Special interest Article;
Anthony J. Iantosca, BCFE
Part two (2)
When analyzing a written or typed statement the examiner will look for red flags within the statement itself to detect for possible deception.
And to identify when deception has been identified. In Statement Analysis people mean exactly what they say. When a person or persons are committed to their statement their use of nouns, pronouns will remain consistent. Their personal dictionary will also remain consistent unless there is a justification for that change in their personal dictionary. This shows that they have a personal involvement in the actions being explained. They are speaking from their memory and not constructing the event from logic. We also look for punctuation and unique words and phrases just to name a few.
The complete two and a half page ransom letter is typed below exactly as it was found.
Listen carefully! We are a group of individuals that represent a small foreign faction. We do respect your bussiness but not the country that it serves. At this time we have your daughter in our posession . She is safe and unharmed and if you want her to see 1997, you must follow our instructions to the letter.
You will withdraw $118,000.00 from your account. $100,000 will be in $100 bills and the remaining $18,000 in $20 bills. Make sure that you bring an adequate size attaché to the bank. When you get home you will put the money in a brown paper bag. I will call you between 8 and 10 am tomorrow to instruct you on delivery. The delivery will be exhausting so I advise you to be rested. If we monitor you getting the money early, we might call you early to arrange an earlier delivery of the money and hence a earlier delivery pick-up of your daughter.
Any deviation of my instructions will result in the immediate execution of your daughter. You will also be denied her remains for proper burial. The two gentlemen watching over your daughter do not particularly like you so I advise you not to provoke them. Speaking to anyone about your situation, such as Police, F.B.I., etc., will result in your daughter being beheaded. If we catch you talking to a stray dog, she dies. If you alert bank authorities, she dies. If the money is in any way marked or tampered with, she dies. You will be scanned for electronic devices and if any are found, she dies. You can try to deceive us but be warned that we are familiar with law enforcement countermeasures and tactics. You stand a 99% chance of killing your daughter if you try to out smart us. Follow our instructions and you stand a 100% chance of getting her back.
You and your family are under constant scrutiny as well as the authorities. Don't try to grow a brain John. You are not the only fat cat around so don't think that killing will be difficult. Don't underestimate us John. Use that good southern common sense of yours. It is up to you now John!
Statement Analysis of the ransom letter
Consistent use of pronouns
I was at the ATM machine getting cash out when I finished and walked outside a "man" came up behind me "he" put a gun to my back "he" took my money, "he" told me don't turn around or "I" will shoot you, "he" ran off. I called police. In this example the use of pronouns remained consistent.
There was only "one" man who was involved in the action being explained.
Inconsistent use of pronouns
I was at the ATM machine getting cash out when a "man" came up behind me when I finished "he" put a gun to my back "they" took my money, "he" told me don't turn around or "I" will shoot you, "they" ran off. I called police. In this example the use of pronouns were not consistent.
There was only "one" man who was involved in the action being explained. Yet the writer uses "he" and "they." This would indicate the
writer was making up the story or something else happened to to explain his lost money.
In the beginning of the ransom letter we have consistent use of the pronouns, "we" "we" "we" "us" They are talking as a group and should remain expressing themselves with a group mentality. As the ransom letter continues we see a deviation from that group mentality with the use of the following pronouns, "I" "I" "we" "we" "my" "I" "we" "us" "we" "us" "us." The use of the pronouns
"I" and "my" should not be present in the ransom letter when writing as a group.
This would indicate that the ransom letter was constructed from logic and indicates deception.
Consistent use of personal dictionary
If a person starts off writing about an event and calls a "gun" a "gun" they will use that same language throughout their statement.
Problems arise when the person calls the "gun" a "gun" then calls it a "pistol" "weapon" "firearm" etc. Unless there is a reasonable explanation for the change in their language.
Consistent use of personal dictionary
I was cleaning my "gun" my wife came over and tried to grab my "gun" I tried to keep my "gun" away from her as we fought, the "weapon" fired and my wife let go of the "gun." This would be acceptable because it remained his "gun" until it fired and then the 'gun" became a "weapon."
The kidnappers start the letter off with,
Mr. Ramsey a very polite way of addressing a man who's daughter you will behead if your demands are not met. They change their language and start calling him by his first name John. They should have continued calling him Mr. Ramsey
or just Ramsey, the use of his first name is a little to personal and intimate for people who do not know each other. When they changed from Mr. Ramsey to John there has to be a justification for the change as I explained in example above. This would also indicate the letter was written from logic and also indicates deception. Also in the statement we have this line" use that good southern common sense of yours." How do the kidnappers know he was from the South? The kidnappers also demanded $118,000.00 that was a very odd amount. These personalities types are very greedy and would have asked for much more money. $118,000.00 was the exact amount of a bonus he received from his company that year. Only someone close to the Ramsey's would know that exact amount.
Kidnappers would never state who they are as they did in the ransom letter, "We are a group of individuals that represent a small foreign faction." Kidnappers would never make that statement and help law enforcement reduce the possible suspect pool. The alleged kidnappers misspelled the words business and possession but spelled "attaché" correctly, even including the accent on the word "attaché." This would indicate to me that the author of the ransom letter was highly educated. In the known handwriting samples of Patsy Ramsey she used "exclamation points" sparingly in her written statements and letters. The use of exclamation points were also found in the ransom letter. The letter was signed "Victory! S.B.T.C there has been a lot of speculation as to what the letters S.B.T.C mean. At this time no one has come up with a reasonable explanation of the letters and their meaning.
How could you claim "victory' when you have not received any money yet. This is nonsense attempting to have people believe this was some sort of terrorists group.
The most damaging evidence found in this bogus ransom letter is the following unique words and statement,
The kidnappers state, "If we monitor you getting the money early, we might call you early to arrange an earlier delivery of the money and hence a earlier delivery pick-up of your daughter." The word "hence" is not a common word that most people use, the kidnappers used "and hence" the word "and" is not needed. When investigators were analyzing known handwriting samples from Patsy Ramsey they found a Christmas message written on December 14, 1997. The First United Methodist Church in Boulder, Colorado held a memorial service for JonBenet. There was a Christmas message from the Ramsey family that statement had the following words.
"Had there been no birth of Christ, there would be no hope of eternal life, and, hence, no hope of ever being with our loved ones again"
What are the chances of two different personalities and one being a foreigner use the exact same wording.
This ransom letter was staged by someone who wanted to confuse and interfere with a law enforcement investigation into the death of JonBenet Ramsey. Why would innocent people do this? Innocent people would not. The only innocent person in this botched investigation was that poor child JonBenet Ramsey.