JonBenét Ramsey: 911 Call & Ransom Note Analysis with Steven Pagano

Auto-generated captions. Wording may contain transcription errors; check the recording for exact statements.

0:01 Live from Miami, Florida, broadcasting around the world. Around the world. You're listening to Patriots Perspective with Christi Tasker. Your news behind the government's facade. Don't fall victim to propaganda or spend another 30 days in the tech goolog. Turn off your tell live vision and just listen. Hear the most mind-opening hours of your life as we interview whistleblowers and real patriots for uncensored truth. Truth. The Comeie News Network and Facebook cannot control the power of Jesus Christ. Therefore, they have no power over us. There aren't enough Vegas strippers to fake check what's coming. Put in your earphones and avoid the tech tyrants. Subscribe to patriotsperspective.com now and see the evidence and action

0:52 items to help you take back your God-given rights, government, and expose Satan and his demons taking up residence in your community. Be sure to hit the like or rumble button and comment to tell us where you're holding the line. "[Music]" Hello everybody. Welcome back to a night of Patriots Perspective. Thank you so much for joining us here on Patriots Perspective. As you know, we are not into just believing what we are told. We're into investigations and taking a deep dive into what is out there. interviewing whistleblowers, interviewing other investigators so that you guys can know the truth about what's happening in our world with different

1:43 cases. And I want to tell you guys how I found our tonight's guest, Stephen Progno Proano. Sorry, Stephen. I know I've just butched your name. I apologize. But Stephen I found by way of Peter Height. Stephen is an amazing um linguistics expert and um he has a blog full of um linguistics on the John Bane Ramsay case and I will be showing you that throughout. Um Stephen, welcome to Patrick's Perspective and we look forward to going through Linguistic Crime Science Consulting LLC which is your business. um where I found tons of great information posted regarding the

2:25 John Bené Ramsey case and the linguistics um throughout. So, I'm looking forward to first of all you telling my audience about yourself and linguistics actually is Oh, thank you. Um so, my name is Stephen Pagano. Uh I'm a police officer uh in Northeast Ohio for over 20 years now. Um I've been studying linguistics in terms of statement analysis, which is a deception detection technique. um that law enforcement and other investigators use uh in their work. Um but for probably the last seven or eight years, I've been studying it uh intensely and I studied it under Pete

3:07 Peter Hayatt who we unfortunately lost earlier this year. um where the techniques of statement analysis went into uh more than just deception detection, but also psycho uh linguistic profiling. And what that is is when we use statement analysis, we're looking at the words somebody chooses when they speak freely. And we're trying to discern not just deception or veracity in and somebody's account, but we can find essentially what are clues to the hidden truths. Um what's what's on a person's mind will leak out as they speak. And the more somebody talks, the more they reveal uh what is what it is that they're trying to hide from an investigator. Uh psycho linguistic profiling is when you take those same

3:56 principles that we use in the analysis and you ask different types of questions. Whereas um we start out by asking what really happened um where the truth and deception lies and then we go into asking questions about the words that the person chooses to use and what that tells us about them themselves. Um, and then we can get some insight as to the the subject that we're looking at, you know, what types of personalities they have, um, background, experience, things of that nature. Okay. And then, so when you started working with Peter Hyatt, um, tell us like how you guys met or how what what's like what prompted your interest to

4:34 even, you know, study study this specifically because I know that there's many routes that you could have taken um, you know, on the investigative trail. like what made you like want to get into linguistics? Yeah. So, from an early uh early on in my career, um learning how to discern deception was important. It's an important part of any investigator. You know, we we unfortunately have to deal with uh deception as a regular part of our job. Um I had uh stumbled across statement analysis through the book uh by Mark Mccllich. uh I believe it was titled I know you're lying. Um

5:15 through that book I kind of got the interest in it. Um explored it more found some training um that I went through uh various different instructors basic trainings but you know like many people I found Peter Hayyatt through his blog. um he did a lot of his uh promotions for his business and his training that he did through a blog and I read a lot of his blog work and and eventually I just I did the training under him. Um I signed up for his courses uh completed both of his courses and just continued a uh you know sort of

5:54 student mentor relationship with him for for many years as he does with or I should say did with many of his students. Um, so you know it was Peter who kind of encouraged me to do what I'm doing now which is you know I started the website and you know promoted uh through the blog that I you know do on my website here. Well I thought the blog your blog was actually very easy you know for people to read understand um and and you've broken down the different parts of the notes. Um, so where is a good place for us to start? Is it John Bernain and Ramsey note number one part one? Is this

6:36 the best place like to start with this particular case with the John Bernet Ramsey case? Um, I think actually the the best place might be the 911 call. Okay. All right. Let's go for that. I believe is on there as well. Yep. And I love the fact that you actually have everything on here. Okay. So with the 911 call um with your notes um so yeah just kind of go through and you know tell us what you found in the 911 call. Well the first thing somebody needs to do when they're analyzing a 911 call they need to understand the context. Um whenever we do any analysis context is a

7:13 very critical part of what we do. And so 911 calls have a sort of an acute analysis uh context in that and and especially when you're dealing with a 911 call from somebody who is a family member or loved one of the person who's experiencing the emergency. So, in this particular um case with John Bane Ramsay, uh as as many people know, um John's mother, Paty Ramsey, made a 911 call the morning to report that John Benet had been kidnapped, or at least that's what she was uh reporting to believe at the time of the phone call.

