More on this later... I have to say that Lou Smit and I disagree on this piece of evidence so I am not sure how I am going to handle this one...

Smit's argument: The author is a vicious, brutal person. The note was written before -- not after --
the killing and is written in a calm, deliberate manner.

Violent references: The letter makes frequent allusions to death and violence. It threatens
"immediate execution" of JonBenet. The family is threatened with being denied her remains for burial. There are four consecutive
threats ending with "she dies."

Timing: There's a reference to calling between 8 and 10 "tomorrow morning." To Smit, this suggests the letter was written
before midnight, before JonBenet's killing.

Face value: Smit believes the letter should be considered at face value. It's appears to be a kidnapping and ransom letter.
"Don't try to change it from a kidnapping and ransom just to fit any particular idea you have." In addition, the letter mentions two
"gentlemen" watching over JonBenet. Smit says the possibility of two people involved shouldn't be dismissed.

Language and state of mind: The letter begins: "Mr. Ramsey, listen carefully, we are a small foreign faction. We respect your
business, but not the country it serves." Smit said, "Picture a mother and father writing that right after they've mutilated their
daughter." Smit also cites the phrase that says the letter-writer is aware of law enforcement "countermeasures and tactics." Smit
can't picture Patsy using such words.

Familiar references: The letter incorporates references some interpret as information only the
Ramseys should know. One is the ransom amount -- $118,000 -- which was the net amount of
John Ramsey's most recent bonus. Smit agrees the $118,000 may have meaning, but not only for
the Ramseys. For example, earlier that year a disgruntled former employee of Ramsey's company
claimed it owed him close to $118,000. Three other employees of Ramsey's company knew the
amount of Ramsey's bonus. And two employees owed the firm $18,000. Smit also believes it's
significant the writer asked for $100,000 in $100 bills and the remaining $18,000 in $20 bills.
Maybe this person wanted to bank $100,000 and spend $18,000, he said. Also, just as it's
questionable why an intruder would use the $118,000 figure, it's equally questionable why Patsy
Ramsey, if trying to stage a murder, would use it. Why not a round figure? Smit asks. The letter is
signed using the acronym SBTC. Police wondered if that was a reference to Subic Bay, a training
center where John Ramsey spent time during his naval career, though no one in the Navy apparently
used that acronym to describe the place. Smit doesn't know what the acronym means but is aware
of other places where its use has appeared, including a sign at a protest demonstration with SBTC
spelled out vertically. Horizontally, it reads: Stop/Bombing/Third world/Countries.

References to popular movies: Language in the ransom note reflects that in several popular
movies. The movie Ransom was playing in Boulder during December 1996, the month of JonBenet's
death. It is the story of a child taken hostage for money. In addition, Smit said, there are references
in the ransom note that echo lines in similar movies, such as Dirty Harry, Speed, Nick of Time and
Ruthless People. The Ramseys didn't have such movies in their home, and hadn't seen those
movies, Smit said.

BPD: Police and a police-hired expert in use of language, Don Foster, said the $118,000 has
two other possible connections to the Ramseys. The Ramseys' home computer showed a net
liabilities figure of $1,118,000 and Patsy referred to Psalm 118 in some of her writings. They point
out that the ransom note and a Ramsey Christmas letter both used the phrase "and hence," and that
SBTC could be the first four letters of four verses in the Bible, if the verses were read in reverse
order. Police said John Ramsey's Bible was found opened at Psalms 35 and 36, which contain the
verses.

I agree with Lou Smit - The author is a vicious, brutal person. The note was written before -- not after the killing and is written in a calm, deliberate manner.

We also both feel that the parents would not kill their daughter then write a note with so many references to her death. This is clearly a note that tells us what the killer was thinking about - - his fantasy.

Timing: There's a reference to calling between 8 and 10 "tomorrow morning." To Smit, this suggests the letter was written before midnight, before JonBenet's killing.
I think "tomorrow" simply meant the next time the sun came up - - the hour made no difference to the person writing the note.

Face value: Smit believes the letter should be considered at face value. It's appears to be a kidnapping and ransom letter.
"Don't try to change it from a kidnapping and ransom just to fit any particular idea you have."

I think the note was written while the killer was waiting for the family to come home and settle in for the night. While I think it is possible the killer intended to remove her from the house, I think he always knew he was going to torture and kill her, never intended to return her for any ransom. I think the note was an "after thought", not part of the original plan, and hance the pad and pen coming from the house is logical. he brought in the other "tools of his trade" - - I think that indicates the note was not part of the plan but simply a "bonus" fantasy puzzle piece.

In addition, the letter mentions two
"gentlemen" watching over JonBenet. Smit says the possibility of two people involved shouldn't be dismissed.

I think the "two gentlemen" actually represent John Ramsey and the killer's father - I think including that reference in the note was a way of thumbing his nose at his father.

Won't know the truth until SickPuppy tells us, but I am curious about which one of us will be closest on this one.

