Jump to content
Davjos

Stannis wrote the Pink Letter. Clydas changed it

Recommended Posts

My problem with the Pink Letter has always been  that I don’t think the content is true. I don’t think Stannis lost and Ramsey has Mance. The arguments supporting this have been discussed before. There is a 19 page thread discussing it below. 

However, I don’t think Stannis or Mel has written this letter either. While they have all the information required, they do not have a proper, not convoluted motivation to manipulate Jon. 

 

Therefore, I want to suggest my current idea and see if anybody agrees. I wish any more knowledgeable contributors to scrutinise this as much as possible. 

Stannis wrote an informative letter to Jon. An update. Clydas read the update and wrote another letter with the information. This is the manipulative Pink Letter.

Goal: Get Jon to break his vows so he can be removed for the watch. Clearly Clydas wants this. 

I imagine Stannis wrote Jon an update letter, something along the line is of:

I hold Winterfell after a week and two battles, one at the crofters village, one at WF. I sent your sister north with the creature named Reek. The King Beyond the Wall freed her from the bastard Ramsey. He performed his duties.  Send Selyse and Shireen to the South. Let Val and some Wildlings accompany her (she seems trustworthy and skilled enough in the snow to make the journey on their behalf- my reasoning for mentioning Val). The KBtW wants his babe. Send it with them. Come south to see your home, Jon.

 

Clydas (and Bowen, maybe Alliser etc) took this information, reversed everything, worded  it as a taunt and gave themselves an excuse to depose Jon. 

This addresses: the required information, the motivation, the lack of a seal, the weird wax, the writing not being mentioned as Ramsey’s, the all out outrageous demands, the knowledge Jon has an army of Wildings so he has the chance to move south. 

 

So what do you think? Does it hold up?

Sorry for the formatting. Wrote this on mobile during my commute. The idea sprung into my brain while reading the Ramsey wrote the PL thread. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I was the first here to suggest that the letter was tampered at the Wall, regardless of its original author. There are a number of hints: The lack of the distinctive Ramsay's calligraphy, lack of skin (particularly in such a letter), the melted seal, the scare on Clydas face like he knew his contents or was afraid of being caught, etc.

However, I don't think the author is Stannis. Remember, the ravens that Karstark brought are likely homing for Winterfell, not Castle Black. So, it means that Stannis is sitting now in Winterfell and the letter would have been very different, more like in the tone of the one arriving from Deepwood Motte, like the one you propose. However, this would have changed the political calculations of those at the Wall. If Stannis is the victor, the conspirators would have readily understood that it is better to be in good relations with the Stannis. Killing Jon would have not accomplished that.

I think the letter is most likely from Ramsay and in a very similar tone, but certain things were added at the Wall to make it even more unacceptable. I think Alliser Thorne was involved. 

I admit there is a slight possibility of Mance being the author (my nose), but this would require Mance glamouring Ramsay and I don't think it would be so easily. In that case the letter was a message to Melisandre but as it was modified by Clydas et al. it failed to bring Jon's attention in the proper direction.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh obviously I am not the first to think of this and did not intent to ‘claim’ this idea in any way. 

Fair point on them  not wanting to antagonise Stanny B. However, a possible counter argument can be made. I do not know how well known Davos’ story is around CB and I cannot remember if any Stormland/Storm’s End person is at the Wall by the conspirators. However if the punishing, strict, by the books nature of Stannis is known among the conspirators, perhaps they think they can get away with or even get praise for their execution of an Oathbreaking, deserting criminal. 

 

Not it the most convincing argument, but enough to not outright disregard Stannis I think. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Davjos said:

Oh obviously I am not the first to think of this and did not intent to ‘claim’ this idea in any way. 

Fair point on them  not wanting to antagonise Stanny B. However, a possible counter argument can be made. I do not know how well known Davos’ story is around CB and I cannot remember if any Stormland/Storm’s End person is at the Wall by the conspirators. However if the punishing, strict, by the books nature of Stannis is known among the conspirators, perhaps they think they can get away with or even get praise for their execution of an Oathbreaking, deserting criminal.  

