If he’s that nuts, I can buy him screwing up. He may be guilty, but at the moment his confession doesn’t really ring true to me.
Her dad found her. And I did read, in a book about the case which I didn’t finish because I realized it was going to take 600+ pages to say “We still don’t know,” that her dad said “Oh my god” before he turned on the light in the room. As in, he couldn’t have seen her before he said that. But who knows.
If there was a dead body there, he wouldn’t have had to see her, the smell would’ve been obvious.
Would she have been stinking after only eight hours in a (presumably) cooler basment though? Could he have stepped on her and realized the nature of what was underfoot though?
Personally I’m not all that sure… the only time I’ve ever been around a dead body was when a homeless guy had died on the NYC subway. The smell was unmistakable and I’ll never forget it, but I have no idea how long he’d been there.
I’ve been under the impression that putrification begins fairly rapidly and that gases characteristic of the ‘death smell’ begin being emitted rather quickly. Not to mention that at death many folks void their bowels.
I must admit, though, that I don’t know for certain, especially not wrt variables such as temperate and such. So I suppose I won’t waste anybody’s time further, and just say that my gut instinct is that a body will be able to be detected by smell within a short ammount of time, but that I don’t have facts to back this up.
Not to be glib (well, okay, a little bit to be glib), but most of the homeless guys on the NYC subway don’t smell so great alive; his odor could have had nothing to do with his recent death.
There’s stinky and then there’s stinky. I’m pretty sure Finn is not talking about BO.
Doesn’t death cause the sphincters to relax? Maybe that’s what it was.
And (off the top of my head) I thought JBR had eaten late on the night she was murdered, so it is possible that her intestines were not empty. And do I misremember, or did JBR wet the bed? I always thought that was significant - that she was habitually under stress. (Maybe I am confusing this with that guy in Fatal Vision who killed his family. Dr. MacDonald or something like that.
Maybe it was just that JBR wasn’t as thrilled as her mom at being in all those pageants, but maybe it was more than that.
I keep going back and forth. I thought her father did it, then this Karr guy confessed, now I am wondering if his confession is bogus.
Let’s see what the DNA says.
Regards,
Shodan
Shodan mentioning the Jeffrey MacDonald case is apropos in that in both that case and with JBR, authorities used a child wetting the bed as a possible reason why an otherwise good parent would snap and kill and a child. Not commenting on the guilt or innocence of either (except to say MacDonald is INNOCENT!), just find it odd- unless that’s a standard ploy in these type cases.
sigh And to think I was going to suggest you become a member yesterday because you seemed so smart. 
On the other hand, Sam Sheppard WAS innocent.
“minor brief hijack in lieu of starting new thread”
dropzone, my opinion on MacDonald is based on the following- if any of the following in not true, then I could change my view:
-
He described four intruders, and described them in detail. These four people were found to exist, live in the area, hung around each other, were drug users and general lowlifes.
-
None of the four had an alibi for the night in question. One or two of the guys later speculated they were on drugs on that night and “may” have done it.
-
Helena Stoeckly, the girl in question, was seen by MP’s standing in the rain a few blocks from the crime scene right after the murders. They said they did not mentally connect to her to possibly being involved. She was definitely drug addled, never denied being there, half ass admitted it, but wasn’t allowed to testify, for obvious reasons.
-
The clincher though, is MacDonald said the girl present had long blond hair. Stoeckly was known to wear a long blond wig- the MP’s noticed the girl they saw had long blond hair. Long blond wig fibers that could not be matched up to anything in the house were found, but not entered as evidence.
There is nothing that I have seen that in any way implicates Macdonald, other than the fact he was not badly injured and the other three were brutalized. The defense concocted a story about him going into a rage at his daughter possibly wetting the bed. The writer of Fatal Vision, to sell his book, made up a thoery that he was under the influence of some meds at the time, which caused him to overdo the bedwetting punishment accidentally, even though there is no basis for it. They also introduced the fact that he was having an affair(!) and killed the family to be with the other chick.
Also, a problem he brought on himself is that on the stand he was an arrogant prick, and he seemed to start dating quickly after the deaths. But as juries often forget, being a dick don’t make you guilty, and hell, being happy you’re family was killed doesn’t mean you did it either!
The newest news is that Karr apparently knows details about the girl’s body that were never revealed to the public. But there is still no proof that he was ever in Colorado, and they don’t know how or when he is supposed to have been there, among other issues. This still doesn’t make sense to me. Maybe he got the details thirdhand from a ‘source’ or something? He may very well be guilty, but at the moment this is too weird for me to take at face value.
Not badly injured? He had an almost <ahem> surgical incision that deflated one lung. The remainder of the family was horrifically and brutally beaten to death. I don’t care if the Manson Family was seen on the street corner chatting with the Zodiac Killer, that’s strong evidence.
Elaborate theories about involuntary excretions or body decay are not necessary.
Depending on the light coming into the “wine cellar” from the area outside the room, JonBenét’s body may have been visible enough without turning the light on in the storage room. The boiler room before the wine cellar had a basement window, and JBR’s body was found covered with a white blanket.
The Thai official has backed down in his claims as to the “details” of the confession.
No, trust me. I’ve been around plenty of homeless guys on the subway, this guy had a particular scent which I’ve never smelled before, and hope to never smell again.
There was also the fact that he wasn’t breathing… dude was definitely dead as doornail.
So last night on the news it was said that
–Karr has said things about her manner of death which did not match the facts, such as, for example, his claim that he knocked her out with chlorine gas.
–There is no evidence that he was in Colorado at the time, and his ex-wife positively claims he was not in Colorado at the time
–Karr has never said exactly that he killed her, but instead, just that he was there when she died, that her death was accidental and so on.
I also noted that he seems to avoid answering directly any questions about what happened that night. For example, when asked by a reporter what happened, he said “It would take hours for me to describe” which seems clearly evasive. When the reporter pushed “If you had to be brief…?” he simply said “I couldn’t be brief.” That makes no sense.
So which of these four observations, if any, are false?
They seem to me to add up clearly to saying that Karr is not the killer.
-FrL-
It was said, incorrectly that he confessed to using chloroform on her, see my post #115 in this thread for the correction regarding the confession details.
Yyyyyeah…but a press conference is not a court of law. Perhaps he doesn’t want to give any sound bites that could be taken out of context or misinterpreted. If you don’t have a lawyer with you, best advice is STFU.
On the other hand, it just occurred to me that he could be doing some kind of Johnathan Edwards thing…I was there…I’m seeing…a little girl…suffering…Oh, wait a minute, did you cops think I meant that I killed her?! Are you crazy? I wanna lawyer and a book agent…
hh