Laying the Foundation For Borg Mentality

Never go to the Ladies room with a live microphone. :shutup:

 

ROFLLLL I knew it was YOU!!! :glug: :beersign:

You quit drinking and I'll quit flushing on national TV...

Heymom

 

Cherokee

"Like BluesStrat said, BlueCrab had some good ideas, but his insistance that Burke wrote the note was both ludicrious and never ending."

I agree, except for the possibility of a computer graphics program, developed by an older brother, that closely duplicated Patsy's handwriting. For instance, it could have been used to write excuse notes at school. After all, Access Graphics was John's business.

 

Spade, I hope you're not serious. That above idea is not even a realistic possibility!

There is no way a person copying a computer graphics program could have produced the ransom note. For one thing, there are too many variables in the handwriting, and for another thing, the linguistics are a match to Patsy, not John Andrew or Burke.

I personally know a computer expert who tried to duplicate the above idea and failed. You cannot successfully immitate another person's handwriting for one page, much less three pages. If you were a handwriting and linguistic analysis expert, you would know that idea is both absurd and preposterous. (That's not a slam, just an observation.)

It is true that a person can derive a script for each letter, (there is a "Ransom Note" computer script on the Internet), but you CANNOT match word for word the connecting strokes, the spacing and loop variables or other subtle differences in a person's handwriting! It is impossible.

Just because John's business was Access Graphics does not mean John Andrew was the inventor of a copycat script, and helped Burke write a ransom note in the dead of night. That is really reaching into the realm of fantasy.

The Burke Did It scenario can stand alone on it's own with Patsy writing the ransom note to cover for him. The addition of these kinds of fanciful ideas only serves to give credence that some people are willing to stretch the boundaries of reality to pronounce the Ramseys, particularly Burke, guilty.

 

Cherokee

Originally Posted by Spade
"Like BluesStrat said, BlueCrab had some good ideas, but his insistance that Burke wrote the note was both ludicrious and never ending."

I agree, except for the possibility of a computer graphics program, developed by an older brother, that closely duplicated Patsy's handwriting. For instance, it could have been used to write excuse notes at school. After all, Access Graphics was John's business.

Originally Posted by Cherokee:

"I hope you're not serious. That is not even a possibility!

There is no way a person copying a computer graphics program could have produced the ransom note. For one thing, there are too many variables in the handwriting, and for another thing, the linguistics are a match to Patsy, not John Andrew or Burke."

I am serious as the proverbial heart attack. I know the detective that analyzed the the font "Andrew". This is not to say that Burke wrote the note, my personal opinion is that Patsy wrote it with John's assistance. But---it is a possibility.

 

I repeat. It is NOT a possibility. Not in this world or the next. Trust me.

 

Cherokee

Spade: This is not to say that Burke wrote the note, my personal opinion is that Patsy wrote it with John's assistance. But---it is a possibility.

Cherokee: I repeat. It is NOT a possibility. Not in this world or the next. Trust me.

Spade: I do trust you or I wouldn't be posting at FFJ. This bizarre case has taught me that EVERYTHING is a possibility and that you can NOT be too cynical. Does anybody know of a case where the DA's office and the main suspects collaborated to obscure the facts?

 

Thanks, Cherokee. That's been on my mind for a while.

 

You're welcome, Punisher. I will be glad to address any questions you, or others, have about the handwriting in the Ransom Note.

Competent graphologists, and document examiners, know when handwriting has been faked or forged. There are elements in the forgery that give it away. One of those elements is the speed with which the script was written.

A person trying to forge another's handwriting must necessarily write slower than the writing be copied in order to "perfect" the copying of letters. This "hesitation" of the flow of handwriting impacts the natural speed and rhythm of the script, and is very noticible to the trained eye.

If the ransom note were only a few sentences long, the interruption in speed and rhythm might escape notice, but there is absolutely NO WAY it could be continued successfully for three pages, and certainly not by a nine-year-old boy.

The whole idea that John Andrew MIGHT have made previously to 12/15/96 a computer script that MIGHT have tried to copy Patsy's handwriting that Burke MIGHT have tried to use to write the ransom note is so preposterous, you might as well believe in the Easter bunny because it makes more sense.

Leaving aside the handwriting, the linguistics and punctuation of the ransom note is that of an adult woman, not a nine-year-old boy. Give me a break. Was Burke supposed to be able to fake that as well? Was there a secret computer program for that, too?