Alf of Runnymudd is likely among of the conspirators. He blames Jon for the death of his lover (a ranger called Garth). He is a Queen's man though, so likely from the Reach, but he might be knowledgeable enough about Stannis (and Davos).

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Davjos said:

So what do you think? Does it hold up?

Not really.  Just because Jon decided to march on Winterfell does not mean that that was the intention of the letter, or even a logical response.  There were many other potential responses to the letter, many of which make more sense than what he did.  He could send search parties for Arya and Ramsay, ambush parties for Ramsay, suggest that Mel and the others evacuate, etc.  There is no requirement to go to Winterfell, and I was a little surprised that he decided to do so.

It appears that the conspirators were a little surprised as well.  Their attack of Jon had all the appearances of improvisation, necessitated by his effective declaration of war on the Boltons and the fact that he was leaving Castle Black and would be inaccessible.

I also have doubts on the purported motivation.  I cannot imagine that it would be in Marsh's interest for the Nights Watch to get into a conflict with the Boltons.  And that is what would happen.  Also, I think that the assassination (attempt) was a last-ditch option when the alternatives ran out.  They seemed decidedly reluctant.

As a side note, I doubt that Alliser Thorne is hiding in CB's basement.  Somebody went with Dywen and the other ranger.  Given that Dywen is loyal to Jon, I would expect him to not continue if he noticed a switch, and nobody is missing from CB.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmm. Has there been any new updates/rebuttals on why Jon didn’t notice a change in handwriting? Everyone who gets a letter from Ramsay makes note of his spikey handwriting. IIRC Jon makes note of it the first time but later when he receives the pink letter he doesn’t mention the handwriting. To me this hints at him obviously having seen the handwriting before. This was the point that won me over and convinced me that it was Ramsay that wrote it but, by misdirection of Stannis. I don’t think Ramsay truly defeated stannis but stannis allowed Ramsay to think he’s won for the moment. There’s a theory that stannis and some of his men will sneak back into Winterfell wearing the Frey armor.

 

but! Like I said I haven’t followed any new pink letter theories in a while. I’m open to new ideas. I wasn’t sure if anyone had refuted the handwriting bit though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would Stannis, knowing how serious the threat of the others are, do this to lure the watch away from the wall?  I'm thinking he won't.  His sense of responsibility is not that far corrupted by ambition.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Coffeewiththegods said:

Hmm. Has there been any new updates/rebuttals on why Jon didn’t notice a change in handwriting?

The argument would be that anyone else who has seen a previous Ramsay letter could do a credible imitation of the spiky handwriting. After all, Jon is not comparing the letters side by side, and has seen Ramsay's hand only once previously. I suppose since Clydas was standing by when Jon read that previous letter, he could have noted some characteristics of the handwriting.

Tybald the Dreadfort Maester at CV, and some of the three Maesters at WF with the Boltons could be familiar with Ramsay's scrawl as well. Asha and Lady Glover read one of Ramsay's letters at DM, and Stannis may have as well, when he took the castle later. Finally, all the lords and ladies that signed the Asha and Jon letter have seen the hw as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
On 4/16/2019 at 8:25 AM, Davjos said:

My problem with the Pink Letter has always been  that I don’t think the content is true. I don’t think Stannis lost and Ramsey has Mance. The arguments supporting this have been discussed before. There is a 19 page thread discussing it below. 

However, I don’t think Stannis or Mel has written this letter either. While they have all the information required, they do not have a proper, not convoluted motivation to manipulate Jon. 

I disagree that Stannis motive to manipulate Jon is convoluted. Stannis is a player and he views Jon as a piece. Players manipulate pieces, that's how the game of thrones is played.

On 4/16/2019 at 8:25 AM, Davjos said:

Therefore, I want to suggest my current idea and see if anybody agrees. I wish any more knowledgeable contributors to scrutinise this as much as possible. 

Stannis wrote an informative letter to Jon. An update. Clydas read the update and wrote another letter with the information. This is the manipulative Pink Letter.

Goal: Get Jon to break his vows so he can be removed for the watch. Clearly Clydas wants this. 

