Sunday, January 6, 2013

Ramsey Case: Crime Wire Questions for Readership

On an upcoming broadcast of "Crime Wire", we are going to cover the Jonbenet Ramsey case.  

Would you please take the time to answer the following five questions, in order, for our program?

It is a fascinating case where emotions of the public have always been strong, but, at least in my own observations, have shifted as well. 

Here are some questions for readership for the Comments section.  If you can follow the questions by number, it will be easier to follow and interact.  

1.  In 1997, what did you think happened to Jonbenet?

2.  In 2013, what do you think happened to Jonbenet?

3.  In 1997, who did you think wrote the Ransom Note?

4.  In 2013, who do you think wrote the Ransom Note?

5.  In this case only, has Statement Analysis impacted your thinking?  (explain) 


Vita said...

I have not followed JonBenet's case, as I have others.

I googled where is she? not knowing myself if she has a grave site, etc. The first link that caught my eye, I will post here.

This posted July 2012. A video provided of the actual basement of the Ramsey house. Taken hours after JonBenet was found.

I guess since the Ramsey's wrangled to all they were so wealthy and untouchable, I expected their basement to be finished and of living space. As you see it is neither finished nor living space. Find it strange anyone would leave a cut wire, hot in a closet. As it is written by someone, HOT WIRE, on the wall board. The window shown, clearly it has cobwebs on it, as this video shows. This find to denounce an intruder, entering the house via this window. Thought I would share.

Vita said...

The window frame, @3:15 shown, the metal shown at the bottom. The
" pry" is inward not outward.

One would have to be inside, prying the frame towards them. The window already open. The metal beyond the window, which opens as a door. Why would anyone do this?

The window then would be incapable of closing proper, incapable of sealing itself, allowing heat/AC to escape. This a basement window. No logic.

Video, Husband and Wife doing home renovation, woman inside the house, breaking the window with force. The glass at first falls inward, she then to push the glass outward, she inside. Not the same result as the Ramsay's broken window.

Nature breaking house windows
Video of Hail Storm, if you begin the vid @2:50

Hail hits the front windows, breaking them one by one, it to view as the Ramsay's window. "a hole" yet not shattering or removing the entire window.

Ima.grandma said...

Vita, I am so happy You continue to be a strong and vital contributor to this site.

Yukari said...

1. I didn´t know about the Ramsey case in 1997, but when I first learned and read up about it (around 2007), I thought that there might have been a pedophile ring in Boulder that had enough influential connections to manipulate the investigation.

2.I still think it is a possibility that such a pedophile ring existed, or exists, and did not want the investigation to go in certain directions BUT I am now convinced that other than that, there is no connection to the JBR case.

Today, I believe that Jonbenet met with a fatal accident in her parents´ home and the parents covered it up. I used to tend towards John Ramsey as the person who abused her, with Patsy closing her eyes to the signs until it was too late; Patsy, however, being the one who caused the deadly accident in a fit of rage. In the first questionings, the Ramseys still mentioned Patsy having some red wine at the Christmas party, that quickly was never mentioned again. I don´t believe she was drunk that night but she might have had just enough to over-react or lose inhibitions in a fatal way. Of course, the shock after the accident would have made her sober again. With additional information in a recent book on the case, I believe that Jonbenet´s brother Burke might have been the one to cause her accident and Patsy and John worked together to protect him, though it leaves open the question who abused the poor girl.

3. and 4. The more I read about the case, including both handwriting and statement analysis of the Ransom Note (in fact, this was what got me into statement analysis in the first place), the more I was convinced that Patsy wrote the ransom note.

About the only thing I am absolutely certain of in this case, other than the victim´s death, is that there was no intruder and no foreign faction.

Anonymous said...

In 1997 I took it at face value whatever the media presented. Didn't keep up with it too much. However, that same year a child went missing in my area and I passed out flyers. My life has been a living hell ever since. They were certain a "serial killer" was at large.

Two years later I learned the fallacy of this weird idealism, though a lie I know, ofter these "serial killer" move in threes.

In 2013 I am convinced it was an operation much like the ones of recent events: Operation Orion (a knock-off of the Zodiac) Operation Sunflower (Either WWII or Vietnam era military programs designed to keep everyone perputually miserable and doom comes to any and all objectors) Or that dumbazz operation which forewarned of the FBI going to take away everyones firearms...Operation something walker.

In 1997 I can't recall what I thought about who wrote the note. In 2013 I am convinced the mother did not. Too much money made off these scams.

No, it hasn't impacted mine because of the bunny rabbits posted on the blog. If you've ever had to scrap one off your air conditioner Y ou'd know why.

Sus said...

1. When I first heard abt it, I thought JonBenet's parents had exposed her to a sexual predator through child pageants, and the predator murdered her. I didn't even know there were child pageants till this, but JonBenet looked sexualizrd to me.

2. Now I believe Patsy killed JonBenet and John staged the basement scene. John may have even completed the murder in the basement. I also believe John was sexually abusing JonBenet.

3. I don't recall anything abt the ransom note in 1997.

4. Now I think Patsy wrote the ransom note, probably while John was in the basement. In a way she thought she was helping to save her family, helping John...But also angry, blaming, and derogatory toward John.

I think the ransom note is the key. It shows exactly how Patsy and John "had" each other. She couldn't help but let that slip out in the note. She probably had him on sexual abuse. He had to cover for her and she had to cover for him.

5. Yes, I used statement analysis on the ransom note and interviews with the couple. It was also interesting to use with John's recent interviews and newly released book.

Eliza said...

I am looking forward to thw Crime Wire show, as Jonbenet's case is the one that haunts me the most. It has really affected me and I am still praying that justice will be done for this precious little girl.

In 1997 I was 11 years old and hadn't heard about the case. I first read about it probably around 2000-2001. So I am answering about 2001 and about now.

1) In 2001 I was torn. I was young but still I could see that something wasn't right about the intruder theory. But I also wanted to believe that a pedophile had done it. Also, I hadn't heard the 911 nor read thoroughly the ransom note. So, although I had my doubts, I was more inclined to think that a pedophile had done it.

