RDI lack understanding of relevant science in handwriting ransom note JonBenet Ramsey

by redpill Thu Aug 22, 2019 10:21 pm

Thu Aug 22, 2019

I've looked at claims along the lines of

This!

The whole 3 page well-written ransom note from a "foreign faction" and her dead in the basement with her head bashed in... It just don't make any sense.

Agree, it was the first case that came to my mind. I know many who think it was an intruder will vehemently disagree but in my mind I think it's painfully obvious the parents (and most likely brother also) were involved.

No intruder would take their time, to write a 3 page long ransom note IN THE HOUSE and not come prepared with pre-written shit.

I just can't understand how the police and investigators are so blind and ignore those obvious things, but I guess it comes down to politics.

This hole case is a blatant cover up from the parents, trying to protect either each other, or their last remaining child.

this is her claim

koldkase wrote:
"Me, I can use my own eyes and I don't need no special training to see that Patsy wrote the note.

koldkase wrote:
"Patsy Ramsey wrote the note. Period. No question. No reasonable argument. All anyone who is objective has to do is compare her exemplars with the ransom note, not to mention the repeated, innumerable writings, statements, and interviews with the Ramseys which repeat excessively the language in the ransom note." -

koldkase is a house wife with zero scientific or forensic qualifications

similarly, on topix,

Capricorn wrote:
Patsy wrote that note; there's no denying it. Not only would anyone with a working pair of eyes see it, but the lying about the scale and the rest just prove the point. Yes, Patsy was the one and now inadvertently, AK drove the point home for me

Capricorn wrote:
Again, the naked eye is never obsolete or outdated.

All anyone has to do is look at the comparisons and graphology, shmaphology, the writing is the same, both in handwriting and linguistically. You don't even need an expert to state it; it's blatantly a match

For every expert who is wishy washy or "excludes" Patsy, you'll find another who will state it IS Patsy.

Definitely agree with the ransom note stuff, it's actually comical. To be fair to the police and investigators though, the vast majority of them did actually believe the Ramsey's were guilty and pressed their superiors to charge them but the DA Alex Hunter was reluctant to, probably based on their reputation in the community. In James Kolar's book Foreign Faction (former detective that worked on the case), I do remember him saying the above and some eventually ended up quitting out of frustration that the parents weren't being charged and given too much leeway.

Buggy77 wrote:
I have followed this sub and the other sub for some time now. I have held back on my opinion and my theory as I was still undecided and there was a lot of information to process. I admit I only knew of the basics of this case until I started to look in to it more and the posts on this sub have been very informative. With that said I have a few questions that I would love anyone who believes IDI to answer for me:

If the purpose of the RN was to misdirect the police then why would an intruder want to misdirect the police by having them look outside the home? If an intruder was able to break in undedicated and with no evidence of a break in, then why try to make the police look in your direction? Wouldn’t it put the focus on the parents more if you just left the body in the home the way it was?

Why would an intruder write this long ass ransom note with a pen and paper from the home? Why would he put it back neatly in its place? How could he see what he was writing in the dark? Alternatively for those who believe he hid in the home and wrote the RN while waiting what exactly was his purpose to do this? Just to mess with them? And again why would he neatly put the pen and paper back in its spot? Wouldn’t you want to leave no evidence of yourself in the home? Isn’t it incredibly risky to leave pages of your handwriting in the home?

How did the intruder know that there was no alarm system? Or a huge dog? Or that the Ramsey’s could have had guests staying with them? How could the intruder know that the Ramseys weren’t going to have family staying with them which would mean more people around, the potential for someone to wake up and catch you, or someone who is a night owl and planned on staying up all night in the living room watching tv?

How did he navigate in this huge maze of a home in the dark?

How did he get JonBenet out of her bed without her waking up and screaming? The stun gun theory has so many flaws. What if it didn’t work? What if she was able to scream before being subdued? What if she was sleeping with her parents or her brother that night? It was Christmas. It seems like the worst day ever for an intruder to break in because of the potential for guests in the home and there is a higher chance of the Ramsey’s letting their children sleep with them because of the holiday.

