Now the TRUTH is coming out. A Shout out to Carol McKinnely and Fox for the truth.

Tricia

Manager Websleuths.com
Staff member
Administrator
Moderator
Joined
Sep 13, 2003
Messages
28,620
Reaction score
42,204
First, Karr WAS NOT ARRESTED FOR THE MURDER OF JONBENET.

Thanks to the WONDERFUL Carol McKinnley for this info. Fox has it right!!

Karr skipped town when he was arrested for some child *advertiser censored* a few years ago. He ended up in Thailand. He was ARRESTED IN THAILAND AND IS BEING BROUGHT BACK TO THE U.S. BASED ON THE CHARGES HE SKIPPED OUT ON. NOTHING TO DO WITH THE JBR CASE.

Karr is being brought back for QUESTIONING IN THE JBR CASE.
That's it. He will be QUESTIONED about the case. Nothing more.

This suspect came to light because he was emailing with people involved in the case.

Guess who is behind the "emails"?....Patsy, Michael Tracey, and Lin Wood. Yep, the three of them. I know Patsy was in direct contact with him. About the other two I don't know other than they were in on the emails too.

This has Michael Tracey's stink all over it. He needs a new documentary since we blasted his last one out of the water. Who's to say Tracey didn't feed Karr info? Wouldn't you confess to anything just to get out of a Thai jail?

Oh by the way, Karr's brother said his brother spent Christmas '96 with his family and he has the pictures to prove it.
 
I said close to the same thing on the long thread. This stinks of Tracy, Smit and the Ramsey clan. I no more think this is JonBenet's killer than I think I'll look out my window tomorrow morning and see pigs flying.
 
Tricia I've been trying to tell people just that tonight but nobody seems too interested because it isn't juicy enough.
 
So all news is wrong until they report something you agree with, at which point they are reporting "the truth"?

Come on.
 
If this is true, it's going to do irreperable damage to the Ramseys already tarnished reputation.


Lin Wood was on TV, explaining that he wouldn't jump the gun & assume Karr is guilty, like people did with his clients.
 
Lurker Steve said:
So all news is wrong until they report something you agree with, at which point they are reporting "the truth"?

Come on.


There has been little nuggets of truth out there all day, you just have to be able to not get stuck on the sensationalism.
 
HeartofTexas said:
I said close to the same thing on the long thread. This stinks of Tracy, Smit and the Ramsey clan. I no more think this is JonBenet's killer than I think I'll look out my window tomorrow morning and see pigs flying.
But I WANT pigs to fly, dammit!

I WANT him to be the one.

looking for a stamp my foot icon...
 
justice2 said:
Help me please, who is Michael Tracey?
He's the guy from the UK who did the documentary on the Ramseys.
 
The last report i heard on the radio said he was denying involvement.
 
If this lead ends up being bogus, at least it sheds light on what direction mary's team is investigating. Most reporters today are saying that since 2003 they intruder theory has held more weight blah blah. The only person who still seems uneasy about an intruder was bill o'reilly who was still a bit pro patsy this morning.

It just seems that this case is getting further and further from the real perps.
 
So does everybody think is a stunt to make the media look bad?

How simple would it have been to just say the guy was being bought back for questioning in the case?
 
JBean said:
The last report i heard on the radio said he was denying involvement.
I thought he confessed lol.
This is crazy.
Here I was thinking it was all nearly over.
 
Honestly I think alot of spin was being leaked out of the Ramsey Camp today and Im not sure the Boulder DA was prepared for it.
 
LI_Mom said:
If this is true, it's going to do irreperable damage to the Ramseys already tarnished reputation.


Lin Wood was on TV, explaining that he wouldn't jump the gun & assume Karr is guilty, like people did with his clients.
I dont think it will damage the ramseys at all-this will further add to the possibility that they are innocent till proven guilty-how many people involved in the case have to come out and say the ramseys didnt do it before they are credited with knowing more than we do.
Further-it could not have been patsy who killed her because they are saying the genetic profile is of a man-a man who is not john ramsey.
We use dna to convict and its also used to determine that someone wasnt there-and did not do the murder..this is established.
The rest is tunnel vision imo-and a whole lot of people who cannot admit they persecuted without cause..I have never thot they were guilty and the more i read the less i think there are many unbiased people saying calling for their heads.

If this can be proven by a jury of his peers there will still be a whole group of people who will say they convicted the wrong woman..sarcasm..the killer is apparently a male-so its not patsy and its not john.
 
Lurker Steve said:
So all news is wrong until they report something you agree with, at which point they are reporting "the truth"?

Come on.

No Steve, I happen to know this all checks out.

This guy will fade away and leave egg on the face of Team Ramsey.
 
How could it possible be egg on the Ramsey's face when it is the news outlets (one that you quoted as being right by the way) that are reporting that he was arrested in connection with JBR murder?
 
newtv said:
I dont think it will damage the ramseys at all-this will further add to the possibility that they are innocent till proven guilty-how many people involved in the case have to come out and say the ramseys didnt do it before they are credited with knowing more than we do.
Further-it could not have been patsy who killed her because they are saying the genetic profile is of a man-a man who is not john ramsey.
We use dna to convict and its also used to determine that someone wasnt there-and did not do the murder..this is established.
The rest is tunnel vision imo-and a whole lot of people who cannot admit they persecuted without cause..I have never thot they were guilty and the more i read the less i think there are many unbiased people saying calling for their heads.

If this can be proven by a jury of his peers there will still be a whole group of people who will say they convicted the wrong woman..sarcasm..the killer is apparently a male-so its not patsy and its not john.


Why do people still cling to this 'foreign' DNA. It was that degraded, forensic investigators couldnt even date it to the time of the murder! even Dr Henry lee said "this is not a DNA case"
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
179
Guests online
2,273
Total visitors
2,452

Forum statistics

Threads
589,972
Messages
17,928,539
Members
228,027
Latest member
Sarahlm8627
Back
Top