CA - Child porn charges against John Mark Karr dismissed

[Leila]

SONOMA COUNTY
Judge won't unseal evidence in porn case
Shocking details might sway jurors, the bench decides

A Sonoma County judge refused to unseal incriminating evidence in a child pornography case against John Mark Karr on Tuesday, as the sheriff's department re-opened the 5-year-old investigation.

The flurry of activity in Sonoma County followed the collapse Monday of the murder case against Karr in Boulder, Colo., where investigators revealed that Karr's DNA did not match DNA found on the body of 6-year-old JonBenet Ramsey.

Karr's apparently phony confession to the 1996 slaying of JonBenet set off a worldwide media frenzy and prompted Sonoma County authorities to take another look at the 2001 child pornography charges.

Karr, who fled the Bay Area in 2001 while being prosecuted in the porn case, is expected to be brought back to Sonoma County within the next few days to face five misdemeanor counts of child pornography.

Lawyers representing The Chronicle, the Santa Rosa Press Democrat, the Associated Press and NBC challenged a judge's decision -- made as the Colorado case unfolded -- to seal search warrants, police reports and arrest warrants in the pornography case.

The argument, essentially, was that the sealed evidence, including pornographic photographs of children, is so shocking that the details would negatively impact potential Sonoma County jurors and hurt the newly reopened investigation if the material was disseminated in the media.

Judge Cerena Wong agreed despite arguments by media lawyer Rachel Matteo-Boehm that shocking material and media attention are not enough under the law to allow the sealing of documents unless there is "a probability of prejudice in the case."

Wong described the sealed evidence as "very inflammatory and highly prejudicial."

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2006/08/30/BAGM7KRRAP1.DTL

Buzz,
Thanks for the article!

 

[capps]

The charges are misdemeaners that he has already served 6 months on. I cant imagine this even going to trial. Certainly there will be a plea agreement.

Yeah,but then he skipped town,isn't there added charges for that?

 

[Buzz Mills]

Misdemeanor Offense:

A misdemeanor offense is punishable by up to one year in the county jail. Misdemeanors are only dealt with in the Municipal Court level. After successful completion of a probationary period, a misdemeanor can be expunged from your record.

The Flight From Justice was only supposed to be charged as a Misdemeanor too.

We'll have to wait and see, what the Sonoma D.A. can come up with.

We should probably, at the very least, deport him back to Alabama, or Georgia, whichever one wants him.

 

[kazzbar]

he will get 5 years parolled in 2 and a slap on the hand in California.

I want him sent back to Bangkok to stand trial for the little girl he killed.

Can you provide evidence to back up these claims?

 

[panthera]

Maybe at least they have JMK's DNA in the CODIS database now, for future reference.

Perhaps they can share Karr's DNA with Thailand, Honduras, France, Costa Rica, and anywhere else Karr was known to have spent time.

Ahhh! I get it, I think! From what I'm hearing, it seems they are trying to see if he was involved in any child molestation/child pornography crimes overseas; but those would be prosecuted in each individual country or here under that "U.S. Sexual Tourism" law?

 

[panthera]

The charges are misdemeaners that he has already served 6 months on. I cant imagine this even going to trial. Certainly there will be a plea agreement.

I feel sorry for Sonoma County on this one. What originally would've been a simple matter (misdemeanor violations) is now going to turn into an expensive and decisive matter if it goes to trial, i.e. trying to find jurors who haven't heard about the defendant, his tapes, the Ramsey allegations, etc. They may feel the need to prosecute him however, because of his notoriety and what the public has heard about him, and not just give him that 'slap on the wrist' punishment that the misdemeanor charges normally have. Yet the law that was in effect in 2001 is what they must go by.

 

[Buzz Mills]

I feel sorry for Sonoma County on this one. What originally would've been a simple matter (misdemeanor violations) is now going to turn into an expensive and decisive matter if it goes to trial, i.e. trying to find jurors who haven't heard about the defendant, his tapes, the Ramsey allegations, etc. They may feel the need to prosecute him however, because of his notoriety and what the public has heard about him, and not just give him that 'slap on the wrist' punishment that the misdemeanor charges normally have. Yet the law that was in effect in 2001 is what they must go by.

It could be that JMK will be looking for a change of venue. Everyone will want an example to be made of Karr, but in the meantime, all they have are the charges from 2001, for which he has already served six months, and an additional FFJ misdemeanor. I don't think I would be too far wrong, if I said, that in cases of this type, the perp receives 2 years probation, with visits to his probation officer required for the first year, one year counseling, and he walks.

I'll be surpprised if he is imprisoned, unless new charges come up.

He will have to register as a Sex Offender.

 

[BillyGoatGruff]

It could be that JMK will be looking for a change of venue. Everyone will want an example to be made of Karr, but in the meantime, all they have are the charges from 2001, for which he has already served six months, and an additional FFJ misdemeanor. I don't think I would be too far wrong, if I said, that in cases of this type, the perp receives 2 years probation, with visits to his probation officer required for the first year, one year counseling, and he walks.

I'll be surpprised if he is imprisoned, unless new charges come up.