2) Now, in 2013, I am convinced that it was an inside job. I am more inclined to believe that Patsy killed her -maybe accidentally- over a bedwetting incident. My second choice is Burke and that would explain perfectly the cover-up.

3)In 2001 I hadn't read the ransom note nor the analysis of it. When I first found out the note it struck me as strange that a kidnapper wrote a 2-page note with a pen and pad from the home. So, I thought someone from the house wrote it. Patsy or John.

4) Now I strongly believe that Patsy wrote it. There are too many similarities, too many indications that she is the writer, too many experts said so.

5) Yes, it had. The SA of the 911 call made me sure that Patsy was lying. She said "I am THE mother", she said "There is a note" and then "my daughter is gone". She didn't ask help for the Jonbenet but for her etc etc.
Also the SA of the ransom note... Truly revealing and eye-opening.

Jules said...

I think it's strange that her family had "love, purity and joy" on her head stone

My problem is with the word "purity". It makes me think of sexual purity and that it is a ver strange thing to put on a child's grave

Jules said...

1. In 1997, what did you think happened to Jonbenet?
that she was kidnapped by a stranger
2. In 2013, what do you think happened to Jonbenet?
her parents were involved in her death and cover up
3. In 1997, who did you think wrote the Ransom Note?
4. In 2013, who do you think wrote the Ransom Note?
5. In this case only, has Statement Analysis impacted your thinking? (explain)
absolutely. I have read your coverage of this case and agree that the language in the note appears to be written from an "insider" perspective vs a stranger/kidnapper

In 1997, I was a teenager and I didn't really question the media at all.

Trigger said...

My answers to these questions are the same as Jules answers.

When I found out that Jon Benet never left her home the night before the day she was reported missing and then "found" by John Ramsey in the basement after the police arrived, my doubts started to surface about John and Patsy's innocence.

Vita said...

Ima.Grandma thank you :)
Jules, the words upon her head stone

Love, Purity, Joy, below the three words, is engraved, photo link for you to view the entire base of her head stone.

The words are disturbing. All are in capital letters, centered.


It is impersonal. She age 6.
A message for who? photogs?
Her grave site to be visited by who? thousands upon thousands, she being in the media as a unsolved murdered little girl.

Her name as it is on her head stone, she is shadowed. As it is not Jonbenet, but Jonbenet PATRICIA Ramsay.

Her mother to live vicarious through Jonbenet's successes, being preened and pranced via Patsy herself.

I have watched on cable the women, mothers, who perp, prep, their daughters for pageants dance etc.
One mother to tell press that she had her two children for one purpose. She older, never wanted children, yet felt if she did it would gain her income. She to have two that would be born, to be created for her to sell them, train them, prance them.
I had them, for this reason. Patsy no different.

A GIFT to her family. What is a gift? a present. Monetary and or allowance, that is temporary, yet is to be paid back. She paid with her life, baby Jonbenet did, for who's benefit? who's reaping? Patricia's. She then to become LOVED and EMBRACED by the world as victim, mother of the dead "princess".

I did not follow the case, I did watch on the 20/20's etc, the Ramsay's blather. Patsy, a self centered narcissist to a fault. JonBenet who?

Jonbenet, who was but a tot, was manufactured by Patsy. Once put in cosmetics, in dress of a 22 yr old, she was astonishing. This was not Patsy's dream? to have a daughter that out shined her EGO?
I think it was overwhelming for ol' Patsy. It was no longer about HER. Jonbenet employed, enchanted all and everyone by herself, her on stage. She didn't have to buy anything, her dresses, her fake teeth, her gallons of hair spray, cosmetics. No investments for Jonbenet of money, she though her childhood taken.

Instead of JonBenet moving on and upward, Patsy ceased it all. Due to it was no longer in her control.

JonBenet not a baby any longer I am sure was making connections and communications with others. Patsy not to want this, her secrets to come out, NO MORE WIRE hangers. Jonbenet being sexually abused, quite possible. She was going to tell on Mommy? Sexual abuse is not only about touch, it is too about mental and verbal abuse, because of one's sex. She being a girl, she was not her daughter, was created to be her dupe, mirror. Jonbenet was not to have a voice and or identity? No, stand there and look pretty, mouth wide shut.

Monsters do not want witnesses.
You never ally with one who cares, those who CARED about Jonbenet, Patsy's enemy. You ally align with one who protects your secrets, her husband, the pos that he is. Jonbenet was created for a purpose, and she was taken out of this world, via her mother's order. Patsy was not a mother, she was an agent of destruction, her basement tells me so. Her foundation built, on HOT Wires exposed.

annie said...

1. In 1997, what did you think happened to Jonbenet?

Some bizarre sexual stunt gone bad. Now, in 2013, that's still what I think.

3. In 1997, who did you think wrote the Ransom Note?

Someone on the inside.

4. In 2013, who do you think wrote the Ransom Note?

Not only am I sure the mother wrote it, but also that the story in the note was hers as well.

5. In this case only, has Statement Analysis impacted your thinking? (explain)

Aha! I was right!

nymima said...

Statement Analysis has re-affirmed my opinions that Patsy Ramsey wrote the ransom note and that JonBenet was a victim of sexual abuse from one or both parents. In other words - I believed back then that the parents were involved in her murder, and I more strongly believe now that I was right in my hunches.

I have not deviated much from my formulated opinions at the time of her death.

I had and have concluded that their money bought their freedom. But Patsy Ramsey was never really free after the murder of her child now was she?

Statement Analysis Blog said...


I think a lot of people associate the word "purity" with sexuality. Good point.

Trigger said...

I think that if Hailey Dunn or Ayla Reynolds were found under the same circumstances as Jon Benet, Bille and Shawn would have been arrested and prosecuted and so would the Waterville three.

Tania Cadogan said...

1997 - parent(s) killed JonBenet or know who did and covered for the killer. She was a victim of sexual abuse both in her sexualised pageants and at home.

