CA - Child 🤬🤬🤬🤬 charges against John Mark Karr dismissed

[i.b.nora]

Doesn't he have to be returned to California this coming week?

"Boulder and Sonoma authorities have not said when Karr would return to California. For now, the 41-year-old teacher is being held in the Boulder jail awaiting extradition, which must occur by Sept. 13."

 

[panthera]

"Boulder and Sonoma authorities have not said when Karr would return to California. For now, the 41-year-old teacher is being held in the Boulder jail awaiting extradition, which must occur by Sept. 13."

Thank you ~ I couldn't remember the exact date, and thought it was the by the end of this coming week!

 

[Buzz Mills]

Dept. of Justice Link

See especially the second to last paragraph - if JMK did anything in Thailand to a child and it can be proven, it seems to me he could face 30 years in prison in the US, according to this law.

It doesn't even seem to require that he went to Thailand for that express purpose, at least as I am reading it, anyway.

Also, from the same site, I wonder if they could charge him with this - if he has pornogrpahy on his harddrive and he brought it back with him from Thailand, could it not be construed as importing? It certainly seems to carry a much more hefty penalty than the 1 year less time served he seems likely to receive for his California charges...

Dept. of Justice Link

18 U.S.C. §§ 2421-2423 also cover interstate and international sex trafficking, but generally require that actual travel across a state or international boundary or other interstate activity has taken place. Some of the key provisions that hold the traffickers accountable are: 18 U.S.C. § 2421, which prohibits transporting a person across state or international boundaries for the purposes of prostitution or other unlawful sexual activity and carries a 10 year maximum sentence; 18 U.S.C. § 2422(a), which prohibits enticing or coercing a person to travel across a state or international boundary in order to engage in prostitution or other unlawful sexual activity and carries a 20 year maximum sentence; 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b), which prohibits using the mail or other interstate communications such as the telephone or the Internet to entice or coerce a person under 18 to engage in prostitution or other unlawful sexual activity and carries a 5 year minimum sentence and a 30 year maximum sentence; and 18 U.S.C. § 2423(a), which prohibits transporting a person under 18 across state or international boundaries for the purposes of prostitution or other unlawful sexual activity and carries a 5 year minimum, 30 year maximum penalty.

Those who profit from victimizing children and adults in the sex trade are only one half of the problem. The other half are those who patronize this exploitive industry. Federal statutes hold those who travel to do so, and those who benefit from arranging that travel, accountable. For example, 18 U.S.C. § 2423(b) prohibits traveling across state lines or into the United States for the purpose of engaging in any illicit sexual conduct (which includes any commercial sex act with a person under 18) and carries a 30 year maximum sentence, while 18 U.S.C. § 2423(c) prohibits an American citizen or national engaging in illicit sexual conduct outside the United States and carries a 30 year maximum sentence. 18 U.S.C. § 2423(c) does not require that the citizen have traveled outside the country with the purpose of engaging in illicit sexual conduct in a foreign country. 18 U.S.C. § 2423(d) prohibits arranging or facilitating, for financial gain, another person's travel to engage in illicit sexual conduct and carries a 30 year maximum sentence.

http://www.usdoj.gov/criminal/ceos/trafficking.html

 

[Buzz Mills]

California Penal Code Section 311.11

Karr committed five violations of penal code section 311.11, possession of child .

Karr was arrested April 13, 2001 and released October 5, 2001

(a) Every person who knowingly possesses or controls any matter, representation of information, data, or image, including, but not limited to, any film, filmstrip, photograph, negative, slide, photocopy, videotape, video laser disc, computer hardware, computer software, computer floppy disc, data storage media, CD-ROM, or computer-generated equipment or any other computer-generated image that contains or incorporates in any manner, any film or filmstrip, the production of which involves the use of a person under the age of 18 years, knowing that the matter depicts a person under the age of 18 years personally engaging in or simulating sexual conduct, as defined in subdivision (d) of Section 311.4, is guilty of a public offense and shall be punished by imprisonment in the county jail for up to one year, or by a fine not exceeding two thousand five hundred dollars ($2,500), or by both the fine and imprisonment.

(b) If a person has been previously convicted of a violation of this section, or of a violation of subdivision (b) of Section 311.2, or subdivision (b) of Section 311.4, he or she is guilty of a felony and shall be punished by imprisonment for two, four, or six years.

(c) It is not necessary to prove that the matter is obscene in order to establish a violation of this section.

(d) This section does not apply to drawings, figurines, statues, or any film rated by the Motion Picture Association of America, nor does it apply to live or recorded telephone messages when transmitted, disseminated, or distributed as part of a commercial transaction.