7:49 So, if we use that as our context as we go through the call, um we can see where the problems start to arise in the language that she uses. So, uh, and I can just go through a little bit of the call here. I have it in front of me. So, it starts out with 911. It's kind of inaudible, but you hear the 911, uh, operator say 911 emergency, and Psy Paty responds with something that's also a bit inaudible. Um, it to me it sounds like she says, "We need police." But what's obvious to me is that the word police was within

8:26 the response. So, we're not quite sure what she says there. We don't know really what to make of it. But, um, if you listen closely, I think we can reasonably say what she doesn't say, which is what the actual emergency would be, which is, you know, my daughter John Benet has been kidnapped. The 911 operator, uh, you know, she starts to ask what's going on, but Paty gives out the the address. Um when she gives out the address, the 911 operator then comes up and says, "Uh, what is going on there, ma'am?" Now, this is a

8:59 very crucial part in this call because this is the first clear opportunity that we expect Paty Ramsay to take when um reporting this emergency to explain what's going on. So, here's her opportunity to tell, you know, the police that John Benet has been kidnapped. But that's those aren't the words that she chose. And so, what happens is as she's speaking and her brain's formatting her thoughts, you know that that there's there's a fraction of a second that it goes from thoughts to speech. And in that fraction of a second, she looks or she, you know,

9:39 she's looking to report her daughter's been kidnapped. But the word she chooses are we have a kidnapping. So I would you know I would challenge anybody to think of you know just imagine in your mind you what are you you rode your bike to the store and you come out and that your bike's been stolen and so you call the police and the police ask you you know what what's going on. Um how many people would say we have a bike theft or I have a bike theft. these words um they they betray the idea of an emergency.

10:15 So and and let me let me let's pause there for just a second audience. I want you right now before we go any further, you to basically say what you know comment below and put in the chat what you would say because I can tell you what I would say Stephen is I would say I cannot locate my daughter like if the daughter hadn't been found she had not been found at this when the 911 call was made. Correct. She if so, you know, again, so what we're what we're meant to believe is that Paty Ramsay at this point

10:49 believes that her daughter actually was kidnapped because if if you'll recall, and we'll see as we go on in the the 911 call, she brings up this the ransom note, the note that they found. Okay. Gotcha. Okay. So, at this point, she's to have at least read enough of the note to know that somebody has taken her because she's got the words of a perpetrator to rely on. And so when she says we have a kidnapping, instead of say my daughter's been kidnapped, um she's fundamentally speaking about herself and and what she's experiencing, what the emergency is from her own

11:23 perspective. She's not speaking for her daughter. And and she's not just speaking for herself, but she's speaking for presumably her and John Ramsay because she uses the pronoun we. So she's not alone in this either. So what we expect in a 911 call, it would be the emergency itself. The emergency isn't what Paty and John Ramsay are experiencing. It's what John Benet would be experiencing. And and that would be especially for the mother of a of a little girl who's kidnapped that it would be the maternal instinct of that mother would would be to be focused on

12:01 her daughter in those moments. But that's not the language that she uses. And it gets a little bit more interesting in my opinion because when she says we have a kidnapping, she's doing a couple more things. She's saying she's in possession of this kidnapping, which is obviously odd language. But if you look at the word or the the phrase a kidnapping, um the article a in a kidnapping, it's it's a very um vague language. It's abstract in a sense. And if you think about again this is all based on just you know the normal common uh use of our English language everybody uses this language when she says a kidnapping

12:45 she's she's being vague she's being abstract and she's basically linguistically bringing into this phrase the concept of all kidnappings. And this is going to be kind of hard for me to articulate, but what what she's doing is she's telling us on her mind isn't just this one important kidnapping. She's thinking of the fact that there are kidnappings that exist throughout the world and she's telling us that she has one of them. So it would be like saying I have a dog in in terms of linguistics, you're also bringing in the concept that other dogs exist. I hope I'm hope I'm making that clear, but it's very Yeah, it does because, you know, it it

13:27 kind of really does help when you think about like what would you say at this point if you you know the average person, what would you say at this point? And and all I can think of is my daughter has been kidnapped. Please send help. you know, and like I would think that you would start to give a description direction like say yeah I found a note you know I mean so I don't know if we we get to that point but I mean I'm just you know putting myself in that position. Yeah. So so what what by being so abstract about it what she's doing is she's showing us that she's thinking

14:08 about the concept of kidnapping in a very abstract way. And so what so what I'm getting at in a very hard to articulate and roundabout way is it's an indication already right at the beginning of staging that this crime was staged because it shows us that she's not focused on this one kidnapping but she's also she's also thinking of kidnappings all in general as a general concept and what it kind of gives us a suggestion and this at this point it's just a suggestion it would be something for us to want to explore throughout the rest of the analysis or in our

14:41 investigation, but it it it gives us this first suggestion that um there's there was this sort of thought of okay this can kidnap let me put it this way kidnappings are a thing and we'll make this look like one of them. Is that is that tracking correctly? Yeah. Yeah. So, so you know, we we already start off with a really really bad sign, some really big red flags when it comes to this 911 call. Um, and so, and then the the the uh 911 operator continues on and says, "Explain to me what's going on." and she responds

15:22 uh their comma. She kind of uh self uh corrects herself here and she goes into we have a and then she edits herself again to there's a note left and our daughter is gone. So, one of the principles we look at when we're doing any sort of an analysis is we look at priority. And priority usually the most important things that we want you to know are the things that we're going to say first. And we can look at that in the micro, we can look at that in the macro. Here in the micro priority, we see that um she finally

16:02 tells us the status of John Benet being gone. But she first wants the dispatcher to know that there was a note left. It's more important than saying my daughter's gone. And so this is kind of our second indication of staging is we're going through if we were going through this fresh here, we would see that first indicator and now we're looking at this and we're starting to see a pattern arise. And so when she says there's a there's a note left and our daughter is gone, the note is what is more important to her to communicate to the dispatcher at that moment. And that again is another red flag.

