New Immissions/Updates:
boundless - educate - edutalab - empatico - es-ebooks - es16 - fr16 - fsfiles - hesperian - solidaria - wikipediaforschools
- wikipediaforschoolses - wikipediaforschoolsfr - wikipediaforschoolspt - worldmap -

See also: Liber Liber - Libro Parlato - Liber Musica  - Manuzio -  Liber Liber ISO Files - Alphabetical Order - Multivolume ZIP Complete Archive - PDF Files - OGG Music Files -

PROJECT GUTENBERG HTML: Volume I - Volume II - Volume III - Volume IV - Volume V - Volume VI - Volume VII - Volume VIII - Volume IX

Ascolta ""Volevo solo fare un audiolibro"" su Spreaker.
CLASSICISTRANIERI HOME PAGE - YOUTUBE CHANNEL
Privacy Policy Cookie Policy Terms and Conditions
Talk:John Mark Karr/Archive 1 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Talk:John Mark Karr/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

You have new messages (last change).
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents

Don't delete relevant information

Combining his arrest and/or extradition with other information in the article is fine, but do NOT delete relevant items, such as the city he was flown to, what facility he was taken to, etc. Michaelh2001 01:16, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Note on age

Just to try to clarify: it's unclear right now, as this story unfolds, whether Karr is 41 or 42, and consequently what year he was born in. The New York Times and others are reporting 42, while CNN and others are reporting 41. Until this is settled, I think the "circa" will work. --MZMcBride 04:53, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

At this site he gave his birthdate as Nov. 12, 1964: http://www.job4teacher.com/Candidates/Candidates.html --67.180.200.145 06:33, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

I have searched the following background check websites and they verify that his age is indeed 41. Look for the John M. Karr with the relative "Lara Marie Karr."
--Blueag9 19:37, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

I don't really know how to edit on Wikipedia, but I have confirmed that Karr's DOB is not Nov. 12, 1964, but rather Dec. 11, 1964. I work for a news publication, and I simply called the Sonoma County Registrar of Voters and asked for his DOB; (707) 565-6800. If you do a person search on Nexis.com you will also see that his DOB comes up as 12/1964. It seems like what happened was 12/11/1964 was inverted to 11/12/1964, hence the wrong DOB.

This site, http://www.job4teacher.com/Candidates/Candidates.html, no longer has any info on John Mark Karr; everything about him has been removed. Mdoc7 04:59, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Considering that Karr was a fugitive, he may have used an inaccurate DOB on purpose to evade law enforcement. --Dan East 14:24, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Content removed

Hello. I've removed the following content from the article per WP:BLP:

In 1996 Karr created a "support organization for kids" called PowerWurks[1]. Numerous Usenet posts linking Karr to questionable pedophelia exist in archives. For example, Karr apparantly posted a message to a K-12 chat newsgroup asking "The legal age to consent to sex, in many states of the U.S., ranges from 14 to 16. Do you think the age should be raised or lowered and why?"[2]. Other posts that can possibly be attributed to Karr include likely-fraudulent messages suposedly posted by young girls asking for pen-pals[3] [4].

I'm very concerned about such speculative original research regarding a person who must be presumed innocent until proven guilty. We must make sure all criticsm comes from reliable sources. Thanks. Rockpocket 06:24, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Perhaps some of my comments were out of line with some bias, but I think the links to the posts should at least stay with some explanation of what he actually posted. Posting links to posts that this fellow made doesn't fall under original research, right? Oh BTW, some news sources are now reporting he confessed. Anyway you can all fight it out, I'm going to sleep.

24.130.6.237 06:29, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

My concern is that there is no corroborating evidence that these posts are from the same John Karr. Until they have been reported by a reliable source, including them based on our own investigations is OR.
We can't provide such damning content based on the qualifier that they could "possibly be attributed" to him, or that he "apparantly posted a message". I'm sure the media will be all over this, however, and tomorrow we will be able to source it. Rockpocket 06:34, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

I am thinking to that the authorities will need to run a cotton swab q tip collecting the DNA over this guy to help confirm the burden of proof, the data should prove interesting
www.geocities.com/berniethomas68 06:54, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Hey Slim, I don't see why we're allowed to link to one Usenet posting by a guy @powerwurks.com, but not another one that's signed PowerWurks. 68.163.249.49 14:32, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

WIKIPEDIA EDITOR PLEASE VERIFY

As stated in one of the paragraphs, it may in fact be false that Karr was arrested for "sexual crimes." media outlets have been retracting stories that state he had been arrested for crimes in Thailand. The info should be either removed or much clarification done to it. Michaelh2001 08:46, 17 August 2006 (UTC) 08:45, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Agreed, unless that can be sourced....--Tom 13:13, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
I think we should note this is what the media said, but has since been retracted.

--OrbitOne [Talk|Babel] 13:46, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

I wondered about this as well. It was my gut feeling that it is rare to be charged with a sex crime in Thailand.Lowellt 16:02, 17 August 2006 (UTC)


The charges in 2001 was in the USA, not Thailand, was my gist.

Karr and Allison

I have no doubt that it takes very little rational thought to explain this, but it is interesting that Karr fits a lot of the predictions by the psychic Dorothy Allison. One of the big exceptions of course is his name. Still, I expect we'll see these similarities blown out of proportion on some television program any day now.

It doesn't take a psychic to have a guess at this guy's personality. 68.163.249.49 14:23, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
and we won't use a psychic as any type of "reliable source." Mdoc7 19:46, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

"Petaluma, Old Adobe, Liberty and Wilmar"

Petaluma is specified as being in California. Are the others also in that state? Uucp 13:53, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

They're all adjacent or near to each other in Sonoma County. --Plexust 20:32, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

More Usenet / PowerWurks

http://groups.google.com/group/alt.missing-kids/msg/a45d5b900f4cb1d2?dmode=source

In this message:

  • he claims to have 3 kids of his own
  • he uses anon.penet.fi to advertise PowerWurks, quite mysteriously
  • he makes the highly amusing statement: "All my plans revolve around kids."

Unfortunately, this is probably WP:OR as well, because of the anonymizer. 68.163.249.49 14:39, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the sleuthing... http://en.wikinews.org/wiki/Talk:Man_confesses_to_1996_murder_of_JonBenet_Ramsey -- Zanimum 16:07, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

And yet more usenet, and OR, in case more information on Lara is needed: Search Google Groups for message dated 1996/06/03 id 14871@powerwurks.com : if it's the same Lara, then she was born in 1972/1973. -213.219.187.253 02:20, 18 August 2006 (UTC)


I posted this above, but it's in the wrong place -- so it will be removed.

Folks, I have MORE information about the *possible* PowerWurks link with John Karr. The posts are there. Blog readers also came up with a link between Hamilton, AL and some of the "test" posts made by PowerWurks founder, John Karr. I am still NOT sure if this is the same John Karr. However, my blog has quite a bit more information that looks like there could be a potential link between PowerWurks' John Karr and *the* John Mark Karr arrested in Bangkok, Thailand. If I can leave a link to my info, it's http://sopebocks.blogspot.com.

Hoax section?

Maybe he said it to get out of Thialand. Isnt he in trouble there too? Arent they the ones that give you a life sentence for smuggling weed?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by [[User:{{{1}}}|{{{1}}}]] ([[User talk:{{{1}}}|talk]] • [[Special:Contributions/{{{1}}}|contribs]]).

How soon until its added? The prosecutors BETTER have DNA evidence or SOMETHING concrete, imho. --Tom 16:12, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

They do have male DNA found under JonBenet's fingernails if I recall correctly. If this matches, I imagine that would be pretty strong evidence. 24.12.163.71 18:02, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

That is correct, they do. Mdoc7 19:56, 17 August 2006 (UTC)


Can someone expand the "skepticism" section? Maybe post some links to sources that discuss other cases of people confessing to crimes they didn't commit? Is there a professional term for this sort of behavior? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.141.180.139 (talk • contribs).

