to me it seems like an IP address i have been working with computers alot lately and it looks like one to me (99.84.8 2)
One of the news articles I read said they believe the notes were written within 3 days of his death.
My question is how would they know this? Maybe it was folded in a receipt?
I also looked in the SSI index-and was surprised to find no one by this name who died in June 1999. I wonder why. That is a puzzle as well.
[quote=“kasper, post:60, topic:576552”]
Please…know thy puzzle! Check the SSI death index, ther is no 1 this age, name, place and date.
I looked it up in the SSI as well. Found it quite strange no listing!
I was Googling around and found this fantastic message board so I registered. Forgive me if I make mistakes while replying and posting.
A couple of thoughts on the two “puzzles”
First, I decided to assume writing codes became fascinating after something he may have read in school so I looked up popular children’s books with secret codes. I found a few but my search was very brief. I was thinking maybe he copied a little of the code used in a book and then mastered it and made it his own: changed a few things but still kept it close to the original.
Second-how is it that his family knew of his code writing but apparently ignored it? If they knew he was doing it his whole life why didn’t someone keep it. Did he destroy them? How is it the FBI only have the two found on his body and, if he was writing them his whole life, why is there not at least ONE more SOMEWHERE…
I am hoping the huge interest in this case will prompt the FBI to release more info.
I also looked up where they found his body in relation to the area. I was trying to see if there were any roads with those numbers-as in directions.
It is also strange that the news report says “even if it is only a recipe or love letter we want to know” (basically so they can add the code to their database I assume.
QUESTION: Why would they pre-empt (sp?) attempts with that psuedo-disclaimer. Did he like to cook? Was he known for writing love letters.
Overall, I think until more information is given to us amateur sleuths and code-breakers, the puzzle will not get solved. I also think it may be more of a shorthand with random word and line breaks (that darn letter E!)
Oh, as I am looking at the notes again: Sometimes it appears as if there is a letter N and other times its a very small N-maybe it’s not a small N but an ~
Also, his E’s are sometimes three stroke E’s (imagine writing an L then two more lines to make an E) and sometimes two strokes (a C with a line in the center to make what APPEARS to be an E but perhaps it is not)
Just some thoughts. Anyone want to add?
Not everyone is listed in the Social Security Death Index. In order to be listed the Social Security Administration would have had to have been notified of his death. I read a blurb on wikipedia (not sure how much of it is truth) that said he sometimes lived with his elderly mother, didn’t work and wasn’t married. If no one filed a social security claim or it social security didn’t pay anything out he wouldn’t have been listed.
Was there a flash-mob or something arranged to appear in this thread? Do a lot of you know each other from somewhere else, perhaps? Or is Google somehow bringing you all here independently?
Sorry, but these questions are more interesting to me than the incoherent scribbled ramblings of someone who seems to have died of natural causes over a decade ago.
Though, I gotta say, I might just write up a bunch of cryptic scribblings to keep in my pocket for when I die. That way there will be a whole bunch of mystery, and random people puzzling over me and my life, long after I’m gone. The only thing that would suck is that I wouldn’t be around to enjoy seeing all the crazy theories people come up with in their attempts to make sense of the nonsensical.
Seriously? The kid sounds like a classic schizo.
I donno about dying of natural causes, but this thread did kind of turn into a jizzy dork fest.
Oh thanks for the correction. I had actually read that bit on the FBI site from the OP. But then I read the contemporaneous news story that was also linked down thread that said:
It was early, so I forgot the more recent assertion of definitive homicide by the FBI.
Today was the first time I bothered to read the article. I thought it was stupid.
I think WLD could be someones initials
At the end of one of the letters it says “WLD’S” which makes me think its someones name
:smack:
Remember, the articles and the police report stated that McCormick had heart and lung issues? What if these notes were related to him documenting any health episodes he had recently had and the dosages of his meds? Also, he was found on July 22. What if 71 was July 1, 74 July 4, 75 July 5?
I don’t think it’s code. Probably his own shorthand and could be written in a sort of journaling format. I also don’t believe that the solution that is posted is accurate. There was no mention of McCormick having mental issues he was being treated for, only that he had written notes in this form since childhood.
~star*
Hello everybody,
I just signed in to try to give my help to the solution of the “code”. I hope these considerations could be useful.
First: it is very important to me to observe that the two sheets, where the code is, were written in different moments; more, the first part of “notes” is written before the second (I mean in a completely different time, as several hours or days), while the second one, consisting of 4 baloons, seems to be a unique body.
I can argue that by looking carefully at his writing style: very relaxed and precise in the first sheet (see i.e. the sentences in brackets’location), very disturbed in the second one, and the second part of this even leaning to a contrary position of the first sheet, it’irregular, reaveals some kind of anxiety.
This is going to blast all the theories leading to driving informations, medical ones and stuff like that, as we’ll see.
