Here is statement analysis of a recorded denial by the Ramseys, 2 1/2 years after the death of Jonbenet Ramsey.
If you were falsely accused of killing your daughter, how long would it take you to say, "I didn't kill Jonbenet"?
This would be a reliable denial if found in the Free Editing Process (one speaking freely). A reliable denial has 3 components:
1. First person singular pronoun, "I"
2. Past Tense Verb "didn't"
3. Allegation or event specific "kill Jonbenet"
Patsy Ramsey: “I didn’t do it, John Ramsey didn’t do it, and wedidn’t have a clue of anybody who did do it. This child was the most precious thing in my life.”
Note that besides not addressing the specific event or allegation, there is something of note here:
"...we didn't have a clue" indicates, first, the weakness of changing from "I" to "we" while stating what another thought, but also that she uses the past tense "didn't have a clue"; and not present tense. Strong is when one speaks for oneself.
As to the pronoun, "it", what is she referring to? Is this referring to killing Jonbenet? Is it referring to writing the ransom note? Is it referring to lying? Many have accused Patsy of writing the ransom note in covering for her husband, but not of killing Jonbenet. We do not know what "it" refers to. Unreliable denial.
John Ramsey: “It was hard for us to believe that we were considered suspects. They were trying to fit a square peg in a round hole and we were the square peg.”
Weak use of the plurual. This is also not a denial; only a statement of what it felt like to be considered suspects. It may have been hard to believe, but not impossible. By refusing to be interviewed, by refusing the polygraph, by lawyering up, and by overall sabotaging of an investigation, suspicion will fall upon one. I do not see how it was "hard" to believe, but I do note that he does not say that he had a hard time believing it, but "us" and "we" are used instead.
That’s John and Patsy Ramsey speaking in videotaped interrogations by the Boulder Police Department taken in June 1998 and obtained exclusively by NBC News. On the tape they reassert that they are innocent two and a half years after her murder.
John Ramsey: “We know we didn’t do it. There’s a killer out there.”
Unreliable denial. His use of "we" violates principle #1. The pronoun "it" violates principle #3. Even after 2 1/2 years, John Ramsey still does not make a reliable denial.
Please note that sentence two is truthful: there is a killer out there.
One can be coached to say "I did not kill Jonbenet" by simply reading analysis and repeating it. This is not the easy free editing process where someone is speaking for oneself. The first moment an innocent parent believes that he is a suspect, he will say, "I didn't kill Jonbenet" early, and easily. He will not retreat to "we" (sharing of guilt/Dillingham) nor avoid addressing the allegation.
Most people believe that one of the Ramseys killed Jonbenet, and that her death was unintentional, and due to fear, created a ruse as a cover up, using a fake ransom note written by Patsy Ramsey. Because the intruder notion was so far fetched, the story quickly fell apart.
Analysis of the 911 call indicates deception. The ransom note proved to be deceptive and false, and then the practice note was found.
Jonbenet was dressed up in a sexualized manner for her pageants, like a Las Vegas showgirl.
She had a history of urinary tract infections, something often occurring in sexual abuse.
Statement Analysis of John Ramsey's language affirms sexual abuse.