Read False confession. wikipediatrix 00:02, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Remember this is an encyclopedia, not the outdated Current Affair show. Mdoc7 00:20, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm not sure what you mean by that. However, it's definitely a component here. just look at the tone of the titles of all the AP and Reuters stories that are coming out lately. --Elliskev 01:20, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
I meant that encylopedias, last time I checked, don't have sections on speculations, POV, etc. There is no justifiable reason for it, and we all know that speculations never have a place in history. Mdoc7 20:43, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
But the fact that notable people are skeptical about the main point of this article (his confession) should be addressed. Right? --Elliskev 21:08, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Though notables have been quoted in AP, Rueters, etc., encyclopedias don't do that. Mdoc7 21:16, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Hmmm. Well, I guess that's where we disagree. --Elliskev 21:19, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
I meant that it is not a news service... in the context of that. Mdoc7 21:24, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Resetting indent: I agree. I think we need to stay away from every rumor or juicy bit that comes along, but the fact that his confession is being questioned is now a major part of this. It can't be ignored. To do so would put his confession in an unrealistic context. --Elliskev 21:30, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Rumor has it John Mark Karr also confessed to 9/11, the assassination of JFK, and kidnapping the Lindbergh baby. All confessions were an attempt to be extradited, all being shot down due to the fact that he's a weirdie. - Paul August

Got a ref? And he's not a weirdie-- Have ya found out that's merely a subjective comment? Mdoc7 18:49, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

No hoax shall ever be supported by petty "references" or "evidence." This is the hoax section... everything will most likely be subjective here! - Paul August

OK, here's my entirely unfounded, far-fetched and knuckle-brained pre-coffee-this-morning conspiracy theory: He was paid off by the real killer to confess, given bits of unpublished information that would 'prove' his involvement. His family was broke, and he had the kind of background that would lend credibility to his guilt. The guy was going to kill himself later anyway. Kind of like the 'child molester' in the movie "Minority Report". ;) --Eric

Be wary

Let's be very, very careful about only reporting words that came from the mouths of sources here, and not let the article's language lapse into assuming he's the killer, even though it may seem to some like WP:CN. A lot of what Karr has said already does not mesh with what is already known about JBR's murder, and I feel it's quite possible Karr has made a false confession. Example: he now claims to have drugged JBR, yet the coroner's toxicology report says no drugs were detected. wikipediatrix 16:18, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Can drug screens really come back that quickly? It looks like he got them back in 24-48 hours, is that common for way back in 96' j/k. I also agree, see hoax section above..--Tom 16:45, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

I wouldn't be surprised at all if this ends up being revealed as a hoax in the next couple of days. Tallbuildings 19:18, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Hah- if indeed it ends up being a hoax, the guy will be prosecuted. Mdoc7 20:12, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
Well, probably. What, though, if he were to say something like "I pissed off a powerful mafioso in Thailand who told me that he was going to get me arrested on child prostitution/drugs charges, which can carry the death penalty. I called the US embassy and they were very unhelpful, saying they couldn't intervene if I hadn't yet been charged. I had to do something fast to get back to the US alive, so I made up a story that could get media attention, and get me out of the country in the company of US marshalls."
Let's face it, with a kiddie porn conviction on his record, he's always going to have a problem being employed in the US. However, if he really were innocent, and had a plausible reason for inventing this, there might be a lucrative book deal somewhere in it. Count me among those who don't think this purported "confession" will add up to much.  ProhibitOnions  (T) 21:44, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
I don't think he's been convicted of kiddie porn charges. I was under the impression he was working abroad because he fled rather than face those charges, and that he's facing those charges again now that he's been expelled to the U.S. heavensblade23 23:19, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Factual Accuracy and Verifiability.

==Online posting== According to a posted resume,[5] Karr was a teacher of young children in Europe, Asia, and the United States. He described his activities of one job in Germany as "changing, feeding, and bathing" a nine-month old baby. Karr expressed his excitement on Usenet at becoming an elementary school teacher, just months before the JonBenét Ramsey killing, stating "I can't wait to be a part of such a wonderful profession! I love children and I hope to have an impact on the lives of every child I teach".[6]

Other online resumes that appear to be Karr's say that he worked as a private teacher or caregiver in London, Paris, Amsterdam, Zurich, Milan, Osaka, Seoul, Sydney, Singapore, Taipei, Taiwan, and Istanbul.[7]

I removed this section because it fails WP:V. Unless the media reports on this, please do not post infomation like this. Let's be careful about what we say here. It must be factually accurate and we must be able to verify the infomation. dposse 16:21, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree that mentioning other resumes "that appear to be Karr's" is original research, but the job4teacher.com resume is verifiably the same man. Smokinggun.com has already posted a mirror of it to their own site in case it gets taken down. The Seattle Post-Intelligencer has mentioned it here. wikipediatrix 16:28, 17 August 2006 (UTC)


That entire section is unverifiable. saying stuff like "Other online resumes that appear to be Karr's say that he worked as a private teacher or caregiver in London, Paris, Amsterdam, Zurich, Milan, Osaka, Seoul, Sydney, Singapore, Taipei, Taiwan, and Istanbul" sends red flags up for me, doesn't it for you as well? I think it's better to be safe than sorry in this case. We can always add the section again with links and infomation that fall into what WP:V talks about. dposse 16:40, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
I already agreed with you about the "Other" resumes. I'm talking about the job4teacher resume, which the media has already referred to, verifiably. wikipediatrix 16:42, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
Then post a link from the media that says that, hopefully one that is in the national media. Just having the job4teacher link doesn't cut it. We should also try to change the language of the section if we are going to add it again. Doesn't it feel good to be working together instead of having a edit war? ^_^ dposse 16:48, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
Added a media link for the resume (it was already in the article). For the USENET post there is no media link but there will be within the next 24 hrs once the Google caches catch up and it can be searched on. I would ask that you leave it in the article for 24hrs, I'll add a {fact} tag - it is not critical of him, so its not a problem that needs to be removed right away. -- Stbalbach 17:52, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
It doesn't matter if its critical of him or not. All infomation on this article must meet WP:V guidelines. Posting a link from Google Groups doesn't meet those guildlines because there is no way to verify the accuracy of the infomation. Also, the "9 month baby" comment must have a reference, even if the reference is already in the article. I know i'm being anal here, but i'd rather be right now than have problems later. dposse 18:07, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
That is inaccurate, we have Template:Fact for a reason - the only reason you delete something outright is if you suspect it to be false and have some evidence to prove so - if someone is working to provide verification the fact tag is used in the meantime. I suggested 24hrs although really a fact tag can be in place weeks before it is deleted to give the user the courtesy of time to provide the verification. -- Stbalbach 18:21, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

In any case, the owners of that job4teacher site apparently must have heard about the arrest and yanked the resume. It is now a broken link. The D.O.B. entry is still there, however. Mdoc7 20:00, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Update: now everything about John Mark Karr has been removed from the site. Mdoc7 05:01, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

external links.

I have removed that link because it is spam. It does not add anything to the infomation on the article. The author is not notable, the website is not notable, and it doesn't belong here. Please only add links that add to the article. dposse 18:13, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

--I added it back - it is NOT spam. The author - had you actually Googled him - is a freelance journalist who has covered many criminal cases. Do some research before you make rash judgments.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.240.144.166 (talk • contribs).

OK, dposse, I am not going to play the DELETE - ADD- DELETE- ADD game with you. Do your research, though, and have a nice day.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.240.144.166 (talk • contribs).
You might wanna try being civil while replying on wikipedia. dposse 18:28, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
I AM being civil. You are reading too much into this. You made claims about the author without researching them, that's all. Besides, this was an "external links" entry, not a citation. But, no problem on my end. There are plenty of other outside profiles people can refer to. Again, have a nice day (no sarcasm).—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 72.240.144.166 (talk • contribs).

Blogs aren't usually notable enough for source citations, but there's nothing wrong with including them as External links or courtesy links. As better external links become available, this one may or may not get phased out, but for now, there's no reason not to include it. wikipediatrix 19:27, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

I was at the press conference and shot the whole thing on DV. It is posted on my site unedited. I have about 150 photos there as well. No ads. No spam, and no big media bias. The press conference was a madhouse..... —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 203.144.143.8 (talk • contribs) .

Hi Anon - Your probably right, but two problems. 1) Your site has no copyright information, therefore it is automatically copyrighted by default and can't be used (except as Fair Use). If it is in the Public Domain it needs to say so on your website, or even better use a Creative Commons license. 2) We don't know who you are, so we can't just assume that your word is enough permission. -- Stbalbach 13:42, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Ah, I just saw this, after I'd already put up a frame shot and a picture from the same site, except the frame shot was retrieved from within Google (video). A madhouse, indeed. Mdoc7 08:49, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

I had to flag it as a copyright violation for reasons above. Also not sure why you taged it as property of the US Government? -- Stbalbach 13:42, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

the strict guidelines to copyright is a different kind of madhouse. Wiki is very close to losing another editor. Mdoc7 16:21, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Copyrighted photo

I hate removing photos and so I won't, but this one is obviously copyrighted. You can even see the logo on it if you look carefully. Just an FYI. Moncrief 17:29, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

I'm wondering if this photo could be used instead. It's not very large and its copyright status is unknown, but I pulled it from his former resume. Any thoughts? http://www.job4teacher.com/sitebuilder/images/Karr_Photo-170x140.jpg 24.12.163.71 17:57, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

The mass media have appropriated that image from the site and have been using it, so might as well be hung for a sheep as for a lamb. wikipediatrix 19:28, 17 August 2006 (UTC)
..."hung for a sheep as for a lamb"... now how did you say that?  ;) Mdoc7 23:52, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

We need a photo. If there is no free version, than we should use a Fair Use copy. If we go Fair Use, then why not pick a good quality AP photo instead of the small and hard to see resume photo? -- Stbalbach 14:33, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