16:39 It's also very passive in the sense that, and this is where we kind of got to dig a little bit, but in the sense that when you say there's a note left, how many ways could she have said it? The kidnapper left a note, somebody left a note, but she says a note was left. In passive language like this, it removes and denies us any sort of linguistic responsibility as to who put that note there. And that's, you know, that can be again context driven. But in this case, we don't just have um the fact that she

17:12 doesn't tell us who it is. But, you know, when you consider that somebody wrote out a ransom note telling uh Paty and John that they have their daughter, these words are very impactful. This is what you would expect in an actual kidnapping. So the person is is somewhat we expect them to be somewhat psychologically present on Paty's mind. And so when it's passive in this way, it sort of denies the concept of there being an author of that note, if that makes sense. So um if I again to use another example to just try and paint the picture here, if I go outside and

17:55 somebody writes some sort of you know slur on my car, they key it painted or whatever. Um, even though that person's gone and I don't know who wrote that, the mystery is is who the author is, their presence is still there. So, so I'm expected in my psyche at that moment to be thinking that that there is a person behind this. And we don't see that in Paty's language. Mhm. And it gets even a little bit more comp, you know, complicated for her in this in this case here could be because what we have here is also what we would refer to

18:32 is another principle we look at is when somebody changes their language. So um she tells us that they have a kidnapping. But when she finally tells us the status of John Benet, she doesn't say that John Benet has been kidnapped. She merely says that she's gone. And what we look at and and when we do these analysis is we consider this principle that when there's a change in language, it's a change in the person's subjective perception of reality. So she she is using the word gone to describe John Benet even though she's saying what they possess is a kidnapping and the two are

19:08 not the same. Um even though it sounds like it's nitpicking, it's not because once she decided to use the word kidnapping, um she assigns some sort of internal uh we'll say internal subjective, you know, definition of that. And when she changes that language, what she's telling us is that something's different from the first time she used it to to to this new language now that she can't use that word kidnapping again. And as we go through the 911 call, and I'll just kind of just you just hit this point right now. She'll you'll notice she'll never say that John Bet was

19:45 kidnapped. She never actually reports that in her 911 call. And so again, another principle that we use is if they don't say it, we're not allowed to say it for them. Um we don't interpret their words. Uh we just do our best to try and understand the words that they choose. Let me ask you something, Stephen. So, you know, because I'm I keep trying to picture, you know, it's hard to say what people will say, you know, like when you are in the state of emergency, but I would think if it were me, I would basically pick up the phone and probably be screaming at the top of my lungs that

20:18 either my daughter is missing and I need help. Um, and then I would think the 911 operator would start trying to get a description of the child, the missing person, right? I mean like what is typical with a missing person? Yeah. So when when I talk about you know what we expect her to say and what we don't you know what what she says that is unexpected. Um you're right. I you know there's not a script that we expect her to go by. You know she she could say you know my daughter's been kidnapped. You could say my daughter is missing. There's no

20:58 script. What we're trying to do is we're trying to just follow her words and try to understand the way her words are reflective of her perception of what it is she's reporting. And and at the end of the day when we do these analysis um this analyses that that is what we're looking at. We're really just trying to gauge the perception of somebody. So when I say, you know, we have a kidnapping as a red flag, it's because in in those moments, what her word suggests to us is her perception is self-centered. She's focused on what we

21:31 are experiencing, me and and I'm assuming, you know, her husband as opposed to what's important, which is what's going on with my daughter. So yeah, there's no script to say. There's, you know, every call, everybody says obviously something a little bit different. But when we look at the actual words and follow, you know, you just, you just follow what they say and you'll see that there are these all these indicators as to what their true perceptions are of the of the of the crime. And then we do have expectations that we follow. That's what the context

22:02 is for. So in this case again, um, you know, you you have to practice a little empathy. You have to kind of try and actually imagine yourself waking up that morning, finding your daughter's been kidnapped, finding a note from somebody saying that they have her, threatening to, you know, do all the things that they say they're going to do to her. And then imagine to yourself, what would be most important to you at in those moments? And then ask yourself, is this person's words reflective of that or is it reflective of something different? Yeah. Just like your number two says here, you know, when when you have a hypothetical parcel and you use the word my and I would definitely I mean my

22:42 first instincts is to say my daughter, you know, and and I and claim that person, the human. Um, so does is that like one of the main triggers too because she didn't say my daughter? Well, yeah. So, you know, when we look at the language, we're kind of looking at it from, you know, 360 degrees and there's many things to to discuss about about any any sort of um uh aspect of the language. But yeah, so so as I wrote in there, um the example is you know if something's taken from you, the word my becomes almost instinctual when you're reporting it because

23:25 um you know again that's where your that's where your psyches focus. You're focused on the fact that your personal possession you you your personal possession is gone. And so this is essentially reported being a theft of her daughter. And so, yeah, it's the same exact thing that we expect. You know, it's it's not it's not a kidnapping, it's my daughter. This is very personal to me because this is my child that's been taking and this is what we're looking for in the language that we just don't see. Okay. Yeah. And that makes total sense because I was even thinking like for instance my neighbor got burgl burglarized, you know, like and her

