as you have pointed out, it's so repetitive, just occurred to me something else might be going on there.

Speaking of the missing notebook pages/ransom note practice pages, what kidnapper would take garbage with him when he leaves, as well? He's already written the note on Patsy's paper with her pen. Why not just throw the scraps in the garbage, or leave them in the notepad? But no, Mr. Anal Retentive TAKES his mistakes WITH HIM...?

I don't think so. I think it's more along the lines of "How strange will it look to LE if they find PRACTICE PAGES of the note, as well?"

I tell you one thing I can't figure, and it is strange enough to give me pause about John being in on this before he found JonBenet: why did he give Patsy's note pad to LE, just handed it over? If the cops couldn't find a child's body in the home, I'm not sure I'd be too worried about them identifying that the note came from paper in that one pad lying around in the house. Of course, maybe John was just so focused on the pad and note, if he knew about it or helped in the wording, he just jumped right on it. Or maybe he was busy downstairs while Patsy was writing upstairs and didn't realize she'd used other pages from the pad LE would find and/or be able to "read" from imprints. But then, what did they do with those pages?

You know, I have gone back and forth about John in this murder, and I find myself wondering now if Patsy really did the deed by herself--until John realized she was in it up to her neck and hired the best lawyers he could find for both of them.

Which is another thing: Patsy is the one who got her own lawyers...after a few days with the Haddon firm. That was the first inkling I had the Ramseys were guilty in this crime. Maybe the lawyers saw quickly what was going on and realized the conflict of interest was imminent: because of the molestation, John would be the primary suspect for that; but because of the ransom note, Patsy would certainly be nailed first as at least an accomplice.

But here's the thing: all the evidence is Patsy Patsy Patsy: fibers in the garrote cord; her paintbrush and her paint tray beside which JonBenet was molested and strangled; her pad and pen; her writing and language all over the note; she's the one who takes six tries and two different examiners to pass a polygraph the Ramseys paid for themselves, STILL refusing to take one with LE; she's the one who can't give a decent answer to a simple question in LE interviews.

The only thing they have linked to John is the fibers from his sweater in her genital area, which is stated by Kane in the Atlanta interview with John. But that is again in question because of Smit's allegations that the fibers came from the duvet, which he states CBI believes, but the FBI disagrees.

I don't know. I bet you have thoughts on this, as well, Cherokee. And anyone else, please feel free to share ideas.

 

Don't go back to lurk, Scarifier. (Love that movie!) We need all the help we can get. I see what you mean about the writer "being with" John and using "bring." I'm Southern, and that is exactly the context we use "bring" in, as my examples earlier show--it's relative to the speaker being "with" the person spoken to or "at" the location where the object is being brought. If that makes sense....

 

According to Steve thomas, they did find practise pages KK and Patsy was still not arrested. Thanks to D.A. Alex Hunter(?)

 

I would like to hear more from Barabara too, Cherokee. I have posted with her before. Her posts are great. Maybe Barbara doesn't want to interfere here, because you are doing such a fine job on your own (?). Just a thought!

 

That's a very good possibility, KK. As you said, the writer obviously lost their train of thought and began repeating themselves for some reason.

The author did practice the beginning of the ransom note as evidenced by the salutation "Mr. and Mrs. Ramsey" on the page found by LE. It's not too much of a stretch to think they also wrote out a rough draft of the whole note in order to organize their thoughts and try a few ideas.

Like I said before, the writer had the ending of the story, but had to work backwards to fill in the middle and beginning. It's the same method imployed by detectives and CSIs ... you have the crime scene and dead body, but then you have to work backwards from the clues and evidence to find the perp and the action that took place.

Patsy may have tried several different scenarios before she finally hit on one she thought "explained" JonBenet's dead body in the home, and why she and John and Burke needed to leave town.

That's a very good question, and one we talked about here at FFJ several months ago. Personally, I believe John gave LE the notepad because he was trying to PROVE an intruder had been in their home during the night ... "See? Here's the proof. They wrote on this pad. Someone was here besides us."

I, too, have gone back and forth about the very same thing ... just WHEN did John know Patsy was involved?

Here are the two things I know from the ransom note:

1. Patsy wrote it
2. Patsy was "holding something" over John's head at the end of the note

(We'll talk more about that in the next section of analysis that I plan to post next week.)

The very personal threats at the end of the ransom note directed at John by Patsy let him know that he'd better help her "pull off" the cover-up OR ELSE!

I do not know what was behind that threat. Maybe Patsy told John they'd lose Burke if he didn't cooperate, maybe she knew who was molesting JonBenet, or maybe she had some other secret on John. Whatever it was, it was powerful enough to make John realize he'd better hold up his end of the bargain.

The fact that neither of them went near each other while they "waited" for the kidnappers to call says volumes about the personal dynamics going on between them that morning. The agreement between John and Patsy to cover up what really happened to JonBenet was a pact made in hell that neither one could break. Since that day, their marriage has been based on mutual blackmail.

 

It's uncanny reading over KK's post and your reply, Cherokee, because all of these thoughts are the same ones which have gone through my head too. I can almost see every poster here nodding their heads and agreeing to what both of you are saying here, because it has gone through their heads too.

At one point on CN2000 we discussed that JonBenét may have been placed in the freezer in the basement before she was moved to the windowless room, and we thought John Ramsey had moved her body when he left the group upstairs for quite a long time, and later admitted to having been in the basement.

Her body being in the large freezer downstairs would have slowed down rigor mortis, and thrown off her true time of death, had they just left her where she originally died; maybe upstairs in the bathroom when Patsy lost it, and accidentally killed her. jmo

I personally think John Ramsey had to be involved in the staging for whatever reason, or hold Patsy had over him.

 

Like KK said, you SHOULD share what you're thinking, so don't go back to lurk mode if you can help it.

 

Ha. I don't know about "fine job" on my own business.

Barbara knows she wouldn't be interfering ... she and I go way back. We've been on the same page from Day One.

I do know that, like me, Barbara finally realized the Ramseys would never be prosecuted, and we both thought posting on the forums had become a futile exercise in frustration. But as many times as I've tried to break away from this case, I've never quit reading and lurking, and something always pulls me back in.

So Barbara, get on your Guttah Guccis and jump in ... you're being paged. :wave:

 

Excellent analysis

Great work Cherokee. Your analysis made me go back and read the 911 tape text and the linguistics are interesting there too. No mention of JB's name, "the" mother not "her" mother, not using the word help (or until off the phone then help is asked from Jesus). Reading it backwards gives a different perspective as you pointed out. Hope you do a thread on the 911 text someday. Your note analysis is superb - you are the very best.