I put up a frame shot from a free video stream. Quality's not that good but it passes for now. Mdoc7 06:30, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

the "John Karr" redirect

Currently the article is redirecting from John Karr to John Mark Karr..... since there is a horror fiction author by the name of John Karr who may in fact be notable enough for his own article, I think some sort of disambiguation may be in order. Even if it involves creating an article for Karr, the author. wikipediatrix 19:59, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Googling John Karr still propagates results of the author and his book, above John Mark Karr. The media have also not been excluding the Mark in his name, so its reasonable for people to be searching for John Mark Karr, instead of just John Karr. The redirect needs to be removed. (btw, I know I'm rambling).Cannibaltom 20:31, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Added a dab page. -- Stbalbach 22:01, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Personally, I think this is a bit ridiculous. The author is not at all notable; he seems to have had only one book published, by a tiny publishing house. The Google results for John Karr the author will vanish within a week. The instinct to "protect" the author, so to speak, from the ignominy of being linked to the "real" John Karr is a noble one, but ultimately it isn't practical. Thousands of people share unfortunate names. That doesn't mean that anytime someone searches for, say, "Joel Rifkin", they shouldn't be pointed to a dab page that mentions a different Joel Rifkin who currently waits tables in Peoira. Raggaga 03:47, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
I agree. The assertion is, essentially, John Karr the author is notable because he shares the name with a notable person. If no one created the article before, why should we now? The redirect ought to be restored. StarryEyes 03:57, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
That is not the case. The assertion is the John Karr is a published author and is therefore notable and could have his own article. Dab pages for peoples names always come first, there is no "most common usage" redirect (unless it's a nickname). -- Stbalbach 04:16, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
I think we should wait and see what other people think, and even though I think it's "proper" to have the dab page, if the John Karr (author) remains red, and there no other John Karr's, technically there should be no dab page - dab pages are for navigating existing articles, can't navigate hypothetical articles. I searched some pay databases for biographical info on the author and could find nothing so I suspect creating an article for him would be difficult. -- Stbalbach 04:21, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

There is nothing in WP:DAB that precludes this action, and given the vast precedent for redlinked or non-article-bearing subjects in DAB pages, I see no reason for the fuss. For just a few examples among many, see James_Bennett, William Bell, John Bruce, Thomas Brown, Robert Clark, John Davis, etc. wikipediatrix 04:32, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

From Wikipedia:Manual of Style (disambiguation pages):
  • Links to non-existent articles ("redlinks") may be included only when an editor is confident that an encyclopedia article could be written on the subject.
I searched the largest database of author bibliographies (Contemporary Authors, Gale, [1]) and came up with nothing. There doesn't appear to be anything on Google, A9. Could you write an article about John Karr (author)? I think it's unlikely one will be created anytime soon. Pragmatically speaking. The purpose of dab pages is navigation, not to teach or inform on a subject, they are not articles. -- Stbalbach 04:51, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Broken Links

I removed 2 broken link refs citing the resume on job4teachers site, one of them twice now. The resume's been pulled. Mdoc7 22:15, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

I added the Google cache and a mirror of the Google cache. -- Stbalbach 01:08, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Here's another site where the resume is shown; it obviously came from the job4teacher site. There's no place for me to put it in a footnote. http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/0817061resume1.html

CNN article: Resume.

[2]

"Two resumes posted online with Karr's name and picture offered possible clues to his whereabouts after he left California.

Starting in 2001, one resume said, Karr was a private teacher and caregiver in Germany, the Netherlands, South Korea, Costa Rica and Honduras, almost always working with young children. The other resume was less detailed.

The longer resume said that in Germany he cared for two girls, ages 5 and 8, and a boy, 10, getting them ready for school and helping with homework.

"At days end, I made sure the children had their evening bath, then put them to bed and read to them before they went to sleep," the resume said.

From 2004-05, the resume said, he worked as a second-grade teacher in Honduras.

The authenticity of the resumes could not be confirmed. An English institute removed the shorter resume from its Web site Thursday in response to a reporter's query, citing concerns about bad publicity. A call to the administrator of the site with the longer resume was not immediately returned Thursday." dposse 00:45, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

These institutions don't want the negative publicity. We should approach it like CNN and assume they are real and add a disclaimer at the end, there is no evidence to suggest they are not real, and lots to suggest they are. CNN says it is "Karrs .. picture". -- Stbalbach 01:07, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
We must be careful with the resumes. We cannot post this infomation if it cannot be authenticated! dposse 02:00, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Dposse, it has be authenticated, according to the standards set by Wikipedia. Your personal standards of authentication are extreme. -- Stbalbach 02:27, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
No, it hasn't. Even CNN couldn't authenticate it. And what standards? I'm only following WP:V and common sense. dposse 02:32, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Your confusing verifiability with truth. We don't decide what is true on Wikipedia. The online resume is verifiable with 1) the primary source document and 2) the "Herman" footnote. If the Herman source (and many others indirectly BTW) say that the resume is Karr's, than we can quote that source and assume that the Herman source has verified it is Karr's (unless there is some reason to doubt the Herman source). If two sources differ (CNN says it cant verify), than we can say there is a difference of opinion. Relevant quote from WP:V:
"Verifiability" in this context does not mean that editors are expected to verify whether, for example, the contents of a New York Times article are true. In fact, editors are strongly discouraged from conducting this kind of research, because original research may not be published in Wikipedia. Articles should contain only material that has been published by reliable sources, regardless of whether individual editors view that material as true or false. The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is thus verifiability, not truth.
--Stbalbach 02:45, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
This has been a hot, frenzied write-up by more people than all the sources referenced. These people (editors) are concerned more with truth rather than verifiability- and one even quoted a source in a way that changed the context of the source. Can't expect consistency in the implementation of WP:V. So the cleanup takes time. Mdoc7 04:49, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Where? --Elliskev 12:38, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
There's no problem discussing the resumes as they're being discussed by the media, but the text should be written to make it clear that the material is not confirmed as his. SlimVirgin (talk) 13:11, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Footnotes

Could people please be careful not to remove or repeat references? Before adding a ref, check the Notes section to see whether it's already there and what its shortcut name is, then use it. Also, please add a full citation for new refs (byline, headline, publication, date), and not just a URL or "Rocky Mountain News." Finally, someone has been changing full citations back to URL only. I don't have time to check through the history to see who did it, but whoever you are, please don't! SlimVirgin (talk) 13:00, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

changing full citations back to URL only? Are you sure you're not misreading people adding sources as URLs only? as for adding full citations, well, to me, a full citation is {{cite news}}/{{cite journal}}. If this were an unbusy article, not prone to edit conflicts, I would certainly take the time for a full citation. On an article of this nature, I think it's better for someone who has a source to edit in that source first, to show that there is a source, and then they or someone else can format that source with a full citation. (I mean, this morning, I spotted the same source being used in two different references, and I went to consolidate the two, and found that in the single minute it took me to prepare that edit, you'd done the same consolidation. Busy article...) -- Antaeus Feldspar 14:10, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
I noticed the change some 9 hours ago. I thought what you did was good. Mdoc7 15:13, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

This usenet stuff

We CAN'T have it. Per Wikipedia:Reliable sources:

Posts to bulletin boards, Usenet, and wikis, or messages left on blogs, should not be used as primary or secondary sources.

Per Policy Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons:

Editors should remove any negative material that is either unsourced or relies upon sources that do not meet standards specified in Wikipedia:Reliable sources from any page, including those concerning living persons and related talk pages, without discussion; this is also listed as an exception to the three-revert rule. This principle also applies to biographical material about living persons found anywhere in Wikipedia. Administrators may enforce the removal of unsourced material with page protection and blocks, even if they have been editing the article themselves. Editors who re-insert the material may be warned and blocked. See the blocking policy and Wikipedia:Libel.

Please do not put his stuff back in. I'll just revert it. --Elliskev 13:18, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

  1. If the material is referenced in a secondary source it is allowed.
  2. The material is not of a negative nature.

I would ask that you work this out on the talk page before you "just revert it" - that can lead to more serious problems. -- -- Stbalbach 13:20, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

  1. That's why I kept the secondary-sourced material.
  2. It can be construed as being negative by being given supposed relevancy to the topic at hand, i.e. an allegation of pedophiulia and murder of a child.

I'm all for working it out, but not while ignoring policy. --Elliskev 13:25, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Elliskev is strictly speaking correct. We need to know of each posting, per V, RS, and BLP, that someone in the media has discussed it. My own view is that this is one of the rare occasions where referencing Usenet and personal posts to websites is okay. First, the material is not in and of itself negative per BLP. Second, the fact of his apparent posting to Usenet is being discussed in the media (though I don't know whether the particular posts we cite have been). Third, we wrote the material in such a way as to make clear that the posts were simply by someone of that name, accompanied by an image that looked like Karr, which is how the responsible news media has been discussing it too. However, it would be more in keeping with our policies if we could find secondary sources for each post we write about. SlimVirgin (talk) 13:32, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
I agree. Plus we have Template:Fact for a reason, it is "to put on notice" that additional material is needed. You don't delete things out-right from the article unless you believe them to be false and have some evidence for it. As I said yesterday this story is developing and its only a matter of time before the press mentions the Usenet stuff, it already has, we just need to hunt it out. -- Stbalbach 13:37, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
That's not right. Again:

Jimmy Wales has said: "I can NOT emphasize this enough. There seems to be a terrible bias among some editors that some sort of random speculative 'I heard it somewhere' pseudo information is to be tagged with a 'needs a cite' tag. Wrong. It should be removed, aggressively, unless it can be sourced. This is true of all information, but it is particularly true of negative information about living persons."[3]

A fact tag is not good enough --Elliskev 14:00, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Elliskev, you've violated 3RR. It's not clear that the 3RR exemption would apply here, as the material is not negative i.e. is not potentially defamatory. I don't think you should be reported for this, because it's a borderline case and you're acting in good faith, but it might be a good idea to be careful from now on. SlimVirgin (talk) 13:38, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm trying to do this without being a jerk, but policy specifically says that it should be removed "aggressively."