2013 - parent(s) killed JonBenet r know who did and covered for the killer. She was a victim of sexual abuse both in her sexualised pageants and at home. It was interesting to note that the father married a costume designer for vegas showgirls which lead me to conclude he likely abused JonBenet. Most likely the abuse took place after the pageants when he saw her dressed up as a minature showgirl. It is clear what his fetish and fantasy was and still is.

1997 - Patsy wrote the note. The note was totally unlike any ransom note i had ever come across. it was too wordy. It explained the whys and wherefores rather than the simple demands i would expect.
Given their status the sum demanded was way too small. men tend to write short to the point notes, no flowery words.

2013 - Patsy wrote the note, same as above.
Men tend to think to the point we have your child get $xxxx by whenever we will call to arrange the drop do not call the police.
All the required info is there, women however tend to think more emotionally and often feel the need to explain why something has been done, they emotionalise.

At the time i didn't understand exactly why i felt the parents were being deceptive as the case wasn't covered as much as in the states.
What i could see was their behavior wasn't what i would have expected, the lawyering up, the refusal to take polygraphs or cooperate with LE. They shopped for polygraphs, their interviews all 'smelt' and sounded wrong.

When i first heard about Madeleine McCann i instinctively knew the parents were lying and were covering up her death. I thought back to other missing child cases and landed promptly on the ramsey's. The language and behavior were the same, the only difference was in the ramseys case JonBenet was found in the basement by her father (how convenient when LE were there and he could explains anything incriminating found on her as being when he picked her up)

I still wonder if the mccanns got their ideas from the ramseys as the similarities in regards to parental behavior after the crime was and is striking

Tania Cadogan said...

Love, Purity, Joy

Order is important.

I agree Jules, purity does have a sexual connotation, it is associated with virginity.

Given JonBenets age why did they think it important to include purity?
Was it a denial of their sexual abuse and sexualisation of JonBenet?

Looking at the images of her in pageants dressed up as a tiny vegas showgirl complete with full makeup and revealing clothing are they selling the fantasy image?
It was important to them they described her as pure,innocent,virginal whilst her clothing and actions in pageants said the opposite, i am your deepest fantasy, i am sexy and available.

Patsy did the pageants probably living her own pageant desires through JonBenet, i wonder though how much imput into her costumes her father had, especially given his later marriage to a costume designer for vegas showgirls.
Was she perhaps replacing patsy in her father's fantasies?
Patsy was a beauty queen who was facing the ravages of time, her looks fading.
Jonbenet was a beauty queen, young, beautiful and would keep her looks and get even more beautiful as she grew up.
Patsy was past it, a has been, Jonbenet was a promise of things to come a bud which would blossom into a perfect flower.

I also wonder if JonBenet was his only victim?
Had he ever babysat?
What was he like when he was younger?
Were there any rumors or whiffs of scandal?
Have there been any wafts of unease or rumors since?

Paedophiles can't change their spots, the same as a normal heterosexual cannot change to being a paedophile.
They may step back from actual rape and try and satisfy their urges via inappropriate touching or viewing especially if LE are watching and thy were suspects in a high profile case, the urges though are still there.

Anonymous said...

1. In 1997, what did you think happened to Jonbenet? Thought a family friend or the father killed her.

2. In 2013, what do you think happened to Jonbenet? I think Patsy her mother killed her and John helped to cover it up.

3. In 1997, who did you think wrote the Ransom Note? Father or family friend.

4. In 2013, who do you think wrote the Ransom Note? Patsy and or John

5. In this case only, has Statement Analysis impacted your thinking? (explain)
Your breakdown of the letter convinced me that it was someone in the household ( which only could have been Patsy or John… Someone who would just break-in to get JonBenét would not write a badly written letter to lead suspicion else where…. Because the police did such a terrible job with evidence I don’t trust the DNA evidence they had gathered…..

Anonymous said...

What do you make of the relationship between the daughter and the mother. I realize it's unlikely that the mother is involved, but it seems such an odd quote!

(CBS) -- Police said a California teen was reported missing after she disappeared after leaving a New Year's Eve party, CBS Los Angeles reports.

PICTURES: Calif. teen missing since New Year's Eve

Friends said 19-year-old Sarah Alarid was last seen arguing with her ex-boyfriend around 3 a.m. Tuesday in a Santa Clarita neighborhood, before taking off alone in a 2002 silver Ford Focus.

Her father, Mike Alarid, said calls to Sarah's phone go straight to voicemail and there hasn't been any activity on it since 3:41 a.m. that night.

"She's always called or we've always known where she's at. Or she's communicated with her friends. And that contact has just fallen off," he said.

Sarah's mother, Laura Alarid, said the teen never goes longer than a day without calling.

"She's my youngest daughter and I need her home," she said. "Please, Sarah, I need you home. I care about you a lot. We all need you here."

Volunteers, family and friends, including Sarah Alarid's former boyfriend, have been actively searching and passing out fliers around Santa Clarita since her disappearance, according to CBS Los Angeles. Alarid's friends said it is unusual for her to lose touch with them.

"She knows that I'm one of her only friends that if she ever got into any trouble, I could come pick her up," said Jordan Carrico. "Didn't matter where she would be, I could come get her. But she hasn't tried calling any of us."

Trigger said...


What a good job of describing John Ramsey's unspoken fantasies about Jon Benet.

It fits.

Did Patsy imagine Jon Benet as a life long rival for John's affections?

That would be a motive for killing her. Patsy could eliminate Jon Benet and never have to acknowledge John's sexual desire for their daughter.

Or John could have killed her to cover up his incestuous behavior thus making sure Jon Benet never spoke about their secret.

This would not be the first time an abuser(s) killed a little child to keep them silent about sexual abuse.

Anonymous said...

Saturday, January 05, 2013
Republican failure to provide disaster relief for Sandy victims is just GOP business as usual
“There is only one group to blame for the continued suffering of these innocent victims, the House majority and their speaker, John Boehner. This is not a Republican or Democratic issue. National disasters happen in red states and blue states and states with Democratic governors and Republican governors. We respond to innocent victims of natural disasters, not as Republicans or Democrats, but as Americans. Or at least we did until last night.

