"I like it".
Posted on 08/17/2006 7:30:29 PM PDT by HitmanLV
To this day, John and Patsy Ramsey have lived up to their promise and continue to search for their daughter's killer. They have posted a composite sketch of a suspect compiled by the late psychic, Dorothy Allison, on their Internet site with the attached message:
"Have you seen this man? This man may have been in the Boulder area in December 1996. ... We firmly believe that this most horrible of killers will be caught based on information provided by people who care about right and wrong. ... Please help, so another innocent child will not be a victim and another family will not suffer unbearable grief."
Allison, who claimed to have assisted police investigations, came up with her vision of the suspect during an April 1998 appearance on a network television show. She died on December 3, 1999. Boulder Police Chief Mark Beckner declined to comment on the late psychic's work.
(Excerpt) Read more at crimelibrary.com ...
You're funny. Are you saying you read the entire report?
Watching his mannerisms at his "press conference", the thought that kept running through my head is that this pencilneck looks like a total flamer.
Maybe the fact he wears his polos buttoned up to the top might have something to do with the fact that he was living in.....
Tie-land????
Sketch: pointed chin.
Karr: not as pointed chin.
Sketch: pointed jaw.
Karr: square jaw.
Sketch: thin lips.
Karr: average lips.
Sketch: wide nose.
Karr: narrow nose.
Sketch: close-set eyes.
Karr: wide-set eyes.
Except for all that, it IS pretty darn accurate.
Hurkos and his supporters maintained that he was a great psychic detective; by 1969, he cited the successful solution of 27 murder cases in 17 countries. However, in some cases the detectives assigned to these cases countered that that Hurkos contributed no information unobtainable from newspapers and, in some cases, that he took no part in the investigations whatsoever. In response to Hurkos' claim that he located the stolen "Stone of Scone", Home Secretary Chuter Edge declared:
The gentleman in question whose activities have been publicized (though not by the police) was among a number of persons authorized to come to Westminster Abbey to examine the scene of the crime. He was not invited by the police, his expenses have not been refunded by the Government, and he did not obtain any result whatsoever.
Hurkos also claimed to have identified the Boston Strangler, and he did in fact travel to Boston and spend time with the police there. However, he was not of help to them; several days after he concluded his consultation, he was arrested (and eventually convicted) for impersonating a police officer. Hurkos allegedly posed as a police officer in order to gather information that he could later claim to be psychic revelations.
In the case of John Norman Collins, he sometimes claimed the killer was blond, other times brown-haired, so that he could claim victory either way. He made other claims about the killer that were simply wrong. He claimed to have identified Charles Manson to police, but this was not true; Manson was identified by his supporter Susan Atkins to a cellmate while she was in jail for a different crime. In fact, Hurkos had been to the Tate residence to do a "reading", but his guesses were well off the mark. The Los Angeles Police Department has a standard approach for handling information from psychics: listen politely, then dismiss it.
What if the DA had never meant for this to go public as fast as it did. Suppose it was a scheme to motivate the real murderer to cometo surfase in protest of the imposter?
Well forget that...he won't have to protest now, the whole world thinks this nut is innocent.
I did find it strange that last night his brother said he would have to check his scrapbooks to see if there was a Christmas picture taken at the time. It was over 24 hours later -- what is the delay in the search for this evidence that would supposedly clear him?
that is what I'm saying. I have all the pics from past Christmas's in my home since I got married and had children. Before that all Christmas pics are in my mother's homes making it easy to access to find any pics within minutes if need be. I think most people can find past pictures easily as well. So, why hasn't the ex wife or other family of this Karr guy released any pictures to the media proving he was there with them in Christmas of 1996. If they did that this case would be over with Karr, so what is the hold up? If they can't come up with proof that he was there with them CHristmas of 96 than I think that he may in fact be the killer of JonBenet afterall.
I also think that the DA must know somehow if Karr was in CO in 96 or not. You'd think she did a bit of investigative work on that before all this started.
In most cases family members will always come to the defense of family regardless of if they are guilty or not. This guy here in Ft.Worth killed his ex girlfriend and her son a couple of years ago. He confessed and everything, went to trial, got found guitly, and is now on death row. But his mother still thinks and says she KNOWS her son is innocent as he couldn't have commited the crime.
"Those pants almost reached his armpits...and his polo shirt was buttoned to the tippy top button. Eeew."
LOL!
Uncanny.
Predicting the future and discerning events of the past are two different phenomena.
I'm not saying that I believe either one happens, but they are fundamentally dissimilar.
What good is knowing last week's winning lottery number - we all know it and it does no one any good. Supposedly, this phychic didn't predict this guy would one day murder this girl, it was a done deed.
I'll bet his laptop ( He's traveled all over the world) contains a Motherload of evidence.
Not sure it pertains to JonBenet though.
If he did murder the little girl, I'll bet he took trophy shots. If they are in the laptop....it's over.
The Warren Report.
Too many people investigate backwards. They have a "feeling" someone did it and then try to prove it. Instead, they should understand what happened and work from there.
My problem with the report isn't so much the conclusion as some of the parts of the report. The leaps in logic for the single bullet theory to be believed, are incredible.
Do I think there was more to it than what we were toldd? I honestly don't know. From what I've seen of government investigations subsequent to that, I'm not comforted in the slightest.
There was only a single bullet. If not, a researcher would have to find all the possible trajectories and origins of any other bullets which caused such damage.
No one and I repeat no one has ever been able to explain any other bullets, their trajectories and sources.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.