Posted on 08/20/2006 5:37:25 AM PDT by Rte66
For your bookmarking assistance, this is a reference list of links to the Aug 2006 or newer Free Republic threads on the topic of the JonBenet Ramsey murder case and the possible arrest of John Mark Karr as a suspect in her murder.
Rounding up the usual thread of suspects?
Thanks Rte66...
I think she was fed pineapple by the kidnapper(s). Patsy denied feeding her anything. Possibly she snuck down and rummaged it out of the fridge herself.
I think the kidnapper(s) were in the house when they came home, hiding and having already written the ransom note while waiting.
I think the kidnapper (or one of them) knew or knew of the Ramseys, had researched and chosen them for reasons not necesarily obvious to most. It may have been about ransom or perhaps the kidnapper(s) had rationalized it to themselves as a ransom kidnapping, but could not control their perverse desires. Perhaps the ransom was intended to be a ruse and never a seriously intended ransom note.
One thing for sure, the ransom note created quite a diversion and a lot bunny trails as investigators concentrated on it.
http://www.centredaily.com/mld/centredaily/news/15320674.htm
Does enough evidence remain to ID Karr?
DEBORAH HASTINGS
Associated Press
BOULDER, Colo. - The most important evidence amounts to this: DNA taken from two blood stains, hair and fibers taken from the body, half a footprint and two partial palm prints.
What it boils down to is this: It is infinitely easier to prove itinerant teacher John Mark Karr did not kill JonBenet Ramsey 10 years ago than it is to show beyond a shadow of a doubt that he garroted and beat the 6-year-old child he claims to have loved.
Because of the nature of DNA testing, it is simpler to prove a negative.
"DNA is the sure way to eliminate him," said Scott Robinson, a Denver defense attorney who has closely followed the case. "If it's negative, you ride that horse all the way to the stable."
The stable, in this case, being the exoneration of Karr, arrested in Bangkok last week and paraded before journalists to whom he professed his love for the little beauty pageant contestant and then claimed he was present when she died.
He called her death "an accident."
Since then, his fantastic professions have been met with increasing suspicion and distrust.
So if genetic testing rules him out, as some legal experts predict, what happens next?
"If it's not this man's DNA, then there has to be some very strong and compelling evidence that places him at the crime scene," said Lin Wood, the Ramsey family's longtime attorney. "Unless you have some positive evidence of DNA, it would be an extremely difficult case."
Difficult, agreed Robinson, but not impossible.
"There are other things," he said, including questions that Boulder District Attorney Mary Lacy should be asking: "Can we place him in Boulder at the time of the murder? Can we place him in some relationship with the Ramseys?"
Whether the prosecutor has the answers to those queries is anyone's guess at this point. Since announcing Karr's arrest, she has refused to comment on nearly all aspects of the investigation.
There is no publicly known evidence putting Karr in Boulder or any other town in Colorado. JonBenet's father, John Ramsey, has said he has no recollection of the man meeting anyone in his family.
Prosecutors would also have to corroborate Karr's statements to Thai police, including claims he sexually assaulted the girl, said Bob Grant, a former Adams County DA who helped investigate JonBenet's death.
An autopsy found no semen in or on the child's body, but noted vaginal abrasions and tearing of the hymen. There was not enough evidence to determine what caused those injuries.
The theory that an intruder killed JonBenet is supported by unexplained evidence: a mysterious boot print found outside the house after her body was found Dec. 26, 1996; marks on her body some say could have been made by a stun gun; and signs that someone may have entered the house through a basement window.
Then there is the DNA of an unknown male found in blood in JonBenet's underpants. Tests in 1997 and 1999 indicated it was from a male who was not a member of the Ramsey family.
Two years ago, Wood said a better-quality DNA profile was worked up but it did not match any samples in an FBI database of convicted violent offenders. At the time, that database included 1.5 million samples.
Celebrity forensic scientist Dr. Henry Lee, who initially participated in the Ramsey case, said even a positive DNA match is not always enough to convict.
"It can never be 100 percent," he said of the analysis which matches samples and donors by statistical probability.
If it turns out that a DNA sample from Karr matches crime-scene DNA, the first salvo from his attorney - whomever that turns out to be - would be against the testing process. As demonstrated by the O.J. Simpson criminal case, even supposedly ironclad genetic test results can be shaken by lapses in testing protocols or procedural breakdowns in handling evidence.
"Whoever represents this guy will whine about the testing that was done, and not being able to do their own testing," Grant said. "It's pretty standard."
There were also DNA traces found under the child's fingernails, but they were degraded and tests were inconclusive, Grant said.
Prosecutors need to find out if Karr truly knows anything about the case that isn't public knowledge, he said. In this sensationalized investigation, he does not think that is possible.
"The whole world knows everything about this case," Grant said. "I'd be surprised if everything I knew (as an investigator) wasn't out in the public domain."
"The whole world knows everything about this case," Grant said. "I'd be surprised if everything I knew (as an investigator) wasn't out in the public domain."
I'm beginning to think this is true...
I found another article
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1686992/posts
mark
I think he attempted to do CPR but realized it was hopeless as it was obvious she was dead since at that point Jonbenet's body was going through rigor.
"I'd rather study the case and deal with facts."
