Monday, August 28, 2006

I knew it!!!

Charges dropped against JonBenet Ramsey suspect

BBC--The case against John Mark Karr was dropped after forensic tests found that his DNA did not match that discovered at the scene of the crime.

However, Mr Karr is still in police custody, following a request that he be taken to California to face child pornography charges dating back to 2001.

All right, all right...I know I'm only contributing to the spread of this whole non-story, when so many more crucial issues need to be addressed. But I can't help it, because John Mark Karr intrigues me. Much like with last Friday's local mall shooter, I wonder what would compel a man to do something so drastic--in this case, take credit for a very heinous crime that he obviously did not commit. He must have known the DNA wasn't going to match--chromosomes are pretty hard to fudge. Also, he was supposedly in Alabama during the whole ordeal. And Alabama's far away from Colorado in about a million ways.

So what's this guy's deal? I'd really like to know.

Karr has a history of what could diplomatically be called a "thing" for children. Most pedophiles try to keep it a secret; and though Karr's cover was blown stateside, he found educational employment in Asia. Basically, the bastard got away. What, then, would compel him to "admit" that he strangled JonBenet Ramsey? That's like O.J. Simpson confessing to the murder of Robert Blake's wife!

It definitely wasn't for prison cred. Child molesters are the least-respected people in the world; that's especially true in prison, where such "chesters" are repeatedly beaten and doused in urine and equally vile humors. And even Karr himself must realize that his pencil neck would be snapped before the bars slid shut.

Are we, as a society, so obsessed with fame that some will admit to stuff like this just to get attention? If infamy was Karr's motive, then he certainly got it. He will forever be known as the guy who lied about raping and killing a six-year-old girl, and was enough of a heel to almost pull it off.

Incidents like this make me pine for the upcoming '00s edition of Trivial Pursuit. In a sarcastic kind of way.

10 comments:

Cajun Tiger said...

Same feelings...I said the day he "confessed" that he didn't do it. Either he has a major mental issue or he is one sick puppy.

Nick said...

Well, he ought to at least be thrown in jail for obstruction of justice, at a minimum. Also, I think they ought to investigate him for any sort of possible child porn charges to get his sick ass out of society.

Nick said...

Looks like niether of our letters of support for UL were published this week. Oh well, as a consolation prize TDA finally published my letter about Chris Williams.

Ian McGibboney said...

I kind of saw that coming when they never called me to verify my letter.

After reading the letters, I can only imagine what their criteria was for choosing which ones to print. Maybe we're both officially off-limits over there. Considering who used to get printed there on a weekly basis, that almost hurts.

Jester said...

If all they needed was DNA from this freak, why did the FBI feel the need to wine and dine him on the plane beforehand? Nevermind. It's all Bush's fault anyway.

Ian McGibboney said...

It's simple, jester. Photographers were there, and people (as we've seen) will do anything for a few minutes in the spotlight. Even it's to associate themselves with this guy. There's no understanding some people.

Your last statement ties to absolutely nothing I've said. Couldn't resist, could you?

Nick said...

Well, I don't know if you can tell from the verification. TDA didn't call me to verify my letter that was published today.

However, my dad told me today that he was disappointed the Times didn't publish the letter I sent, as he thought it hit on a few points that the ones they chose didn't.

But you may be on to something with the Gannett crowd. I haven't heard anything about my application to be one of their guest op/ed writers.

Ian McGibboney said...

I always just assumed that it was my views that kept me from getting published locally. But that doesn't explain why you don't get published. I mean, you have experience as a pundit and a lot of people like you. And you're certainly not any more extreme than some of the junk they publish on a regular basis. If it's my association with you, I apologize for that :) Or it could be that they're slow and inefficient. That's probably what it is.

Nick said...

Yeah, I can't imaging you or me would be on some kind of "we don't like you" list. Hell, some PETA loon now gets a letter published almost twice a month where he gets on his podium and preaches to Advertiser readers that we are not good, earth friendly people if we still eat meat. I'd be insulted to know he gets preferential treatment.

However, Gannett really is a waste. I recently conceeded that after the whole UL/NCAA violation debacle when they ran Robert Lee's name through the mud for FOUR front pages stories, yet, the two articles regarding exhoneration weren't even on the front page of the sports section, if my memory serves right. That proves to me that the powers at what is supposed to be a local paper could care less about the local university.

Kind of relating, I think it was on Suspect Device's blog I made a comment a couple weeks ago that the last editor at the Times of Acadiana was an asswhipe. That prompted an e-mail sent to me by Nick Pittman (the guy who a couple yrs. ago wrote the "support the Cajuns or move to BR op/ed), one of the few people I actually like reading at the times, him and the John Minigis (sp?) guy. He assumed that I had called him the asswhipe. I had to e-mail him back and let him know that I actually used to like his columns, and that I was referring to Eric Benjamin (turns out Benjamin was like a general manager or something.) Well, needless to say, Pittman was not in disagreement with me about the "asswhipe" reference. I wonder why the Independent doesn't let him right op/ed? Truth be told, though, I don't care for either paper. I usually pick them up to read letters and Rand Ressler's column in the TOA, he's an old professor of mine.

Ian McGibboney said...

For all our differences, Nick, we're both the same in a way. We both have a cavalier streak that probably bothers some people. I've noticed that even the most extremist letter-writers in the TOA or the Advertiser aren't as individualistic as we are. They can be a lot farther off the see-saw than either of us, but there's still a line being toed there.

And yes, the Advertiser might as well be the Advocate in terms of UL-LSU coverage (the difference being that the Advocate is a stronger, independent paper). That was true even before Gannett's ownership, but it's only worsened over time. Case in point: 2004 Sugar Bowl coverage ("Only 26 days away! Here's our LSU fan of the day, 6-year-old Gilbert Dumbeaux!") Oh, the stories I could tell...

As for the Independent, they need columns. Honest, frank, local talent to write editorials every week. It's a void in this city, and is the one thing keeping me from picking the Ind up out of compulsion every week.