Language and state of mind: The letter begins: "Mr. Ramsey, listen carefully, we are a small foreign faction. We respect your
business, but not the country it serves." Smit said, "Picture a mother and father writing that right after they've mutilated their
daughter." Smit also cites the phrase that says the letter-writer is aware of law enforcement "countermeasures and tactics." Smit
can't picture Patsy using such words.

I agree - Doesn't sound like either Ramsey to me - and I can't imagine them making a mistake and saying AG served some country and then neglecting to mention JonBenét by name or asking for a LOT more money. The ransom note just doesn't make sense coming from John or Patsy.

Familiar references: The letter incorporates references some interpret as information only the
Ramseys should know. One is the ransom amount -- $118,000 -- which was the net amount of
John Ramsey's most recent bonus. Smit agrees the $118,000 may have meaning, but not only for
the Ramseys. For example, earlier that year a disgruntled former employee of Ramsey's company
claimed it owed him close to $118,000. Three other employees of Ramsey's company knew the
amount of Ramsey's bonus. And two employees owed the firm $18,000. Smit also believes it's
significant the writer asked for $100,000 in $100 bills and the remaining $18,000 in $20 bills.
Maybe this person wanted to bank $100,000 and spend $18,000, he said. Also, just as it's
questionable why an intruder would use the $118,000 figure, it's equally questionable why Patsy Ramsey, if trying to stage a murder, would use it. Why not a round figure? Smit asks.

Since the letter has no other religious references, I would argue that the 118 is likely NOT from the psalm. And I think Patsy would have asked for a cool million - - maybe 2 - - an effort to point out that someone knew they could afford to pay that - - that JonBenét truly WAS a valuable article to be bartered for in a real kidnapping situation. Having said THAT, if an intruder saw that amount on John's pay stubs while lurking in the house, I think he MAY have used that number - - kind of a nasty joke. John would never see his daughter again and the ransom that promised her back was the amount of a BONUS - - so sick a joke.

The letter is signed using the acronym SBTC. Police wondered if that was a reference to Subic Bay, a training
center where John Ramsey spent time during his naval career, though no one in the Navy apparently
used that acronym to describe the place. Smit doesn't know what the acronym means but is aware
of other places where its use has appeared, including a sign at a protest demonstration with SBTC spelled out vertically. Horizontally, it reads: Stop/Bombing/Third world/Countries.

I, jameson, think SBTC could mean any number of things, but I see so MANY similarities between the Ramsey murder and the murder of the Clutter family that was immortalized in the book In Cold Blood, I think the letters may stand for "Suggested By Truman Capote". Again, only SickPuppy can tell us - - and I am hopeful that one day he tells us if one of us was right - or what it DID mean to him.

References to popular movies: The Ramseys didn't have such movies in their home, and hadn't seen those movies, Smit said.

I agree with Lou on this one -- the killer certainly had mmore than a passing interest in such movies - - and I will go him one further and say I think our guy was a student of true crime. I see references to the murders of Suzanne Degnan, Bobby Franks and the Clutter family in the note and crime.

The police position: Police and a police-hired expert in use of language, Don Foster, said the $118,000 has
two other possible connections to the Ramseys. The Ramseys' home computer showed a net
liabilities figure of $1,118,000 and Patsy referred to Psalm 118 in some of her writings. They point
out that the ransom note and a Ramsey Christmas letter both used the phrase "and hence," and that
SBTC could be the first four letters of four verses in the Bible, if the verses were read in reverse
order. Police said John Ramsey's Bible was found opened at Psalms 35 and 36, which contain the
verses.

I already commented on the 118 as it may have connected to a bible verse or the Ramsey bonus.
But I would say here that in another place the police used Foster as a handwriting analyst -- which he is NOT. And as a text analyst, he will be totally discredited as a charlatan if he DARES take the stand in this case. I am shocked the BPD hasn't actually put out a statement saying they will NOT be using Foster as a witness, that they feel he is NOT a credible witness in this case. If they could do it to Kimberly Ballard, why not to Donald Foster?

I think that the note was composed way ahead of the murder, by perps who had the intention of kidnapping a child. They probably decided on JonBenet after the publicity that JR received from the Boulderado Hotel dinner, celebrating the success of Access Graphics.

As for the $118,000 being a 'small amount' - not to some people it isn't. Also, the perps may have considered that John would pay that amount without warning the authorities.
And how do we know that they would not have asked for more money, had the original request been satisfied?

Overall, I still have to favour the 'kidnapping gone wrong' theory first, and the possibility of an L & L type crime second.

I'm in the UK and the 26th December is called 'boxing day' (I'm not sure if it's the same in the US). Boxing day is a national bank holiday and there is not a bank in the country that would be open. If the Ramseys were supposed to collect the ransom money on that day, without alerting bank authorities then how are they supposed to do this if the bank was closed?

If things are different in US re Boxing day please let me know.