It should be removed, aggressively, unless it can be sourced. This is true of all information, but it is particularly true of negative information about living persons. - Jimmy Wales.

I apologize if it's frustrating, but there are some things that really aren't up for discussion. I think this a clear case of one of them.
I don't think that WP:3RR applies here, but I'll stop so this doesn't turn into a crazy anger-fest. I hope that someone else will come in and see that policy is being broken here. --Elliskev 13:54, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
I take your point about the use of primary sources, and how we need to be very careful, but in what way do you feel this is negative information about him? SlimVirgin (talk) 13:59, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Slim, Elliskev has not violated 3RR if he is removing material that violates WP:BLP. That's spelled out in black and white at WP:3RR. You point out that it's possible to argue that the content of the Usenet posts is not derogatory and potentially libellous in itself (even though it clearly is in the context of Karr's situation) but frankly, I think Elliskev has the right of it here; including such tenuous material and strongly implying that it has great significance in respect to Karr is a danger zone we don't need to traipse into. When a secondary source mentions it, we can mention it; if no secondary source can be found that mentions it, doesn't that say something about whether it's information reliable and significant enough to merit mention? -- Antaeus Feldspar 14:01, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
That's basically the reason why I think it's defamatory. The context of the situation puts the Usenet material in a prejudicial light. The posts are all about relationships with children. They even mention a missing and exploited child database. It's just too touchy coming from a Usenet source. --Elliskev 14:07, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
I don't see the Usenet material as negative, but you're right that no reliable source appears to discuss it. I've just looked for one and couldn't see anyone reliable discussing the Usenet posts, although we have one that discusses the website postings (admittedly I only spent a few minutes looking). On reflection, I agree that we should err on the side of caution, so I've made the paragraphs that rely on primary sources invisible, although if someone wants to remove them entirely, that's fine with me too. SlimVirgin (talk) 14:13, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
I should add that I don't see the issue as defamation, because he has thrust himself into the spotlight in the most negative way imaginable, so I doubt it'd be possible to libel him now. However, we should still be careful not to be the source of inaccurate gossip, for reasons of intellectual honesty and fairness, legal issues aside. SlimVirgin (talk) 14:16, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Thanks. I respect your read on it. Again, I don't want to be a jerk. I just want to make sure that we don't include what shouldn't be included and I think that this is something that we really don't want to include. And thanks for your comment that you believe that I was acting in good faith. It's nice to hear that. --Elliskev 14:20, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
You're very welcome. Your point about the material being negative in this particular context is a good one, and is taken. Thanks for helping to keep us on the straight and narrow. :-) SlimVirgin (talk) 14:28, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

It seems we have boxed ourselves into a corner where we can't say anything at all. I've redone the section from another angle. I'm not particularly happy with it because it portrays a controversy or no consensus, when in fact almost every news organization is reporting these resumes as factual and accurate. I'm still looking for sources to confirm the Usenet posts. -- Stbalbach 15:19, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

The resume stuff is fine. I never had an issue with that because it's sourced in accordance with WP:RS. I think your recent edits are very well done. If there are news reports (or any reliable secondary source for that matter) discussing the Usenet posts, I think they can go right back in using the same format you used for the resumes. The whole issue is going to them as the primary source. I have nothing against negative material. I just don't think we should include negative (or potentially negative) material that comes from a primary source that doesn't fit the guidelines of WP:RS. --Elliskev 15:27, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
This is what i saying above! I agree with Elliskev. dposse 15:47, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Yes, they're good edits, Stbalbach. SlimVirgin (talk) 13:43, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Anyway, we have at least one source now for the Usenet postings: [4]. Sarah Ewart (Talk) 13:58, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Two more [5] and [6]. Sarah Ewart (Talk) 14:03, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

from cnn

Bryce Smedley claims to know him.

< http://google.com/search?q=%22bryce%22+%22smedley%22+%22%22+%22%22++bangkok+christian+college++ >.

Hopiakuta 13:51, 18 August 2006 (UTC)


Lieutenant General Suwat Tumrongsiskul, Thai Immigration Police Commissioner &/or Police Chief.

Someone might want to show that his title has been represented in @ least ten variations.

Hopiakuta 14:22, 18 August 2006 (UTC)


Bryce Smedley 21:15, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

< http://daytondailynews.com/news/content/oh/story/news/sns0818ramseylocal.html >.

Hopiakuta 21:15, 19 August 2006 (UTC)


I am new to editing wikipedia, and I don't want to get in over my head by adding anything to this page. I just wanted to supply an additional information link that I did not see in the sources or on this talk page. If it's there and I missed it, I sincerely apologize. The link is < http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/08/18/karr.questions/index.html?section=cnn_topstories >. It includes video links to Karr stating that he wrote to Patsy Ramsey and a forensic pathologist who delineates some of the holes in Karr's story. I thought this information might be helpful to people, or at least for certain types of sourcing. If not, I apologize for wasting people's time. Mrs. S.E.O. 21:47, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

I see your ref has been added. Mdoc7 01:11, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Possible evidence?

I found this article from The Rocky Mountain News to be interesting. Would the information from this article fit under the section "Possible Evidence?" http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_4927208,00.html --Blueag9 23:53, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, I put it in, thanks Mdoc7 01:31, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Section title

Maybe it's just me, but there's something about the title of this section that bothers me. It's just too.... I don't know... Wiki-investigatory? Can we come up with a better name? Something that will fit in with a possible section regarding charges or a trial, without being crystalballish? --Elliskev 01:54, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

I changed this to "Possible guilt factors" "Factors of possible suspect culpability" How's that? Mdoc7 02:29, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

sorry, I missed the changes. Right now it's Incriminating factors cited by the media. Seems kinda weaslish, but I can't think of anything better. Your changes were pretty good, too. --Elliskev 01:19, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

No problem, I agree with your change, too. Mdoc7 03:37, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Yearbook Abbreviation

In the article it says "the words in initial-capitalized letters do not appear anywhere in the yearbook as an acronym" - neglecting to note that all of the words are completely written in capitalized letters [or better, upper-cased]. This should possibly be changed, or added to. It may be that whoever wrote this has not seen a copy of the said yearbook page.

You're right, it was an oversight. Changed; thanks. Mdoc7 01:24, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Small opinion and observation on my part

This growing article here on Wikipedia as it continues to develop oand unfold over time about this guy for when it is carefully read over by the reader each day makes him sound so incredibly mentally fragmented and deranged and seems to best characterize him as having no useful cement of reality inside of his head. He sounds like a socio path with no fundamental compassion for anything. www.geocities.com/berniethomas68

This is unfounded speculation.heavensblade23 01:46, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Another item of interest

This piece of information might be worthy to add to this article or the Jonbenét article:
"There have been e-mail confessions in the case before," Wood said. "John Ramsey has received e-mail confessions in the past and nobody was arrested."[7] (Lin Wood is the Ramsey family attorney.)--Blueag9 05:42, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Original Research Rule

I hate to admit it, but after reading about the no origional research rule in the wiki policies, it looks like the following two sections are close to violating that rule:

  • Possible suspect culpability
  • Questions about confession

That's because nobody (in the litigation business, maybe the media, too) said anything about evidence. We are just building up two opposing views compiled from media source references -- that makes it original research. The media didn't do the compilation. Mdoc7 06:35, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Ive seen this guys face before. Has he been on the news before?

Not to my knowledge. Mdoc7 19:01, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

It seems to me that the accumulation of evidence already noted in the media is not original research -- but the headers might be, as they might be read as a synthesis of the evidence underneath. "Questions about confession" is a little better in that department, as many news organizations have probably already said something like "Officials said there were still questions about Karr's confession, blah blah blah". But overall if we could find headers that organize the evidence neatly while not making (or appearing to make) presumptions about what that evidence means, it'd be for the best. -- Antaeus Feldspar 14:54, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

OK that makes it clear. Mdoc7 20:14, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

fair use pictures.

we need to get a fair use picture of John Mark Karr. It needs to be one that has been taken since his arrest. If anyone can find one, please upload it. dposse 17:13, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

Should be easy enough to create a screenshot of one of his TV appearances... wikipediatrix 22:16, 19 August 2006 (UTC)
yeah, right. Mdoc7 04:29, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
If you can get a screenshot, then please do so. We really need a picture on this article! dposse 21:43, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
That photo that's there now is my work. Copyright's still unclear. It's up to the guy who made the video and put it on manonthestreet.com. Mdoc7 02:07, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
BTW, I didn't put the photo back in. Somebody did, and now it's gone again. Mdoc7 02:47, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Isn't his mugshot public domain?146.115.113.69 23:03, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Thai Wiki article?