Why would the intruder want to attack her or sexually violate her in the home? Wouldn’t he want to immediately gtfo so he can do whatever he wanted to without the chance of being caught?

Did the intruder have a car? He must have. Where did he park? Wouldn’t he be worried that a neighbor would see him?

Some last points I want to make. How can anyone be IDI? The dna is a red herring. It’s most likely touch dna. I read that there were 5 profiles meaning 5 different people. So do IDIers think 5 pedophiles came through the basement window on Christmas night and without being caught murdered JonBenet in the basement? How did they know where the new bloomies were?

How can anyone be IDI?

forensic handwriting falls under Daubert and therefore science,

this is an example of scientific validation

RDI lack understanding of relevant science in handwriting ransom note JonBenet Ramsey Kam97w10

conclusion of these experts,

this is what Richard Dusak says

Richard Dusak

Dusak Findings. "Richard Dusick (sic) of the U.S. Secret Service concluded that there was "no evidence to indicate that Patsy Ramsey executed any of the questioned material appearing on the Ransom Note." (SMF P 200; PSMF P 200.)" (Carnes 2003:26, note 14).
Qualifications. Dusak is a member of the American Board of Forensic Document Examiners. According to ABFDE: "The American Board of Forensic Document Examiners (ABFDE) is the only certifying board sponsored by the American Society of Questioned Document Examiners, the Canadian Society of Forensic Sciences, The Southeastern Association of Forensic Document Examiners, the Southwestern Association of Forensic Document Examiners, and is recognized by the American Academy of Forensic Sciences."

so when Richard Dusak says "no evidence to indicate that Patsy Ramsey executed any of the questioned material appearing on the Ransom Note"

that means "inconclusive" according to Mark Becnker and RDI

Edwin F. Alford, Jr.

"Examination of the questioned handwriting and comparison with the handwriting specimens submitted has failed to provide a basis for identifying Patricia Ramsey as the writer of the letter."

also means "inconclusive" according to Mark Becnker and RDI

Rile Findings. "Howard Rile concluded that Mrs. Ramsey was between "probably not" and "elimination," on a scale of whether she wrote the Ransom Note.

so when you fact check what RDI and Mark Beckner et al say against the original experts
it is conclusive. Patsy for all practices and purposes was eliminated

Myth: Handwriting experts confirm that Patsy Ramsey was the author of the ransom note demanding $118,000 for her missing daughter’s return.

Boulder police hired four handwriting experts and the Ramseys hired two who made comparisons between the ransom note and writing exemplars by Patsy Ramsey. None of the six experts identified Patsy Ramsey as the author. Although they also did not eliminate her as the possible author, the consensus was that she “probably did not” write the letter. On a scale of one to five with the high score of five being elimination, they scored her between a 4 and 4.5.

http://www.denverpost.com/2016/12/23/jonbenet-ramsey-myths/

on the ASTM 9 point scale with 9 being elimination, Patsy scores an 8, highly improbable,

this does not mean, Patsy can't be eliminated, therefore Patsy wrote the ransom note,

it means, there's no evidence the handwriting is Patsy's, it is highly unlikely Patsy wrote the ransom note, she should be ruled out as the author of the ransom note.

what I am stating here is a scientific approach to the ransom note,

what RDI have claimed is just pure nonsense.

this scientific assessment, along with DNA and other crime scene evidence leads to the conclusion of an intruder, not RDI

the question for actual forensic science, is there scientific evidence Patsy or John or Burke wrote the ransom note,

and the conclusion is there is no evidence. they have been eliminated.

the ransom note therefore evidence of an intruder.

RDI claims otherwise has no scientific basis.

a team of forensic scientists advising the prosecutor of the DA"s office in JBR can only follow these under Daubert, not RDI specious and unsupported claims. note RDI don't claim any sources for their claims about how the ransom note is so long therefore there was no intruder.

you've been redpilled. Like a Star @ heaven