Christina Freitas

Mrs. G

7th period

11/14/2019

Handwriting Analysis: Ransom Note

An analysis has been conducted to find similar and dissimilar traits of a ransom note with

six suspects writing samples. There are many ways to characterize handwriting and they are

condensed into 12 main characteristics. Line quality is whether or not the size and length is

consistent. Spacing is a way to measure if spacing between words and from each size of the

paper is consistent. Letter ratio is the size of the small, lowercase letters compared to the big,

uppercase letters to make a comparison. Continuous writing is if letters connect consistently.

Connection between uppercase and lowercase letters is another descriptor. Complete formations

of letters is whether the writing is complete (do the O’s make a complete circle?). Cursive

writing can be the entirety of the writing or just certain letters. Pen pressure is the darkness of a

mark made (a heavy hand may produce a darker mark). Slant is the tilt or lean of the letters and

words. The lines of the paper are guides that some people distinctly follow and others tend to

veer off. Fancy loops and curls can be a unique characteristics (i.e g’s with a large swoop). The

dots on top of i’s and crosses on t’s are the final characteristic. While it is not possible to convict

someone of a crime based off of handwriting analysis it can also give undeniable numbers that

prove similarity.

The ransom note was analyzed using the previously stated base 12 characteristics along

with other unique traits found. The line quality was smooth and easy to read. The space between
every word was six millimeters, and after punctuation, 10 millimeters; the writing goes all the

way to the edge of the right side of the paper. The ratio of small to capital letters was consistent

at 3.5mm:6mm. The writing was not continuous, none of the letters connected. There was also

no connection between capital letters and the preceding lowercase. The author left certain letters

unfinished, their lowercase and uppercase b’s did not fully complete. None of the writing was

cursive. The pen pressure is the same throughout, no dark spots or overly light spots. The letters

all slant ever so slightly to the left. All words written touch the line they are being written upon.

There are two letters that are formed with a fanciful loop or distinctive curve; the capital B’s are

very distinct, they have an extra little hump at the top of the B. The lowercase g’s all have a very

exuberant swoosh, sometimes encroaching on the line below. The final characteristic is how the

i’s and t’s are dotted and crossed. The i’s are dotted not with a line but with a diagonal dash (ì);

the t’s are dashed on the exact center when measured.

The first suspect was Mike Mason. His line quality was smooth and consistent, while this

is similar to the ransom letter, Mike’s writing is much sloppier and smaller. The words and

margins were not even, the left margin was even while the right was not; the spacing between

words was widely varied (ranging from 15 mm to 4 mm); this is not close to the ransom writer (6

mm spaces). The ratio of small to large letters was not consistent, with capital O’s changing the

most. The writing here was continued and connected. The capital letters B, A, and O all connect

to the following lowercase letters. The lowercase letters d, r, e, b, and the capital of B are not

completely formed letters. None of his writing is cursive, only connected. The pen pressure

remains constant throughout with the darkness unchanging. The letters have a slight slant to the
right. The letters are all written on the line. There are no distinctive fancy curls or loops. All i’s

are dotted but the dot is always to the right; the t’s are crossed close to the top.

The next suspect was Paul Anderson. His line quality was smooth, just like the ransom

letter. The words were spaced ranging from 4-8 mm which is very similar to the ransom letter;

the margins were consistent on the left side and writing went all the way to the right side of the

page, similar to the ransom letter. The ratio of small letters to capital letters was 3.5mm:6mm,

exactly the same ratio of the ransom letter. The writing is not continuous with each letter

separate and the same was true for capitals going into the following lowercase, same goes for the

ransom letter which is similar to the ransom letter. The letters b and d were not complete in their

formation when written, very similar to the ransom letter. The writing is not cursive, and the pen

pressure was the same throughout which was the same for the letter in question. The letters all

have a slight slant to the left which is similar to the letter. The words are all written on the line

except the last words on the last few lines, which is slightly dissimilar to the letter because the

words there are stay on the line. The lowercase g’s had very distinct curls that intruded the line

below and capital B’s that had an extra bump at the top, the exact same as the ransom letter. All

i’s were dotted with not a dot but a slash (ì) and t’s crossed dead center when measured; these

final characteristics are very unique and are exact to the ransom letter.

The next suspect was Wyatt Vongunten. His line quality was smooth and similar to the

ransom letter. The words all had an 8 mm space and margins stay consistent on the left but goes

to the edge of the page on the right, which is very similar to the ransom letter. In Wyatt’s writing,

the ratio of small letters to capitals was largely varied. There was also a variation in connecting

letters, some connected while others didn’t. The capital B’s and lowercase e’s in the sample
connected. All letter formations were complete. All of these traits are completely dissimilar to

the ransom letter. None of the writing is in cursive which is similar to the letter. The pen pressure

is the same for all words but periods are very dark. There was a very heavy slant to the left. Both

of which are not what the ransom letter had. All of the letters were written on the line. There

were fancy curls and loops on the R (an extra loop to the left of the line on the R). The i’s were

all dotted with a circle rather than a dot. The t’s had a fancy curls on the end of the cross. These

traits were also dissimilar to the ransom letter. This suspect is not likely to be our culprit.

The next suspect was John Rohde. His writing was choppy. Left and right margins were

relatively consistent. The spaces between words ranged from 2-4 mm. The ratio of small to big

letters was 3:5.5 mm. Some of the o’s were not complete but all other letters were. There was

some variation in the pen pressure leading to a darkness change. There was a slight slant to the

right. The words didn’t stay completely on the line, they went off and on, like a wave. The

writing had no fancy curls or loops. The i’s had a dot very high above normal placement. All of

these traits are not similar to the ransom note. The traits that were similar were the separation

between letters, exact center crossing of t’s, and lack of cursive. This suspect is likely not the

guilty party.

The next suspect was Max Wrobel. His writing was choppy and constantly varying in

spacing (3-9 mm) and margins (3-22 mm). The letter formations of b, g, a, and d were all

incomplete. All of the letters had a minor slant to the right. The writing occasionally goes up and

down off the line. All of the previous traits were unlike those of the ransom letter. However, the

writing had no connection between capitals and preceding lowercase. There was no cursive and

the pen pressure was the same throughout. There is also a fancy loop on the g’s. Those traits are
similar to the letter. With this suspect, it is safe to rule them out because of the overpowering

lack of similarity.

The final suspect was Brett Frye. The writing was choppy and inconsistently spaced with

numbers ranging from 4-10 mm. The small to capital letter ratio was 2:5 mm. His writing was

very continuous with lack of completion of the letters o, g, e, r, p, j, i. There is a minor right slant

and the words jump on and off the line. The i’s were rarely if ever dotted and the t’s were

crossed towards the bottom. All of the aforementioned traits were dissimilar to the ransom note.

There was no connection between upper and lowercase letters. There was no cursive writing.

Little to no pen pressure change; also a fancy loop of the g’s. All of these traits make the writing

similar however this suspect can also be eliminated from the pool due to lack of similarities.

In conclusion, the writer of the ransom note was most likely Paul Anderson. His

handwriting almost exactly matched the analysis done of the ransom note. While there is room

for error, the final outcome is reliable due to measurements and careful analysis. While

handwriting alone is not enough to convict someone of murder or even kidnapping, it is simply

another piece of evidence that can bring a criminal closer to justice. Handwriting analysis is

important in evidence because it narrows down a suspect group even further.