All these convoluted theories are nothing but just that; convoluted theories made up by someone trying to fit the evidence to THEIR perp of choice. It always comes down to Occam's Razor. The simplest answer is always the best answer. There is no need to create fanstastical scenarios with no foundation in reality. It only muddies the water, obscures the true facts, and hampers any chance of justice in the case.

Burke may have inflicted JonBenet's fatal wound, but he did not write the Ransom Note. Patsy Ramsey wrote it to either cover for herself or Burke or someone else. Nothing else fits the FACTS (the handwriting and linguistics) of the Ransom Note.

 

I've heard that handwriting analysis is usually to find out who DIDN'T write something, sort of on Holmes' principle that, once the impossible is eliminated, whatever remains must be it.

Any truth to that?

 

Dear Cherokee:

As I've said previously, I've read both handwriting and linguistic analyses of the ransom note from several sources with yours, as I said, being, in my opinion, the most comprehensive and superlative. However, one point that I noted regarding the note that I've yet to see anyone else pick up upon could be both telling and perhaps even critical in resolving who wrote the note, and thus committed the crime or was complicit in it.

It is noted in most analyses that the writer misspelled two relatively common words towards the beginning of the note, but afterwards spelled and punctuated correctly throughout the note. The conclusion generally reached is that the writer is well-educated and had initially intended to give a contrary impression and/or that he or she might be foreign and then lasped in the effort.

However, this is not precisely true. The writer does not punctuate correctly throughout, and makes the same punctuation mistake consistently. Please consider this:

http://www.rhlschool.com/eng3n31.htm

"Don't grow a brain John." [sic] The comma in the direct address preceding the name is omitted in every such instance, is it not? This tells me that this was not a mere slip such as forgetting the final period after 'C' in "S.B.T.C," but rather an habitual ignorance on the part of the writer. No, I don't think the writer was poorly educated or foreign. Rather, I think the writer was simply not an expert grammarian. Would Mrs. Ramsey, as you noted--a journalism major in college--, be ignorant of the proper usage of a comma to set off direct address? Are there any examples of her writings prior to the crime in which she exhibits this tendency?

If I were Mr. Ramsey, I'd go through all of his late wife's personal correspondence with friends and relatives to see if he can find a letter writer with this tendency. If so, I think the authorities will have an interesting place to look in accordance with my previously stated theory.

Indeed, so engrained is it in the minds of people really competent in writing English that a comma precedes (and follows, if applicable) names in direct address, that a Mr. Delmar England actually puts the commas into his typed version of the note, doubtlessly unconsciously correcting it, in regard to his analysis of the note below:

http://www.geocities.com/Area51/nebula/9337/ramseynote.html

The point is that I find it highly unlikely that the writer would have omitted it in each and every instance if he or she realized the proper form. We are looking at a person who has above average English language skills, but not excellent ones.

 

Yes, there is. Early on in the investigation, John Ramsey and Burke Ramsey were ruled out as the Ransom Note writers, as were close to 100 other people who had contact with the Ramseys. Patsy was the only one who could not be eliminated as the author of the Ransom Note.

In a Fox News story, Carole McKinley stated, "Out of 100 people Chet Ubowski of the CBI analyzed for the Boulder Police Department, he found only one person whom he thought may have authored the document, Patsy Ramsey. Investigative sources tell Fox News that the disguised letters and bleeding ink from the felt tipped pen used to write the note kept him from 100 percent ID of Mrs. Ramsey."

 

Otoh, her interview speaking patterns come right off the page of the RN.

Thanks, Cherokee. But you don't have to remind me of that quote. i was the one who furnished it for Ms Marple, after all!

 

Journalists are not usually perfect grammarians. Read a newspaper lately?

Heymom

 

“doubtlesslyâ€, you say? The problem with your conclusion is that
I don’t have a personally typed version of the note. To avoid
personal error, I copy and paste when possible; which was the
case when I analyzed the note. Even if someone did make such an
error, the assumption that is was my typing error via
“unconsciously correcting†is disregarding alternative
explanation unto false conclusion. You might want to watch that.

BTW, much earlier in this thread, I asked if you believe there is
evidence of an intruder; and if so, would you list the alleged
evidence and answer questions about it. I’m still waiting for
answer.