 

[Buzz Mills]

Karr's lawyer demands speedy trial on child charges


SANTA ROSA, Calif. - John Mark Karr's new lawyer asked a Sonoma County judge on Tuesday to hear his client's case on child charges as soon as possible. San Francisco attorney Robert M. Amparan told Sonoma County Superior Court Judge Cerena Wong that Karr was asserting his right to a speedy trial, meaning the case would have to be heard within 30 days.

Karr was cleared last week in the 1996 murder of JonBenet Ramsey and remained jailed in Boulder, Colo. on Tuesday awaiting extradition to California. A Boulder judge ruled last week that authorities had until September 13 to return Karr to Sonoma County. "We obviously don't want him in custody," Amparan said after the hearing. "We will obviously do what we can to change that situation."

Amparan officially took over Karr's defense from the county's public defender during the Tuesday morning hearing. He said the decision to seek a speedy trial was made in hopes of bringing the case to a quick resolution and setting Karr free.

Five misdemeanor counts of child possession have been pending against Karr in Sonoma since his arrest in April 2001, when authorities seized Karr's computer and alleged that the hard drive contained five sexually oriented images of children. Karr pleaded not guilty to all counts and was jailed for six months, but fled the country before he could be tried. Prosecutors decided to pursue the charges after Karr surfaced last month as a suspect in JonBenet's murder.

During preliminary hearings in 2001, Karr's public defenders waived his right to a speedy trial as they tried to get a judge to invalidate the search warrant that allowed Sonoma County sheriff's deputies to enter Karr's home and seize his computer.

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/merc...s/california/northern_california/15444818.htm

 

[panthera]

Dept. of Justice Link

18 U.S.C. §§ 2421-2423 also cover interstate and international sex trafficking, but generally require that actual travel across a state or international boundary or other interstate activity has taken place. Some of the key provisions that hold the traffickers accountable are: 18 U.S.C. § 2421, which prohibits transporting a person across state or international boundaries for the purposes of prostitution or other unlawful sexual activity and carries a 10 year maximum sentence; 18 U.S.C. § 2422(a), which prohibits enticing or coercing a person to travel across a state or international boundary in order to engage in prostitution or other unlawful sexual activity and carries a 20 year maximum sentence; 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b), which prohibits using the mail or other interstate communications such as the telephone or the Internet to entice or coerce a person under 18 to engage in prostitution or other unlawful sexual activity and carries a 5 year minimum sentence and a 30 year maximum sentence; and 18 U.S.C. § 2423(a), which prohibits transporting a person under 18 across state or international boundaries for the purposes of prostitution or other unlawful sexual activity and carries a 5 year minimum, 30 year maximum penalty.

So, he could be prosecuted for having child on his computer hard-drive, even though he was using the computer in Thailand and had no intent to return to the U.S. before he was brought back here by Law Enforcement? I'm still not clear on this law. Sorry!

 

[BillyGoatGruff]

So, he could be prosecuted for having child on his computer hard-drive, even though he was using the computer in Thailand and had no intent to return to the U.S. before he was brought back here by Law Enforcement? I'm still not clear on this law. Sorry!

He never surrendered his American citizenship, which means he is still bound by US law even when in other countries where illegal activitiy IS legal (hence the sex tourism and child that he engaged in Thailand is punishabe by our laws, if not theirs). Its a thorny legal decision, though.

 

[panthera]

He never surrendered his American citizenship, which means he is still bound by US law even when in other countries where illegal activitiy IS legal (hence the sex tourism and child that he engaged in Thailand is punishabe by our laws, if not theirs). Its a thorny legal decision, though.

While I think this is a good law ~ it sounds like something that, since it is new, could be challenged by a good defense attorney.
:waitasec:

 

[Buzz Mills]

So, he could be prosecuted for having child on his computer hard-drive, even though he was using the computer in Thailand and had no intent to return to the U.S. before he was brought back here by Law Enforcement? I'm still not clear on this law. Sorry!

Karr hasn't been charged with anything having to do with his computer that was confiscated in Thailand, but I would think they would investigate its contents.

 

[panthera]

Karr hasn't been charged with anything having to do with his computer that was confiscated in Thailand, but I would think they would investigate its contents.

I had heard about this on one of the cable news programs and was trying to understand this international law. Thanks so much for clarifying this issue!

 

[BillyGoatGruff]

Karr hasn't been charged with anything having to do with his computer that was confiscated in Thailand, but I would think they would investigate its contents.

Since part of his original probation deal was that he could not own a computer or have access to the internet that gives them lee-way to investigate.

 

[GonzoReiter]

Karr hasn't been charged with anything having to do with his computer that was confiscated in Thailand, but I would think they would investigate its contents.

I thought you might get a kick of out of this one (for your collection)

 

[i.b.nora]

Karr's lawyer demands speedy trial on child charges
By MARCUS WOHLSEN, Associated Press Writer
Tuesday, September 5, 2006
(09-05) 12:45 PDT Santa Rosa, Calif. (AP) --

"John Mark Karr's new lawyer asked a Sonoma County judge on Tuesday to hear his client's case on child charges as soon as possible.

San Francisco attorney Robert M. Amparan told Sonoma County Superior Court Judge Cerena Wong that Karr was asserting his right to a speedy trial, meaning the case would have to be heard within 30 days."

"Amparan said authorities had given him no indication of when Karr would arrive in Sonoma. Authorities in Boulder and Sonoma County said they would not reveal when they expected the transfer to take place.

Amparan said Karr's lawyers in Boulder contacted him last week and asked him to represent Karr. He said he spoke with his new client, but would not describe the conversation."

more...

 

[panthera]

i.b. nora ~ Thanks for posting that. Quite a different tactic than when he originally faced the charges in 2001. Maybe the attorney is afraid of what else he could be charged with, or new evidence added to the original charges? I have heard that the computer could be analyzed more scientifically now than it was five years ago.

 

[Buzz Mills]

It is my understanding that John Mark Karr insinuated that he was set-up by Wendy Hutchens (friend/advocate of Richard Allan Davis) on the child charges. Now that Karr has substantial legal representation in the person of Attorney Robert Amperan I am wondering if more will come to light on this insinuation.

Hutchens worked as an informant for Sonoma County Sheriff's Detective Beau Martin, wearing a wire and taping conversations and saving e-mail messages from Karr. The material she gathered was the basis for a search warrant that investigators say resulted in the discovery of child in Karr's computer.


2001 – early in the year, John Mark Karr contacted Wendy Hutchens re: Richard Allan Davis (murdered Polly Klaas in October, 1993, now on Death Row in San Quentin, awaiting execution).

2001 - April 3, Sonoma County Sheriff’s deputies seized a computer at Karr’s Petaluma home containing five pornographic images of children.

2001 – April 13: Karr was arrested, and jailed, on five misdemeanor charges of possession of child , and was booked into Sonoma County Jail on $100,000 bail.

2001 - - April 17: Karr plead not guilty to the charges, according to court documents

2001 – April 19, Karr's wife Lara filed for divorce

2001 – Oct. 5: After a series of court hearings, Karr was released from jail, without bail, but was ordered to report to a probation officer and avoid child , children and places where children congregate, such as schools, beaches and parks. The judge ordered Karr to stay away from Wendy Hutchens in a 2001 court order setting conditions for release from a Sonoma County jail after being held for six months on the child charges. The court records in the case were sealed.

2001 – November: A judge issues a restraining order, compelling Karr to stay 100 yards away from his wife and three children for three years. The divorce is finalized.

2001 – December: A warrant was issued for Karr's arrest after authorities said he violated the terms of his supervised release by failing to appear for a court hearing.

 

[panthera]

It is my understanding that John Mark Karr insinuated that he was set-up by Wendy Hutchens (friend/advocate of Richard Allan Davis) on the child charges. Now that Karr has substantial legal representation in the person of Attorney Robert Amperan I am wondering if more will come to light on this insinuation.

2001 – early in the year, John Mark Karr contacted Wendy Hutchens re: Richard Allan Davis (murdered Polly Klaas in October, 1993, now on Death Row in San Quentin, awaiting execution).

2001 - April 3, Sonoma County Sheriff’s deputies seized a computer at Karr’s Petaluma home containing five pornographic images of children.

2001 – April 13: Karr was arrested, and jailed, on five misdemeanor charges of possession of child , and was booked into Sonoma County Jail on $100,000 bail.

2001 - - April 17: Karr plead not guilty to the charges, according to court documents

2001 – April 19, Karr's wife Lara filed for divorce

2001 – Oct. 5: After a series of court hearings, Karr was released from jail, without bail, but was ordered to report to a probation officer and avoid child , children and places where children congregate, such as schools, beaches and parks. The judge ordered Karr to stay away from Wendy Hutchens in a 2001 court order setting conditions for release from a Sonoma County jail after being held for six months on the child charges. The court records in the case were sealed.

2001 – November: A judge issues a restraining order, compelling Karr to stay 100 yards away from his wife and three children for three years. The divorce is finalized.

2001 – December: A warrant was issued for Karr's arrest after authorities said he violated the terms of his supervised release by failing to appear for a court hearing.

While I am in no way defending JMK ~ but ~ looking at that timeline makes me wonder specifically what the images were on the computer, i.e. something that Hutchens sent him in e-mail? Something that Hutchens gave him the link to download? Or are these five images he just found on his own and then saved? I also think it's rather ironic that 6 days after his arrest, his wife is filing for divorce, and then later on getting a three year restraining order. If there was no child molestation going on in their home, it's almost as if that was her perfect excuse to get an uncontested divorce and keep him away from their kids.

 

[Buzz Mills]

SF attorneys take over defending Karr
Rob Amparán, an associate of Tony Serra, asserts right to trial within 30-day time period

John Mark Karr, the former suspect in the JonBenet Ramsey murder, got a trio of new lawyers Tuesday to fight his five-year-old child case in Sonoma County.

Karr, 41, remains in a Colorado jail pending extradition to Santa Rosa by Sept. 13. Citing security and publicity concerns, authorities have refused to say when Karr would be transported.

During a brief hearing Tuesday morning, San Francisco attorney Rob Amparán officially took over Karr's case from the Sonoma C ounty public defender. He and two associates will defend Karr on the misdemeanor charges.

Amparán, a former San Francisco public defender, works with a group of attorneys that includes famed civil rights lawyer Tony Serra, who defended Huey Newton of the Black Panthers, vigilante mom Ellie Nesler, Earth First activist Judy Bari and Eugene "Bear" Lincoln, a Round Valley Indian accused of gunning down a Mendocino County sheriff's deputy in a shootout that left two people dead.

Amparán said Karr's Colorado defense team suggested Serra handle the Sonoma County case. But he took it over because Serra's license to practice law is suspended following a misdemeanor tax evasion conviction.

Amparán said it was premature to discuss any additional aspects of Karr's defense, including whether he would seek to unseal police documents related to Karr's arrest or move for a change of venue for his well-known client.

Despite his client's infamous and bizarre confession in the Ramsey case, Amparán said he will vigorously defend him against the local charges.

"We think Mr. Karr deserves some protection and we're happy to provide that," he said.

Because he is charged with misdemeanors, Karr has a right to bail unless a judge determines he is a flight risk or a danger to the community, Amparán said. While he has no criminal history, Karr failed to appear in 2001.

Amparán declined to say whether he is taking the high-profile case without a fee.

http://www1.pressdemocrat.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060906/NEWS/609060326

 

[Buzz Mills]

While I am in no way defending JMK ~ but ~ looking at that timeline makes me wonder specifically what the images were on the computer, i.e. something that Hutchens sent him in e-mail? Something that Hutchens gave him the link to download? Or are these five images he just found on his own and then saved? I also think it's rather ironic that 6 days after his arrest, his wife is filing for divorce, and then later on getting a three year restraining order. If there was no child molestation going on in their home, it's almost as if that was her perfect excuse to get an uncontested divorce and keep him away from their kids.

As sensitive as Petaluma was to the 1993 Polly Klaas murder, and Richard Allan Davis's nationally covered trial, the exposure of substitute teacher John Mark Karr's fascination with Polly's murder, so much so that he had moved his family to Petaluma from Alabama, had to really have an effect on the townspeople, and thus a horrendous effect on Lara Karr, and her 8,9, and 11 year old, sons, let alone Lara's finding out that her husband was not only a pedophile, but a pedophile fascinated with dead little girls. Can you imagine what that must have been like at the time.

 

[dragonfly707]

http://www1.pressdemocrat.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060909/NEWS/609090333/1033/NEWS01



Two Sonoma County sheriff's deputies traveled to Colorado this week to extradite John Mark Karr, but returned empty-handed, sources in both states confirmed Friday.

Sheriff Bill Cogbill would not discuss the details of the trip or why deputies left Boulder without bringing back the high-profile defendant on a local warrant for failing to appear at a 2001 hearing on charges of possessing child .

But he alluded to larger issues in the case that could affect Sonoma County's five-count misdemeanor prosecution of the former Petaluma substitute teacher who famously confessed, apparently falsely, to the 1996 JonBenet Ramsey slaying .

"The dynamics evolve day to day," Cogbill said, adding to the mystery surrounding an already bizarre case. "There are huge dynamics going on that could change the whole course of this." He said he would be able to talk more freely early next week.

"There is a whole other dimension to this that I'll probably be able to talk about later, but not today," he said.

Cogbill said it is still the intention of local authorities to return Karr, 41, to Sonoma County to face charges.

"That could change," he added.

 

[scandi]

Hi Dragonfly,

Could it be that Boulder is going to charge him with giving them a false confession? I wonder if that is even a charge and if so, how serious it is. It has to be worthy of keeping him from being prosecuted by Sonoma County at this time,right?

Hey- maybe he has given them info who really killed JB. He might know due to any dealings he might have had with other pervy pedos! Maybe they have been checking that out and it's panning out. Remember we heard nothing on the Santa Bear the DA took posession of right before this thing blew up. Maybe they got DNA off of it!!!

Always thinking [coloor=crimson]Scandi[/color]