Last night, politics was placed before our oath to serve our citizens. For me, it was disappointing and disgusting to watch. …. Last night, the House of Representatives failed that most basic test of public service and they did so with callous indifference to the suffering of the people of my state. “

by Larry Geller
In his impassioned press conference three days ago, New Jersey Governor Chris Christie blasted his own party leaders for holding up disaster relief for areas affected by Hurricane Sandy. If you haven’t heard his speech, here is an extract:
Without doubt, this strident stand on behalf of Christie’s constituents will serve him well politically. On the other hand, it’s great to hear someone in the public spotlight take on GOP stonewalling. It’s mind boggling that Republicans chose to skip authorizing badly needed relief funds. Heck, many of the people driven out of their homes (305,000 affected in New York alone, according to reports) are themselves Republicans.

But Christie is not correct in saying

We respond to innocent victims of natural disasters, not as Republicans or Democrats, but as Americans. Or at least we did until last night.

Mother Jones countered this claim in an article posted the next day, responding not only to Christie’s statement but to a floor speech by New York Representative Peter King, also a Republican:

But [Rep. Peter] King and Christie shouldn't be surprised. Boehner's stonewalling on disaster relief, far from a clean break with tradition, has become characteristic of how the currently deficit-obsessed GOP does business.

Mother Jones listed up some memorable disasters and Republican attempts to block funds for relief, noting Republican votes against Hurricane Katrina relief, Republican leadership killing a bill to extend a relief deadline for Hurricane Ike so that Texas could draw on the funds, and Republicans blocking relief for 9/11 responders, who finally got it at the end of 2010.

Mother Jones adds to this Republican opposition to the 2011 tornado relief for Missouri, Hurricane Irene, Tropical Storm Lee, Mississippi River flooding and the Texas wildfires.

The electorate, of course, have short memories. And those who watch Fox News or for that matter, any other popular news channel, or who read the commercial press, won’t put all this together.

After King and Christie (among others) blasted GOP leadership, they approved only a down payment on the total relief bill. So it’s not a done deal yet.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial Share Alike license.
Larry at 1/05/2013 11:29:00 AM

englishivy said...

englishivy said...

To All: I ran across this and wanted to share. Please read and take into consideration. Thank you.

englishivy said...

Want opinions...please....

englishivy said...

maybe copy into browser....not highlighted here.

englishivy said...

The above is in reference to the Jonbenet case.

Jane said...

1. 1997 - her brother sexually abused and murdered her.

2. 2013 - one or both of her parents sexually abused and murdered her.

3. 1997 - ransom note written by one or both of the parents to cover up for their son.

4. 2013 - ransom note written by the mother.

5. Statement Analysis - has made me more certain that the mother wrote the ransom note.

Anonymous said...

1. In 1997 I thought that the parents were the only likely suspects and that both were either involved or knew what happened. If I recall correctly there were no footprints outside in the snow and cobwebs in the one window that would have otherwise seemed like a possibly entry.

2. In 2013 I still think that the parents are guilty.

3. In 1997 I thought that Patsy Ramsey wrote the ransom note.

4. In 2013, after reading about the case occasionally over the years, I am more convinced than ever that Patsy wrote it.

5. Statement analysis has further confirmed my suspicions and helped me to see indicators in what has been said and/or written.

Foolsfeedonfolly said...

1. In 1997, I thought either one of the Ramseys had killed JonBenet or Burke.

2. In 2013, I think it more likely one of the parents killed JonBenet, but I haven't conclusively ruled out Burke with the parents covering for him.

3.In 1997, I thought one or both of the parents in conjunction wrote the ransom note.

4. In 2013, I think Patsy was the actual writer. John may or may not have had input.

5. Yes, Statement Analysis impacted my thinking by causing me to examine and re-examine specific words and phrases in: the ransom note; 911 call; and interviews granted by Patsy and John. In short, they deviated from the expected quite a lot and they came across as defensive almost from the start. They seemed to have a need to over-explain seemingly insignificant details; almost as if they knew what LE would be suspicious of. The only way to know that would be if one or both had personal knowledge of what happened to JonBenet. It appeared they spent more time, effort, and energy defending themselves, than grieving JonBenet and demanding justice and that the murderer be found. The overwhelming lack of intruder DNA on: JonBenet, several articles of her clothing; the basement window/window frame/window well/window hardware/basement floors/doorknobs/light switches; the suitcase near the window; the paintbrush; the garrot; the drawer handles; the pen; the paper pad; and the staircase treads or railings. There should have been residual snow/water/dirt/mud/grass residue on the stair treads, basement and first level floors, window well, and suitcase from said intruder's shoes, at a minimum. How could an intruder carry or drag a conscious /semi-conscious/unconscious child, carry a flashlight, open doors, assault and strangle a child without leaving considerable DNA or cleaning solvent evidence, much less glove residue? Given that the blunt trauma instrument was never identified/found,nor blood trail of it being carried away from the scene(nor a chemical clean-up) this has to be the neatest, most detail oriented intruder murderer of all time. All of which is in direct contrast to the rambling note. An highly organized, detail-oriented killer would not leave a disorganized, rambling ransom note. SA of the ransom note supports that this was not, in fact, an intruder murder.

John Mc Gowan said...

1. In 1997, what did you think happened to JonBenet?

Her parents murdered her,having said that though i may have just gone with the consensus,as i dont recall much media coverage over here in the UK.

2. In 2013, what do you think happened to JonBenet?

Without doubt she was murdered by 1 or both her parents.

3. In 1997, who did you think wrote the Ransom Note?

I dont recall the ransom note.

4. In 2013, who do you think wrote the Ransom Note?

I think it was Patsy although John had his input also.

5. In this case only, has Statement Analysis impacted your thinking? (explain)

When i first read the ransom note there was slight doubt that it was not written by kidnappers,yet i couldnt put my finger on what was wrong.