Second: this is definitely not a code: at the very beginning of the first page, first line (TFRNE N’9t NSE NPBSE R CBRN SE N PRSE INC) and in the very last one (<194 WLD’S NCBE) (JRFXL>), he’s evidently imploying an apostrophe and a saxon genitive: this is enough to me. We also have to keep in mind what kind of person we are talking about: a person involved in violence for years, just realeased from jail, with drug problem (he probably died for an overdose), low insctruction level and son: it sounds strange that such a person when writing fast notes for his personal use is going to employ very complex and hard encrypting systems. I think that it would be more real if this person is going to write with abbreviations or with words that makes sense to him in anyway. I am often used when I have to do something to write down a list like that:
- buy the bread
- call the doctor
once I did, I write next the list objects a word like “done” or “ok”, or whatelse: - buy the bread done (I could have written also “d”…)
- call the doctor call tomorrow (or “ct”…)
That NCBE, apparently used in a long time row, often at the end of a sentence, remind me of what above. I think that the man was simply using some abbreviations or, anyway, a kind of personal stenography, so there is not a code in the proper meaning of the word. I think all of this was made with the purpose to speed his writing, not to encrypt the sense of it (even if the result is an encrypted text).
Before I go more far, I would like to post my reading of the text of the two sheets:
PAGE ONE
1- (MNDMUNEARSE-U-STA-UNARE) (ACSM)
2- TFRNE N’9t NSE NPBSE R CBRN SE N PRSE INC
3- PRSE NmRSE OPRE HLD WLD NCBE (TFXLF TCXL NCBE)
4- AL-PRPPIT XLY987Y NCBE mGKSE WLD R CBRN SE PRSE
5- WLD R CBRN SE N T SE NENTXSE-GRSLE-CZ TRSE WLD NCBE
6- AL WLD NCBE TSmE LISE RLSE VQG LSNE AS N WLD NCBE
7- (NOPFSE NLSRE NCBE) NTE GDD MNSE NCURE R CBRN E
8- (TENE TFRNE NCBR TSE NCBE INC)
9- (FIRSE PRSE ON DE71 NCBE)
10- (CDNSE PRSE ON SE74 NCBE)
11- (PRtSE tRSE ON REDE75 NCBE)
12- (TFNR CmSP SOLE mRDE LUSE TOTE WLD N WLD NCBE)
13- <194 WLD’S NCBE) (JRFXL>
NOTES
1- ALPNTE GLSE-SE ERTE
2- YLSE mTSE-CTSE-WSE-FR TSE
3- PNR TRSE ON PRSE WLD NCBE
4- N WLD XLRC mSPNE WLD STS mE XL
5- DUL mTGT UNSE NCBE XL
6- (mUNS AISTEN mU NARSE)
7- RLSE-LRSTE-TRSE-TRSE-mRSEN-mRSE
8- (SAE6NSE SE NmRSE)
9- NMNK CBRN SE PtE 2pTE WSRC BREZE
10- 26m2SE 74 SPRK SE 29KENO SOLE 175R TRSE
11- 35 GLE CLGSE NUNUTXE DKQSE PSESHLE
12- 651 mTLSE HTLSE NCUT CTRS NmRF
13- 99.84.5 2UNEPLSE UCRSE AOKTSE NSKSE NBSE
14- NSRE ON SE PVTSE WLD NCBE (JX9RL)
15- NmSE NRSE INZ NTQLE QCB RNSE NTSR CR5NE
16- LSPNSE NGSPSE mKSE RBSE NCBE AV XLR
17- HmCRE NMRE NCBE 1/2 MUND PLSE
18- D-W-M-Y MIL XDRLX
As I told above we can find a saxon genitive in the text at the very last line: <194 WLD’S NCBE) (JRFXL>
it means that the word “WLD” is without any doubt a substantive. It can’t be “would” as I read in many posts. It has to be something else we don’t know. World? Some kind of Lawyer Department? A…?
Probably also NCBE could be a substantive at this point.
Another thing is interesting of this line, the number at the end: we know that the value of the saxon genitive WLD’S NCBE is probably JRFXL. It’s interesting now to notice that line 14 in “notes”, written in a completely different time, as told, is reporting that the value WLD NCBE (without saxon genitive) is now JXDRL. 4 letters of whose are the same of the number at the end of line 18. What is it? A password? A reference number for, exemplum, a bet? An invoice? It also means that an important element, as it appears to be, has (dramatically) changed at a certain time.
Lets go back to the beginning of page 1.
It seems the first 6 lines are telling a story or anyway a consequent series of events: it starts saying that a TFRNE, probably in 90es, NSE NPBSE R CBRN SE N PRSE INC. This INC appears once again in line 8, where the word TFRNE also once replicate. Is it a society too? Is he already talking abouit WLD?