He will have to register as a Sex Offender.

The fact he fled before means he will be put into prison. He's not a good candidate for probation at all.

 

[Bobbisangel]

I think that they are hoping that with his mug all over the TV for a couple weeks that some little girls will tell their parents if he messed with them or not. They are hoping to get more to keep him in prison.

In just listening to some of those tapes that he made with the professor and the woman...I think it should have been easy to see that he was full of crap.
The guy lives in some kind of a fantasy world that involves dead little girls. He even said that he wanted to have sex with Patsy and talked like him and Patsy had spent time together. He is just way out there. Those were two educated people that were exchanging emails and phone calls with him. I can't believe that they thought he was being truthful. He didn't say a word on those tapes and calls about JonBenet that hadn't been in the papers or written in a book.

Don't stone me now but I just wonder if he actually has ever touched a little girl? He was so engrossed with JonBenet and Polly Glaas and they were both dead. Not that he should ever be trusted around little girls but I am just wondering if in his world he isn't attracted to dead little girls and he is so into the fantasy that he begins to really believe that he was there and did it. He is really a warped human being. The schools have said that he said inappropriate things to little girls but what were the things that he said? I think if he had ever touched any little girl the school would have to press charges...not just cut him loose to go on to another school like they did. Maybe he wasn't at any school long enough to do more than say some not so nice things to little girls.

I'm glad that most of the media hype is over...except for Nancy Grace and she just can't seem to let it go. It just felt to me like JonBenet was re-victimized daily/nightly on TV on every single channel. Same with Polly Glaas. I know that was hard for Mark Glaas and I'm sure it was even harder for Jonbenet's family.

 

[Buzz Mills]

SF Lawyer to defend Karr in porn case

Sonoma County authorities plan to extradite former Petaluma teacher in secrecy for trial on 2001 charges

John Mark Karr has hired a San Francisco attorney to represent him in his child pornography case in Sonoma County.

While Karr has yet to be returned to Sonoma County from Boulder, Colo., his case is scheduled to be called in Superior Court on Tuesday for substitution of a new lawyer.

Rob Amparán of San Francisco had filed paperwork to take over the case from the public defender, John Abrahams said.

Amparán could not be reached for comment Friday afternoon. He has been practicing law in California and federal courts for more than a decade and formerly worked in the San Francisco Public Defender' s Office, according to his Web site.

Karr, 41, was represented by the Sonoma County public defender in 2001 after he was arrested on suspicion of possessing five images depicting children in sexual situations.

A public defender also represented his interests last week, successfully arguing against a motio n by news organizations to unseal documents police related to the case.

http://www1.pressdemocrat.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060902/NEWS/609020335

 

[Buzz Mills]

Sonoma County takes new look at Karr case

SANTA ROSA - Sonoma County authorities said Tuesday they're currently investigating John Mark Karr and will re-examine his computer for images of child pornography, according to a court hearing Tuesday.

A prosecutor and a lawyer for the sheriff's department called the Karr investigation ''ongoing,'' and said deputies have asked for a new warrant to search Karr's hard drive because technology has advanced in the five years since the original probe.

It was unclear whether investigators still had Karr's computer or whether the warrant had been granted or executed.

Lawyers refused to answer questions after the hearing in Sonoma County Superior Court.

Judge Cerena Wong also refused Tuesday to unseal documents connected to Karr's arrest in Petaluma in 2001.

''He still is the defendant, armed with his constitutional right to a presumption of innocence and his right to a fair trial,'' she said. ''These important rights could be prejudiced if these records were unsealed.''

http://www.montereyherald.com/mld/m...3.htm?source=rss&channel=montereyherald_state

 

[Buzz Mills]

Karr will eventually appear in Sonoma County on a warrant for his arrest that was issued when he failed to make a court appearance in December 2001. Further court dates will then be set, Passalacqua said.

"The main purpose of the extradition is the fact that he has to register as a sex offender,'' Passalacqua said. Karr faces a year in the county jail if he is convicted of each of the five misdemeanor charges, but Passalacqua said there will likely be defense arguments for a lesser sentence because the alleged offenses are believed to have occurred on the same date.

Chief Deputy District Attorney Joan Risse will handle the prosecution, Passalacqua said.

http://www.sanfranciscosentinel.com/news_in_brief/jonbenet_ramsey_060829.shtml


The judge made her ruling after viewing the documents during a closed hearing with Sgt. Robert Giordano of the Sonoma County Sheriff's Department and Deputy County Counsel Anne Keck.
It was disclosed during the court hearing that the Sheriff's Department has re-opened its investigation of Karr on the pornography charges.
Giordano would not comment on the scope of the re-opened investigation. Chief Deputy District Attorney Joan Risse said new technology has allowed a more thorough examination of Karr's computer on which the pornography was allegedly found five years ago.

http://www.kfty.com/news/local/story.aspx?content_id=AF406ADC-30C8-4E59-91A2-DC39DC4BBDC7


2001 – April 13: Karr was arrested, and jailed, on five misdemeanor counts of possession of child pornography, the Sonoma County sheriff's office said

2001 - - April 17: Karr pleaded 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, but was ordered to report to a probation officer and avoid child pornography, children and places where children congregate, such as schools, beaches and parks. 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. Divorce is finalized.