Since i have started learning SA the language used in the ransom note is completely off,and now to me, it is obvious it was written by the Ramseys.

dadgum said...

I agree with fool (not the fool), I am too lazy to type the entire moniker.

dadgum said...

Is there any 'new' information regarding what Burke has had to say?

brosnanfan said...

1. In 1997, what did you think happened to Jonbenet?
At first, my suspicions went immediately to the parents. Then, after a while of reading about the case in the tabloids and newspapers (I didn't get a computer or teh interwebs until late 1999), I waffled between the parents and an intruder. However, I still leaned towards the parents because there just didn't seem to be any other rational explanation, and a parent getting away with killing a child and blaming someone else was not unheard of. It was something I couldn't get out of my mind.

2. In 2013, what do you think happened to Jonbenet?
I think that either John Ramsey or Burke Ramsey had been sexually molesting JonBenet, and one night things went way beyond anything that had happened before and there was a terrible accident. I think one of two things happened:

1: JonBenet was either suffocated to death or almost to death (as part of the molestation); either the molester (if it were John) or Patsy (if the molester were Burke) then hit her with a blunt object to "put her out of her misery", perhaps thinking she was too far gone to come back.

2: JonBenet was hit with a blunt object hard enough to mortally injure but not kill, perhaps to keep her quiet. This could happen if it were Burke who was molesting her; kids don't understand that in real life you can't hit someone with a blunt object and it not hurt them, like in cartoons. He then got scared and ran back to his room. Patsy heard the commotion, came to investigate, and found her daughter morally wounded. Then she was suffocated, again to "put her out of her misery".

Patsy also could have flung her against a corner of the bathroom vanity in her anger at JonBenet wetting the bed, and then suffocated her, but I find this the least likely scenario.

3. In 1997, who did you think wrote the Ransom Note?
I was torn between thinking it was Patsy or it was an intruder. It looked like Patsy's writing and the things she would say, but I wanted to believe a mother would not murder her child and then cover it up with a bogus note.

4. In 2013, who do you think wrote the Ransom Note?

5. In this case only, has Statement Analysis impacted your thinking? (explain)
Statement Analysis is helping me to think outside the emotional box. By that, I mean that it is helping me to learn how to put emotions aside, both mine and the subject's, and to really dig into what the words themselves are saying. As Peter so often says, "The subject is dead; the statement is alive."

In this particular case, it is helping me to put aside the images and sounds of a crying Patsy and an indignant John and really listen to the words they are saying, or to put aside the sad feelings of thinking of the poor parents who lost their daughter and look at the words in the ransom note.

There is no room in SA for emotions; they can be deceitful, both in myself and others. But, I think (my opinion) that there is room for a "gut feeling", since gut feelings are often at odds with what our emotions tell us. My emotions wanted to believe that an intruder killed JonBenet; but my gut told me that her parents (and possibly her brother) were the killers. Hence (yeah, I see the irony), my waffling between the two opinions in the late 1990's.

Anonymous said...

I realize that I am the only one here who is willing to openly disagree; however;

#1 1997 - I did not believe the Ramseys, either John, Patsy or Burke had anything to do with killing JonBenet. I believed an intruder killed her.

#2 2013 - I still believe an intruder killed JonBenet, now even more so. However, if anyone could have influenced my opinion it would have been Peter's SA and some of those agreeing with him who pointed out (a few) what appears to be reaonable conclusions as to how/why they did it, including their belief that Patsy wrote the note, but never suspecting Bruke. He was just a little boy, for heaven's sakes.

#3 1997 - I did not believe that Patsy wrote the ransom note or that John had any part in it either, regardless as to how logically it appeared that Patsy wrote it. I believed the ransom note was cleverly crafted by the intruder/killer who deliberately and purposefully set up Patsy & John, taking his time writing the note prior to killing JonBenet. I believed he intended to remove her from the home initially but found it too difficult then decided to kill her, leaving the now highly suspicious ransom note behind in his haste.

#4 2013 - I still believe the outside intruder/murderer wrote the note, that NOT being either Patsy or John Ramsey, while others refuse to even consider this possibility that is right under their nose if they would just carefully review additional research and evidence discovered by Lou Smit and other professional investigators who have years of experience that none of us have.

#5 Yes, in this case Statement Analysis has greatly impacted my thinking, causing me to question my judgements. I have kept up to date with every aspect of JonBenets' murder since the day her body was found, including the articles and reader responses that have been posted here and have given these articles a lot of merit, always considering the possiblity that SA was correct and I was wrong.

Seriously trying to find the answer, and being willing unemotionally to change my opinion; many times SA caused me to question my beliefs, creating doubts as to my opinion, thinking I must be wrong since everyone else believed the Ramseys did it.

Still searching further; sometimes almost believing you all were right, just not some of the twisted speculation some here imagined; still, I wondered if you were right. However, in the end I do not believe you are; No disrespect to anyone as we are all entitled to our opinions, but I believe that it is some of you who are not willing to even consider the possibility that the Ramseys (or Burke) did NOT kill JonBenet and Patsy did NOT write the letter. I almost waivered several times, but still believe that the Ramseys are innocent.

Thank you for allowing my dissenting opinion.

John Mc Gowan said...

The Ransom Note Pad
Steve Thomas' Book
"JonBenet, Inside the Ramsey murder investigation"
Pages 73 and 74

Steve Thomas book, "JonBenet, Inside the Ramsey murder investigation"
Quotes from Page 73-74

Illustration at bottom of page showing location of pages.

Page 73-74

"Chet Ubowski at the CBI had pulled startling information from the tablet belonging to patsy Ramsey. By comparing tear patterns, Ubowski had determined that the first twelve pages were missing and the next four - pages 13 through 16 - contained doodles and lists and some miscellaneous writing."

"But the next group of pages, 17 through 25, were also missing from the tablet. The following page, 26, was the practice ransom note (Mr. and Mrs. I), and that page showed evidence of ink bleedthrough from the missing page 25."