24:05 purse and everything was taken from our parking lot here in Miami. And I remember just shouting to the police, you know, my neighbor's just been burglarized. like help her, you know, like so that even even though she wasn't like beat up or anything, but it's just, you know, your instincts are to to claim that person, you know, the human as as my when it's in close to you, even though like my neighbor is not my own daughter, you know, I'm just trying to think through like different situations that, you know, can be similar. Um, well, that and that's absolutely it. I mean, that's just that. So you you look

24:44 at that s um circumstance with your neighbor and then now just imagine that we are talking about your own daughter who's been taken that morning. And so again the the the perspective we look at we we see what's missing and we see what's there and we compare the two. So we see that there's this focus on herself and and presumably John when she says we have a kidnapping. We see that the kidnapping itself is vague. She doesn't say, you know, we are dealing with our daughter's kidnapping even. She just says, we have a kidnapping. And then, you know, she goes on to talk about the note before we even find out about the status of her daughter being gone. And it's always interesting to

25:26 note the language, too, because if you look at the word gone, um, you know, that can mean a lot of things. you know, people use that term for people who are deceased, you know, um it's and it goes back to that sort of internal subjective dictionary that we're looking at. And so we're just trying to we're trying to again gauge where her perceptions are in the moment. Yeah. Um and so the dis, you know, the dispatcher repeats it back to her. A note was left and your daughter is gone. And then they get into a little bit of a description. You know, she asked, "How old is your daughter?" She's 6 years old. She's blonde.

26:01 Um, how long ago was this? I don't know. I just found the note and my daughter is and it was a little inaudible, but I'm pretty sure she just says her her daughter is gone again. So, she she kind of doubles down again on the whole priority thing about the note, too. So, um, you know, again, she wants in this call, she wants that note to be known. She wants that note to almost take center stage of what's going on in that house. Um, which is troubling because right now the the the biggest most important thing is the status of John Benet being

26:39 kidnapped, which again she still hasn't, you know, told us in the call. "[Music]" Uh was it also Stephen one one other thing I had a friend um that was actually um she wrote a book called Once Ransomed um and her father was very well off and um she was ransomed at one point and you know one of the things I know when your child is really ransomed is you're very careful not to make a 911 call too that you you know so I mean you know I don't know if that's normal this has been like back in the 80s or yeah 80s I want to say like the mid mid 80s and you know because you

27:24 know when the child is simply missing at the at the moment you know the parents are super concerned about also what is taking place in some note um but you know again I have not analyzed the the note for John and Paty and John Benet it's It's been a while, but did that ever trigger anything with you guys? Like that she was so focused on the note, but then also immediately called 911. Well, yeah, and so, you know, it's come up. I've I've read a lot of people's opinions on this case. Um, and and of course, it's come up, you know, in various interviews and things. Why did

28:05 you call 911 right away? Um and and of course I agree with all all those uh sort of criticisms, but what I found interesting was and I think I put it in one of those posts. Um I had mentioned it. There was a a I think it was a Larry King interview with them where he brought it up and the response that John Ramsay made to answer that was something to the effect of um we couldn't we couldn't just sit there and wait. We would have gone mad. And again, so again, so if we're going to analyze those words and we're going to analyze them under the context of specifically

28:50 what Larry, I believe it was Larry King had asked them what they're talking about. Now, you have to ask yourself if you are sitting around and you're worried about, you know, whether or not you should call the police and your response to Larry King is the reason why we called the police is because we would have went mad. What you're what you're basically telling us, you're suggesting at that point you already know your daughter's beyond help because what you're telling us is that your decision on whether or not to call the police was not dependent on your daughter's well-being and what would happen to her. It was dependent on

29:27 your your mental health state. You know, how stressed you were in the moment. And so, again, you got to put yourself in that position. And and just as you were bringing up, you know, would you would you call the police if the if the note told you not to? I I don't know if I would or not. I I've never been in that situation, but I can tell you this that my decision wouldn't be based on how I felt in the moment. It would be based on how I thought it would affect my daughter who was in the hands of these kidnappers.

29:57 Yes. And so that's the thing. If it and that's, you know, I I always go back to Once Ransomed, and I'm not going to say any names. you can look up the book if the book is still there or if you're interested in it. Um because I haven't confirmed with her, you know, I don't want to bring anybody else's case into it. But I but I just know her father. Um you know, I mean when things and your children are ransomed in some way, shape or form, you go about things a little bit differently because you want to make

30:26 sure that that person is protected. Um and probably the last thing you're going to do is immediately call. Like even if you call police, you're gonna possibly go to the police or have somebody else take something to the police like come in a car that's not that's even an undercover car. Um so that that way because a lot of times I know when when people actually are ransomed like when my friend was taken you know they watched the house you know to see if anybody who was coming and going and her father was very concerned about that and it was not even made public until after

31:05 she was found. Um, so you know, like I I just can't help but think about, you know, here's a little girl who yes, you know, you need to get the record out that, you know, that it can possibly be seen, you know, that, you know, that she's missing, but you know, there's not even a call that's missing, you know, that the child's missing. When she said she's gone, she's gone where, you know, it is it is very concerning just in general. Yeah. And that's absolutely it. So, you know, um I think what what you touched upon is is exactly the point. The

