Patsy's Lefthanded Writing Sample-Dou...

Patsy's Lefthanded Writing Sample-Doubt Removed

Posted in the JonBenet Ramsey Forum

First Prev
of 5
Next Last
cyber

United States

#1 Jun 9, 2009
At the back of the paperback version of The Police Files, compiled by the Enquirer, are several of Patsy Ramsey's writing samples along with the Ransom Note.
After having contributed a few samples during 1997 Patsy was asked again to give a sample. She didn't know until she sat down that LE wanted this sample to be left-handed (her non-dominant hand). Take a look at this one in comparison to the Ransom Note. If this sample isn't a dead ringer for the Note I don't know what is.
The nail on the coffin for me is the so-called "London Letter", a form letter given to suspects to copy. This is also at the back of the book. Patsy's sample of the London Letter shows a lower case "a" which is the same style as in the Ransom Note.
The Ransom Note features an "a" that faces "left", such as in the typeface in which I am writing. Almost all of Patsy's samples show the "elementary school a", a circle with a post on the right side, EXCEPT for the a's in the London Letter. They are dead ringers for the Ransom Note a's, and they have the final word with me. I believe she wrote the note. I don't see how anyone else could have written it and just coincidentally have left handed printing that was just like Patsy's.
cyber

United States

#2 Jun 9, 2009
To see the London Letter and the Lefthanded writing sample google "London Letter Patsy Ramsey". Scroll down and choose the blabbieville site home page. The Lefthand sample and the ransom note are printed side by side on the second row, on the left. I think the London Letter is so entitled.
learnin

Spring Hill, KS

#3 Jun 9, 2009
cyber wrote:
At the back of the paperback version of The Police Files, compiled by the Enquirer, are several of Patsy Ramsey's writing samples along with the Ransom Note.
After having contributed a few samples during 1997 Patsy was asked again to give a sample. She didn't know until she sat down that LE wanted this sample to be left-handed (her non-dominant hand). Take a look at this one in comparison to the Ransom Note. If this sample isn't a dead ringer for the Note I don't know what is.
The nail on the coffin for me is the so-called "London Letter", a form letter given to suspects to copy. This is also at the back of the book. Patsy's sample of the London Letter shows a lower case "a" which is the same style as in the Ransom Note.
The Ransom Note features an "a" that faces "left", such as in the typeface in which I am writing. Almost all of Patsy's samples show the "elementary school a", a circle with a post on the right side, EXCEPT for the a's in the London Letter. They are dead ringers for the Ransom Note a's, and they have the final word with me. I believe she wrote the note. I don't see how anyone else could have written it and just coincidentally have left handed printing that was just like Patsy's.
Thanks, Cyber. I appreciate your input which always brings out some good discussion. I'll check it out.
cyber

United States

#4 Jun 10, 2009
learnin wrote:
<quoted text>
Thanks, Cyber. I appreciate your input which always brings out some good discussion. I'll check it out.
This is the first piece of physical evidence I've personally seen for which I can use the word "convincing". I really have stayed uncommitted about this whole thing but I can't dismiss these writing samples. It's just not possible that an unknown third person wrote this RN.
koldkase

Lawrenceville, GA

#5 Jun 10, 2009
It's hard to imagine how much pressure there was for those handwriting analysts NOT to state outright that Patsy wrote the note, isn't it, when one does the simple comparisons that anyone with a normal brain can do? Patsy should have been arrested. No question. Why didn't that happen? ALEX HUNTER, that's why.

Now, cyber, compare the long list of "linguistic" dead ringers provided by the Ramseys through the years of TV interviews; but especially compare Patsy's extemporaneous sample letter she wrote for LE, in which she wrote about the "two gentlemen" sitting at the table with her, LE in fact. The first time I read that, I thought, either she was FLAUNTING her complete assurance she'd never be arrested for this murder (and why would an innocent parent mock the investigation into her child's murder?)or she simply was oblivious to the fact that she just wrote a very significant phrase from the ransom note out of context and it's extremely incriminating. Either way, she wrote the note.

Also notice in the "sample letter" Patsy MISSPELLED "dispel". She doubled the consonant "l" and wrote "dispell". Confusion with double consonants was something the ransom note writer had trouble with: "posession" vs the correct "possession"; "bussiness" vs the correct "business".