The conspirators didn't need Jon to break his vows to remove him. He had been declared a rebel by the crown for assisting Stannis. Marsh and company have more than likely been plotting to remove him for some time. Marsh was not happy about the wildling situation or about the Stannis situation or the beheading of Slynt. But it was Jon's reaction to the letter that forced them to act because if they had let him ride south against the Lord of Winterfell then the Watch would obviously risk being seen as complicit in Jon's actions. That's why it was "For the Watch."

You say Clydas' motive was to get Jon to break his vows, but as the conspirators had enough reason to act already then the letter being for this purpose too is the very definition of convoluted.

Stannis is the one who wants Jon to break his vows, this runs right through Jon's arc. Jon will not accept Stannis offer of Winterfell because of his vows. Stannis needs to accept that or else find a way to get around it. Some people say he accepted that, and while I agree he may have done so temporarily when he was going to give Winterfell to Arnolf Karstark, once the Karstark plot was exposed by an act of loyalty from Jon that clearly showed his investment in Stannis removing the Boltons from Winterfell, he needed to revisit the matter. Given that Stannis had no viable alternative who could unite the north like the son of Eddard Stark could, he wrote the pink letter to try and get around Jon's vows by triggering Jon to break them.

On 4/16/2019 at 8:25 AM, Davjos said:

I imagine Stannis wrote Jon an update letter, something along the line is of:

I hold Winterfell after a week and two battles, one at the crofters village, one at WF. I sent your sister north with the creature named Reek. The King Beyond the Wall freed her from the bastard Ramsey. He performed his duties.  Send Selyse and Shireen to the South. Let Val and some Wildlings accompany her (she seems trustworthy and skilled enough in the snow to make the journey on their behalf- my reasoning for mentioning Val). The KBtW wants his babe. Send it with them. Come south to see your home, Jon. 

 

But what's this imaginary letter based on? He didn't send Reek with fArya. Your reasoning for why he mentioned the wildling princess ignores the political value that Stannis places in Val, he plans to use her to seal a peace between the wildings who will settle the Gift and the North. He doesn't want Jon to come south to see his home, he wants him to be the Lord of Winterfell and bind the north to the king's cause.

On 4/16/2019 at 8:25 AM, Davjos said:

Clydas (and Bowen, maybe Alliser etc) took this information, reversed everything, worded  it as a taunt and gave themselves an excuse to depose Jon. 

This addresses: the required information, the motivation, the lack of a seal, the weird wax, the writing not being mentioned as Ramsey’s, the all out outrageous demands, the knowledge Jon has an army of Wildings so he has the chance to move south. 

 

So what do you think? Does it hold up?

In my opinion, no.

Do I think the conspirators read the letter? Yes. The smear of pink wax suggests the letter was opened and resealed.

Is it possible that the conspirators altered the letter? Yes, it's possible. If they read it then of course they could have altered it, but did they? I'm not convinced because I think the language largely relates to Stannis, particularly the quote from Theon. That the parchment was not described as wet may be a clue to the letter being rewritten but at the same time it could easily be explained if the conspirators had the parchment in their possession long enough for it to dry. How long did they scheme between reading the letter and resealing it for Clydas to deliver it to Jon? Long enough for a piece of parchment to dry I would think.

On 4/16/2019 at 9:43 AM, rotting sea cow said:

I think I was the first here to suggest that the letter was tampered at the Wall, regardless of its original author.

Actually the idea was discussed here shortly after ADwD was released. Several years ago @bemused wrote a very good piece about it being rewritten by Thorne.

19 hours ago, The Lord of the Crossing said:

It's pretty much a given that Ramsay wrote the letter.

It seems to be, but that doesn't make it right.

21 hours ago, Coffeewiththegods said:

I wasn’t sure if anyone had refuted the handwriting bit though.

Firstly, if you want to argue along the lines that you did then I would say that if any potential forger had seen Ramsay's distinctive hand then they would obviously copy it.

We could argue back and forth on why Jon didn't mention Ramsay's hand. Some people say Jon didn't think about it because he recognized it, but recognition does not exclude him from thinking about it. Why didn't we get that recognition through his pov? Jon recognized the huge spiky hand or the letter was signed in a familiar huge spiky hand or whatever. That way GRRM would have clarified that the letter was actually from Ramsay and not set up a false mystery.