 

I know, Punisher. I wasn't reminding YOU ... I was posting it for OTHERS to see.

 

Just because a person has had English language, or journalistic, training, doesn't necessarily mean that particular training is used in her everyday life. Like Heymom said ... does every journalist always punctuate correctly? No.

Those of us who have completed high school (and perhaps some form of higher education) have all been exposed to the proper forms of punctuation, but do we all use that correct punctuation at all times? No.

As a former English teacher who taught correct punctuation and grammar, I can assure you that I don't always punctuate correctly. I have had the training, but that doesn't always translate to usage in everyday situations. Sometimes, I'm in a hurry, and sometimes, I just don't care. There are times I don't like a punctuation rule, so I ignore it, and substitute something else I like better ... like using elipsis instead of colons or semi-colons.

People who don't have to use correct punctuation every day often forget the rules (if they ever really knew them that well to begin with). It's like anything in life. If you don't use it, you lose it. I've forgotten half of the Spanish vocabulary I learned in class because I don't use it that often. Does that mean I never had the training? No. It just means I've forgotten the usage, just as Patsy Ramsey, or any other person, might forget the correct punctuation rules they may have been taught.

In the samples of Patsy's handwriting that are available to us, I wasn't able to find any examples of Patsy directly addressing another person (within a sentence) where she should have set off the person's name with a comma. However, I did find two examples where Patsy consistently did not use another correct punctuation rule in her writing. It seems Patsy did not set off two complete sentences on either side of the conjunction "and" with a comma, as is the proper punctuation. If Patsy ignored, or forgot, that rule of punctuation, she could easily have ignored, or forgotten, the rule concerning commas and direct address.

Furthermore, when a person is in shock and high stress as they write a ransom note to cover up their (or a loved one's) involvement in a family member's death ... the very last thing on their minds is correct punctuation!

 

I have never formally taught punctuation and grammar, but have
proofread a lot of papers for college students. In this capacity,
I am very careful to go by rules because I know what their
instructors expect. At other times, I also make my own rules, and mistakes.

“People who don't have to use correct punctuation every day often
forget the rules (if they ever really knew them that well to
begin with). It's like anything in life. If you don't use it, you
lose it. I've forgotten half of the Spanish vocabulary I learned
in class because I don't use it that often.†(ibid)

How right you are. About a “100 years agoâ€, I could hold a decent
conversation in Latin. Now, with memory faded, the best I can
muster to describe “evidence of an intruder†is ignotium per
ignotius.

 

"Ignotium per ignotius" ... LOL, how right you are! :yes:

 

Mr. England, I presume? (Er, please note the comma after your name (g))

It is indeed an honor, sir! I've read small excerpts thus far from your Mind and Matters: The World in a Mirror and intend to look for the book. Being new here, might I inquire if this constitutes your general "coming out" post, or has this already been common knowledge?

Reading the excerpts from your aforementioned work, it is indeed obvious that you are both erudite and possess a remarkably incisive mind. In that light, might I ask you what you make of my point within my post you responded to? (It is okay, these days, for one to end a sentence with a preposition, is it not? Or perhaps you are "old school" and ending a sentence with a preposition is something with which you will simply not up with put!?)

Anyway, just on that miniscule chance that the Ramsey family might be innocent, you would, I hope, agree that it could do no harm for Mr. Ramsey to rummage through whatever personal correspondence his late wife might have left behind to see if he can find a correspondent of his wife who habitually omits commas setting off direct address? You would agree it could do no harm if the Ramseys were to be innocent?

I have limited time to post this week, but shall respond to your question to me ASAP, and to Cherokee's most thorough response as well. I need time to study the latter.

Finally, having used you as an example of someone so competent in English language skills that you might have difficulty in even transcribing writing from another not so well-versed in the subject without reflexively correcting the writer's grammatical errors, is hardly cause for offense, even if I had erred in my conclusion in this particular instance. I, nevertheless, do apologize for my erroneous assumption.

Nevertheless, if you will please permit a small piece of gratuitous advice, should you ever have reason to write an actual ransom note, please be very careful about the usage of semicolons within the text. They're always a dead giveaway concerning the true intellectual and educational attainments of the writer. (VBG)

As with smoking, habits can be a damnable thing to rid one's self of and, at times, a damning thing as well.