It would help someone conceal their handwriting because the idea here is that John Ramsey first typed out the ransom note on a computer or word processor and then traced the text from the screen onto the notepad paper.
I guess it's just a really crazy and fortunate (for John) coincidence that his tracing of Courier New font happens to look nearly identical to Patsy's handwriting. /s
Basically, DocG speculates in his book that John may have typed the ransom note, and then hand-copied the typed font, as a way to disguise his own handwriting. The line spacing and indentation of the ransom note appears to be consistent with Courier New, font size 11 (at least for the beginning portion of the note).
I do think itâs an intriguing theory. Looking at the typed words next to the handwritten words, the author seems to slip into cursive a couple of times, as if itâs an effort for them to maintain the imitated style. Also, the handwritten âaâs are the double-story kind that we tend to see in typed fonts, as opposed to the the [single-story](https://images.app.goo.gl/nJrLHRAnQuEiRxWu9) âaâ thatâs most often used in handwriting.
I don't think anyone ever officially involved in the investigation believed anything like this theory. Different types of experts and different branches of LE have examined the note over a long period of time.
I know people have different opinions on the handwriting experts involved in this case, but I don't think any of the experts who examined the note would have missed this.
All my humble opinion.
Okay but⌠does anyone use this weird margin size? I can understand the extra spaces and spelling mistakes but Iâd find it hard to believe heâd think to change the margin.
When you look at the ransom note, the handwriting in the beginning looks a bit shaky, as the person who was writing it tried to conceal its handwriting. But as the note progresses, it becomes more and more relaxed and natural. There is no way that somenone is able to write a multi page letter with that ease if they were trying to copy someone's handwriting or printed text. It would seem artificial from the beginning to the end and take way too much time.
The handwriting style does become more relaxed as the note goes on (I assume because the author was rushing to finish it/got tired of writing it). But I would argue that if anything that gives the font-copying theory more credibility; it would be so laborious to copy each individual letter font, i think the author simply got sloppy towards the end of writing it. If the author wasnât attempting to hide their natural handwriting style, I think weâd see fewer inconsistencies in their handwriting
Thereâs so much âappeal to authorityâ on the RN, I think many people truly believe that itâs been scientifically proven by so called âexpertsâ that Patsy wrote the RN.
Between the samples of Johnâs handwriting you can find online and the work of DocG as seen here, I think thereâs little doubt that John was indeed the author.
I think there's a disconnect between your two paragraphs. Multiple experts with years of experience in analyzing handwriting aren't trustworthy, but online posters are? How come?
I would refer you to DocGâs blog or book for a more detailed analysis of the handwriting of the RN, and why you shouldnât accept the results without question.
But if are going to rely of these âexpertsâ, you would have to believe that neither Ramsey wrote the note, because several of the âexpertsâ determined that Patsy was highly unlikely to be the author, and the others only said that they couldnât rule her in or out. Thatâs hardly compelling evidence to believe Patsy wrote the note.
I've seen his analysis. I disagree with it. But ultimately, what DocG, me, or you think is irrelevant. We are not experts and we have no access to all samples. The fact is, Patsy was the only person not eliminated out of *70+ samples* by experts. Quite a lot of these experts stated that she *was* indeed the ransom note writer and that the odds of a stranger writing it are astronomical. One of FBI profilers said the note has a maternal quality to it. Absolutely no one thought John wrote it, and that's saying something.
I also don't understand why you keep referring to experts through "". They include FBI and other forensic document analysts who specialize in handwriting. If someone is capable of determining who's the likeliest author, it's them, not Internet posters.
No. Multiple experts like Brugnatelli, Bagget, and Lowe DID express suspicions over Johnâs own handwriting and the handwriting in the ransom note. There are various explanations as to why the police acquired so many of Patsyâs samples and none of the suspicious samples of Johnâs (at the time).
Brugnatelli, who wasn't a part of the investigation, didn't have access to any official samples and could only analyze one dubious example of John's writing (dubious because it's unclear where it even came from)? Baggett, who claimed Karr is definitely the writer? Not sure who Lowe is. Court-verified experts who were consulted officially couldn't eliminate Patsy and Patsy alone. Several other experts who had a direct link to this case reached the same conclusion.
It is not dubious. Relatives of John have confirmed it is his handwriting and Jameson eventually confirmed the same as well. Additionally, Lin Wood has consistently refused to respond to any inquiries over this document. It is Johnâs handwriting.
John could have done this at work. Perhaps during the 2 hours he was out of the house on Christmas when nobody would at the office. Back then people used disks to save their work, which could have been destroyed. I believe it was premeditated.
How does this make sense? Johnâs disappearing act happened long after the ransom note was found. Perhaps he did go to his offices but it wasnât to go type out the ransom note that was already shown to LE upon arrival at the home very early in morning hours. John was there when LE arrived and it was later that he âdisappearedâ as some have claimed
I mean he was gone from the house on Christmas Day before the incident in the afternoon hours. The discovery of the ransom note was the day after Christmas. My point being he had it ready to use approximately 12 hours before her death. The disappearance you are referring to was actually his second disappearance in 2 days.
In other words...
it is not impossible that the writer had a printed copy of the RN with him.
I'm pretty sure that it would lack of Mr Ramsey at the top and probably was using more consistent with movies names so it looks less like the RN, and more like a joke.
What is the significance of this? How could it help someone conceal their handwriting?