Huge spiky hand is set-up twice, once through Asha and once through Jon. It is set up for a reason. It's absence is meant to be noticed. This is a very standard device in mystery writing.

10 hours ago, 300 H&H Magnum said:

Clydas doesn't have the balls to edit that letter. 

Agreed. If it was edited then it would have to be someone like Thorne or Mel or maybe Marsh. Clydas would have held the pen at best and written what he was told. Still, I'm not convinced it was edited but I accept it is possible.

10 hours ago, 300 H&H Magnum said:

Would Stannis, knowing how serious the threat of the others are, do this to lure the watch away from the wall?  I'm thinking he won't.  His sense of responsibility is not that far corrupted by ambition.  

Stannis wants to unite the wildlings and the north by marrying Jon Stark, Lord of Winterfell, to Val, the wildling princess. The Wall is a mess right now and the north is embattled. Stannis' plan, if it came to fruition, would only make the Wall and the north stronger for the war to come.

Edited by three-eyed monkey

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Ser Hedge said:

The argument would be that anyone else who has seen a previous Ramsay letter could do a credible imitation of the spiky handwriting. After all, Jon is not comparing the letters side by side, and has seen Ramsay's hand only once previously. I suppose since Clydas was standing by when Jon read that previous letter, he could have noted some characteristics of the handwriting.

Tybald the Dreadfort Maester at CV, and some of the three Maesters at WF with the Boltons could be familiar with Ramsay's scrawl as well. Asha and Lady Glover read one of Ramsay's letters at DM, and Stannis may have as well, when he took the castle later. Finally, all the lords and ladies that signed the Asha and Jon letter have seen the hw as well.

This was mentioned back in one of those 19 page Pink letter debates and while feasible, seems pretty unlikely.

Let me put it this way, have you ever forged your parents signature for something as a kid? It's pretty difficult to write like someone else. Granted Jon has only seen Ramsay's writing one time so he wouldn't be the best judge but still (shrugs).

@Coffeewiththegods I agree, info, tone, and handwriting won me over to Team Ramsay-wrote-it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

 

Do I think the conspirators read the letter? Yes. The smear of pink wax suggests the letter was opened and resealed.

 

Is it possible that the conspirators altered the letter? Yes, it's possible. If they read it then of course they could have altered it, but did they? I'm not convinced because I think the language largely relates to Stannis, particularly the quote from Theon.

I think the quote from Theon I TWOW is a herring. Anyway, if Stannis sent the letter he did it from Winterfell, not from the Crofter Village

11 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

Actually the idea was discussed here shortly after ADwD was released. Several years ago @bemused wrote a very good piece about it being rewritten by Thorne.

I was unaware of that, but I wouldn't be surprised if she did. @bemused has written much and more about the events in the North in ADWD. As I noted a lot of the language sounds like Thorne

(the idea that Thorne is an honourable man is btw laughable and not worth of a reply)

11 hours ago, three-eyed monkey said:

 

Firstly, if you want to argue along the lines that you did then I would say that if any potential forger had seen Ramsay's distinctive hand then they would obviously copy it.

We could argue back and forth on why Jon didn't mention Ramsay's hand. Some people say Jon didn't think about it because he recognized it, but recognition does not exclude him from thinking about it. Why didn't we get that recognition through his pov? Jon recognized the huge spiky hand or the letter was signed in a familiar huge spiky hand or whatever. That way GRRM would have clarified that the letter was actually from Ramsay and not set up a false mystery.

Huge spiky hand is set-up twice, once through Asha and once through Jon. It is set up for a reason. It's absence is meant to be noticed. This is a very standard device in mystery writing.

The fact that Jon didn't note the particular Ramsay's script is a huge hint that the letter was written from someone else with average calligraphy.  Besides there is no skin attached to it and it was not written with blood.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, rotting sea cow said:

I think the quote from Theon I TWOW is a herring. Anyway, if Stannis sent the letter he did it from Winterfell, not from the Crofter Village

I was unaware of that, but I wouldn't be surprised if she did. @bemused has written much and more about the events in the North in ADWD. As I noted a lot of the language sounds like Thorne

(the idea that Thorne is an honourable man is btw laughable and not worth of a reply)

The fact that Jon didn't note the particular Ramsay's script is a huge hint that the letter was written from someone else with average calligraphy.  Besides there is no skin attached to it and it was not written with blood.