31:39 decisions that are made should be made for the well-being of the child and not and so that's and and to go back to the Larry King response that it, you know, when you say I made that decision because I was experience experiencing X, Y, or Z, you're you're void of any concern for your child at that moment. And so what I would do if I was in his position, I don't know. But I do know that it would be whatever I thought was in the best interest of my child and and my child's well-being. And that's what we're not getting in that response. And that's what um you know, and that sort of tracks with what we're seeing in the

32:18 911 call in the sense that the status of John Benet is not the priority in this call. And and then when they went on Larry uh the Larry King show, I don't want to play a clip of it. I see it online, guys. So, I will link it below so that you can actually watch what Stephen is talking about yourself. There's the full episode that other people have on where you can see the comparison. Um I'll link like several different playlists so that way you can you guys can watch the call if you want. Um so, you can see exactly

32:51 what's happening. It's just very um concerning. And then you know here recently what what really made me start to look back into it Stephen is also not only uh Peter's sudden passing but also John the John Benet Ramsey story um that came out on Netflix you know so it's like you know we need some PR to kind of clean up this like once and final to get our message out. Um and then I know also journalists too that that um Mr. Ramsay would not contact and would not um you know do any follow-up interviews or whatever. It's like okay here's the documentary. You're supposed to believe what's here and that's it. Don't ask any more questions. You know so that becomes

33:36 concerning and you know it still just you know doesn't make a lot of sense and um you know even with the the other linguistics. Now what are the other things that you found that were that you think the audience would be super interested in? Um well, we can uh look at the ransom note. Um I know that's always a big topic of interest. There's a lot in my opinion, there's a lot to be said about this note. It's it's it's you know, it's complicated and yet in a sense it's not. So from just from a sort of deception detection type of um approach, it's not

34:16 it's not extremely complicated to see the problems with this being a legitimate ransom note. Um but then trying to just dig deeper into the words and just trying to pull out some clues as to what happened, that becomes a little bit more, you know, uh complicated. But you know um so the first thing I would just note and this isn't even an original thought of mine and many people have said this already. It's extremely long for being a ransom note. And so what I what I would point out from the from the perspective of doing the analysis is that we consider every

34:55 you know again this is this is the free editing process. This is their words um not contaminated by uh anybody else but th this is what they chose to put down on this paper uh when they wrote this note. So these are this is the author whoever wrote this note. This is their words. And so we can look at this and and glean a a lot from it. But they chose to write I think I think it was two and a half pages written. Um you know a ransom note. Anything somebody communicates to you in the free editing process we consider to be important. They feel we consider it for them it is important. It's important that they communicate that to us.

35:41 And a ransom note doesn't need to be this long, right? I mean, it just needs to be, you know, we have your daughter, go to the bank and withdraw this much money and we're going to call you at this time with further instructions or whatever. So, what we have here is an abundance of unnecessary information. And unnecessary information for us is not actually it it looks unnecessary. It's extra important when we do an analysis because then we take it and we go well why did you have to include all this and there's a lot here to unpack

36:14 but you know I'll just start right from the beginning I mean the first thing of the body of the note is listen carefully and I don't think um it's very hard to understand that the word listen is not really typical of writing right it's it's an audible word um it requires somebody to actually hear the words that you're saying so it it right off the bat, we get this suggestion that there's um that there's something audible to this note. And if we take the context that it's being written to John Ramsey because it's addressed Mr. Ramsay, um then it suggests that whoever wrote this

36:52 perceived, and now I just use that word cautiously, perceived his presence. Does that mean John Ramsay was in the room? It seems like it. Um but I wouldn't rule out the possibility that he wasn't. It could be that this author was merely um you know using their deep imagination but the the suggestion there is at least there that John Ramsay was present when this was being authored. the the note goes on and I you know I won't go over the whole thing just because there's so much to it but if we if we go to that same concept of priority that I mentioned with Paty in the 911 call as she's bringing up the

37:34 note and making job's status low priority. We can see that same concept play itself out in the note. So um you know first thing that the authors need to do is they need to talk about themselves. We're a group of individuals that represent a small foreign faction. We represent or we respect your business but not the country that it serves at this time. We have your daughter in our possession. So all this stuff that happens before we have your daughter in our possession is let me tell you about our let me tell you about us. Here's who we are. And that is not only counterintuitive to somebody who doesn't want to be caught

38:16 as the kidnapper, but it's pri it's the priority of this author to talk about themselves. And so this suggests to us masking, which is basically that the author is trying to pretend to be somebody else to push um you know the attention or the you know focus away from themselves. And if masking is actually occurring in this letter, that tells us something else because who would need to mask their identity other than somebody who is otherwise close to the investigation, whether it be the Ramsies themselves or somebody known to the Ramsies or some, you know, somebody that the police would

38:54 be looking at, it's somebody close by because otherwise there, if it's a perfect stranger, there's no need to mask your identity. Um, this all and in terms of priority too, I think it was about halfway through the the letter before the author even says, you know, anything about not going to the police. Very low on priority for this author, which suggests again they didn't have a very strong concern about the Ramsy's going to the police. And if that's accurate, what that rep, you know, represents to us is the the suggestion that this author knows what we would say knows the mind of John Ramsay and Paty Ramsey. Basically, we have no reason to

39:37 be concerned of you going to the police, at least not one that's very strong. I think what's been critical though for me in this here is um you know at one point here in the note the the author writes that uh if you if we get I'm trying to find it. I think it was something to the effect of if we monitor you get the money early we're going to call you early but the author never says what time they expect him to get the money. Um this is missing context in the note. There's content and there's context that is missing that somebody would have to know