"Comparisons of the ragged tops of the ransom note pages with the remnants left in the tablet proved that it had come from pages 27, 28, and 29."

"Furthermore, the ink bleedthrough discovered on page 26 indicated that perhaps still another practice note could have been writtenon page 25 and been discarded. Two possible practice notes and one real one covering three pages led me to believe that the killer had spend more time in the house composing the ransom note than we originally thought."

"But even more significant, it seemed clear that whoever wrote it was unafraid of being caught in the house. We never found the missing pages."

John Mc Gowan said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
John Mc Gowan said...


JOHN RAMSEY 5/1/97 Press conference


There have also been innuendoes that she has been or was sexually molested, I can tell you that those were the most hurtful innuendoes.

Read More..

Anonymous said...

1. In 1997, what did you think happened to Jonbenet?

Killed by one or both of the parents.

2. In 2013, what do you think happened to Jonbenet?

Killed by Patsy out of jealousy and fear she and John could/would be exposed as abusive parents.

3. In 1997, who did you think wrote the Ransom Note?


4. In 2013, who do you think wrote the Ransom Note?

Patsy,SA clearly showed me that.

5. In this case only, has Statement Analysis impacted your thinking? (explain)

I never believed there was an intruder,SA only made that belief clearer to me.

Anonymous said...

1. I thought the son did and it was covered up by the parents.

2. I think one parent did it and the murder was covered up by both. Not sure which, tho.

3. I thought Patsy wrote it.

4. I think they started writing it together, but Patsy took over and wrote most of it.

5. SA mostly brought the issue back up and clarified some of my thinking. My earlier opinions weren't all that strong (hard to keep up with the facts pre-internet), but the deceptions exposed by SA makes me think John & Patsy were hiding something awful. Before, I just had a 'feeling' that they weren't being truthful. SA gives my feelings some reason.

Anonymous said...

J. RAMSEY: I swear to God I didn't do it. I swear to God.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Do you know anybody else? Could your wife have done it?

J. RAMSEY: Swear to God. What I told you is the absolute from the heart truth.

P. RAMSEY: He didn't do it. I didn't do it. Burke didn't do it. We love that child, OK? We're not involved. Read my lips. Let's find out who is.

Anonymous said...

I read almost all of that and find it difficult to believe. A stun gun,really? No mention of another instance of child abduction before or after this case using a stun gun. If that's what happened why move Jonbenet to the basement? If that's what happened why didn't the Ramsey's do all they could to clear themselves and help police,no matter what the police believed?

Trigger said...

"We love that child, OK?"

"that child" sounds like child abuse language and is distancing language from a mother.

Did John Ramsey ever give a reliable denial as to incest or sexual abuse of Jon Benet?

"I swear to God I didn't do it. I swear to God." Not a reliable denial as "swear to God" is said before and after "I didn't do it." diminishing reliability. It's a phrase that liars use frequently.

candy said...

1. I thought her parents (plural) were behind the murder and cover up.

2. I think everyone in the house is suspicious acting, and someone in the house killed her, and one or two staged the crime after that.

3. Patsy

4. Patsy
5. More reasons to believe Patsy wrote the note.

Eve said...

Back in 1997, I thought if a deceased child were found in the basement of one of the modest homes in my neighborhood, the parents would have been jailed and arraigned that same day. I believed that one of the parents, probably Patsy was most likely responsible for JonBenet's death with both parents involved in the cover up. Patsy was once a beauty queen herself and tried to relive her glory through her child. It's not that unusual for a child of JonBenet's age not to be dry at night, but to a perfectionist like Patsy, this might have been seen as a source of shame. I also think as JonBenet grew older, Patsy may have begun to view her as a rival for John's affection. I believe if there was ongoing sexual abuse, John would have been the guilty party in that regard.

I think Patsy wrote the note. Besides the language which parallels other writings of Patsy's, there is the simple fact that the paper and pen were from the home.

My opinion remains the same today, and SA has reenforced my beliefs.

Dee said...

1. In 1997, what did you think happened to Jonbenet?

One of the parents killed her.

2. In 2013, what do you think happened to Jonbenet?

John killed her to cover abuse.

3. In 1997, who did you think wrote the Ransom Note?

One of the parents due to the pad and pen coming from inside the house.

4. In 2013, who do you think wrote the Ransom Note?


5. In this case only, has Statement Analysis impacted your thinking? (explain)

Yes. At first I thought one of the parents killed her (Patsy) and the other(John) was covering. Due to SA my thoughts have now flip flopped. I think John killed her and Patsy covered for him. I think Patsy devised the story and wrote the note. (I don't think Burke was involved.) Even on her death bed Patsy's image meant too much to her for her to come clean for her little girl.

Lemon said...

Welcome Robert Walker :)

1. Someone in the house killed Jonbenet.

2. Patsy was responsible for Jonbenet's death, but blamed John. She knew John was abusing Jonbenet. They conspired together in the cover up, Patsy the stronger of the two.

3. John and Patsy.

4. Patsy.

5. Yes, Statement Analysis has impacted my thinking. Looking at the ransom note through the lens of SA was an eye opener-
And hence…my conclusions.

Anonymous said...

Some of you (most) have not read the evidence as dicovered by Lou Smit and other investigator;, in many instances, with photographs attached that were never released.

There was no evidence found of any bed wetting by JonBenet. Her bed was perfectly dry and there was DNA on the sheets showing that she had recently slept on the bed on the same sheets.

There was no evidence ever found Of JonBenet having been sexually molested.

Eliza said...

"J. RAMSEY: I swear to God I didn't do it. I swear to God.

UNIDENTIFIED MALE: Do you know anybody else? Could your wife have done it?

J. RAMSEY: Swear to God. What I told you is the absolute from the heart truth.

P. RAMSEY: He didn't do it. I didn't do it. Burke didn't do it. We love that child, OK? We're not involved. Read my lips. Let's find out who is. "

First he says "I swear to God" but when they ask him if his wife had done it he avoided answering and omitted the pronoun. "Swear to God." That's trying to avoid direct lying.