Could someone with knowledge of the Thai script check the Thai Wikipedia to see if there is an article on him or the case? Having an interlanguage link for this article would be nice. -Fsotrain09 19:00, 19 August 2006 (UTC)

I think not... the only person who could read and write both languages is the suspect himself -- hehe. Maybe there are others around here, but it's been three days now. Mdoc7 18:54, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Suicide Watch

Source: http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/08/19/ramsey.arrest/index.html

Since Karr's arrest, two English-speaking Thai guards have been monitoring him at all times, Thai officials confirmed to CNN. But they said that the around-the-clock presence was not a suicide watch. <-- The wikipedia article says he is on a suicide watch. 67.173.153.119 15:53, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Read the source. [8]

"Karr is currently detained in Thailand and is on a 24-hour suicide watch. Upon arrival in the United States, he faces charges in Boulder, Colo., in connection with the 1996 murder of JonBenet Ramsey." dposse 17:19, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Yeah, but he's not in Thailand anymore, so it a mute point. We could say that while he was in Thailand, he was under a suicide watch.--MONGO 17:25, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Then let's say that. He probably will be kept on suicide watch, and if the media reports that he is on suicide watch in a American prison, then i'll add it. dposse 17:44, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Every media report since last night has steadfastly denied that he has ever been under a suicide watch. wikipediatrix 17:48, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Then how exactly do you explain ABC News saying that he was on a suicide watch on August 18, 2006? I doubt that ABC News would make that much of a slipup. dposse 17:58, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
It doesn't matter what I think or how I explain it. Subsequent reports have denied or contradicted the initial suicide watch report. Like this one. Still, WP:V is about verifiability, not truth, so I'm not saying we shouldn't use the ABC report, I'm saying it should be tempered with other, more recent and updated, reports like the CNN one I just cited. wikipediatrix 19:24, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
You could say that ABC News reported that he was on suicide watch, while other news organizations "contradicted the initial suicide watch report." dposse 20:07, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

I read on MSNBC.com that he is on suicide watch now. Should this info be add? I don't see how it's relavent to the article overall.ShadowWriter 00:54, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

"JonBenet suspect on suicide watch", August 23, 2006. -- Antaeus Feldspar 19:54, 24 August 2006 (UTC)


That's the article I was refering to. But is him being on sucide watch relevent to the overall case aginst him? ShadowWriter 21:00, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Sipping Champagne??

Please tell me this ain't so [9]. The guy is in business class? What, we don't want him to get leg cramps? This has gotten to be WAY too much...--Tom 19:13, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Yep, it's true. It's also been reported that he had a dinner of paté and shrimp. dposse 20:04, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

Why is this information even in the article? Is information about what Karr had for dinner really pertinent to the article? heavensblade23 22:50, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

It doesn't really matter if you do not think it's relevant or not. It's part of his trip to the United States. There's nothing wrong with it. dposse 23:06, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Whoa! Yes, what another editor thinks is relevant DOES matter just as much as what you think. No one WP:OWNs this article, not you, not him, not me. I think you owe heavensblade23 an apology. Personally, I think the dinner info is acceptable for the moment, but will probably have be trimmed in time as the article gets longer and meatier with more important data. But Wikipedia articles are sculpted by consensus, not bullying. wikipediatrix 23:50, 20 August 2006 (UTC)


Relevancy to the article doesn't matter? I was under the impression extraneous information shouldn't be posted to the article, as they're not intended to be an exhaustive resource on the subject. Should we include a note about how many times he went to the bathroom or whether he watched the in-flight movie? heavensblade23 23:12, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
This is wikipedia. It isn't your usual encyclopedia. Going to the bathroom is too trivial, however his last meal before being in the United States is not. dposse 23:21, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
I've been reading wikipedia for years now, I'm well aware of the generalities of how it works. Even wikipedia articles have an appropriate scope and I don't think this qualifies, unless you want to make an argument that it should be included for now (while it's a current event) and eventually removed (as the article ages). I doubt you or anyone else thinks this is information that should be recorded for the next 10 years. Anyone else want to weigh in here?heavensblade23 23:42, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Even the national media like CNN has reported about his dinner. [10] dposse 23:43, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Which is appropriate for a news article that will read now and mostly forgotten by tomorrow. Knowing what Karr had for dinner doesn't tell us anything important about Karr, or his relation to the JonBenet case. That's why I say it's irrelevant to the article. At what point does what Karr had for dinner become too trivial to include? Tomorrow? A week from now? Do you think a month from now it will still be worth including in the article?
o.O fine. i'm sorry. I was out of line with that one. But that doesn't mean the infomation is going to be removed from this article since it's in the national media. dposse 23:58, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
I am getting tearried eyed the way everybody's getting along so nicely :) J/K. Anyways, the reason I WOULD include it is because its SO freaking unusuall. WHY is he getting wined and dined WITHOUT handcuffs. Because he hasn't been formally arrested? So he reveals some info because he is so relaxed and DRUNK?? Its unusall to say the least so it is releveant...I guess :)....--Tom 00:05, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
I might be able to buy that argument, but it would be better if it was explained why it was unusual, and why it was done in this case. And it would probably still need pruned eventually. heavensblade23 00:06, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
Have you ever heard of a suspect, who jumped bail on a child porno charges in Cali, get what the media is calling "the royal treatment" while on his way back to face charges? [11] The media is speculating that he is getting everything he is asking for so than he will talk later on. It's in the media now, on CNN, MSNBC, ect, so it shouldn't be a problem to keep it in this article.
"Authorities probably had a very good reason for allowing JonBenet Ramsey murder suspect John Mark Karr to live it up on the 15-hour flight to the United States, legal experts say -- they wanted him to talk."

I added infomation on why the dinner infomation is important in the article, with a citation. If you want me to expand on that, i can.dposse 04:50, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Much better, though I think the quote should be taken out, or at least truncated. I think it reads better without it. Something like "It was suggested in the news media that Karr was given unusual priviledges on the flight back to the US as a way of getting him to divulge information about the JonBener case." In whatever wording you see fit, of course. heavensblade23 05:37, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
I'm glad you like it. And i think that the quote says a great deal about what the authorites are willing to do even before the interrogation begins to end this case once and for all. dposse 05:53, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

John Mark Karr and a sex change

I respectfully disagree with the repeated deletion of the link on the breaking news of John Mark Karr seeking a sex change operation. A site's status as a blog is not a reason to disqualify; the author is a national journalist. Also, in the future be so kind as to offer a replacement, instead of merely deleting the material. There will soon be national media sites offering the same information. Thanks!Historymike 19:46, 20 August 2006 (UTC)

The national media has been on this for hours now. Here's one. wikipediatrix 19:48, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
Here's another. dposse 20:02, 20 August 2006 (UTC)
I request that it never be said that that scumbag is a transsexual. He is just a pervert with rampant transvestic fetishism or Autogynephile who is confused. Please do not let what this person ( and I used the word loosely) has done rub off on us all.--66.92.130.180 00:07, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
I disagree. Whether or not Karr is a transexual does not, or at least should not, have any bearing on what anyone thinks of transexuals. In any case I don't think wikipedia should be in the business of diagnosing what form of gender dysphoria, if any, he has.heavensblade23 00:28, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
Brilliant! Let's suppress infomation just because he is a disgusting disgrace for a human being. dposse 04:54, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
He's a potential disgusting disgrace for a human being. He's not yet been convicted of any crime, though some of the information that has surfaced does not bode well for any criminal proceedings he might be involved in. heavensblade23 05:39, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Karr may not have been in Alabama after all

[12] This article states that his ex-wife didn't intend to state that he was with her in Alabama in Xmas 96. The section about inconsistencies in his confession should be edited to reflect this. heavensblade23 00:38, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

done. thanks, Mdoc7 02:03, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

SPEAKING of Alabama, JMK's ex-wife's name is Quientana Shotts, not Quintana Shotts. And the possessive form of the name is Shotts's, not, as written, Shott's.