We also find for the first time the word PRSE, which also opens the following line. This word is prominent in this first page but totally absent in “notes”. I think that for its positioning it possibly is a verb, or an acronymous hiding a verb or an activity. It seems to be in contrast with the word TRSE, another action word probably.
You can see by yourself other similar things. Anyway the second parts, in brackets, of page on, seems to be a close examination of the first, or details relating to it.
I read an interesting post in another forum who related these sentences to sport bets (in particular to some matches of Saint Louis football teams in 1999). It is a possibility.
Tha page “notes” starts, to me, speaking of how the situation in page 1 evolved, or anyway with something again related to WLD. Did he lost (a lot of) money?
Anyway the situation drastically changes. We see it, as I said from his handwriting style: lines are sharp, irregular, late sentences are added, a unique baloon consisting of 4 sub-baloons. It seems these are the last words written by McCormick.
As told, we find a new value for WLD NCBE. Probably numbers for bets (it seems line 10 is refering to a St.Louis Cardinal result (lost 17-5) in match they played the 7/4/99 (see line 10 in page 1).
I found it, as told, in a post on another forum:
"Taking a look at the other page of code, I saw the 71, 74, and 75 lines. And I have a different thought that I haven’t seen discussed yet in this thread. (Maybe I just missed it.) This man died in the last week of June, 1999. It’s entirely possible these numbers, in that context, could represent 7/1, 7/2, and 7/4 ie dates in the upcoming week. Maybe they refer to upcoming appointments.
Taking the bookie angle again, I looked to see if there could be a sports connection. Maybe they represent upcoming games.
(FLRSE PQSE ONDE 71 NCBE)
Maybe this is FLR = short for FLoRida Marlins. They played an away game on 7/1. They lost 6-3.
(PRTSE PRSE ONREDE 75 NCBE)
Maybe this is another abbreviation he used. PRT = Pittsburgh PiRaTes. They lost a home game on 7/5 which was 5-2. Hmmm a coincidence with the 52 above.
Finally, (CDNSE PQSE ONSDE 74 NCBE)
Perhaps CDN was his abbreviation for the St Louis CarDiNals. They lost a home game on 7/4 17-5.
Now to address a conspiracy theory that some MLB games are fixed or that some super genius betting group can predict scores in advance for betting, I took at look at the numbers to see if this was a sheet of betting instructions with predicted scores on the above games. What can I say? I was trying to be thorough.
Looking at 26 MLSE 74 SPRKSE 29KCNOB,OLE 175 RTRSE
35 GLE CLGSE UUNUTKEBKRSE PSESHLE
We can see the 17-5 score. The other scores are close to numbers listed, but not an exact match. I don’t personally feel this is likely, but just throwing it out to the community since I noticed the data."
here: http://www.websleuths.com/forums/showthread.php?p=6296770
I also liked the post in this threas of this forum finding Mitchell’s Hotel in S.Louis in line 12, probably room 651: was he going to meet someone in there? Someone related to/involved with hid loss of money in sport bets?
I think this is all athe moment. I am really far from understanding what McCormick really wrote. But I hope that what above will inspire someone.
Greetings and thanks for reading.
Line 10 of page “notes”, as in many posts I read on Internet already found out, 26m2SE 74 SPRK SE 29KENO SOLE 175R TRSE
is probably referring to a horse named kenosole, being kenos- the prename of a number of horses at that time.
This probably confirming that the text of the pages is probably talking about bets.
Correction, line 14
14- NSRE ON SE PVTSE WLD NCBE (JXDRL)
Total WAG ahead.
Well, MIL could be interpreted as a (techinically incorrect, but parseable and calculable) Roman number, 1049 (1000+50-1). The correct Roman number would be MXLIV. XDRLX looks suspiciously like another Roman number, but it includes R, which is not a valid Roman numeral to my knowledge. Ignoring it and taking XDLX, that would be an incorrect form of 550 (500-10+50+10).
So, D-W-M-Y 1049 550?
Perhaps the 1st day of the 0th week of the 4th month, 9550? So, April 1, 9550. Was he an SF fan?
Or, treating the R as a divider, D-W-M-Y 1049 490 60
So, and this is getting really bizaare, take a substitution and substitute “April 1, 9550” for April 1, FOOL". 9=F, 5=O, 0=L.
I’ve been reading what you all have to say and something has caught my eye and I wanted your opinion.
Barbariccia stated:
“As I told above we can find a saxon genitive in the text at the very last line: <194 WLD’S NCBE) (JRFXL>
it means that the word “WLD” is without any doubt a substantive. It can’t be “would” as I read in many posts. It has to be something else we don’t know. World? Some kind of Lawyer Department? A…?”
Probably also NCBE could be a substantive at this point."
NCBE is mentioned 13 times on the 1st document and 5 times on the 2nd document. I did a web search on NCBE and came up with National Conference of Bar Examiners (NCBE). http://www.ncbex.org/
I’m not sure if this will help any, but I hope it does.