There really is no doubt Patsy wrote the note.

Here is the "sample letter" written as a spontaneous exemplar by Patsy:

http://blabbieville.tripod.com/patsychart8let...

BrotherMoon

“Sandy Stranger killed JonBenet”

Since: Jan 08

Not Boulder, Co.

#7 Jun 10, 2009
cyber wrote:
<quoted text>This is the first piece of physical evidence I've personally seen for which I can use the word "convincing". I really have stayed uncommitted about this whole thing but I can't dismiss these writing samples. It's just not possible that an unknown third person wrote this RN.
It's possible that someone that studied the Ramseys very, very carefully and knew intimate details of their lives and stole Patsy's correspondences and learned her handwriting and also had loads of degraded DNA to shed wrote the note.
Patricia Fox

Hogansville, GA

#8 Jun 10, 2009
koldkase wrote:
It's hard to imagine how much pressure there was for those handwriting analysts NOT to state outright that Patsy wrote the note, isn't it, when one does the simple comparisons that anyone with a normal brain can do? Patsy should have been arrested. No question. Why didn't that happen? ALEX HUNTER, that's why.
I just happened to read this last night while browsing through PMPT. pg 536 - paperback version.

"Hofstrom may have been happy with Beckner, but the CBI wasn't pleased with how he was handling things. Chet Ubowski, the CBI's handwriting expert learned from Detective Trujillo that Beckner had requested - and the DA's office had authorized- another handwriting analysis of the ransom note. Hofstrom and the police had looked for an expert who would testify that Patsy had written the note. They turned to the U.S. Secret Service and got an opinion less conclusive than Ubowski's. The UPSHOT was that the CBI's CONCLUSIONS were now COMPROMISED. Under the process of discovery, the Ramseys would have the right to use the second analysis in the defense. The police had never bothered to ask Ubowski if he had put his entire analysis of the ransom note into his report and whether it was his final report. Either way, Ubowski was prepared to say, "Patsy wrote the note." The CBI saw this as one more example of the MISSED OPPORTUNITIES in the investigation."
Anti-K

Fort Saint John, Canada

#9 Jun 10, 2009
cyber wrote:
At the back of the paperback version of The Police Files, compiled by the Enquirer, are several of Patsy Ramsey's writing samples along with the Ransom Note.
After having contributed a few samples during 1997 Patsy was asked again to give a sample. She didn't know until she sat down that LE wanted this sample to be left-handed (her non-dominant hand). Take a look at this one in comparison to the Ransom Note. If this sample isn't a dead ringer for the Note I don't know what is.
The nail on the coffin for me is the so-called "London Letter", a form letter given to suspects to copy. This is also at the back of the book. Patsy's sample of the London Letter shows a lower case "a" which is the same style as in the Ransom Note.
The Ransom Note features an "a" that faces "left", such as in the typeface in which I am writing. Almost all of Patsy's samples show the "elementary school a", a circle with a post on the right side, EXCEPT for the a's in the London Letter. They are dead ringers for the Ransom Note a's, and they have the final word with me. I believe she wrote the note. I don't see how anyone else could have written it and just coincidentally have left handed printing that was just like Patsy's.
The most common error made by amateurs (possibly a few so-called experts, too!) is an over-emphasis on similarities.

The question one should ask is this,”‘How is it that a person with no meaningful education or experience in the field and without using authenticated and original documents and exemplars, how is it that this person can do what qualified and informed (access to necessary documents, etc) persons could not?”
Do you remember how Thomas used to always say something along the lines of,“out of all the people known to be in the house Mrs Ramsey was the only one who could not be excluded?” This is because there were others (according to his depo MOST!) who fell into the same category as Mrs Ramsey – they could not be excluded.

Did you know that ‘cannot be excluded’ does NOT mean ‘can be included?” If it was meant that she could be included, than that’s what they would have said – she can be included; but, they didn’t say that.

And, of course, I’m sure that you’re aware that you can find a an expert or two who claim that Mrs Ramsey is the author, just as you can find a few experts who would stake their careers on Karr as being the author, and, yes, some will argue that Mr Ramsey wrote that note, or McReynolds or…. So, how do we differentiate between claims? We must giving strongest consideration to those experts who are qualified, and who had access to the necessary materials, and, we know what these people said and none of them were able to identify Mrs Ramsey as the author. So, how can you?