 

 

How do you explain Thorne writing the letter when he is supposed to be on a ranging? Ive never really looked into how people who support the idea of thorne still being at CB explain this so i’m curious

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, HelenaExMachina said:

How do you explain Thorne writing the letter when he is supposed to be on a ranging? Ive never really looked into how people who support the idea of thorne still being at CB explain this so i’m curious

Well, Jon himself wonder what happened to the rangers

"The thought was a disquieting one. Six of the rangers Jon had sent out were still missing. It is too soon. They may yet be back. But another part of him insisted, They are dead, every man of them. You sent them out to die, and you are doing the same to Val. "Tell Tormund what I've said."- Jon VIII, ADWD

Among these six missing was Thorne. The question if he is back then how Jon doesn't know it?

There are two options

1) Through Eastwatch:

"No, my lady. This news was long awaited." Though the last part troubles me. Glendon Hewett was a seasoned man and a strong one, a sensible choice to command in Cotter Pyke's absence. But he was also as much a friend as Alliser Thorne could boast, and a crony of sorts with Janos Slynt, however briefly." Jon X. ADWD

So, Cotter Pyke was in Hardhome when Thorne arrived and Hewett didn't informed Jon.

2) Through the Black Gate at the Nightfort where Othell Yarwyck is rebuilding stuff. He is likely among the conspirators.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, rotting sea cow said:

I think the quote from Theon I TWOW is a herring.

If you think the Theon quote is a red herring then I take it you don't believe the letter is from Ramsay, as red herrings are added to mysteries and Ramsay writing the letter means no mystery regarding authorship.

3 hours ago, rotting sea cow said:

Anyway, if Stannis sent the letter he did it from Winterfell, not from the Crofter Village

I agree he sent it from Winterfell. That does not exclude him from quoting what Theon told him about Ramsay a few days before that. I find that explanation at least as plausible as any other potential author quoting Theon, if not more plausible..

3 hours ago, rotting sea cow said:

I was unaware of that, but I wouldn't be surprised if she did. @bemused has written much and more about the events in the North in ADWD. As I noted a lot of the language sounds like Thorne

(the idea that Thorne is an honourable man is btw laughable and not worth of a reply)

I never said Thorne was honorable. I'm not even sold on him being involved in the conspiracy, but I accept it is possible. My own position is that the letter was read and resealed by the conspirators, not rewritten. I think they believed the contents were true and it really was from Ramsay. I think the letter provided the conspirators with additional reasons to act against Jon and his speech in the shieldhall where he outlined his plan to ride against Ramsay meant they had no choice but act or risk being seen as complicit by the crown.

4 hours ago, rotting sea cow said:

The fact that Jon didn't note the particular Ramsay's script is a huge hint that the letter was written from someone else with average calligraphy.  Besides there is no skin attached to it and it was not written with blood.

Well, we disagree as I believe all of the above are clues that the letter was not written by Ramsay. As I said, I think the absence of huge spiky hand is simply a literary clue. I guess we'll have to wait and see.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, three-eyed monkey said:

If you think the Theon quote is a red herring then I take it you don't believe the letter is from Ramsay, as red herrings are added to mysteries and Ramsay writing the letter means no mystery regarding authorship.

???

I think the letter is from Ramsay, but people takes that quote as evidence enough that it's from Stannis. In that respect is a herring.

 

51 minutes ago, three-eyed monkey said:

I agree he sent it from Winterfell. That does not exclude him from quoting what Theon told him about Ramsay a few days before that. I find that explanation at least as plausible as any other potential author quoting Theon, if not more plausible..

The problem is the tone of the letter is very out of character. If Stannis sent the letter it must have been a very different one.

 

51 minutes ago, three-eyed monkey said:

I never said Thorne was honorable.

