N O T E S

Homicide, the unlawful taking of a human life. Some states use classes or degrees to indicate the nature of the crime.
Capital Murder. The most serious. Usually requires to have been committed during the commission of another felony.
Murder. The premeditated taking of another’s life.
Manslaughter. The unpremeditated taking of a human life under circumstances that give the perpetrator an opportunity to stop.
Reckless homicide. A person is killed when the perpetrator is engaged in irresponsible conduct likely to cause serious or fatal injuries to another.
Every accused person has the right to offer evidence in 1) justification, 2) mitigation or 3) excuse. Such examples as, self defense, in defense of another and acting under mistaken belief.

Facts. We have heard Mr. Karr say he was present when JonBenet died. He has related facts that were supposedly known only to the perpetrator, such as the inside layout of the house and footprints in the snow. Offsetting this damning information is the psychological makeup of Mr. Karr. It is obvious he is suffering from more than one diagnosable psychiatric disorders.

This intense media coverage of the case flies in the face of ever providing a forum for a fair trial for Mr. Karr. The Boulder police have been scourged for mishandling the investigation from the beginning. Any elected prosecutor’s pre-trial public statements must be taken in the context of electoral politics.
There are professional ethical considerations that may be honored in the breach.


So with all this in mind, and based on what you think you can believe about this crime, I ask you to vote;

1) Yes, Mr Karr is guilty of harming JonBenet

2) No, Mr Karr is not guilty of harming JonBenet

3) Hung Jury. Mistrial. I cannot decide if he is guilty or innocent.



[edit on 8/28/2006 by donwhite]

I will say number 3 is to early to make a very clear opinion base on facts that has not been released by the police yet.

So far all we have gotten is pure speculation of what he may had said or did.

Need more info.

[edit on 28-8-2006 by marg6043]

From what's been publically revealed so far, I have to go with number 2. I haven't seen any evidence linking him to the crime that would allow me to vote guilty if I was on the jury.

Of course, new evidence could always come out.

posted by djohnsto77

From what's been publically revealed so far, I have to go with number 2. I haven't seen any evidence linking him to the crime that would allow me to vote guilty if I was on the jury.

Good Vote, Dijon

Karr remains under arrest and is being held for California to extradite him on child porn charges which in this case are a misdemeanor. Normally states do not extradite in misdemeanor cases because the cost to bring the case and the resulting penalty - maximum of 1 year confinement in the county jail - do not justify the expense. Additionally, in the Karr case, the charges are old - stale - and witnesses may be hard to find and etc.

Another example of prosecutorial misconduct, playing for votes, your tax dollars be darned!


[edit on 8/28/2006 by donwhite]