I think I need to point out the fact.....

  • #21
calus_3 said:
Isn't it enough that the people prosecuting this case have come out and said, "He has information that only the killer and investigators would know about the condition of the body".

Cal

Here's a little fact which may explain how he knows "details of the condition of the body" that "only" the killer would know (not).

Michael Tracey
Stephen Mills
Lou Smitt and
Tom Bennet all had that same information and corresponded with each other on a regular basis.

Karr was in contact with everyone he could be over the years that is directly connected to this case including Don & Nedra Paugh (JonBenet's paternal grandparents).
 
  • #22
Pharlap said:
Think all are getting ahead of ourselfs....all the threads.

He has to be on USA ground.
DNA has to be linked.
Maybe there were 2 people, we don't know.
Maybe someone leaked info to him from outside sorce....
The x-wife has to produce pictures from 1996.

After all that is done, some CORRECT facts in hand, all of us can go on...:truce:

Given recent events, unless exonerating evidence proves Karr was not in Boulder on 12/25, 2006, his confession and emerging profile stands to almost assuredly convict him.

If the D.A. can prove Karr's handwriting matches the ransom note or if they can produce physical evidence (dna, gas receipts, tickets, invoices, etc.) that corroborates Karr placing himself at the scene of the crime, Karr's best hope is a plea deal.
 
  • #23
calus_3 said:
Just because YOU WEREN'T ALERTED to the fact that something was redacted from the autopsy report, doesn't mean that it couldn't be so.

Cal
Per a judge's order the autopsy was released in it's entirety.
Meyer's personal notes were not part of the report and have never been publically released. Photo's of JonBenet's autopsy were thrown in the trash, her autopsy report stolen from the morgue by an attendant looking to cash in, who knows if this guy got something he shouldn't have by way of a third party or not?

Meyer and his assistant were not the only ones in attendance during the autopsy...

Linda Arndt was there and is currently writing a book about the experience, who knows if she was in contact with Karr or not and told him what she saw? Or Trujillo who was also there? We just don't know who all this guy was in contact with that could have told him something about the body that wasn't revealed. Maybe it was something relatively simple or nondescript that nobody ever felt was worth mentioning.

We will just have to wait and see, but I have already been assured by a source that this guy never even so much as saw JonBenet while she was alive. He only became infatuated after she became national news due to her death.
 
  • #24
Seeker said:
SNIP

Linda Arndt was there and is currently writing a book

SNIP


Linda Arndt (paraphrasing): I looked into John Ramsey's eyes and knew he did it. (snicker)

If she wants to now profit off of Jon Benet's death by selling her babbling pablum to idiots, you can color me unsurprised.
 
  • #25
"Except the garrote wasn't placed on her neck...but made on it. Note her hair entwined in the knot"

Along with Patsy's fibers!

There are a lot of questions about what he knows and how he might know it.
 
  • #26
Seeker said:
but I have already been assured by a source that this guy never even so much as saw JonBenet while she was alive. He only became infatuated after she became national news due to her death.
Just doesn't make sense. I am swaying from side to side on this one. But they musta had SOMETHING SOLID to do all of this, IMO. I am understanding they have been investigating this guy for months. I can not for one second believe that haven't throughly investigated how he knows/knew Ramsey's/JonBenet, and can not believe for one second that they haven't already investigated where he was on Christmas, yada yada yada. Wouldn't ya think? I mean that would be the first things to do, see if he knows them, where was he on Christmas. What the hell have they been investigating for these months???

I just don't understand, could the keystone cops/DA office be THIS stupid?????
 
  • #27
christine2448 said:
Just doesn't make sense. I am swaying from side to side on this one. But they musta had SOMETHING SOLID to do all of this, IMO. I am understanding they have been investigating this guy for months. I can not for one second believe that haven't throughly investigated how he knows/knew Ramsey's/JonBenet, and can not believe for one second that they haven't already investigated where he was on Christmas, yada yada yada. Wouldn't ya think? I mean that would be the first things to do, see if he knows them, where was he on Christmas. What the hell have they been investigating for these months???

I just don't understand, could the keystone cops/DA office be THIS stupid?????

But, christine, they practically admitted that they only arrested him now because of emergency circumstances. They said, I think, they never talked to his ex-wife at all.
 
  • #28
SuperDave said:
But, christine, they practically admitted that they only arrested him now because of emergency circumstances. They said, I think, they never talked to his ex-wife at all.
I believe you are talking about what was said at the nottapressconference? I understood that statement to be made as an example, not at all relating to this case...maybe I misunderstood?

You really think they let all this 'out' before knowing these basic things, such as, can he be placed in CO at the time of murder?

If so, they have totally screwed up, pitiful, just pitiful.
 
  • #29
SuperDave said:
Yes! Half are talking like he's already been convicted, the other half rejecting it out of hand. It's hard, but after ten years, what's a little more time to wait?

lol :laugh: :crazy:

It is hard to wait because most people have their minds already made up from the beginning and now all the sudden they have a suspect??? Still fishy to me...
 
  • #30
That fish is about Moby Dick size now, PaperDoll!

"I believe you are talking about what was said at the nottapressconference? I understood that statement to be made as an example, not at all relating to this case...maybe I misunderstood?

You really think they let all this 'out' before knowing these basic things, such as, can he be placed in CO at the time of murder?"

Christine, I don't know what to think.
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
129
Guests online
3,460
Total visitors
3,589

Forum statistics

Threads
632,637
Messages
18,629,532
Members
243,231
Latest member
Irena21D
Back
Top