Posted on 08/28/2006 9:01:50 AM PDT by Rte66
I hope that continued digging by both the media and BPD will eventually turn up iron clad physical proof that he couldn't have done it and then ignore him.
But letting him get away with this stunt and leaving the matter hanging as possible but unprovable is just begging for continued posturing on the part of JMK.
I won't say why, b/c I know that's controversial to say here, but I doubt this case will be solved in our generation. It will take *years* before this case can be looked at objectively and that will be by historians, not detectives. A la Lizzie Borden
How did it go? Whacked her mother by the bed and gave her dad forty whacks with an axe on the head.
Her stone engraving:
Myne countrey Maplecroft
Lizzie Borden
Quite possibly so.
Well, even if it's not the case (and it may not be) there are interesting parallels:
1.) The murders were shockingly brutal
2.) Lizzie Borden's main defense was that an intruder did it
3.) She was a well-to-do, fair, christian woman and nobody believed she was capable of such a crime
4.) It was all circumstantial
5.) Her testimony was shot full of holes; she denied trying to buy poison from the pharmacist that said she did, she burned a dress a couple days later and denied it, she told stories that didn't fit the physical evidence, etc.
6.) She retained super-high priced lawyers for her defense
7.) The public was obsessed with the case and the media followed it passionately
8.) There was no obvious motive
9.) The evidence seemed to point everywhere and nowhere
Forgot one:
Well, even if it's not the case (and it may not be) there are interesting parallels:
1.) The murders were shockingly brutal
2.) Lizzie Borden's main defense was that an intruder did it
3.) She was a well-to-do, fair, christian woman and nobody believed she was capable of such a crime
4.) It was all circumstantial
5.) Her testimony was shot full of holes; she denied trying to buy poison from the pharmacist that said she did, she burned a dress a couple days later and denied it, she told stories that didn't fit the physical evidence, etc.
6.) She retained super-high priced lawyers for her defense
7.) The public was obsessed with the case and the media followed it passionately
8.) There was no obvious motive
9.) The evidence seemed to point everywhere and nowhere
10.) It was a murder, if she was in fact guilty, of an immediate family member
Is there iron clad physical proof that *I* couldn't have killed her? Disproving the negative is always a difficult task.
Your benchmark should be "what can the DA prove in court" and, after establishing what can be proven, "is there enough proof that a reasonable jury would convict?"
If Karr managed to kill her and waltz away without leaving any witnesses, footprints, fingerprints or DNA then he probably gets away with committing the crime. You almost can't LUCK your way into leaving no evidence, particularly in a violent struggle.
If this was an intruder, he would had to have been such a pro as to wipe down all sorts of items used during the crime, vacuumed up all the hair and skin cells shed, altered their handwriting so as not to match the ransom note, etc and vanish all without being detected. MAYBE he can do that if he kept gloves and a ski mask on at all times but, otherwise, most people just aren't capable of being so neat.
Which leads me back to the likelihood that either someone already familiar to the Ramseys (and thus has an alibi for leaving trace evidence in the home) did it or that the Ramseys covered up the crime before calling police.
You forget that David Westerfield left no physical evidence in the Van Damm home. And he walzted in past their dog also. It was hair/fibers in his dryer and the print in his motorhome he was convicted on, not anything found in the victim's home. And his was a spur of the moment crime, not well planned.
My point in finding some physical evidence like a photo to prove his alibi (I wasn't very clear) is to deny him the speculation and additional fame he will receive because even though there is no proof he did it, there is also no absolute proof he didn't.
I don't want the scumbag capitalizing on that unproven negative. Because he will and it chaps my behind. I resent this puke being able to sell his filthy obsession (and he can factually state his alibi is only circumstantial and his family has financial reasons to now go along with this, so no more pictures will surface).
If his alibi/innocence was proven rather than circumstantial, then the media would be forced to dismiss him for the perverted crank he is, but since questions can reasonably be raised, they gonna help him make a buck and take their cut.
Nah, but your bias against Patsy is readily observable. JMO.
So what? She obstructed a murder investigation. I don't like people who lie like that.
Why am I not supposed to give my opinion on what I observed? I'm supposed to post "neutrally" or something and only *you* are allowed to have an opinion?
It's *your* bias that's showing, but I sure didn't jump down your throat about your blindness to it.
Danielle wasn't killed in her own home.
I don't see how anyone can be convicted in this case, because whoever is prosecuted will always have the other suspects as reasonable doubt in that one juror's mind.
steve thomas on nancy grace now. but he is unfortunately, fearful to speak due to civil lawsuit fears.
I have to buy his book.
"Locked Room" murder mysteries are standard fare in fiction, yet truth is stranger than fiction.
2006 Child Abduction Murder Study
· In 74 percent of the cases, the child murder victim was female and the average age was 11 years old.
· In 44 percent of the cases, the victims and killers were strangers, but in 42 percent of the cases, the victims and killers were friends or acquaintances.
· Only about 14 percent of the cases involved parents or intimates killing the child.
I have few questions that is Karr related.
Karr was not suppose to use a computer, this was a condition of his release back in 2001. So Karr has been on the run overseas. Colorado DA has refused to give Karr back his laptop computer he had in his possesion when he transported back to the US. They have also refused to give Karr back the photograph they sent Karr (via UPS) of JonBenet and Patsy. The Colorado DA is going to giving Sonoma Co the laptop.
Can LE in California add more charges on Karr since he was arrested in Thailand and had it in his possession a laptop that surely belongs to him? What if the hard drive on Karr's computer has child porn on it even if he was overseas when he was caught with laptop. Will he face additional Child Porn possession charges in the state of California if they find child porn on his laptop computer that he had in his possession in Thailand?
I wonder also if the FBI was able to look at the hard drive on his laptop computer and if there is some way find out or show he was selling or solicting child porn on the internet.
sorry my post is once again full of missed words do to brain farts!
Who is Steve Thomas?
he is the boulder PD former detective - he left after seeing the behavior of the boulder DA. he had a memorable confrontation on larry king with the Ramsey's, where he told Patsy she could/should have been arrested. he wrote a book, and was sued in civil court by the Ramsey's to silence him.
"Only about 14 percent of the cases involved parents or intimates killing the child"
I certainly agree that the JBR case was a statistically rare one...
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.