I do think that taking a 2nd look at the known evidence as it could relate to an intruder has bearing.
I don't think it has a "unique nexus" to the parents and the grand jury didn't think so either. So there is no point in returning there again and again because they didn't arrest the parents, they arrested JMK.
Since most of the evidence hasn't been looked at from the intruder angle but only from the parents did it angle. It's time for a fresh look and a fresh reinterpretation and how it relates to the recent arrest and what little new information that's been released.
Can someone take the available evidence, as it stands now and including the obvious and common sense stuff, and summarize what we've got? I think it would be helpful to start there. I know it's been discussed already but it might help to summarize it all in one post. Here's what I see so far:
JMK 'fits the profile'
JMK confessed to the crime
JMK has no alibi
The DA *must* have more on him
anything else?
thanks
Time is of the essence in a kidnapping. And if they had read the note "correctly", they would have realized the call was 24 hours away not two hours away.
I don't think there was a way Karr could have known exactly what TIME the Ramseys normally got up. Doesn't matter, no call would ever come. It's not to say that it would not have come. They probably took off the trace when Mr. Ramsey found his daughter and the media blew the find. Maybe there was a call that we don't know about.
Karr had clarified the 27th date by saying get some rest.....The cops missed it and I did, too....at least for a while.
The grand jury couldn't decide which family member to charge with which part of the crime. Double jeopardy would attach if the wrong one were charged and taken to trial, then acquitted.