Pictures of the Karr Family Christmas of 1996 Have Been Found

[newtv]

I have to say,this is the first case I have ever followed where a perp is admitting he's guilty,and were trying to prove he's not. It's usually the other way around. LOL!

I actually wish I had the energy to point that out in a big way..the ramseys who were never arrested are "guilty", and a creep with a million reasons to be under this scrutiny is having excuses made for him and everything viewed from a place that he did not do it-cuz the ramseys did..
it is bizzarre..

 

[T Broodwater]

I think at least the family seeing the pictures will help them to recall if he was there. PIctures of surroundings will remind them if there was anything odd that went on that day or night.Pictures should jog everyone's memories so they can be certain.

This is still helpful, IMO

I wonder if they can account for who took the pictures?

I was thinking the same thing. In fact by the time I looked at a few photos I'd recall what went on that Christmas.

The fact that he's not in any yet has to be giving them all quite a chill!

 

[HollywoodBound]

If the pictures are of the family at the grandparents I wonder if he's going to end up with 2 more alibis...the 2 grandparents. I wonder if they're still living. Crazy, I'm thinking of alibis and this guy is insisting he was in CO.

 

[JBean]

I was thinking the same thing. In fact by the time I looked at a few photos I'd recall what went on that Christmas.

The fact that he's not in any yet has to be giving them all quite a chill!

I'm never in any of our pictures..I will have to make a point of getting in some in the future. never know when I might need an alibi.

 

[close_enough]

Does anyone think they already know if the DNA is a match from the Thai sample they took (days ago)? If you think they do know can anyone draw a conclusion on whether or not it matches based on the trip to see the ex for pictures? I'm just trying to figure, would a match make them go there to get pictures or would a non match.

i don't know...one would think they'd already know, if the sample was taken for an immediate test????....why would you make a trip for the pictures, if the DNA isn't a match?...is that what you mean??

 

[ketel0ne]

Is this the only Christmas where he is *not* in a photo? Was he in all the pics at Christmas they had prior to 1996?

 

[Chrishope]

Well if they cant connect JMK, and charge him with anything, it might be nice if they can find charges for Tracy for the wild goose chase.

I don't know why they even listen to him.

 

[HollywoodBound]

i don't know...one would think they'd already know, if the sample was taken for an immediate test????....why would you make a trip for the pictures, if the DNA isn't a match?...is that what you mean??

I guess it can go both ways. If it's a match they need to collect other evidence to create a case. The ex having no pics of him would be evidence. If it doesn't match the DNA still could be from somewhere else (not Karr) but that doesn't mean he didn't commit the crime, so they still might go for the pics.

 

[capps]

So I'm thinking the burden of proof is not on the ex wife,or the DA,the burden of proof is on Karr,since he is the one insisting "he was with JonBenet when she died."

I hope he can prove it,to give the Ramsey's the peace they deserve.

 

[dragonfly707]

I don't know why they even listen to him.

Welcome to Websleuths Chrishope.

 

[close_enough]

I may be in the minority here, but my firm belief is that if the legal system crosses or intersects your 'normal' life, you'd BETTER have a lawyer. HOW many innocent people have been exonerated by DNA in the last 10 years???? Do YOU want to be the NEXT ONE who is wrongly convicted???? Get a lawyer, friends. Get a lawyer. Sooner better than later.

no, i don't think you're in the minority...i'm learning that there's a lot of folks that have to hire lawyers..

 

[tybee204]

Maybe the rush was because they had the possible sex change. How would you track someone after they have a sex change?

His passport and visa would continue to be under John Mark Karr.

 

[Chrishope]

Welcome to Websleuths Chrishope.

Thanks dragonfly.

I may as well state that I lean to the RDI theory. I don't reject IDI completely, but it doesn't seem compelling to me.

So now, some are advancing the theory that JMK spent X-mass day with the family in Ala. (or GA) then X-Mass night, or early the morning of the 26th, the unemployed teacher spent his last few bucks flying to Boulder, waited all day for the Ramseys to go out at 4 or 4:30, then broke in the house, waited several hours, killed JBR in the basement after writing a ransom note, then flew back home.

What did he tell his wife after arriving home late on the 26th? "Oh, I couldn't sleep so I went for a long drive" ?

 

[close_enough]

I guess it can go both ways. If it's a match they need to collect other evidence to create a case. The ex having no pics of him would be evidence. If it doesn't match the DNA still could be from somewhere else (not Karr) but that doesn't mean he didn't commit the crime, so they still might go for the pics.

hmmm, i see what you're saying now..

 

[islanders]

I read somewhere that JMK was an original suspect until the wife claimed he was with her that Christmas morning.

Has anyone confirmed the first time she provided this alibi?

Also, her giving pics to the police without him there is leaving the door open for her own defense, not providing much of an alibi.

 

[Rachael]

I'm never in any of our pictures..I will have to make a point of getting in some in the future. never know when I might need an alibi.

I am not in many either JB, because I am usually the one taking them. :doh:

 

[close_enough]

I have to say,this is the first case I have ever followed where a perp is admitting he's guilty,and were trying to prove he's not. It's usually the other way around. LOL!

lol...first for me too...

 

[otto]

I totally agree. And if finding thse photos is enough to jog her recall of 1996, she is giving him an alibi. It's the alibi that counts, in my opinion, not the photos.

Even if photos are found, how do you prove they were taken in 1996? Even if time stamped, how do you know the time stamp is accurate? I have had my camera's time stamp programmed wrong! I have photos from my 3rd child's birth that say 1994, but it was 1996.

In 1996, people were using single reflex cameras with film. The pictures would be preserved on negatives with all the other pictures taken at the same time. With those reference points, it should be possible to verify when the photos were taken.

 

[otto]

I'm sorry but, these kids were YOUNG. Someone posted 5, 4 and 3. No one can make me believe that they remember a Christmas from 10 years ago. I'm sorry I just don't believe it.

Neither do I. I can't remember what I did on Christmas 2 years ago let alone 10.

I've almost finished reading the whole thread and although pictures of the 96 Christmas may have been found, it's completely meaningless if John is not in the pictures. Christmas pictures usually include opening presents all the way up to dinner in the evening and there have to be some pictures of John at some point during the day if he was there.

 

[Chrishope]

I have a large family and we gather at Mom's house for Christmass. Mom takes lots of pics, but one year managed to miss me altogether. And I'm never the photographer.