I read that article, and it does not say that at all - specifically, it does NOT say that Lara recanted what she said about him being with her that Christmas. What she wanted to clarify was her stance towards Karr. I can understand why this sentence could lead you to believe that (emphasis mine): "Rains emphasized that Lara Karr wanted to correct the misimpression of a previous comment she made recalling that she and her husband were together in Alabama on Christmas Day in 1996." However if you read the next sentence it becomes clearer, "Rains said it was not an effort to establish an alibi for Karr or a vote of support for him." She doesn't want to correct her actual comment - she just doesn't want to give the impression that she is somehow standing up for Karr, or feels he is innocent or incapable of comitting that crime. She obviously has a strong dislike for the guy, but she simply wants the truth to be known - quite admirable in my opinion. --Dan East 13:55, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Flight food

I don't think it's really necessary to write about the food he ate, but shouldn't it be mentioned that he was not extradited, but rather "expelled" from Thailand? I think the article should probably mention that. Any thoughts? --MZMcBride 01:44, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

There's an ongoing discussion about that under the "Sipping Champagne" heading.heavensblade23 01:45, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
It's already in the article that he was deported. That is good enough. dposse 04:41, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

details in the break in JonBenet's case section indicate he was indeed deported. Mdoc7 00:14, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Twin Towers Correctional Facility info added to 2006 Arrest section

I added the documented information that he was taken by helicopter to Twin Towers Correctional Facility in Los Angeles. I also replaced the reference to include an LA Times article that includes this information. The previous CNN article link was factual, but did not include this information. As a side note to this, I updated the Twin Towers Correctional Facility article on Wikipedia to include the fact that the TTCF is often referred to as the Twin Towers Jail - sometimes as a proper noun - in the media. Michaelh2001 08:50, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Looks good. Thanks. dposse 14:40, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
dposse, do you know if anything was done on the plane before he disembarked? The talking heads speculated that they cleared him through customs ON the plane before taking him off. Not a biggie but it does effect the wording. Thanks --Tom 16:57, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
dposse he was wisked from the AIRPORT, not the plane itself. He had to clear customs which probably took place on the plane, hence the delay. Were you watching last night? Also, he was never arrested in Thailand, why is that in the article?? --Tom 17:14, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
Would you please stop biting my head off? We all make mistakes. dposse 21:49, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

"Some in the media have speculated"

Dposse, why did you find it necessary to change my phrase "Some in the media have speculated" to the vaguer and all-inclusive "The media has speculated", when my version is more specific and therefore more accurate? The media in general, as a whole, does not speculate in unison with one will. It really seems like you're constantly making rash changes to this article just because you can. wikipediatrix 18:46, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

I have to agree. "Some in the media" is "better" wording than "The media", imho. --Tom 19:08, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
Agreed. heavensblade23 21:26, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
Don't be a asshole. dposse 18:49, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Then don't act like 'an' dumbass. Grammaticus Repairo 20:54, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Mugshot

I added the mugshot. It was handed out to the media by the LASD so I assume there are no copyright issues. I think it should work well until we can find an alternative. Yesyoudid 19:58, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

As far as I know mugshots are a matter of public record and thus free of copyrights.heavensblade23 21:23, 21 August 2006 (UTC)
the mugshot is fair use, per instructions on the mugshot template on the image page, and it needs to have a fair use rationale included, or the image will be deleted. -- Stbalbach 01:50, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
I see now how fair use can be justified in this particular case. Mdoc7 16:26, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Emails

Here's more information regarding the emails between him and Tracey: http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/local/article/0,1299,DRMN_15_4933325,00.html. Can someone find a place to add this info? --Blueag9 20:40, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

That's a very good synopsis of a break in the case. I put it in a new section. Mdoc7 23:23, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Extradition hearing, extradition to Colorado and trial/appeals

I have added the documented news of his imminent extradition hearing, with a link to the relevant media article, directly below the news of his arrest. I worded it in such a way that the words originally used, "has been set", can be replaced with "was held", after the hearing. That way after this sentence is modified, what happens/happened at the hearing can be added with the relevant link. I would also note that this is a separate event to his arrest. In addition, when he is taken to Colorado, that should be separate as well. Finally, if and when he is put on trial, that is likewise a separate event. Unless he is assaulted or something else unexpected happens to him while in custody in Los Angeles, the arrest has been sufficiently documented and should stand out from everything to follow, imho. Michaelh2001 21:27, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

I haven't read it in detail, but be careful with "crystal-balling" and don't get too far into it. Better not foretell in advance. Mdoc7 23:53, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

Sex change information moved

The sex change information, while very relevant to Karr's life, had nothing to do with his arrest. I moved it to its own section. I think we can all agree that while this information is relevant, it is incidental to his arrest. Michaelh2001 21:40, 21 August 2006 (UTC)

merging "Break in JonBenét case" and "2006 arrest".

Those two sections kinda go hand in hand. Can anyone think of a way that we can merge those two sections? dposse 00:14, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

no merge is necessary. but if you insist, put the break in case section inside "2006 arrest" under subsection "Break in Case" header, and the rest of "2006 arrest" text in another subsection header. But I disagree with the merging idea. If you want to add to the section, go ahead, but keep the sections separate. Mdoc7 00:22, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Why do you disagree? Aren't the two sections pretty much the same thing? dposse 00:27, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
No, they are not the same thing. the break is not part of the arrest, and vise versa, hence two separate sections. They are also separate in chronological terms and major milestones. Mdoc7 00:47, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
The break happened because they found Karr and detained him. dposse 02:12, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
No, the break happened because of Karr's two mistakes, which led to his "arrest," but it was not a formal arrest because of the jurisdiction. Leave this alone. Mdoc7 03:43, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
No reason to be a jerk, man. I was just asking a question. dposse 00:47, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
WP:NPA. You've been warned already. wikipediatrix 13:06, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

2000 arrest

I changed the word in the first sentence from "arrested" to "detained", despite what the referenced news sources say. A formal arrest was made after the suspect landed in LA by officials with the Boulder County District Attorney's office who were waiting for him at the airport. This ref says, "If Karr says something incriminating that is challenged in court, Pozner said, the investigator [Mark Spray] who was sitting next to him simply says he was never in my custody." http://www.cnn.com/2006/LAW/08/20/karr.treatment.ap/index.html But I leave the heading "2000 arrest" intact. Mdoc7 05:47, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

If he taught in so many countries, how many languages does he speak?

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 206.54.199.117 (talk • contribs).

He certainly has to be able to speak Thai, Spanish and German, probably more. But he has only a community college degree in Elementary Education. Weird. (And where does an unemployed schoolteacher get the money to travel all over the globe? Looks like the Lee Harvey Oswald comparison is getting realer all the time.) We should avoid stating he speaks any foreign languages, though, until reliable sources are found that spells it out, rather than infers it. wikipediatrix 13:48, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

he speaks Canadian as well.

Heh-heh. Actually, to work as an English teacher in many countries requires only a knowledge of English, so the living abroad by itself doesn't prove much. He may know a smattering of other languages or he may be a polyglot. Unless we can source this, it shouldn't be in there.  ProhibitOnions  (T) 20:42, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

"contains advertising which capitalizes on the high traffic the site experiences"

Shall we mention the ads on the New York Times, Rocky Mtn News, etc pages too? Let's be fair here. There are no ads on that page anyway, someone fix this.24.127.66.119 06:19, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree; I find no ads there either. The phrase is removed because there's no supporting ref to go with it, though it does make sense to "capitalize on it". But it is not apparent. Mdoc7 14:01, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

When I added that to the article there was indeed advertising on the powerwurks.com site - both on the side and bottom of the page. One was Amazon affiliate links to purchase books relating to the Ramses. I don't remember what the other was. I agree the inclusion of that was questionable, however considering the domain was grabbed up so quickly when the story broke, by someone so quick to condemn and persecute someone they don't know (not that I'm defending Karr in the least), seemed to me to be capitalizing on the event. Even JonBonet's own family is not so quick to throw mud at a suspect as the guy that runs that site now. So what's his point in running the site? Justice? Profit? Notoriety? --Dan East 01:46, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

It's no longer in the article any more so I guess it doesn't really matter but if you add content to an article based on your opinion that the owner "Seemed to be capitalizing on the event", that is certainly original research as well as a NPOV statement. JohnM4402 03:24, 25 August 2006 (UTC)


rape

Why changed "raped" to "possibly sexually abused"? He's admitted sex with JonBenet, and sex with a minor is statutory rape whether it was consensual or not. wikipediatrix 13:37, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

The change is proper as is, because the attached ref has only this: "An autopsy report indicated she may have also been sexually assaulted." There's no confession of rape there. If you're gonna add a ref supporting your contention, be careful, because Thai officials corrected a mistaken charge as just rumor. (I barely remember the details) Mdoc7 14:15, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

Since I made that change, I'll comment as well. The context of that sentence is not Karr's claims, but facts relating to JonBenet. Thus we can't say she was raped just because of his claim. Also, the main JonBenet article makes no mention of rape whatsoever. --Dan East 14:32, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

I remember the details now- it was about Karr drugging the child. And I agree with Dan here. Mdoc7 14:45, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

If I recall the autopsy findings correctly, the evidence did not indicate penile intercourse, but rather was consistent with either digital (finger) penetration or penetration with a foreign object. Grammaticus Repairo 05:26, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

According to statements Karr made to Thai officials, that is how Karr defined sex:

Karr also told a Thai officer that he had "sex" with JonBenet, who was 6, before her December 26, 1996, death but "there was no penetration," a Thai official said Wednesday.

"Karr then said, 'There are so many ways to have sex,' then he went quiet," Thai Immigration chief Gen. Suwat Tumrongsiskul said.[13]

I don't put a whole lot of stock in what the Thai officials have said, after all the other false information they released and later recanted, but that's what CNN reported. --Dan East 06:37, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

parents

does anybody know why he went to live with his grandparents? i havent seen anything about this guy's mother, only his father. did his mother die early on or something? Yesyoudid 19:17, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

I heard a rumor that his mother attemted to kill him as an infant. Weather this is true or not is yet to be seen. ShadowWriter 21:51, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

its very possible that this guy had a colorful childhood. a good mother probably would've kept him from wearing that mullet. Yesyoudid 23:05, 22 August 2006 (UTC)

original research on distance, drive time, etc.

