:::applauds Weirddave:::
In Indiana, you have to register after a second conviction for possession of child porn.
[QUOTE=katie1341]
I’d like to know how the hell they got the DNA results so fast. I had an indigent black client in the county jail on a rape charge for 6 months waiting for a DNA test that exonerated him. There’s nothing (in Georgia, anyway) that a defense attorney can do to get the crime lab to move any faster. I guess some men are created more equal than others…
[/QUOTE]
I think some victims are created more equal than others. Was your client’s alleged victim a young white girl?
[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic]
Apologies from who? I never said he was guilty.
To the OP, I think it’s ridiculous to make somebody pay for ther own arrest and extradiction.
[/QUOTE]
Besides. . .what the hell is there to pay for?
Aren’t the agents and the prosecutors already salaried?
What. . .he got a first class ticket on a flight from Thailand? Let’s spread that out over the taxpayers of Colorado. There, you owe, .00625 for getting a possible suspect here.
[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic]
Apologies from who? I never said he was guilty.
[/QUOTE]
From whom? From Karr, you goof. It’s Karr who’s getting singled out here, not you. For once.
Bit tetchy?
Who the fuck are you to tell me what news items I should and shouldn’t be following? For that matter who are you to dictate what is or isn’t news (based soley on how it ranks to your interests)?.
[QUOTE=Weirddave]
They really shouldn’t have been covering the story at all. This was a local matter. Sad to say, kids get murdered under mysterious circumstances all the time, and in many cases the killer is never caught. That’s not news. Jon Bennet was a cute little blond headed white kid from an affluent family with the added bonus of having been involved in tot beauty pageants, a controversial pastime. News producers saw her angelic face and in their black little hearts they all went “I can sell this, and the public will gobble it up like crack cocaine”.
[/QUOTE]
That’s just not true, and you do our media a disservice by saying so. They said, “They’ll eat this up like Oxycontin.” Jeez, crack went out with parachute pants.
[QUOTE=Rick]
No, but you did say
So are you now going to shout out a giant UNFUCK YOU* to those of us that beleive that the parents know /knew more than they let on?
I’d ask for a giantI was wrong, but I know that ain’t gonna happen.
[/QUOTE]
I WASN’T wrong. I never said he was guilty and I’M NOT IN THE MEDIA.
[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic]
I never said he was guilty…
[/QUOTE]
But you did give a strong implication that you thought he was and that his arrest exonerated the Ramseys. I don’t know why I am joining the dozens of people who have already said this but maybe I’m suffering under the delusion that you are a reasonable man and if enough people say that was how they read your post maybe you’ll look at it with fresh eyes and admit that it did not state your position clearly.
[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic]
I WASN’T wrong. I never said he was guilty and I’M NOT IN THE MEDIA.
[/QUOTE]
Weasle. Sorry, your OP strongly suggests he was guilty, otherwise why would the Media apologize and you shout out “FUCK YOU” to them, since you cite this nutcase’s arrest in that OP? No one can read that and get anything out of it but “hey, now that we know who really did it, the media was wrong all along in saying that it was the parents”. Otherwise, why link to the story? Sorry, DtC, it’s at least time for an “Emily Littela”.
As to the kiddie porn charges- it’s 5 misdemeanor charges. Big whoop.
[QUOTE=dropzone]
But you did give a strong implication that you thought he was and that his arrest exonerated the Ramseys. I don’t know why I am joining the dozens of people who have already said this but maybe I’m suffering under the delusion that you are a reasonable man and if enough people say that was how they read your post maybe you’ll look at it with fresh eyes and admit that it did not state your position clearly.
[/QUOTE]
I tried to clear up any unintended implication that I was assuming guilt early on in the thread.
[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic]
I tried to clear up any unintended implication that I was assuming guilt early on in the thread.
[/QUOTE]
If there was no implication that Karr was guilty, then there was no purpose to your thread. Stop being a weasle. How hard is it to say “I was wrong”?