40:15 outside of what's written on these pages to understand what this author means. And if you consider this that anytime somebody writes or communicates to you, they need to be understood. They have a need for you to know what it is that they're talking about. So the expectation is that when they don't add context or content in the note, they must perceive that you have that already, that you don't need me to explain it here. And so this this occurs a couple times, but the big one for me is when they talk about getting the money early because there's no time frame as to what time

40:49 they expect them to get the money. So how as us as as we read this note, we read this and we go, well, we don't know what early is. And if we don't know what early is, then the authors could not have um uh legitimately believed that John Ramsay would have understood what early was either. This missing context um suggests to us that the author believed that John Ramsay had this context that they didn't need to say it. It's almost like, you know, um an error, if you will, in the writing. So, you know, those those are big things to me. But I think one of the big, you know, one of the bigger things that I that I found interesting in the note,

41:30 and maybe it's interesting to others or not, but, you know, I I'd seen in in reading other people's opinions on this case, I'd seen people who, you know, they believe that somebody broke into the house Christmas night, waited for the Ramsies, wrote the note while they were waiting for the Ramsies to come home, and they intended to to kidnap John Benet. But if you if you look at the the syntax of the details of the of the instructions and and I won't go into all of it right now because it's kind of convoluted and complicated. I had to kind of iron it out in the post, but this note very clearly implies strongly

42:10 in my opinion that this this note was written the morning of the 26th and that the intent for this note was to instruct John and I guess Paty to go to the bank on the 26th and get a phone call on the 27th for the further instructions that was supposed to come between 8 and 10:00 a.m. And a lot of that has to do with the fact that the phone call was supposed to happen the following day. Um, you know, Christmas day, the the banks would have been closed. But there's a lot there's a lot again to unpack and all that. But I find that to be almost in my opinion, I mean, in my opinion, it's conclusive to

42:54 me that that this theory that somebody was waiting in the house um and wrote the note before they got there on Christmas night is just is just not uh it's not a good theory. Well, and did it and you know at the same time um Google still classifies this as the longest ransom note in US history um at 2600 words and you know if that is the case it and in terms of the ransom note oh excuse me 2300 words as it stands out as the longest ransom notes ever discovered in a kidnapping case. So that alone is concerning was concerning. The other thing is the ransom note comparison. Um

43:41 there's an article, you know, not on your site, but uh but I'm showing it on Reddit. There's a stream that the ransom note comparison original versus Pat's handwriting sample. The resemblance is striking. Um evidently the FBI um actually said that you know this that there were 24 out of 26 letters that resembled Patsy's own handwriting. Um so that's something. Did you happen to look into any of that? Um because it's saying that um FBI um Quantino concluded that 24 out of 26 letters were consistent with Paty's handwriting. Um, I thought that was very interesting. So, I don't look at handwriting. That's not anything that I'm trained in or anything like that. But I will tell you that, um,

44:36 you know, when I was going over this note and I decided to try my best at a profile of this author, even though they're obviously masking their identity. Um, it seemed like there might have been a couple different voices in this note. um the the the earlier voice is more structured logical thinking whereas the later we see a lot of emotion you know don't try to grow brain John and and there's some you know frustration and anger in there but there is um in my opinion there's a suggestion uh from the profile that at at least one of the persons contributing to this note was a

45:17 mother and likely you know was a woman likely a mother um and that comes comes from a couple of the phrases that are used here. Uh I believe at one point um the author gives uh John Ramsey advice to be rested. Um so uh you know this is something that I I perceive to be within the maternal instinct, right? Usually um mothers worrying about their family will give them advice like this. They'll say, you know, make sure you get enough rest. make sure you get enough to heat, that sort of thing. But then there's another part in the note here where um the author tells John Ramsay uh be sure

46:02 to bring an add adequate size addes to the bank. Uh again, you know, who tells somebody uh gives them this type of advice, you know, and again, it's to me it's in my opinion, it's it's it's that of somebody who's preparing their child before they're going to go away to school or to camp. Make sure you packed up everything you need. Make sure you got make sure you put a warm enough coat on. Make sure you bring an adequate size at at a shade of the bank. Not only that, but this person as they write this is suggesting that they have reason to be concerned that John or excuse me that John Ramsay

46:40 would go to the bank unprepared. So who would who would know or or have that perception of John Ramsey? Who feels that they need to tell John Ramsay these things in order for him to to follow these instructions? as well. The word bring in that phrase too as we bring it up is another very critical word in my opinion because it's kind of driven from a perspective. When you say you're, you know, when you give somebody instructions to bring something, it's usually under the context of some sort of shared travel or destination, right? Bring Yeah. bring the adequate size at as we go to the bank or bring it to the bank or I'm going to meet you is is typically

47:20 the type of context we see that in. So when we see the word bring, it's another again another critical point for this this note because it it kind of shows um some suggestion that this this author perceives themselves to be with John at some point at the bank. Whether they went there with him or they show up and meet him there, but there's there's some sort of unity uh in their perception of of John being at the bank that this author is going to be there, too. And uh and so you know when I and and again there's so much to unpack here I I I

47:57 it's hard to do in in in this little bit of time but um what happens is as I'm going through the note and this is what we do in any sort of analysis. We see these little things and we s we note them and we start exploring what they suggest to us about the author, about the the the subject matter, the perceptions, all these things and we just note it. We start asking questions about it and then as we go on we see something else and all of a sudden we're starting to ask the same questions of

48:28 this that we're asking and we're start developing these patterns. And so there's there's a pattern that I see within this note that suggests to me, you know, something very consistent that if it were Paty, I mean, I couldn't tell you Paty was the author, but I could tell you that it's very consistent with a with a female, particularly one who's probably a mother or has that maternal instinct. Then if I take in that outside context that I done with the analysis of the 911 call, my opinion, I'm convinced that Paty Rat Paty Ramsey did in fact, you know, write this note.