2001 – December: A warrant was issued for Karr's arrest after authorities said he violated the terms of his supervised release.

 

[panthera]

It could be that JMK will be looking for a change of venue. Everyone will want an example to be made of Karr, but in the meantime, all they have are the charges from 2001, for which he has already served six months, and an additional FFJ misdemeanor. I don't think I would be too far wrong, if I said, that in cases of this type, the perp receives 2 years probation, with visits to his probation officer required for the first year, one year counseling, and he walks.

I'll be surpprised if he is imprisoned, unless new charges come up.

He will have to register as a Sex Offender.

I agree.

Those misdemeanor charges, from what I' ve read on the Penal Code, also have the option of a $2,500. fine for each offense in lieu of/in addition to the jail time of up to one year on each count.

California now must prosecute the case, since he has been captured, however they didn't seek international extradition since they are misdemeanor violations.

 

[panthera]

SF Lawyer to defend Karr in porn case

Sonoma County authorities plan to extradite former Petaluma teacher in secrecy for trial on 2001 charges

John Mark Karr has hired a San Francisco attorney to represent him in his child pornography case in Sonoma County.

While Karr has yet to be returned to Sonoma County from Boulder, Colo., his case is scheduled to be called in Superior Court on Tuesday for substitution of a new lawyer.

Thankfully we won't have to see Harmon & VanZant!!!
:clap:

 

[panthera]

What to do about John Mark Karr

http://www.eagletribune.com/opinion/local_story_243095317

 

[Buzz Mills]

Robert M. Amparan, San Francisco attorney, is set to appear Tuesday in Sonoma County Superior Court to officially take over Karr's defense from the public defender's office, which has represented Karr in the case since it was first brought in 2001.

Chief Deputy District Attorney Joan Risse will handle the prosecution.

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

 

[LaMer]

I think that they are hoping that with his mug all over the TV for a couple weeks that some little girls will tell their parents if he messed with them or not. They are hoping to get more to keep him in prison.

In just listening to some of those tapes that he made with the professor and the woman...I think it should have been easy to see that he was full of crap.
The guy lives in some kind of a fantasy world that involves dead little girls. He even said that he wanted to have sex with Patsy and talked like him and Patsy had spent time together. He is just way out there. Those were two educated people that were exchanging emails and phone calls with him. I can't believe that they thought he was being truthful. He didn't say a word on those tapes and calls about JonBenet that hadn't been in the papers or written in a book.

Don't stone me now but I just wonder if he actually has ever touched a little girl? He was so engrossed with JonBenet and Polly Glaas and they were both dead. Not that he should ever be trusted around little girls but I am just wondering if in his world he isn't attracted to dead little girls and he is so into the fantasy that he begins to really believe that he was there and did it. He is really a warped human being. The schools have said that he said inappropriate things to little girls but what were the things that he said? I think if he had ever touched any little girl the school would have to press charges...not just cut him loose to go on to another school like they did. Maybe he wasn't at any school long enough to do more than say some not so nice things to little girls.

I'm glad that most of the media hype is over...except for Nancy Grace and she just can't seem to let it go. It just felt to me like JonBenet was re-victimized daily/nightly on TV on every single channel. Same with Polly Glaas. I know that was hard for Mark Glaas and I'm sure it was even harder for Jonbenet's family.

Bobbiangel, No stones coming from me. I have wondered along the same lines with regard to Karr ever touching a little girl or was all this a fantasy, wanna be. Let's pray, there were never any children vicitmized by him physcially, other than saying some off handed remarks, even then tho, he could have hurt them, depending on what he was talking about. Thank God there were some children who were wise and brave enough to report his behavior to their parents, and the parents were vigilant enough to report it.

I have trouble with no reports being made per his behavior, wherein there wasn't a system in place for other school districts, in state and out of state to be aware of his behavior. It takes more than one village to care for our children.

 

[LaMer]

Robert M. AmparDan, San Francisco attorney, is set to appear Tuesday in Sonoma County Superior Court to officially take over Karr's defense from the public defender's office, which has represented Karr in the case since it was first brought in 2001.

Chief Deputy District Attorney Joan Risse will handle the prosecution.

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/merc...s/california/northern_california/15427430.htm

Amparan, a one-time San Francisco public defender, said he did not know when Karr was scheduled to arrive. Whatever the status of Karr's whereabouts, he would not likely be present at the Tuesday hearing, Amparan said.

O well! If this is true, Amparan's schedule must be booked.

 

[i.b.nora]

Amparan, a one-time San Francisco public defender, said he did not know when Karr was scheduled to arrive. Whatever the status of Karr's whereabouts, he would not likely be present at the Tuesday hearing, Amparan said.

If this is true, Amparan's schedule must be booked.

I think it means that Amparan will be at the hearing but that it is unlikely that Karr would be at the hearing, even if he is in California by then.

 

[panthera]

I think it means that Amparan will be at the hearing but that it is unlikely that Karr would be at the hearing, even if he is in California by then.

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