The inevitable Diogenes hijack aside:
-
As others have ably point out, Karr faced no charges in Tailand. The Boulder DA is using, as a convenient excuse, the line that he might have been getting too close to one of the children who would eventually be in his classroom as the reason they moved quickly on him. But at the time of his arrest, he was quietly living his life and getting ready for the new school year.
-
Keeping #1 firmly in mind, Karr owes nothing to the people of Colorado. The Boulder DA, after a series of career mistakes, decided to move ahead with the arrest for reasons that aren’t clear, when all she had to go on were the ramblings of someone who was clearly delusional (take a look at some of the correspondance he shared with the university professor).
-
It was the DA’s choice to not begin interviewing people (including those who may have a clue as to his whereabouts that Christmas) until after the arrest. It was her choice to not wait on the “surrupticiously acquired” DNA samples were tested. It was her decision to not even look into whether he had an alibi. It was also her decision to go ahead after Karr has already been investigated way back in 2000. If there’s anyone who owes money, it’s the Boulder DA.
-
Karr damn sure needs a psych eval. The guy is clearly batshit insane. He may truly believe that he was there that night, in which case the Boulder DA had even more of a responsibility to get him evaluated before parading him around as the killer.
-
The guy is a pervert, that’s absolutely true. He’s also clearly mentally incompetant. But he doesn’t owe anyone anything, other than the state of California, and to insist that he does is just giving into the mob mentality that would have had him swinging from the end of the rope before a trial could even take place.
[QUOTE=DrDeth]
If there was no implication that Karr was guilty, then there was no purpose to your thread. Stop being a weasle. How hard is it to say “I was wrong”?
[/QUOTE]
As recent threads show it is extremely hard for Dio to admit he is wrong.
Is he likely to be committed? I can’t help but think this guy isn’t safe to be out on the streets.
Why would he get committed? Dio rarely admits he’s wrong but that’s no cause for committing him.
[QUOTE=Weirddave]
They really shouldn’t have been covering the story at all. This was a local matter. Sad to say, kids get murdered under mysterious circumstances all the time, and in many cases the killer is never caught. That’s not news.
[/QUOTE]
It’s as easy to say “that’s not news” as it is to say “that’s news.” It’s news if it affects people or if the news source thinks people will pay attention; there isn’t a magical formula of ‘importance.’
That said, and I usually try to balance whatever media criticism I read on this site, I mostly agree with Weirddave. This story was hyped beyond comprehension 10 years ago, but I wasn’t paying attention. The coverage of Karr was grotesque. It was sensational, speculative, blown out of proportion, and even the huge holes in the ‘case’ developed, they were focusing on empty details (he ate shrimp on the plane!) in order to fill airtime. On top of that, it’s a crime that didn’t deserve this much attention.
[QUOTE=dropzone]
Why would he get committed? Dio rarely admits he’s wrong but that’s no cause for committing him.
[/QUOTE]
Iced tea- allllll over my monitor and keybaord. All your fault. 
[QUOTE=bobkitty]
2) Keeping #1 firmly in mind, Karr owes nothing to the people of Colorado. The Boulder DA, after a series of career mistakes, decided to move ahead with the arrest for reasons that aren’t clear, when all she had to go on were the ramblings of someone who was clearly delusional (take a look at some of the correspondance he shared with the university professor).
- It was the DA’s choice to not begin interviewing people (including those who may have a clue as to his whereabouts that Christmas) until after the arrest. It was her choice to not wait on the “surrupticiously acquired” DNA samples were tested. It was her decision to not even look into whether he had an alibi. It was also her decision to go ahead after Karr has already been investigated way back in 2000. If there’s anyone who owes money, it’s the Boulder DA.
[/QUOTE]
All right, fair enough. Then the DA should have to answer for this.
[QUOTE=The Flying Dutchman]
Having kiddie porn on your computer makes you eligible for registration ?
[/QUOTE]
Or the guitarist for The Who doing research.