Eliza said...

Also, "that child" is really cold. Especially when a mother says it.

R.L Haley said...

1 1997 I thought parents involved

2 2013 I thought parents involved in death of JonBenet.

3 Patsy

4 Patsy

5 Well im not the only one that believes this

Trigger said...

"There was no evidence ever found of Jon Benet having been sexually molested."

This statement seems moot considering that Jon Benet cannot refute this statement because she is dead. It is reasonable to suspect that she was killed to ensure her silence and prevent her from being a witness against someone for sexual abuse.

Her voice would have been enough evidence for LE to arrest, prosecute, and convict someone who molested her.

Is there a difference between "fresh" DNA and DNA that is a day older?

Jen said...

In 1997 I believed that the parents behavior was suspect and that she may have died in an accident which the family covered up.

In 2013 I believe that she died in the home after an 'incident' with one of the family members. Whether the incident was accidental, the result of a sudden fit of rage, or sexual molestation, sadly I don't believe we will ever know for sure.

In 1997 I believed Patsy wrote the note after handwriting experts said she, 'could not be excluded' as the author and once the notepad and pen were revealed to be from inside the home.

In 2013, after hearing the 911 call and seeing for myself copies of the ransom note along with Patsy's handwriting exemplars, I am convinced that Patsy wrote the note. Also Patsy's answers in the Larry King interview made me even more sure she was the author as she seemed ridiculously desperate to distance herself from the note, even claiming not to have ever read the entire note!?

SA has influenced my opinion by giving me a clearer understanding of the words chosen by the writer of the note and the 911 call. It has strengthened my belief that the family has knowledge of exactly what happened and a vested interest in sticking to the script, regardless of how hard it gets to make sense if it.

If either John or Patsy were innocent, then it wouldn't have taken long before they would have started turning on each other, questioning what the other was capable of, leading to questions and weakness between the couple that LE could capitalize on, eventually bring resolution to this case. They are bound together by their shared guilt and together they have built a brick WALL of lies that they have used to prevent LE from finding the truth.

As the saying goes, 'it's not the crime, it's the cover up'. In this case the cover up is where basically ALL of the real clues in this case come from. The Ramsey's are the only ones with an incentive to engage in a cover up, as a 'stranger' committing the crime has accomplished ALL of his objectives before the note is ever written. Even if the objective was to 'frame' the Ramsey's, the note doesn't fit. Meaning, if someone wanted the authorities to believe the Ramsey's were responsible for killing their daughter, then they wouldn't leave a note suggesting otherwise. Clearly the 'ransom' was never a possibility as the bounty was already dead within the same location as the note, so that leaves only one explanation for the notes attempt to direct the authorities to consider someone other than the Ramsey's.

Sus said...

"We love that child."
WE is not personal to Patsy.
THAT shows distance. THAT objectifies.
THAT CHILD impersonalizes and blames.
CHILD often used when abuse is present.

OK? questions herself on what she just tried to say.

"We're not involved."
WE is again not personal to Patsy.
WE'RE=WE ARE present tense, where she used past earlier (didn't ) story telling.
NOT said in the negative.
INVOLVED shows what Patsy blames JonBenet for. (Involving them in this impersonal way to talk about her daughter's death.)

"Read my lips."
READ is rather like LISTEN UP in the ransom note.
MY now Patsy is personal...when she wants listened to.
READ MY LIPS...listen to what comes out of my lips, truth or not.

TopixNut said...

1. In 97 I thought the brother had done it.

2. In 2013 I think Patsy did it.

3. In 97 I thought Patsy had wrote the note due to the amount of money and a few other things.

4. 2013, still think Patsy wrote it.

5. Statement analysis of the note confirmed my opinions. When things look or sound odd, pay attention.

Sus said...

"Let's find out who is."
LET Instead of telling, Patsy now asked to be allowed.
LET'S=LET US circling the wagons. The police are looking for who is involved, but she wants US to do the investigation.
WHO Patsy uses a person pronoun for the killer, where she used an object pronoun for her daughter.

Anonymous said...

First I read about this case last year.

2. The crime scene photos tell me it was not an accident and cover up. It was a murder or a murder and cover up. The head injury (the huge crack in the skull)and the garroting - both are indication of horrible first degree murder.

Both would imply an intruder's crime IF there was no ransom note involved and the bizarre behavior from the parents.

4. I am sure the note was written by a woman, to throw the investigation off track. She knows John personally. I think it was written by the mother.

The language: she dies, etc makes me think she was already dead when the note was written. But the ransome note is too calm though, that makes me question if it was written before or after the crime.

I read some statements about the events that day. One of them said, the parents let the son sleep, they did not wake him up during the panic hours. I cannot imagine the parents didn't want to hear if he saw or heard something. That was the first red flag. Then the mother told in an interview she doesn't remember if she ran up with the note to John to show him or not. Second red flag. A family friend arrived to the house in the morning and read the note through a glass door from the yard. Third red flag. And the list goes on and on, as I read more and more.

Did they ever determine when she died exactly?

Anonymous said...

1. Mother accidentally killed her, mother covered it up.

2. Mother accidentally killed her, father covered it up as mother wrote ransom letter.

3. Mother.

4. Mother.

5. Yes, more involvement by father prior to murder, contributed to mother's anger.

R.L Haley said...

And may I add the "touch DNA" that they speak of now, has turned me for a loop,for they say it proves that the family is not involved? Im lost or does who ever in charge want it that way? how do 3 different neighbours here a childs scream the same night and parents dont? COME ON!

Jen said...

If I remember correctly the touch DNA was said to have been collected from the seam of the brand new pair of underpants, which had never been washed, and were several sizes larger than JonBenet wore. I don't believe the DNA has any connection to the crime and it seems more likely that the touch DNA was deposited during manufacturing or packaging of the underwear. As far as the announcement that the DNA clears the Ramsey's, I see it as just an attempt to excuse the bungled investigation that we all know allowed her parents to get away with her murder and cover-up.

