whitesoxfan101 Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 Make it a confession of the crime.... http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060817/ap_on_...jonbenet_ramsey Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sonik22 Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 QUOTE(Milkman delivers @ Aug 16, 2006 -> 04:34 PM) Is the guy they arrested some Puerto Rican? If so, South Park nailed it. Funny, i thought the same thing. They still havent found the Puerto rican guy who killed OJ's wife. Sad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 Wow. What an incredible twist. Has any connection what-so-ever been made between either of the parents and this low life? If not, they have a WHOLE LOT of apologies and groveling due to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LosMediasBlancas Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 Earlier this morning I heard that the suspect's ex wife said there is no way he (Carr) commited the crime because he was with her at the time. Why would an EX wife cover for the guy? Strangest.Crime Story.Ever. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 QUOTE(LosMediasBlancas @ Aug 17, 2006 -> 09:10 AM) Earlier this morning I heard that the suspect's ex wife said there is no way he (Carr) commited the crime because he was with her at the time. Why would an EX wife cover for the guy? Strangest.Crime Story.Ever. The supposed DNA evidence should settle all of that. If its there, there really isn't much to argue with. If its not, the guy might have a chance at a case, depending on the rest of the evidence. Then again the guy all but confessed, but depending on who took the confession (US or Thai authorities) and how they got it, it might not be admissable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LosMediasBlancas Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Aug 17, 2006 -> 09:21 AM) The supposed DNA evidence should settle all of that. If its there, there really isn't much to argue with. If its not, the guy might have a chance at a case, depending on the rest of the evidence. Then again the guy all but confessed, but depending on who took the confession (US or Thai authorities) and how they got it, it might not be admissable. I'm unclear as to this guy's relationship or contact with Jon Benet? Was he HER teacher at some point? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kapkomet Posted August 17, 2006 Author Share Posted August 17, 2006 This is one of those deals that there are more questions then answers raised at this point. This guy is WEIRD, if anyone saw snippets of the press conference. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 I think its odd that he kept referring to "being there" when she died, but not killing her. And that he was in long-time contact with the mother. I still think there is the possibility the mother was involved here. Hard to say, though. Dude is creepy in any case. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 QUOTE(LosMediasBlancas @ Aug 17, 2006 -> 09:23 AM) I'm unclear as to this guy's relationship or contact with Jon Benet? Was he HER teacher at some point? QUOTE(kapkomet @ Aug 17, 2006 -> 09:24 AM) This is one of those deals that there are more questions then answers raised at this point. This guy is WEIRD, if anyone saw snippets of the press conference. I agree there. There are a million questions, but not too many answers right now. The relationships between this guy, the kid, and the parents are at the top of that list, but I haven't heard anything yet. It will be interesting when these details start to leak out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queen Prawn Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 (edited) QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Aug 17, 2006 -> 09:27 AM) I think its odd that he kept referring to "being there" when she died, but not killing her. And that he was in long-time contact with the mother. I still think there is the possibility the mother was involved here. Hard to say, though. Dude is creepy in any case. I thought the same when I read what he had said. I also thought it was interesting to note that the parents gave the cops the guy's name. Edited August 17, 2006 by Queen Prawn Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LosMediasBlancas Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Aug 17, 2006 -> 09:27 AM) I think its odd that he kept referring to "being there" when she died, but not killing her. And that he was in long-time contact with the mother. I still think there is the possibility the mother was involved here. Hard to say, though. Dude is creepy in any case. Yep, in everything I've read, nowhere does he say "I did it". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 QUOTE(LosMediasBlancas @ Aug 17, 2006 -> 09:48 AM) Yep, in everything I've read, nowhere does he say "I did it". Asked if he was innocent of the crime, Karr said: "No." http://apnews.myway.com/article/20060817/D8JI67383.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Aug 17, 2006 -> 10:13 AM) http://apnews.myway.com/article/20060817/D8JI67383.html That is exactly my point. He was there, he isn't innocent, but he keeps intentionally avoiding saying he did it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LosMediasBlancas Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Aug 17, 2006 -> 10:13 AM) http://apnews.myway.com/article/20060817/D8JI67383.html Couldn't 'innocent' and 'not guilty' in a court of law be two different things? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soxy Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 The trib is reporting that this guy extensively studied the Ramsey case and the Klaas (I think) case. Sounds to me like a crazy, it will be interesting to see how this turns out. . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 QUOTE(LosMediasBlancas @ Aug 17, 2006 -> 10:20 AM) Couldn't 'innocent' and 'not guilty' in a court of law be two different things? They are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 QUOTE(LosMediasBlancas @ Aug 17, 2006 -> 10:20 AM) Couldn't 'innocent' and 'not guilty' in a court of law be two different things? Court of law aside, there is an important psychological distinction between the two, and his language repeatedly points at the difference in this case. He is trying to make a point with that. What point I do not know, but there it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steff Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 QUOTE(Soxy @ Aug 17, 2006 -> 10:26 AM) The trib is reporting that this guy extensively studied the Ramsey case and the Klaas (I think) case. Sounds to me like a crazy, it will be interesting to see how this turns out. . . I heard that on CNN also. Cant figure out the ex-wife either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 