AK
Patricia Fox

Hogansville, GA

#10 Jun 10, 2009
Anti-K wrote:
<quoted text>
We must giving strongest consideration to those experts who are qualified, and who had access to the necessary materials, and, we know what these people said and none of them were able to identify Mrs Ramsey as the author. So, how can you?
AK
I imagine it's because Cyber has some common sense. Do you really need someone else to do your thinking for you? I certainly don't.
cyber

United States

#11 Jun 10, 2009
Patricia Fox wrote:
<quoted text>
I just happened to read this last night while browsing through PMPT. pg 536 - paperback version.
"Hofstrom may have been happy with Beckner, but the CBI wasn't pleased with how he was handling things. Chet Ubowski, the CBI's handwriting expert learned from Detective Trujillo that Beckner had requested - and the DA's office had authorized- another handwriting analysis of the ransom note. Hofstrom and the police had looked for an expert who would testify that Patsy had written the note. They turned to the U.S. Secret Service and got an opinion less conclusive than Ubowski's. The UPSHOT was that the CBI's CONCLUSIONS were now COMPROMISED. Under the process of discovery, the Ramseys would have the right to use the second analysis in the defense. The police had never bothered to ask Ubowski if he had put his entire analysis of the ransom note into his report and whether it was his final report. Either way, Ubowski was prepared to say, "Patsy wrote the note." The CBI saw this as one more example of the MISSED OPPORTUNITIES in the investigation."
Yeah. Wow. Shot themselves in the foot. But, you know, I'm NO expert and I can see clearly that the sample writer and the rn writer have to be the same. One wonders what a jury would have made of it as they viewed those giant billboards which prosecutors like to use in court. How could a defense attorney sway people from what they can see with their own eyes? Expert witnesses be damned.
cyber

United States

#12 Jun 10, 2009
Anti-K wrote:
<quoted text>
The most common error made by amateurs (possibly a few so-called experts, too!) is an over-emphasis on similarities.
The question one should ask is this,”‘How is it that a person with no meaningful education or experience in the field and without using authenticated and original documents and exemplars, how is it that this person can do what qualified and informed (access to necessary documents, etc) persons could not?”
Do you remember how Thomas used to always say something along the lines of,“out of all the people known to be in the house Mrs Ramsey was the only one who could not be excluded?” This is because there were others (according to his depo MOST!) who fell into the same category as Mrs Ramsey – they could not be excluded.
Did you know that ‘cannot be excluded’ does NOT mean ‘can be included?” If it was meant that she could be included, than that’s what they would have said – she can be included; but, they didn’t say that.
And, of course, I’m sure that you’re aware that you can find a an expert or two who claim that Mrs Ramsey is the author, just as you can find a few experts who would stake their careers on Karr as being the author, and, yes, some will argue that Mr Ramsey wrote that note, or McReynolds or…. So, how do we differentiate between claims? We must giving strongest consideration to those experts who are qualified, and who had access to the necessary materials, and, we know what these people said and none of them were able to identify Mrs Ramsey as the author. So, how can you?
AK
Just look at the samples and the RN. Especially look at the lower case "a" in the London Letter. All I ask is just look at them and forget about what you know other people have said. Do you really think the writer of one is not the writer of the other?
Patricia Fox

Hogansville, GA

#13 Jun 10, 2009
cyber wrote:
<quoted text>Just look at the samples and the RN. Especially look at the lower case "a" in the London Letter. All I ask is just look at them and forget about what you know other people have said. Do you really think the writer of one is not the writer of the other?
Look at the "u" comparison with London letter. Unbelievable. Looks like a tea cup without a handle. Same in both.
cyber

United States

#14 Jun 11, 2009
Patricia Fox wrote:
<quoted text>
Look at the "u" comparison with London letter. Unbelievable. Looks like a tea cup without a handle. Same in both.
Right. The writing is so devastatingly similar it begs the question of why Patsy didn't try to fake it a little better. WHY ARE THEY SO SIMILAR if she didn't write the note??
koldkase