I think it was someone else said that. Not in this thread

51 minutes ago, three-eyed monkey said:

I'm not even sold on him being involved in the conspiracy, but I accept it is possible. My own position is that the letter was read and resealed by the conspirators, not rewritten.

Yeah, that is a possibility

51 minutes ago, three-eyed monkey said:

I think they believed the contents were true and it really was from Ramsay. I think the letter provided the conspirators with additional reasons to act against Jon and his speech in the shieldhall where he outlined his plan to ride against Ramsay meant they had no choice but act or risk being seen as complicit by the crown.

This is true

51 minutes ago, three-eyed monkey said:

Well, we disagree as I believe all of the above are clues that the letter was not written by Ramsay. As I said, I think the absence of huge spiky hand is simply a literary clue. I guess we'll have to wait and see.

I mean, I think Ramsay was the original author and things were added at the Wall. This is what my brain tells me. My nose on the other hand, smells Mance's hand on this (again with tampering at the Wall)

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, rotting sea cow said:

???

I think the letter is from Ramsay, but people takes that quote as evidence enough that it's from Stannis. In that respect is a herring.

 

Red herrings are placed in a mystery by the writer to distract or mislead the reader. But if the letter really came from Ramsay then there is no mystery, and if there is no mystery then there is no need to distract or mislead your readers, so you don't need to place red herrings.

I think what you're suggesting is the quote from Theon is merely a coincidence. It might be, though I don't think that's a convincing argument. In my opinion the quote from Theon is a clue, not a coincidence. A clue that was intended to be placed before the pink letter, naturally, except the Theon chapter got bumped. And it's not the only clue; the huge spiky hand, the wildling princess, etc, all clues dismissed by Ramsay theorists.

Ramsay has no realistic motive to ask Jon for fake Arya back, given that Jon has made common cause with the Bolton's enemies, Jon was the one who sent Mance to rescue her, and certainly not when her fake identity, which Jon would obviously see through, is crucial to the Bolton's tenuous hold on the north. Ramsay asking Jon for fArya back makes about as much sense as Robert writing to Willem Darry to ask for Viserys and Dany back.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 4/16/2019 at 3:25 AM, Davjos said:

My problem with the Pink Letter has always been  that I don’t think the content is true. I don’t think Stannis lost and Ramsey has Mance. The arguments supporting this have been discussed before. There is a 19 page thread discussing it below. 

However, I don’t think Stannis or Mel has written this letter either. While they have all the information required, they do not have a proper, not convoluted motivation to manipulate Jon. 

 

Therefore, I want to suggest my current idea and see if anybody agrees. I wish any more knowledgeable contributors to scrutinise this as much as possible. 

Stannis wrote an informative letter to Jon. An update. Clydas read the update and wrote another letter with the information. This is the manipulative Pink Letter.

Goal: Get Jon to break his vows so he can be removed for the watch. Clearly Clydas wants this. 

Clydas (and Bowen, maybe Alliser etc) took this information, reversed everything, worded  it as a taunt and gave themselves an excuse to depose Jon. 

This addresses: the required information, the motivation, the lack of a seal, the weird wax, the writing not being mentioned as Ramsey’s, the all out outrageous demands, the knowledge Jon has an army of Wildings so he has the chance to move south. 

So what do you think? Does it hold up?

I'm not sure this holds up with what we know of Clydas.  He seems like a relatively loyal and humble NW member who respects Aemon and spent years helping Aemon out then inherited his duties.  I'm just not sure I can see Clydas engaging in this kind of duplicity.  I don't think Clydas has any hate for Jon nor any love for Bowen/Alliser and no reason to want Jon to break his vows.  Clydas is scared because he can instantly see the pink letter is provocative as it is entitled "Bastard" and would suspect nothing good would be in that letter because of that.

Having said this, there may be something to the idea the letter was tampered with by NW members.  I just don't see Clydas being involved with something like that.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Clydas can read and write.  Those are the only things that point to him.  The letter was intercepted and tampered with before it reached the wall.  Assuming it was tampered.  The only people who want this are the Karstarks.  That is one family who would go all nuclear when they learn their land now belong to the Thenns.  If the letter was at all tampered with.  

Edited by Widowmaker 811

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×