Have fun wasting your time. Case was solved by God's justice, Patsy's dead.
I'm starting to think you're right. After thinking about the lack of blood in the house, the strangulation first, and the possibility that the girl came downstairs to get some pineapple out of the fridge, it hit me that she may have encountered an intruder who had been hiding in the basement the whole time and who had written the ransom note while they were at the Christmas party.
My brother suggested that Patsy may have been drunk that night and that is why she was wearing the same clothes the next day. As far as the fibers from a jacket "remarkably like" the one she was wearing found in the ligature, it may simply be that the rope was taken from the house that had prior contact with that jacket.
In any case, the forensic evidence seems to point more to an intruder than to anything done by someone in the home (or supposed to be in the home) since the asphyxiation happened first and there is no blood in the house.
The nature of the asphyxiation is such that it seems that a 9 year old would have a hard time fashioning a ligature like that, twisting it with that much stength and then bashing her head in with that much force (the only thing that would allow it is a baseball bat - but it too would have had traces of blood or bleach on it). No, this was an adult male; methinks now. We'll see.
The case was never solved and you don't know if Patsey murdered her daughter. There is no proof of that and to say that Patsey died was God's justice is wrong seeing you don't know that either.
His will be done. I'm sure that being reunited with her daughter has washed away the pain of persecution.
I don't think Patsey wore the clothing all night. I THINK she changed but in the morning when she woke up in her pj's/or nothing, she had to put on some clothing quickly while the police were on their way their so she grabbed her clothing from the night before which was likely thrown on a chair in her room after she got home from Christmas night. No one would have had time to find a new outfit and put it on when they are in the same panic as the Ramsey's were. She just grabbed the clothes and put it on not thinking about a thing. It makes perfect sense.
Women don't kill by ligature strangulation. Can you find any example where a woman has done that? I spend a lot of time following crime-solving and forensic shows and web sites, and I can't recall a single instance of a woman comitting a murder using ligature strangulation.
It may be the disinfo that's going on, but I thought I read somewhere that she said that she was fully dressed when she discovered the note, so I thought she had already dressed before the panic. I think it came from her 'interview', or one of them, with the Boulder police that was finally held years later.
I never really discounted the possibility that Patsy or John did it, I just didn't see any evidence for it. That's why I thought about an accident and Burke. But now, barring evidence that one of them did it, I would say it's more likely an intruder. I don't know how to explain the clothing, though.
This is the first time I am reading that he STILL feels very feminine. His handwriting in high school was very feminine. The ransom note was written by a masculine person. Unless he is so clever as to be able to adjust his handwriting to look more masculine (which may be the case in other work-related samples the authorities may have), I don't think he's the killer.
Also, there don't seem to be any violent tendencies in him in the years since JBR's death. The murderer of JonBenet seems to have wanted her dead faster. I get that impression from an earlier poster in the thread who remarked that her skull fractures occured about at the same time as the ligature strangulation. It sounded like the killer was in some kind of hurry to kill her, which seems so cruel.
This guy is hugely creepy but doesn't show cruelty or seem to have any known history of violence.
I'm thinking that all of his JonBenet and Boulder info comes from his fascination after her death. I agree with a different previous poster that there is no doubt much JonBenet discussion and fascination in the international world of pedophiles who are after girls.
"Women don't kill by ligature strangulation."
There's always a first time. However, here is how I see it having gone down. Patsy, in a fit, clobbers her kid over the head with a flashlight, mortally wounding her or outright killing her. Patsy's husband John does the ligature to cover up what actually happened. Or, in the alternative, they were both in on it together. But I believe Patsy was the prime mover here, and John Ramsey knew exactly where to go to "find" his daughter's body in the basement. No one entered that house. Either Patsy, her husband, both, or their son (highly unlikely) are the perpetrators. This was not an outside job, it was an inside one. All fingers point to Rome. The police have always maintained their air of suspicion towards the Ramsey family as the perpetrators. We'll probably never know the exact how of it, but at least one-half (and perhaps) the sole perpetrator of the death of their daughter now lies in a grave next to her victim.
Michael Helgoth's "hobby" was stalking people at night, while dressed in a black ninja suit. Within a year prior to Jon-Benet's murder, in the same neighborhood, someone in a black ninja suit broke into a home while the occupants were out, waited until everyone was in bed, and then crept into a young girl's room and began a sexual assault on her. The mother of the girl, who was a light sleeper, woke up and went to the girl's room, and confronted the intruder. He rushed past her and out the door. That intruder was never caught. Doesn't that intruder appear to be a more likely suspect than Patsy Ramsey?
Michael Helgoth was obsessed with little girls. He had lots of videotapes of them. For a while, he moved in with a girlfriend who had a little girl. One day, she came home and found him naked in bed, with the girl on the bed. He told her he couldn't trust himself with the girl when he was by himself, and then she moved out.
You know this Karr person stands to make a lot of money off of this if the Colorado DA cannot show Karr was involved or not. If everything come up unconclusive or they prove he was lying, people will be paying this creep for interviews and to write a book even if he finally admits he made it all up.
Some people will sympathize with him no matter what and they will want to hear is side of it all.
Karr still faces the courts over his 5 counts of child pornography, but this will not keep him in prison for very long.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.