There seems to be some attempt to perform original research on how far Karr would travel or how long it would take to get from where he was purported to be to Boulder. Why this attempt is made is not clear, but perhaps it is to cast doubt on the likelihood he was in Boulder. Unless a reputable source is making this research, it should not be on Wikipedia. I'll also add that while Karr's wife has said he spent Christmas in Alabama, his Father has said Karr was in Georgia. Neither of these conflict at all with Karr being in Boulder for the Ramsey Christmas party, since that party wasn't held on Christmas. Bottom line, stop trying to draw conclusions on your own; cite articles that contain the conclusions you are pointing out. - O^O

Could you please take the time to read the references, so as to not waste your and more importantly my time? From the reference immediately after the sentence you just removed:
Karr's former teenage wife Lara Knutson who said he was 1,500 miles away at the time celebrating Christmas with her.
And here's the sentence of mine you removed, claiming it is "original research":
1,500 miles away from where his former wife Lara recollects Karr was that Christmas.
So is my addition of the word "recollects" the original research or what? I'll allow you to add the sentence back in this go-around. --Dan East 01:37, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Why do you need glasses to see that? (Just kidding- hehe) Mdoc7 01:16, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Dan, respectfully, I think that what the Daily Mail article says and what you wrote were slightly different things. His wife claims he was 1,500 miles away "at the time of the killing" (which would have been late on the evening of the 25th). In the article here, that distance was inserted immediately after a statement about the Christmas party, which was on the 23rd. Perhaps the best thing to do here is to isolate the distinct claims as individual bullets, instead of running them all into one. I'll do that now (and include the 1,500 mile statement clearly). - O^O
Thanks. --Dan East 12:34, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Chronology

OO, it's a small point, but the reason I wrote the early life section as I did is that the usual thing is to say how or where X was raised, and if it's with his grandparents, it raises the question why, and then you answer that by explaining about the mother. I think it makes more sense that way than chronologically. SlimVirgin (talk) 00:22, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

It doesn't matter to me, but it depends on the text flow. Which, BTW, we are sorely in need of. This section needs a build-up; it stands out like a sore thumb. Mdoc7 01:29, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

SV, that's fine with me. It just seemed more logical to do things in the order they happened, but now I understand your logic. Either way would work. - O^O 04:48, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

the insanity of Patricia Elaine Adcock.

Can someone find a link to exactly what Karrs mother suffered from? Did she hear voices or something? Also, can anyone find the hospital that she stayed (or is staying) at? dposse 00:46, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

I think she died in 2000, so she isn't in a hospital currently. - O^O
Well, please add that with a citation. All i'm asking for is more infomation about what her illness was and the proper name to the hospital. dposse 04:59, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Christmas Party

Did Karr attend one or two Xmas parties at the Ramsey residence? The article makes it sound like he attended one in 1996 and one in 2001, though I have a sneaking suspicious both references are talking about 1996. This could be clarified by changing the wording on the latter reference. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Heavensblade23 (talk • contribs).

No idea. This is the first i've heard of it. dposse 00:56, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
No. In 2001 Karr confessed to Wendy Hutchens that he attended a Christmas party at the Ramsey residence the day she was killed. I'll look at the wording. --Dan East 01:24, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
The Christmas party at the Ramsey residence was on December 23rd. Don't know where this piece fits into the puzzle. - O^O 04:49, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Well, from this source: "telling an acquaintance that he broke into the Ramsey house the night of the slaying. " Then from the next paragraph, "Karr told her that he met JonBenet at the family's Christmas party, then sneaked back into the house that night through a downstairs storm window." So unless he snuck into the house multiple times, the source is indicating that the party was less than 24 hours before the murder. --Dan East 12:33, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
What can I say Dan, the source contradicts things already known about the case. The Ramsey family Christmas party was on the 23rd in their home. The Ramsey's went to a Christmas party on the 25th in the home of the White family. I think that there is no problem with citing that source as a standalone bullet, but I don't think we should string together what a series of sources claim and use them to make (or imply) a conclusion, especially when their are so many contradictions. I obviously don't know what exactly happened in that house on the evening of the 25th, but I do know that saying there was a Ramsey family Christmas party the day the JonBenet was killed is in conflict with what are thought to be established facts. - O^O 17:45, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Early Life

I just put in a lot of text from one source in this section; some of which do not belong there. My neck is hurting a little so I have to stop looking at the screen for a while. Edit away! Mdoc7 02:15, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Never mind, I have edited it and cleaned it up... you can, of course, further edit.Mdoc7 02:53, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Correct method of placing ref tags

I find myself copy editing this article a little too much over the same issue. Please take note that reference tags immediately follow punctuation, except for dashes, which they precede. There is no space between punctuation (periods/commas) and the referance tag. The following sentences have the ref tags in the proper location:

  1. John Mark Karr is a suspect in the case.[8]
  2. Karr was deported from Thailand[9] and was flown to California.[8]
  3. He is reported to be facing charges of murder, kidnapping, assault,[10] although doubts have been expressed.

For more information, visit Wikipedia:Footnotes. Thanks! --Blueag9 04:35, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree. Mdoc7 04:52, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Michael Tracy, or Michael Tracey?

Two refs each have the respective last name spellings. Which is the correct one? Mdoc7 04:50, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Passport

Was Karr traveling with a US passport? If so, was that passport revoked when the arrest warrant was issued in December 2001? If so, was the revocation communicated to immigration officials around the world? If so, did they fail to note it, or did he bribe them to overlook it? Dynzmoar 12:50, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Strong new "evidence"

I just added in some items from Quientana Ray's (Karr's first wife) television interview. If the information is accurate (specifically, if she isn't making it up) then my personal view has finally swayed that Karr is indeed guilty of the murder. The fact that he signed those letters SBTC pretty much pushed me over the edge. Also, I have a hunch that the information he has provided, that was never released to the public, was the fact that JonBenet was drugged. As bad as the Boulder police screwed things up they may have had a single ace up their sleeve related to the condition of JonBenet's body. --Dan East 14:31, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

I've gone back and forth, personally. At this point I'm leaning towards guilt, though obviously we have yet to hear a word of his defense strategy which could change everything. heavensblade23 00:16, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Who's to know. There seems to be alot of people wanting publicity from this case. Why didn't all of this info come out years ago? If a crime was comitted; why did her parents not do something then? If my child snuck out and got married at 13/14 years old; I wouldn't wait a year to do something about it. That shouldn't have been legal anyway. She lied about her age and had no parental consent,supposedly. Does that make for an illegal marriage? Do something the day she gets back-don't wait a year!!Lynn01 06:18, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Birthdate

Was Karr born on the 11th or the 12th? Yesyoudid 14:39, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

There is conflicting information. This was already discussed here. --Dan East 14:42, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Birthdate of 12th: The ref attached to it said so, but I think it's wrong. I put it there; I removed it. Mdoc7 14:47, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

CNN article with specific times

I haven't incorporated this into the article, but I wanted to mention it in case someone els would like to. A CNN article[14] contains specific times stated by Karr during the flight that relate to the murder. He said he gained entry to the house at 5, and stayed in the house all night. He said the Ramseys did not get home until 10. This may conflict with statements he made in 2001 that said he attended the Christmas party and sneaked back into the house later that night - unless he gained access to the house on separate occasions. The first on the 23rd after the party, and the second would have been on the 25th at 5 PM, placing him in the house early the 26th when the murder occurred. --Dan East 14:42, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

I took a look at this, and it's unsufficient data to create a timeline out of it in the 48 or so hours before the murder. A timeline's a good idea. Mdoc7 20:30, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Urban Dictionary Definition

I posted this on the main page and it was deleted for some reason...Wikipedia should be a collection of the newest and groundbreaking information, a chance for internet users to share their findings...if this is not "fact" I don't know what is. Check it out for yourself.

Shortly after Karr's arrest, internet users found that the definition of the word "Karr" on Urban Dictionary was, <deleted> The author of the definition was given as "john" and the date the definition was created was December 1, 2003--before Karr was even being tracked. The author "john" had created 954 definitions in Urban Dictionary, the first definition made on July 5, 2002 and the most recent one being created on June 19, 2006--which is the month when authorities began tracking Karr. It is unknown whether this piece of evidence will have an effect in the Karr case or if it is just a coincedence.