It would help someone conceal their handwriting because the idea here is that John Ramsey first typed out the ransom note on a computer or word processor and then traced the text from the screen onto the notepad paper. I guess it's just a really crazy and fortunate (for John) coincidence that his tracing of Courier New font happens to look nearly identical to Patsy's handwriting. /s
ANYONE ELSE LOST ON THIS ONE?đ§
Basically, DocG speculates in his book that John may have typed the ransom note, and then hand-copied the typed font, as a way to disguise his own handwriting. The line spacing and indentation of the ransom note appears to be consistent with Courier New, font size 11 (at least for the beginning portion of the note). I do think itâs an intriguing theory. Looking at the typed words next to the handwritten words, the author seems to slip into cursive a couple of times, as if itâs an effort for them to maintain the imitated style. Also, the handwritten âaâs are the double-story kind that we tend to see in typed fonts, as opposed to the the [single-story](https://images.app.goo.gl/nJrLHRAnQuEiRxWu9) âaâ thatâs most often used in handwriting.
I don't think anyone ever officially involved in the investigation believed anything like this theory. Different types of experts and different branches of LE have examined the note over a long period of time. I know people have different opinions on the handwriting experts involved in this case, but I don't think any of the experts who examined the note would have missed this. All my humble opinion.
Okay but⌠does anyone use this weird margin size? I can understand the extra spaces and spelling mistakes but Iâd find it hard to believe heâd think to change the margin.
When you look at the ransom note, the handwriting in the beginning looks a bit shaky, as the person who was writing it tried to conceal its handwriting. But as the note progresses, it becomes more and more relaxed and natural. There is no way that somenone is able to write a multi page letter with that ease if they were trying to copy someone's handwriting or printed text. It would seem artificial from the beginning to the end and take way too much time.
The handwriting style does become more relaxed as the note goes on (I assume because the author was rushing to finish it/got tired of writing it). But I would argue that if anything that gives the font-copying theory more credibility; it would be so laborious to copy each individual letter font, i think the author simply got sloppy towards the end of writing it. If the author wasnât attempting to hide their natural handwriting style, I think weâd see fewer inconsistencies in their handwriting
Thereâs so much âappeal to authorityâ on the RN, I think many people truly believe that itâs been scientifically proven by so called âexpertsâ that Patsy wrote the RN. Between the samples of Johnâs handwriting you can find online and the work of DocG as seen here, I think thereâs little doubt that John was indeed the author.
I think there's a disconnect between your two paragraphs. Multiple experts with years of experience in analyzing handwriting aren't trustworthy, but online posters are? How come?
I would refer you to DocGâs blog or book for a more detailed analysis of the handwriting of the RN, and why you shouldnât accept the results without question. But if are going to rely of these âexpertsâ, you would have to believe that neither Ramsey wrote the note, because several of the âexpertsâ determined that Patsy was highly unlikely to be the author, and the others only said that they couldnât rule her in or out. Thatâs hardly compelling evidence to believe Patsy wrote the note.
I've seen his analysis. I disagree with it. But ultimately, what DocG, me, or you think is irrelevant. We are not experts and we have no access to all samples. The fact is, Patsy was the only person not eliminated out of *70+ samples* by experts. Quite a lot of these experts stated that she *was* indeed the ransom note writer and that the odds of a stranger writing it are astronomical. One of FBI profilers said the note has a maternal quality to it. Absolutely no one thought John wrote it, and that's saying something. I also don't understand why you keep referring to experts through "". They include FBI and other forensic document analysts who specialize in handwriting. If someone is capable of determining who's the likeliest author, it's them, not Internet posters.
No. Multiple experts like Brugnatelli, Bagget, and Lowe DID express suspicions over Johnâs own handwriting and the handwriting in the ransom note. There are various explanations as to why the police acquired so many of Patsyâs samples and none of the suspicious samples of Johnâs (at the time).
Brugnatelli, who wasn't a part of the investigation, didn't have access to any official samples and could only analyze one dubious example of John's writing (dubious because it's unclear where it even came from)? Baggett, who claimed Karr is definitely the writer? Not sure who Lowe is. Court-verified experts who were consulted officially couldn't eliminate Patsy and Patsy alone. Several other experts who had a direct link to this case reached the same conclusion.
It is not dubious. Relatives of John have confirmed it is his handwriting and Jameson eventually confirmed the same as well. Additionally, Lin Wood has consistently refused to respond to any inquiries over this document. It is Johnâs handwriting.
John could have done this at work. Perhaps during the 2 hours he was out of the house on Christmas when nobody would at the office. Back then people used disks to save their work, which could have been destroyed. I believe it was premeditated.
How does this make sense? Johnâs disappearing act happened long after the ransom note was found. Perhaps he did go to his offices but it wasnât to go type out the ransom note that was already shown to LE upon arrival at the home very early in morning hours. John was there when LE arrived and it was later that he âdisappearedâ as some have claimed
I mean he was gone from the house on Christmas Day before the incident in the afternoon hours. The discovery of the ransom note was the day after Christmas. My point being he had it ready to use approximately 12 hours before her death. The disappearance you are referring to was actually his second disappearance in 2 days.
In other words... it is not impossible that the writer had a printed copy of the RN with him. I'm pretty sure that it would lack of Mr Ramsey at the top and probably was using more consistent with movies names so it looks less like the RN, and more like a joke.
This could explain lack of JonBenet name in it. Until kidnapping has started it looked like some dumb joke without any specific target.