Maggie said...

I haven't read through all the comments yet but in 1994 I was just out of high school and did not follow the news, so I did hear about the case but did not follow it enough to wonder what had happened to Jon Benet.

In 2013, I have read about the case here and elsewhere.
Statement analysis has greatly influenced me in believing that Patsy almost certainly wrote the ransom note.
However, I do not have a definite belief about what happened to Jon Benet.
I think certain commonly held theories are problematic. The 1st theory, that one parent accidentally killed Jon Benet, I have trouble believing. If that had actually occurred, what are the odds that the other parent would have so willingly conspired to cover the crime by either A) penning such a lengthy ransom note which obviously comes from the mind of someone obssessed with cheesy crime novels/TV Shows and/or B) staging such an incredibly disturbing crime scene? If one assumes that Jon Benet's killing was accidental, one also assumes that the other parent jumped right in to help cover the crime immediately and had the criminal mindset to stage the crime scene/ pen the lengthy ransom note, etc. This is not believable to me that the other parent would have conspired to cover-up the crime with this level of criminal sophistication.
I have also read that Jon Benet was killed by an incredibly powerful blow to the head. How could this possibly have been accidental?
I believe it is likely that Patsy murdered Jon Benet intentionally, staged the crime scene, and also penned the ransom note. The idea of the two parents cooperating in the whole hideous crime/cover-up is not believable.
The ransom note truly is the key to solving the crime, in that I do believe that whoever wrote it was also the killer of Jon Benet. I do believe Patsy wrote the note. The more times I have read the note, the more I am convinced that the writer was female and also middle-aged to elderly because many of the words and terms used are relatively old-fashioned.

Maggie said...

I just read through all the comments.

Anon, I too have wondered whether an intruder killed Jon Benet. I do feel Jon Benet was murdered intentionally and brutally--not accidentally and that it would make much more sense that an intruder was responsible for this horrible crime.

The ransom note is what makes me think Patsy was the killer.
I DO NOT BELIEVE the father helped Patsy cover up the crime.
Completely unbelievable that JonBenet was killed accidentally as well as unbelievable that if I suspend my disbelief and believe she was killed accidentally by one parent that the other so willingly joined in to help cover up her accidental killing and created such a disturbing staged crime scene.
It was either one parent--Patsy, or, possibly, an intruder.

Anonymous said...

1: Patsy
2: Patsy
3: Patsy
4: Patsy
5: Confirmed my beliefs.

Unknown said...

1997 - Thought that Burke did it and parents desperately tried to cover it up.
2013 - Patsy went into a violent rage and accidentally strangled JonBenet because the little girl wet the bed because she was being sexually abused by John: they both had something to hide-John, past abuse, Patsy: accidentally killing JonBenet
1997-Patsy wrote letter to cover up for Burke
2013-Patsy wrote letter to cover up for herself. Statement Analysis is a wonderful tool-so exciting discovering discrepancies in the words people say, and hence, write.

Most Sincerely, Meag

Sandy said...

1997 - Thought that Burke did it and parents desperately tried to cover it up.
2013 - Patsy went into a violent rage and accidentally strangled JonBenet because the little girl wet the bed because she was being sexually abused by John: they both had something to hide-John, past abuse, Patsy: accidentally killing JonBenet
1997-Patsy wrote letter to cover up for Burke
2013-Patsy wrote letter to cover up for herself. Statement Analysis confirmed my original suspicions.

Anonymous said...

jaemeson dedicated her life to intruder and got sidetracked with obsession

Anonymous said...

They Ramsey family are clearly innocent. An abhorrently run investigation to which focused wrongly on John and Patsy and ignored hard evidence in which clearly led to intruders. Media portrayal of the family sensationalised the case to which led the public view of guilt against the Ramsey family. It would seem the plan for abduction was preordained to which at some stage changed. The letter implies there are three people involved, the writer and two accomplices. The level of incompetence displayed is at a level that must be seriously questioned and examined.

Anonymous said...

1. In 1997, what did you think happened to Jonbenet?
In 1996 - the step-brother did it - UNTIL the snarky directed-to-my-hubby, religious, movie-prase ransom note was released. Then it was clear it was Patsy. She wrote the note after seeing The Nick of Time at Fleet's house that evening - and earlier movies - and before she coaxed her daughter down with pineapple.

2. In 2013, what do you think happened to Jonbenet?
Her perfectionist, narcissist, psychotic, Klonipin, Ativan, highly charismatic religious Mom, Patsy, who was just one and two years out from intense chemo and a hysterectomy and a certainly terminal diagnosis, pre-planned it for that Christmas Day in order to have her beloved My Twinn Doll waiting in heaven for her. Note the Dec 25, 1996 engraved gold bracelet. WHY give THAT so a six year old?

3. In 1997, who did you think wrote the Ransom Note?

4. In 2013, who do you think wrote the Ransom Note?

5. In this case only, has Statement Analysis impacted your thinking? (explain)
Somewhat but I haven't studied statement analyses except the ransom note ones. But once someone has seen the mind of a perfectionist narcissist falling into paranoia delusion about a great loss (life in Patsy's case) it's understandable. Once I saw ALL of those perfectly-matched outfits (even on vacation in candid shots!), read about the xmas trees in every room, saw the chintzy Southern remake of a lumpy "Hill" Boulder house, saw the cluttered moldy CRAZY basement, and the room which had JUST held the presents from Jesus 24 hours prior, which now housed the body, and the insistence of Patsy that JB died Dec 25 - it's pretty clear she did it in a psychosis which made perfect sense to her. I just don't get how we "get" Andrea Yates but not Patsy. (There was no sexual abuse - any asserted prior vaginal abrasion was JB trying to help her defecation/bedwetting problem. She was an anxious child (genetic from Patsy) and wet the bed because she was constipated. Patsy's "douches" or "enemas" may have aggravated the problem of "picking" but no official source has confirmed or denied them. The paintbrush - ? - gotta guess it was was Patsy acting out her life on her "My Twinn" doll.)