49:07 Yeah, because it it does go into like such unbelievable like unnecessary detail that it just feels very overdone, you know, in general. So the all that detail in there, it all basically seems to hinge on a need a need for the author to persuade the audience of of what how legit this is. Mhm. And again, if you if you go in and you start thinking about the masking and you start thinking about how low the priority is for them on contacting the police and all these um you know, this this picture sort of just kind of

49:54 develops itself as you do go through an analysis and and it's becomes very hard to have an opinion otherwise other than this was a staged uh staged note that this was a staged crime And I know, you know, I followed this case well enough to know that there's plenty of stuff outside of these two things, this 911 call and this ransom note that that can lead to people having all kinds of opinions on this case as well. But just and I'm because it's just what I study, I'm focusing in on the words and I'm just allowing myself to forget, you know, what all the other stuff is out there. And I bring

50:34 that in at the end, you know, so that I can try and understand some of this more in the context of what is known about the case. But you know, well, I'm not I'm not doing this to try and solve the John Benet Ramsey case. I'm doing this to show people how this technique can be used in cases. And this is just happens to be a case that has some, you know, great material for for the u training of doing this sort of thing. Well, and also because the letter is so long, I mean, you know, when you got the longest ransom note in history, no wonder, you

51:07 know, you have to break down the individual parts because, you know, otherwise it it you know, it doesn't make sense. So, when it comes to your cases, Stephen, I know that you, you know, on your, you know, this is just part of your blog. This is a these are the blog post on your linguistic crimesecene consulting llc site um which is lcs-analysis.com. Tell us about some of the cases that you know like people often contact you for for services like your investigative services. So just to be candid, I just launched this website I think it was the beginning of the year. Um I people have

51:47 people that are contacting me are all the same people that I already you know do work for which is usually you know people from local agencies that know what I do and ask me for help. I was recently uh had a um former colleague of mine from another agency reach out to me on a cold case. Um, and I won't discuss anything about it because it's it's an ongoing thing. But, um, so, you know, I still really just use it on my cases and I use it on cases of of some of my colleagues and stuff

52:16 that that know what I do. Um, I launched the website in anticipation of doing some training hopefully here in the future and putting together some courses. Um, and to, you know, let other agencies know what I do. There's there's a there's a section on there on like pricing for consulting, you know, but it's pretty vague because it's not it's not really meant to be um I didn't launch the website in order to try and drum up business as much as I did to sort of offer the services to my fellow law enforcement agencies. And hopefully, you know, I'm not the I'm certainly not even close to being the

53:00 only guy out there. And I'm I wouldn't even say that I'm, you know, the top expert in this field by any stretch of the imagination. Um Peter has trained lots of analysts and uh they're all brilliant and a few of them that I know for a fact, but they're all over the world, too. But a few of them I know for a fact you you can get, you know, analysis done by doesn't even just have to be me. But the purpose of the blog is to show um what can be done with these techniques in terms of just trying to pull information out of people's words.

53:35 Um and you know if somebody goes to my website and they you know just see the value of doing that and go to another anal analyst then you know as far as I'm concerned that's that's a win for me. So it's not really about self-promotion at this point. It's just um just trying to it's not it's not used as much as I think it could be in what we do. It's it's gaining traction. Um it's it's definitely becoming more um uh known amongst law enforcement, but um it's kind of it's kind of come to this point slowly over the probably the last, you know, couple decades.

54:16 Have you ever done any research on the um Adam Walsh case? any linguistic research on Adam Walsh. That's the little boy who um back in the 80s, I want to say 84, 82, 84. Um he was supposedly taken at a Sears department store and um his father is John Walsh. Um who became the voice for America's Most Wanted and the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. Yeah. I mean, I'm familiar with the John Walsh, Adam Walsh um case and, you know, into into what's been in the media, but no, I've I've never done anything like that for that case.

54:58 Okay. I was curious um because I know you know that that you know, they've they it's these cases that it's very odd when they try to like shut them down before the invest in investigations really complete or there's a lot of unexplained things, you know. I think that's where the public, you know, has the hardest time. I know. I I know I have a hard time when when I see, you know, like, okay, we're sometimes the only voices left for the deceased and it's like, you know, people do want to get to the bottom of it and and sometimes, you know, with the training and the words, I feel like, you know, we

55:31 could. Um, so I see that you are also are you going to be offering online courses? Yeah, that's what I'm working on now. It's it's um it's been a slow process. I'm trying to put together some comprehensive um training courses. So, um uh and I'm I'm most of the way done, but I'm I'm trying to come up with something that would be very more than just, you know, what what you would get in sort of a basic course. Um, so a lot of basic courses at least that they offer for law enforcement. Um, you know, we get a lot of the sort of the

56:09 highlights of what this technique can teach you. Um, but not a lot of the depth that you know that I learned over the years um, studying under Peter. So, what I'm what I'm wanting to do is offer courses that kind of just go straight to the to the to the um in-depth training. Um, you know, the basic course that I'm putting together will be a lot more comprehensive than, you know, the typical basic course. So it would be for somebody who actually wants to study the linguistics and not just learn a few you know have a few tools on deception detection but actually understand the language better.