I just just searching google news for different versions of the story and came accross this. According to this breaking story, the guy is now denying a connection to the murder http://www.waow.com/news/full_story.php?id=41806 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 QUOTE(Soxy @ Aug 17, 2006 -> 10:26 AM) The trib is reporting that this guy extensively studied the Ramsey case and the Klaas (I think) case. Sounds to me like a crazy, it will be interesting to see how this turns out. . . This brings up another possibility, which has been itching at me since this broke. The guy could be completely innocent. I'm going to try to put this as carefully as possible... if one knew my real name (my name not being North SideSox the 72nd), and searched the various case files for the Ramsey case, you would in fact find my name. I played a very, very small part in the investigation, back in 1996 or 1997. There was a person of "interest" we happened to come in contact with - a person not all there, and who had a documented history that included sex crimes against a child - who was not only obsessed with the case, but he actually somehow knew the Ramseys before the murder. Mind you, this person is NOT, I repeat NOT, John Mark Karr. My point is, there are a lot of lunatics out there, and this Karr guy may be innocent of the crime but guilty of being a creep. Anyway, suffice it to say, this dude may be entirely innocent of the crime. I've seen something similar before, first hand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whitesoxfan101 Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 QUOTE(NorthSideSox72 @ Aug 17, 2006 -> 10:32 AM) This brings up another possibility, which has been itching at me since this broke. The guy could be completely innocent. I'm going to try to put this as carefully as possible... if one knew my real name (my name not being North SideSox the 72nd), and searched the various case files for the Ramsey case, you would in fact find my name. I played a very, very small part in the investigation, back in 1996 or 1997. There was a person of "interest" we happened to come in contact with - a person not all there, and who had a documented history that included sex crimes against a child - who was not only obsessed with the case, but he actually somehow knew the Ramseys before the murder. Mind you, this person is NOT, I repeat NOT, John Mark Karr. My point is, there are a lot of lunatics out there, and this Karr guy may be innocent of the crime but guilty of being a creep. Anyway, suffice it to say, this dude may be entirely innocent of the crime. I've seen something similar before, first hand. Your were part of the investigation? Wow, that's fascinating....how much do you know (not asking you to tell us, but more like do you know as much as anybody in general is the question). Also, are you saying they might have just decided after 10 years to find a crazy guy who was in the area at the time to frame with the crime? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
southsider2k5 Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Aug 17, 2006 -> 12:26 PM) Your were part of the investigation? Wow, that's fascinating....how much do you know (not asking you to tell us, but more like do you know as much as anybody in general is the question). Also, are you saying they might have just decided after 10 years to find a crazy guy who was in the area at the time to frame with the crime? Not to speak too much for NSS, but I think he is aluding to the fact that if you REALLY believe something, people tend to go out of their way to find evidence that supports your beliefs. If the investigators really thought this guy was the guilty man, it wouldn't be that hard to build a pretty quick circumstancial case against him judging by what he have read about him. Mix in a few conincidences, and you could really convince someone of his guilt, whether it were true or not. (just to be clear, I am not speaking to this mans guilt or innocence, mostly towards human nature) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 QUOTE(whitesoxfan101 @ Aug 17, 2006 -> 12:26 PM) Your were part of the investigation? Wow, that's fascinating....how much do you know (not asking you to tell us, but more like do you know as much as anybody in general is the question). Also, are you saying they might have just decided after 10 years to find a crazy guy who was in the area at the time to frame with the crime? I know a little. Not too much. My involvement was circumstantial and bizarre - we just happend to grab this guy (the one I mentioned) on something unrelated, and some flags came up. Thats about all there was too it, aside from some of the quirky details that I shouldn't really divulge. QUOTE(southsider2k5 @ Aug 17, 2006 -> 12:36 PM) Not to speak too much for NSS, but I think he is aluding to the fact that if you REALLY believe something, people tend to go out of their way to find evidence that supports your beliefs. If the investigators really thought this guy was the guilty man, it wouldn't be that hard to build a pretty quick circumstancial case against him judging by what he have read about him. Mix in a few conincidences, and you could really convince someone of his guilt, whether it were true or not. (just to be clear, I am not speaking to this mans guilt or innocence, mostly towards human nature) That's about right. I meant that, and also, that there are a LOT of creepy folks out there, and that they gravitate often times towards kids. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AbeFroman Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 The news reports are that this John Mark Karr admits "drugging her" and having sex with her. JonBenet's body had clear burns from a stun gun.... Why the hell would someone use a stun gun on a drugged person?! Plus, this dope's wife says he was in Alabama for Christmas in 96... I hope for the sake of the Ramsey's that this sicko isn't making a false confession. Its beginning to look more and more possible. If the DNA evidence comes back negative.... then s*** hits the fan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthSideSox72 Posted August 17, 2006 Share Posted August 17, 2006 QUOTE(AbeFroman @ Aug 17, 2006 -> 01:02 PM) The news reports are that this John Mark Karr admits "drugging her" and having sex with her. JonBenet's body had clear burns from a stun gun.... Why the hell would someone use a stun gun on a drugged person?! Plus, this dope's wife says he was in Alabama for Christmas in 96... I hope for the sake of the Ramsey's that this sicko isn't making a false confession. Its beginning to look more and more possible. If the DNA evidence comes back negative.... then s*** hits the fan The body had no signs of drugs or alcohol, per autopsy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts