You can read through this, it is the arrest warrant that resulted in Karr being returned to the USA. (It contains excerpts from some of the emails to Michael Tracey.)
(Warning, the following is a graphic document.)
http://i.cdn.turner.com/trutv/thesmo...d/johnkarr.pdf
He was brought back solely in an effort by Mary Lacy to pin the death of JBR on anyone with a pulse that wasnt a Ramsey.
It was a completely baseless arrest. Nothing he said with respect to case facts was unique or new, it was all from information that was openly available in the public domain. Interspersed with that were the sick fantasies of a twisted pedophile mind. Despite the fact that Karr mentioned things that were completely untrue with respect to the crime, his confession was deemed by Lacy to have merit.
Consider the following example:
Karr added he placed underwear or "knickers" onto JonBenet that he brought with him. The underwear brought by Karr was several sizes too large for JonBenet.
http://i.cdn.turner.com/trutv/thesmo...d/johnkarr.pdf
This is simply a blatant lie. There is no doubt, whatsoever, that the panties that JBR was found in were panties that were purchased by Patsy Ramsey and not brought into the home by an outside party.
Q. (By Mr. Levin) Well, let's start with what - I will make it very simple for you, Mrs. Ramsey. What information are you in possession of or what do you know about the underwear that your daughter was wearing at the time she was found murdered?
A. I have heard that she had on a pair of Bloomi's that said Wednesday on them.
Q. The underwear that she was wearing, that is Bloomi's panties, do you know where they come from as far as what store?
A. Bloomingdales in New York.
Q. Who purchased those?
A. I did.
Q. Do you recall when you purchased them?
A. It was, I think, November of '96.
Q. (By Mr. Morrissey) And you understand the reason we are asking this, we want to make sure that this intruder did not bring these panties with him, this was something
A. Right.
Q. - that was in the house.
A. Yes.
Q. And we are clear that, as far as you know, that is something that was in this house?
A. Yes.
Q. -- that belonged to your daughter, these panties?
A. Correct.
Patsy Ramsey interview August 28, 2000
Moreover, it could not be shown that Karr was in Boulder, and ultimately DNA testing eliminated him.
While I dont believe the DNA in the JonBenet case is relevant, the Karr situation is profoundly different, and DNA evidence can be used to exclude Karr and expose him as a liar.
Not that I usually ever agree with what Lacy has to say, but she makes a valid point here:
Mary Lacy: So when you say was it the DNA, the lynchpin? It was based on his story. The DNA could be an artifact. It isnt necessarily the killers. In all theres a probability that its the killers, but it could be something else. But the way he (Karr) told the story, it had to be his and its not. So once that came back as not a match, he is not the killer.
Mary Lacy Press Conference Regarding John Mark Karr - 8/29/06
This is the way he told the story: (My apologies to everyone for giving this pervert any degree of attention.)
He kissed the child's body and massaged her feet. DAXIS performed oral sex on JonBenet Ramsey.
Arrest affidavit 8/15/06
http://i.cdn.turner.com/trutv/thesmo...d/johnkarr.pdf
Saliva left as a consequence of his alleged sex act would have left his DNA profile behind. What Karr failed to realize by being so fixated on his sick fantasies is that this little detail painted him into a corner. There is simply no way that Karrs DNA profile would not have been found if he did what he claimed. Not only were the bloodstains from JonBenets panties tested, multiple swabs were taken from the pelvic region of JonBenet. Where is Karrs DNA? Its not there because he was not there. Being there in imagination only doesnt count.