Lawrenceville, GA

#15 Jun 11, 2009
Patricia Fox wrote:
<quoted text>
I just happened to read this last night while browsing through PMPT. pg 536 - paperback version.
"Hofstrom may have been happy with Beckner, but the CBI wasn't pleased with how he was handling things. Chet Ubowski, the CBI's handwriting expert learned from Detective Trujillo that Beckner had requested - and the DA's office had authorized- another handwriting analysis of the ransom note. Hofstrom and the police had looked for an expert who would testify that Patsy had written the note. They turned to the U.S. Secret Service and got an opinion less conclusive than Ubowski's. The UPSHOT was that the CBI's CONCLUSIONS were now COMPROMISED. Under the process of discovery, the Ramseys would have the right to use the second analysis in the defense. The police had never bothered to ask Ubowski if he had put his entire analysis of the ransom note into his report and whether it was his final report. Either way, Ubowski was prepared to say, "Patsy wrote the note." The CBI saw this as one more example of the MISSED OPPORTUNITIES in the investigation."
Well, we have known since Thomas' book that Hunter's Office was de facto working for the defendants all along. Why else would he refuse to get routine clothing and telephone subpoeanas? Refuse to arrest the Ramseys to bring them in for questioning? Instead, focusing on "building trust" with them, letting them dictated when and how much they'd give up in the investigation? Valuable time flew by while Hunter and the Ramsey lawyers danced to the "Intruder Waltz". It worked.
koldkase

Lawrenceville, GA

#16 Jun 11, 2009
[PS Sorry for typos in this post above. Phone rang, I hit "post" too soon. Corrected:]

Well, we have known since Thomas' book that Hunter's Office was de facto working for the defendants all along. Why else would he refuse to get routine clothing and telephone subpoenas? Refuse to arrest the Ramseys to bring them in for questioning? Instead, focusing on "building trust" with them, letting them dictate when and how much they'd give up in the investigation? Valuable time flew by while Hunter and the Ramsey lawyers danced to the "Intruder Waltz". It worked.

BrotherMoon

“Sandy Stranger killed JonBenet”

Since: Jan 08

Not Boulder, Co.

#17 Jun 11, 2009
cyber wrote:
The writing is so devastatingly similar it begs the question of why Patsy didn't try to fake it a little better.
Because she was Sandy Stranger when she wrote the note.
redhead

Franklin, TN

#18 Jun 11, 2009
I also think PR wrote the note. How many practice drafts were there in the house? Somebody would have had to spend a long time in the house to do all that writing. The intrudor theory seems pretty far fetched to me.

BrotherMoon

“Sandy Stranger killed JonBenet”

Since: Jan 08

Not Boulder, Co.

#19 Jun 11, 2009
Intrudor 1. upper crust English intruder.
Patricia Fox

Hogansville, GA

#20 Jun 11, 2009
koldkase wrote:
[PS Sorry for typos in this post above. Phone rang, I hit "post" too soon. Corrected:]
Well, we have known since Thomas' book that Hunter's Office was de facto working for the defendants all along. Why else would he refuse to get routine clothing and telephone subpoenas? Refuse to arrest the Ramseys to bring them in for questioning? Instead, focusing on "building trust" with them, letting them dictate when and how much they'd give up in the investigation? Valuable time flew by while Hunter and the Ramsey lawyers danced to the "Intruder Waltz". It worked.
Beyond a shadow of a doubt Hunter's office destroyed the case by the things they did or did not do. Unbelievable would not even come close in describing their actions. I honestly don't know how Hunter is able to sleep at night. You know he must have some remorse for the way he caved in to all the demands of the Ramsey's lawyers. I would think he would have to relive this in his mind EVERYDAY of his life. He knows he stymied the investigation.
WV Sleuth

Washington, DC

#21 Jun 11, 2009
I believe Hunter acted the way he did because he already knew what happened and whodunnit.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 5
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

JonBenet Ramsey Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
ICU2 's Child Trafficking (Dec '14) 2 hr icu2 454
The John Ramsey Case; 20 years later 2 hr Undrtheradar 4
jameson re simons (Jan '08) 4 hr Jolamom 72
News Clooney's restraining order 12 hr Here is what I 28
Sig 16 hr stoned luck aka ... 67
The state of JonBenet's bed the night of the mu... (Jul '15) 16 hr stoned luck aka ... 23
InTouch and Enquirer this week 16 hr stoned luck aka ... 17
More from around the web