JonBenet Ramsey ransom note and scientific forensic document examination questions RDI never ask

Mon Jul 30, 2018


I told Superdave, Daubert rises and RDI fringe defeated.

On crimeshots i told him that RDI been decisively defeated, at the level of science and forensics.

Superdave said that's so laughable it's insulting.

I once warned my padawan, superdave, of the power of the Daubert side of the Forensics.

That as superdave grew stronger in the Fringe, his equal in Daubert would rise.
Statusquote I assumed. Wrongly.

Closer I said.

one of the most important scientific issue that is to be resolved in the Unsolved Murder of JonBenet Ramsey is the scientific issues surrounding scientific forensic document examination of the JonBenet Ramsey ransom note

you can go through any RDI post from any forum, from forumsforjustice to websleuth to topix reddit to youtube comments and news article comments

you'll find variations of


one forumsforjustice poster is koldkase, who is also on websleuth and topix

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Again, the naked eye is never obsolete or outdated.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.

so that is the extent of the sophistication of the RDI lynch mob at forumsforjustice

Patsy wrote it, that's it. just look at it with your own eyes. it's Patsy's handwriting

the question is,

are the claims of forumsforjustice poster survive scientific scrutiny?

how do you scientifically test these claims? how do you use the scientific method, scientific reasoning to validate forensic document examination

what is the daubert standard?

to RDI posters claim it's patsy's handwriting, meet the daubert standard

what are the requirements forensic document examination need to meet, to meet the daubert standard

what does scientific research, scientific methodology and scientific reasoning look like?

how would you apply this to disputed authorship identification?

what is American Academy of Forensic Sciences?

how is American Academy of Forensic Sciences relevant to both the daubert standard and forensic document examination

What is ASTM ?

how is ASTM relevant to forensic document examination?

is RDI posters koldkast and capricorn claims endorsed by American Academy of Forensic Sciences and ASTM ?

how would you test these claims?

do the experts in forensic document examination support koldkase forumsforjustice posters or contradict it, specifically, that the handwriting is Patsy's, on scientific grounds.

When it comes to science, have actual scientific experts with actual scientific methodology that has been validated using scientific methodology weign in on Patsy and the ransom note?

has any RDI poster ever taken the time to familiarize themselves with both the scientific literature on forensic document examination , and standard textbooks.


if not why not?

imagine that you read an RDI poster with a pet theory.

a pet theory that Patsy wrote the ransom note to explain why there's a dead kid in the basement.

a pet theory Patsy wrote the ransom note in a fit of psychosis religiously inspired.

a pet theory that there needs to be a ransom note to deflect attention away from the Ramseys.

a pet theory that John Ramsey wrote the ransom note because he had motive and opportunity.

but a qualified forensic document examiner, using a scientific methodology and scientific testing, one that is qualified under Daubert, concludes that Patsy and John are eliminated as authors

in the court of science, is a scientific expert witness using scientific methodology weighing in on the handwriting and linguistics scientific expert witness testimony, or like RDI forumsforjustice posters pet theory take precedence?

given that scientific experts have elimianted Patsy and John Ramsey as the authors of the ransom note,

is koldkase and capricorn among other RDI posters using science and therefore justice?

holdontoyourhat and jameson are right.

an intruder wrote the ransom note, based on scientific expert witness testimony

RDI posters are fundamentally misleading the public and demonstrating their total ignorance of the relevant scientific discipline

scientific forensic document examination

Thank you.

Very interesting reading @Redpill

I don’t suppose you have a copy of McMenamin’s chapter on the Ransom Note? The link at this site has been broken.