Thursday, August 17, 2006

TOPIC: IS John Karr guilty or a freak?
An American official, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the sensitive nature of the criminal investigation, said that it was prudent in cases like this to be cautious about concluding that a confession necessarily means he did in fact commit the crime. Many people confess to crimes in high-profile cases - as the Ramsey case has been - based on what they read in the newspapers, and then turn out not to have done it, the official said. But the official added, Karr "certainly knows a lot about it." He declined to provide more details.
We already know that John Karr wrote a term paper on the Ramsey murder while attending college, as an adult. He was encouraged by his professor to investigate the case more deeply, and write a book about the murder and subsequent investigation. Within the next year or two, Karr began corresponding with Michael Tracey, the producer of three documentaries on the topic of JonBenet Ramsey's murder. According to Ollie Gray, a private-eye hired by John & Patsy Ramsey, (via the Rocky Mountain News),"(The suspect) talked about being there, about doing this and doing that, and knowing this and knowing that," Gray said. "He had a whole bunch of things that didn't come out before. It wasn't part of what the media was allowed to get at before."
Many bloggers and reporters are making reference to that fact. My answer is that Karr investigated the case as a reporter or author would. He went so far as to interview JonBenet's grandparents. Additionally, Karr's former wife, Lara, told KGO-TV in San Francisco on Wednesday that during their marriage her husband had spent considerable time researching the Ramsey case. Karr also interviewed police officials and former detectives. It is possible that someone mistakenly gave him details that were not public knowledge. After all, it's been almost ten years since Jon's death. Lips loosen over time.
To his undue credit, Lara Karr also said that she and her former husband were in Alabama when JonBenet was murdered -- so he could not have committed the crime.
Craig Silverman, a former Denver deputy district attorney, said he thought investigators are obviously worried about whether Karr is telling the truth or just trying to get attention. "He doesn't seem credible," said Silverman, who in addition to being a lawyer has a local radio talk show. "He's spewing nonsense." Silverman has been one of the most outspoken proponents of the idea that JonBenet may have been murdered by her parents. Thursday, he said he "just analyzed the facts like everybody else," and still had his doubts.
THE *KEY* to answering the guilt question will be a comparison of the DNA found under JonBenet's fingernails and in her underwear with that of John Mark Karr. What about a picture of Karr in the surveillance tape taken at a local hardware store where police said the distinct cord used to strangle JonBenet was purchased? Also, a match of the shoe print and/or handprint found in the basement would be huge. BUT, if the DNA doesn't match, he is most likely NOT the killer. Former Adams County Colorado District Attorney Bob Grant said, "It would take a heck of a lot to convince me this guy's convictible simply by some statement about what happened that nobody knows. Short of DNA evidence, it's trouble. Serious trouble."
ASIDE: Even before he was linked to the Ramsey case, Karr had come to the attention of American law enforcement officials in Thailand, as part of a broader investigation into Americans who come to Thailand, and other Southeast Asian countries, and engage in pedophilia, an American official said, speaking on the condition of anonymity. Karr had been in Thailand several times in the past two years, the authorities said. He also has an outstanding warrant with California authorities stemming from a 2001 charge of posessing child pornography.
[Some source data: FoxNews, Rocky Mountain News, Associated Press & 9News]
Folks, I just watched part of a FoxNews broadcast with John Mark Karr -- including his verbal statements that were quoted by the Associated Press earlier. [EDIT: REMOVED TEXT DUE TO CHANGE OF HEART BASED ON NEW INFORMATION] Karr is also mentally unstable -- which is also clear from the video interview (unless he was drugged). I'm going to go ahead and prematurely conclude that John Mark Karr is NOT JonBenet Ramsey's killer. A couple of points that lead me to this conclusion: Asked for details of how she died, Karr replied: "It would take several hours to describe — to describe that." He added, "There's no way I could be brief about it. It's a very involved series of events," said Karr, who speaks with a thick Southern accent. "It's very painful for me to talk about." Dressed in a baggy turquoise polo shirt and khaki pants, Karr said that JonBenet's death was "not what it seems to be," though he declined to elaborate. "In every way," he added, as authorities bundled him into a waiting vehicle. "It's not at all what it seems to be." Two statements that sound to me like someone who doesn't know the most intimate details -- and doesn't know how to answer the probbing questions of reporters.
This is not to say that John Mark Karr isn't a guilty party. He probably is guilty of other crimes -- such has child molestation, being a purveyor of child pornography and possibly the kidnapping of young boys for the purpose of sexual abuse. The presumption of innocence until proven guilty applies. I just don't think he will be proven guilty -- or even tried -- for the murder of JonBenet Ramsey.


Anonymous said...

I have to disagree that a DNA match means he is the killer. Someone else could've assaulted her near death and she could scratched another in gasping for her life.

Charlie said...

You are correct. IF John Karr was in the room, I also believe that John Ramsey was there, too. If not, then I may be missing the point entirely. BTW, did John Ramsey ever give a DNA sample to be cross matched with the DNA found under her fingernails and in her underwear? I need to refresh my memory on that one. Anyway, a definite match would put him in the house. A non-match would not necessarily take him out of the picture -- BUT couple that with the weirdo way he's acting -- talking and his profile -- and I'd say he's NOT the killer. THANKS for your comment.