Thai media circus responsible for false confession.
It's taken a day or so but the mainsteam media is catching up with this blog. We published our rather lengthy essay on why we thought the suspect in the JonBenet Ramsey case was mentally disturbed but not guilty of the crime. If I had to give odds on his guilt I would think he has about a one in ten chance of being guilty -- probably less. Now the media is noticing there is no evidence beyond his constant desire to give interviews and tell everyone how he was involved.
Associated Press reported that "the only public evidence against John Mark Karr is his own words" and says that some are now wondering if Karr is a "disturbed 'wannbe' trying to insert himself into high-profile case." They also finally noticed he was "vague in details". One former prosecutor told AP, "I have to believe they have more than his kooky confession." But don't bet on it. The AP also confirms what I said yesterday when I voice doubt that JonBenet had been "drugged" as Karr so readily confessed to the ever-present Thai police. AP reports the "autopsy report found no evidence of drugs".
AP also reported on Karr's wife saying he was with her that Christmas and noted that the professor we mentioned yesterday is also refusing to link Karr to the case even though Karr came to police attention through him. In other words AP is today reporting what we wrote yesterday -- almost as if they read it. One former prosecutor said: "This confession seemed delusional. He looked like a drugged-out Lee Harvey Oswald." The original prosecutor in the Ramsey case, who doesn't have a spotless record in this matter himself, said: "At this point, I haven't heard anything very reassuring that we have the right person. It is disconcerting. I am hoping that they based the arrest on corroborating evidence."
By the way part of this problem is due to the typically disgraceful way the Thai police behave. They love to drag suspects out and subject them to barrages of questions from the media. In Thailand suspect apparently have no rights. And the Thai police are publicity hungry and shameless, not to mention, corrupt. So they have dragged this man from interview to interview.
What I suspect happened is that Karr has been obsessed with the case and "fell in love" with JonBenet from the reports of her and the photographs. He learned the case inside and out. He started pushing to become linked to the case by writing Patsy Ramsey and by corresponding with Professor Tracey who made the documentary on the case. Karr used his knowledge of the case to appear more suspicious than he actually was. And the police jumped too soon, the Thai police then spread the story around the world without using any of the skepticism that police ought to employ -- again typical of them as they assume all their suspects are guilty. So when Karr was put on public display his delusion about being the killer took over completely and he is playing the role to the hilt.
Fox News has Carlton Smith, the author of a book on the Ramsey case, saying: "It's clear to me that he's somewhat interested or maybe obsessed by the case and the real question is whether he's inserting himself into it for some obscure psychological reason." They also report another discrepency. Karr told the ever present, ever incompetent, Thai police that the day he killed her he had picked her up from school. School was not in session as it was the Christmas holiday. As I said since Karr thinks he is in love with the girl he is concocting a story that fits his delusion of the romance and accidental death. None of which is substantiated by the facts.
One thing I didn't mention, because I wanted to confirm it, was that Karr and his wife had three children. The boys would have be six, four and three in 1996 during the Christmas that JonBenet was killed. When Lara Karr says tht her then-husband was with her she has good reason to know. As I did note it was Christmas and if your spouse deserts you on Christmas you remember. But you especially remember it if he left you with three small children by yourself.
Another sceptic in the case is Marc Klaas, the father of Polly Klass, who was murdered in California. Karr also obsessed about the Klaas killing and corresponded with the killer of Klaas, Richard Davis. He also had a copy of the death certificate from the girl. Marc Klaas said it was creepy that Karr moved to Petaluma, where Polly was abducted. He said he's a "very, very disturbed guy" for "collecting mementos of dead girls" but doesn't think Karr is the killer. Nate Karr, John's brother, who we quoted yesterday, is clearly doubtful that his brother was involved. He said the family was going to go through old photos from Christmas holidays. If they turn up a 1996 photo showing Karr with his family that would seriously damage the theory that Karr was over 1,000 miles away that evening killing JonBenet. And it is very possible such a photo exists. Nate told Atlanta TV station WAGA that the family "will provide information Friday to prove the allegations that Karr killed Ramsey is 'just ridiculous'." (Please note I suspect that that publication making this report may have misreported an interview that Nate Karr did where he said they were looking for the photos and instead reported he would provide the evidence on Friday. I think they got it wrong but it possible there was another interview which I can't find.)
I did say one thing that could be misconstrued. I assumed the DNA found on the girl's underwear was sperm. Police have not said it was. They merely call it a DNA sample but the girl was not raped -- which doesn't leave out the possibility that the DNA was still semen. Karr was asked by the ever present Thai police why he had sex with the girl and he vaguely answered affirming he did but not answering the question. But the killer did not have sex with JonBenet. He did not drug her and he did not pick her up from school all of which are part of the Karr confession.
It also appears that the attorney for the Ramsey family has been a hinderance to finding the truth. He was quoted as saying that the Ramseys had provided Karr's name to the police early in the investigation. But John Ramsey says he doesn't think he ever knew Karr. Now the attorney is saying that "a prosecutor does not make an arrest simply because there's probably cause for the arrest --- but when he or she has evidence to prove the case with a conviction beyond a reasonable doubt." If this is his real view never hire him as a defense attorney. He is saying that such arrests are always based on hard evidence. If that were the case we wouldn't need defense attorneys. It is not the case and no doubt this attorney would argue the contrary when defending a client.
Karr needs to be removed from Thai custody immediately and brought to the US so that a real investigation can be made. So far we have the media circus engineered by the incompetent Thai authorities. The US says they are talking to the Thais to arrange this. Thai authorities, who have revoked Karr's visa, are stalling as they bask in the linelight of the false confession they helped engineer.
I also think the media circus is misreporting another fact. They regularly say that Karr lived near the Ramseys in Atlanta. This insinuates much more than the facts do. Karr and the Ramseys did live in the Atlanta area at the same time for awhile. But this was when Karr was a child. He moved at the age of 12 and went to live with grandparents in Hamilton, Alabama and he stayed in Alabama until he moved to California. JonBenet was not yet born when Karr lived within 30 miles of the Ramseys and there is no indication that as a child he meet the John or Patsy Ramsey, we already know he couldn't have meet JonBenet. Mentioning this "connection" gives the impression that Karr could have met the child and/or known the family. For JonBenet's entire life Karr was in Alabama and never lived close to her at all.
I am convinced that we will discover this confession is false. Karr's obsession with the case turned delusional and he tried to insert himself into the case by writing Professor Tracey and Patsy Ramsey. Boulder police officials, anxious to solve the case, decided to arrest Karr on the basis of his knowledge of the case, gleaned from years of research, not personal experience. Unfortunately Karr was in Thailand, a nation known for corrupt and incompetent police anxious to put on a media circus for their own benefit. Thrusting the delusional Karr into the middle of this Thai manipulated frenzy clinched the delusion for him and he is know playing the role that was handed him. He may even believe everything he has said. But so far the evidence is all saying he could not have done it. Unless the prosecutor has evidence that has been kept secret, or the DNA matches, I don't think we have the right man at all. And that is sad.