56:50 And can people ever hire you too Stephen for like cases like um you know I mean obviously you know divorce is a big thing or for other types of cases. Do they ever hire you for cases such as that or common I should say, not just divorce but like other common cases? Yeah, I mean the you can use this on anything. So it's not just for criminal cases. You can use it in civil cases. You can use it the the the point it would be whether or not there's material that's good for doing analysis. And what we want to do is we want to deal with somebody's words uncontaminated.

57:33 Um, the reason why I named my website linguistic crime scene is because the best way to deal with doing this is just the same way we would deal as law enforcement with processing a crime scene. We don't want to come in and trample over the evidence, move things around, and then try and, you know, determine what happened. We want to get it in in its purest form. Same thing with a statement. Same thing with, you know, if I'm going to do an analysis uh for one of my cases, the preference is to merely hand somebody a statement form and ask them, hey, just write down what happened without having asked them any other

58:13 questions, giving them my opinions on anything and and contaminating their their words in that way. So the only the only thing that that would hinge on in my opinion would just be what is it you're bringing to me to analyze. Now what the topic is whether it be like you said divorce or whatever that doesn't matter. I just need to know what it is. I need to know how we obtained it. And then I just need to know what the context is that we're you know we're dealing with. And and really like I I would imagine you can take court transcripts, social media post, um any kind of written any written or spoken,

58:50 you know, anything written or spoken language. Is that correct? Yeah. So it works written or spoken. It's the same. Um we prefer if you got, you know, something that's a spoken word that we work with a transcript because this isn't like something that we do in haste. Uh certainly, you know, as interviewers and in law enforcement when we, you know, when we train on this, we can bring it into the interview room. Um but it's not the same effect as sitting down and doing like the in-depth sort of analysis that we can do. And so the preference is to deal with something even if it was originally audible to deal with it in a transcribed form so that we can spend some time with it.

59:31 Okay. Very good. Well, Stephen, thank you so much for your time tonight. I really appreciate it. I know we've been we've been playing tag trying to get you on, but I really appreciate your time and I'm sure the audience is going to have a lot of questions and I hope that you'll come back eventually. Um we can get you back on if to answer any of their questions. Um and then I'll make sure to send you a link so that you can um you know add this to any of your um oversight you know for your blog post as well. So, thank you and and thank you

1:00:02 for your time and um thanks also for your service, you know, as as a law enforcement officer. We want to keep you guys safe and also um appreciate, you know, all of your hard work because we know, you know, I I have many family members that are law enforcement and fire and um you know, and servicemen and it's just not an easy role that you guys have. So, I really appreciate it very much. Appreciate your service. Well, thank you. Okay, audience, please make sure that you do follow um lcs-analysis.com. "[Music]" Go there. Make sure you subscribe on Stephen's contact. Um and Stephen, I'm going to drop you out because I have some things to tell our audience and um

1:00:48 don't want to waste any more of your time, sir. So, thank you again for being here. All right. Thank you. Okay. Bye bye. Bye-bye. Okay, audience. So, you have just seen it for yourself. If you have questions below, make sure that you do um comment below so that Stephen can either an answer your questions or we can get him back on to answer your questions. Um hope you've enjoyed this interview. Please make sure that you give a thumbs up, that you like, you subscribe because you know what? Those little things out there that are going to keep you

1:01:19 informed are supposed to be on. So, make sure that you have your notification bell on. Make sure that you use the links below. follow our guests and make sure that you follow Patriots Perspective across. We're on X, we're on Rumble, we're on YouTube, we're on Facebook, we're on Tik Tok, we are on um Instagram, um we are on Telegram, we are really everywhere. Truth Social Getter. Um if there's something Gab, if there's anything that you're missing, please let us know. We'll get there. Um, but we want to make sure that you guys are engaging with us there, finding our content and um, you know, communicating with each other because this is a great community. We have a lot of

1:01:59 investigators that follow us and um, that are learning various things. Let us know, do you like this? Do you like this type of interview? Do you did you learn anything tonight? Um, that's super important. So, and make sure you do comment if there's somebody else you want me on and questions you want me to ask them. Happy to do so. Um, you can also support Patriots Perspective by going to patriotspersperspective.com. There is a link there to donate um, so that you can hear more interviews like this. I appreciate all of our donors who have kept us on air. Believe it or not,

1:02:31 it pays for the smallest little things such as our technological pieces that we need in order to be able to record and actually have an online studio. It helps us to make sure that we have email marketing and social media and all of the different things that it actually takes a lot of time for us to do. So, we appreciate you doing your part to follow sharing this video with somebody else and commenting for who you want to see next because that's what we want to know from you. And um you know, if you found somebody, just listen, send us a link.

1:03:03 Um there's a contact form where you can recommend a guest on patrierspective.com. Either become a guest or recommend a guest. Um, and we believe it or not, that's what we listen to. Either I find people um like I did Stephen via another source or um I listen to our audience. So, make sure that you do go on and um you know, just let me know who do you want to hear from? What do you want to hear about? Um and make sure that you do follow our content. Um it's trying to get better and better and better. And um I appreciate all of you for watching until the end. God bless you all. And remember, do unto others as you would have do unto you.

1:03:43 Remember, take action. Take action. Don't let big tech win. Share this video with a friend now. Most importantly, do unto others as you would have others do unto you. "[Music]"