Karr A Possible Krank?

[BillyGoatGruff]

Years ago when you could buy chloroform at any pharmacy without prescription my best friends mother was hooked on it. We had to go to pharmacys all over to get it for her so she could get high on it. Many times I saw the cloth to her mouth, inhaling it. Sometimes all day. And, never was there any marks on her mouth or inside her mouth.

Eventually you had to start signing for it and then it got so that we couldn't get it for her at all. I never saw her go into fits. And, believe me, this woman would hold that stuff to her face for very long times. Telling my best friend she had to fly around the room was about the only "fit" she had.

Its called "huffing". You get brain damage from it. Chloroform, ether, nitreous oxide are the msot commonly abused. Which is why you can't get the stuff without a chemist's license or signing all kinds of documentation. A cheap huffing high is gasoline, paint thinner, airplane glue, acetone, etc. This crap easts away your brain cells Big Time and results in permanent brain & nerve damage.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

Going on and on about how much they care about Jb getting a proper burial leaps to mind.

"You will be denied her remains for a proper burial."

RDI: Its rambling. Nonsensical. Since RDI has already made its mind up that its just filler, of course it appears to be nothing more than rambling!

IDI: It sends an additional message, reinforcing the concept of the kidnappers willingness to kill. This further terrorizes the parents, which was probably part of the perp's intention anyway. Since the statement has reinforcing properties that were probably intended to have an emotional effect on the parents, it can't be written off as 'rambling'.

 

[Eagle1]

"You will be denied her remains for a proper burial."
QUOTE]

How could the note writer control whether or not the body would be released to the family for proper burial? Whoever wrote it is claiming some control!

 

[tumble]

"You will be denied her remains for a proper burial."

RDI: Its rambling. Nonsensical. Since RDI has already made its mind up that its just filler, of course it appears to be nothing more than rambling!

IDI: It sends an additional message, reinforcing the concept of the kidnappers willingness to kill. This further terrorizes the parents, which was probably part of the perp's intention anyway. Since the statement has reinforcing properties that were probably intended to have an emotional effect on the parents, it can't be written off as 'rambling'.

reinforcing, that is the keyword, reinforcing is rambling when it's done in absurdum.

 

[SewingDeb]

"You will be denied her remains for a proper burial."
QUOTE]

How could the note writer control whether or not the body would be released to the family for proper burial? Whoever wrote it is claiming some control!

I think this was a threat that the body would never be found. Of course, the body of JonBenet was still in the house, but the writer was using anything to terrorize the parents, imo, and enjoyed doing so.

 

[Trino]

I've been lurking some, posting some lately. Chloroform? Is it probable that Karr brought this with him as he squeezed through a basement window?

I think Karr's obsession with JB has led him to believe he killed her. It would not surprise me to learn he practiced his handwriting to make it look like the note. If I recall correctly, the match between Karr and the note was 13 characters. For Patsy, it was more. This would be a field day for a good attorney. If there isn't a definite DNA match, Karr has an out of jail free card.

Have we heard more of Karr's definite whereabouts from his ex-wife? He was married with at least one child at the time, so it would seem a wife would remember his absence on any Christmas eve - even 10 years ago. If they were dirt poor, where would Karr get money to be in CO?

Finally, what transportation did Karr use get to the Ramsey's house? Did he park his car nearby? Did he walk? Where was he staying? Did he eat at local restaurants? Did he have a round-trip airline ticket?

 

[stonewall]

Again, given the intense media interest in this case and the new, results oriented prosecutor team,....I just don't see that they would have made this arrest and let it stand in the media that the case was 'solved' if this guy was just a kook. I am sure he is not the first mental case to confess.

All this conspiracy junk is just a bunch of seething people hungry for answers trying to put the pieces of a jigsaw puzzle together when what we really have is a sudoku. Why don't we wait for the real evidence to come in before you all release the guy, huh?

Cal

I agree. It has been stated the Boulder DA's office started investigating this guy several months ago. This is plenty of time to determine if he is just another kook or not. It's certainly enough time to get a DNA sample (maybe from licking one of those envelopes he sent to Patsy) and certainly enough time to analyze his handwriting and determine if he was even in Boulder in 1996. Obviously, they started the investigation with just the emails. Don't you think after several months later of investigating they have uncovered alot more than that?

As for the ex-wife, she stated he was with her on that day in 1996 before she even checked into it. 10 years is a long time. I honestly don't know where I was 10 years ago on Christmas. I imagine I was with family, but I've have to check to be sure.

 

[Holdontoyourhat]

reinforcing, that is the keyword, reinforcing is rambling when it's done in absurdum.

Since it was probably not recognized at the time by the parents as 'rambling in absurdum,' then its an irrelevant after-the-fact observation. More relevant is the effect the ransom note had at the time.

 

[Lauren]

I think he is guilty of being a pervert. I don't think he killed JBR though.

 

[tumble]

Since it was probably not recognized at the time by the parents as 'rambling in absurdum,' then its an irrelevant after-the-fact observation. More relevant is the effect the ransom note had at the time.

HOTYH:
In your reasoning a note full of "Kill! Kill!..." for three pages, and ending with "your daugter is kidnapped, I call you tomorrow and explain the important parts", also would make a great RN.

 

[BillyGoatGruff]

Since a thread I created on this topic was "poofed" I'm going to restate the opinion here:

I have a very good reason to believe John mark Karr is an undiagnosed high functioning autistic suffering from Asperger's Syndrome. One of the telltale signs of this disorder is a tendency to become EXCESSIVELY OBSESSED wth certian topics as well as difficulty with soical interaction and understanding/appreciating "social boundaries" and bizarre body language. It is usually associated with high intelligence. I have nephew with this disorder and the more I see of Karr and learn of his background, the more likely this becomes.
http://www.udel.edu/bkirby/asperger/

A. Qualitative impairment in social interaction, as manifested by at least two of the following:

1. marked impairments in the use of multiple nonverbal behaviors such as eye-to-eye gaze, facial expression, body postures, and gestures to regulate social interaction
2. failure to develop peer relationships appropriate to developmental level
3. a lack of spontaneous seeking to share enjoyment, interests, or achievements with other people (e.g. by a lack of showing, bringing, or pointing out objects of interest to other people)
4. lack of social or emotional reciprocity

B. Restricted repetitive and stereotyped patterns of behavior, interests, and activities, as manifested by at least one of the following:

1. encompassing preoccupation with one or more stereotyped and restricted patterns of interest that is abnormal either in intensity or focus
2. apparently inflexible adherence to specific, nonfunctional routines or rituals
3. stereotyped and repetitive motor mannerisms (e.g., hand or finger flapping or twisting, or complex whole-body movements)
4. persistent preoccupation with parts of objects

C. The disturbance causes clinically significant impairment in social, occupational, or other important areas of functioning


D. There is no clinically significant general delay in language (e.g., single words used by age 2 years, communicative phrases used by age 3 years)

E. There is no clinically significant delay in cognitive development or in the development of age-appropriate self-help skills, adaptive behavior (other than social interaction), and curiosity about the environment in childhood F. Criteria are not met for another specific Pervasive Developmental Disorder or Schizophrenia

</FONT>