--Sam Cohen 11:10, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Well actually Wikipedia should specifically not be that, we wait until something has been covered by a reliable source, see WP:V and WP:RS. You might try WikiNews though, which is for what you describe. --W.marsh 15:20, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
I agree it doesn't belong. Also, when you search for contributions by "John" in Urbandictionary, the results are simply anyone that free-texted that name when they added a definition. That is not an actual user account, thus there isn't anything actually linking contributions (unlike Wikipedia users, which are well-defined and password-protected entities). --Dan East 15:53, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

I deleted it because it is not appropriate content for a living person; it's inflamatory. To re-iterate from the top of the page: Mdoc7 15:24, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

You're mistaken. Wikipedia is an encylopedia, not a place to post every little unconfirmed rumour. heavensblade23 23:46, 23 August 2006 (UTC)

Damon Karr/stymied music career

CNN just has a bit about John Mark Karr apparently taking a shot at a pop music career in the 1980s. Thought I'd mention it here in case anyone wants to look into it. I might try to dig up some sources and post them on the discussion page here. I gotta say, this article is looking pretty good in the past few hours. -Zeno Izen 18:33, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
This Karr story is getting weirder and weirder... dposse 18:48, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
I agree. Makes it more interesting to keep the article updated.heavensblade23 23:34, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
Truth stranger than fiction? --Dan East 01:39, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
I think that if information can be found on his attempt at a pop career it should be added to the article. Jb 007clone 15:47, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Lamborghini

While we're talking about "weirder and weirder", a former schoolmate of Karr said he drove a Lamborghini in high school! "He was very noticeable because he had a Lamborghini. It was the only one I ever saw in Alabama," said Jones."[15] Were his parents filthy rich or what? --Dan East 14:19, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

One of his college profs said she remembers him "tool(ing) around in a Porsche." [16] Sarah Ewart (Talk) 14:38, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
I seem to remember CNN reporting that it was a red Delorean. [17] (The same type of car as the one from 'Back to the Future') Jb 007clone 15:23, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, the article even said it had gull-wing doors. However I thought all Delorean's had stainless steel bodies - that and the doors were its trademark style (excluding the Flux Capacitor that is). Maybe it had been painted. --Dan East 15:53, 24 August 2006 (UTC)
This proves my point that all used-car salesmen are child molesters. Yesyoudid 21:53, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Yes, the car was a red Delorean and he had a Porsche later. That has been too long ago to really remember correctly. The only thing most people remember about him was he was quiet and alone most of the time. He used to stand in the parking lot in town, leaning against his car. I don't think people thought anymore about him after he left town. He wasn't too memorable; except for his cars. No one asked where he got the moneyLynn01 04:29, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

You sound like you knew him personally? Well, he was a car salesman around that time, so he could have had access to loaner vehicles that weren't his. After reading the Wikipedia De Lorean DMC-12 article I discovered you can buy one a whole lot cheaper than I expected. Less than $20,000 currently for one in good to excellent condition. --Dan East 04:52, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

No, not personally. Just some memories; I'm a bit younger-never actually talked to him. It's just a small town; you usually know of most people. I think the Delorean was during high school and the Porsche came later. I don't think he would've been a car salesman that young. You're right, they're not that expensive. Just kind of memorable. Odd carLynn01 05:11, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

During the time that John Mark Karr owned a Delorean it was a very expensive car !! New DMC-12s had a suggested retail price of $25,000 ($650 more when equipped with an automatic transmission); this is equivalent to approximately $56,000 in 2005 dollars. There were extensive waiting lists of people willing to pay up to $10,000 above the list price; however, after the collapse of the De Lorean Motor Company, unsold cars could be purchased for under the retail price.[16]

Nobody cared. It was just an odd car that stuck out.Lynn01 05:49, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Powerwurks edit

Should we be definitively stating that it was used to trawl for young girls online? Do we know for certain that Powerwurks postings were made by Karr and only Karr? The previous wording seemed more prudent to me, unless new information has since surfaced. heavensblade23 05:15, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

We don't know anything for sure.  :) However I do know our article pretty much quotes the TIME source article[18] verbatim (actually, it's a bit too much of a copy/paste for my liking as is):

The name John Karr is also associated with an online company PowerWurks, apparently launched in 1996, whose owner claimed to be running a child-friendly company but was in fact using the name to trawl for young girls on the Internet.

--Dan East 06:27, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Removal of content

I don't know if it is because of the nature of this article, or the amount of information that is constantly being added or what, but there is an awful lot of "let's just delete this section because it isn't quite right" going on, instead of changing a word or two here and there to align it with to the sources. I guess that's just the easy way out. However it is getting rather old seeing substantial amounts of accurate information and statements, well sourced, being thrown away because the tone or wording isn't just right. Yes, I'm talking about the Usenet discussion that was just removed (again). Here's the source, which is now gone from the article too, in case anyone wants to give it another go: 'Karr' postings point to Web site for kids. --Dan East 06:50, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

I deleted it. Fact is, there hasn't been much in the way of "let's delete this section..." going on at all, and it wasn't the tone of the wording. Well sourced? Only one sentence is ref'ed, the rest is merely POV and unsupported (unreferenced) presupposition (even if the statements are technically true). And the only other statement supported by another ref is actually redundant to another statement made in another section. After all this is whittled down, you just have one good statement in the whole section.

It just needs more meat, this time backed with refs. I'll put some in later. Mdoc7 07:21, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

I rewrote the section, adhering closely to the article, so it should be in the ballpark now. --Dan East 13:01, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

Potential trial scenerios, DNA (general discussion)

I know a lot of contributors to this article have been reading scores of news stories about Karr, so I was wondering if anyone has come across any "what if" trial scenarios. I'm curious about what the prosecution would do in various scenarios:

  • He pleads guilty but there is no real evidence against him (DNA rules him out, etc). Would he end up in a mental institution?
  • He pleads innocent and, again, there is no real evidence against him. Would he have to pay various court related expenses and go free (or more likely to CA to face his child porn charges)?
  • He pleads guilty and there is strong evidence. Would they seek the death penalty? Would he get at least life in prison? Potential for parole?

The only thing that I know for sure is that if there is solid evidence against him (DNA matched "99.9%", his statements match unreleased information about the crime, etc), they would prosecute him to the fullest extent.

One other thing that just struck me. One (older, pre-Karr) article I read said that the DNA found on JonBonet, and partial fingerprints, were placed in a crime database, which is checked against criminals in the hope of someday finding a match when someone is apprehended. Well, Karr spent 6 months in a CA prison in 2001. If he was the culprit, wouldn't his DNA have alerted authorities then, or do they only take DNA samples for specific crimes? That tends to make me believe that his DNA will be ruled out (by the way, I'm sure they have the results back from that by now - it would be nice if they would release them). Even more so considering that the reason he was investigated in the first place was because of his claims about JonBonet. I'm certain they would have checked his DNA then and there. So unless somebody really screwed up big-time in 2001, his DNA will not come back as a match this time either. Let me apologize in advance for ruining the suspense.  ;) --Dan East 23:55, 24 August 2006 (UTC)

I had the same questions. This is just another thought: Has anyone wondered if he found out something in his research. If he's not the guy; he could've put info together and come up with the correct person responsible. He was supposedly researching for a book. All of this info he's confessing to could've been found out over the years.(maybe) There was a man that committed suicide after the 1996 murder that was under suspicion, too. He had something with the "SBTC" on it, also. The police couldn't question him because he killed himself before they got to him. This was during the time of suspicion for the Mr & Mrs Santa that were at the party. They had suspicious connections, also. But the question remains; how do they all connect? Everybody wants to convict someone with obvious mental weakness. Maybe he's guilty or maybe he was coerced during interrogation. Who know's what really went on? Nobody but the ones involved. If DNA doesn't match; does that mean he helped another person or found out over the years. <snip per blp> Just wondering! Thanks.Lynn01 05:01, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Can everyone please try to remember that talk pages are covered by WP:BLP. Thanks, Sarah Ewart (Talk) 06:36, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Former owner of De Lorean DMC-12

It was reported on Fox News with from a former school member of John Mark Karr that he owned a De Lorean DMC-12 while attending highschool. Is this significant to add to his biography on wikipedia? Bnguyen 05:20, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

In my opinion, no. But if added, I'm not going to delete it. Mdoc7 06:32, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../j/o/h/Talk%7EJohn_Mark_Karr_Archive_1_413a.html"

Static Wikipedia (no images)

aa - ab - af - ak - als - am - an - ang - ar - arc - as - ast - av - ay - az - ba - bar - bat_smg - bcl - be - be_x_old - bg - bh - bi - bm - bn - bo - bpy - br - bs - bug - bxr - ca - cbk_zam - cdo - ce - ceb - ch - cho - chr - chy - co - cr - crh - cs - csb - cu - cv - cy - da - de - diq - dsb - dv - dz - ee - el - eml - en - eo - es - et - eu - ext - fa - ff - fi - fiu_vro - fj - fo - fr - frp - fur - fy - ga - gan - gd - gl - glk - gn - got - gu - gv - ha - hak - haw - he - hi - hif - ho - hr - hsb - ht - hu - hy - hz - ia - id - ie - ig - ii - ik - ilo - io - is - it - iu - ja - jbo - jv - ka - kaa - kab - kg - ki - kj - kk - kl - km - kn - ko - kr - ks - ksh - ku - kv - kw - ky - la - lad - lb - lbe - lg - li - lij - lmo - ln - lo - lt - lv - map_bms - mdf - mg - mh - mi - mk - ml - mn - mo - mr - mt - mus - my - myv - mzn - na - nah - nap - nds - nds_nl - ne - new - ng - nl - nn - no - nov - nrm - nv - ny - oc - om - or - os - pa - pag - pam - pap - pdc - pi - pih - pl - pms - ps - pt - qu - quality - rm - rmy - rn - ro - roa_rup - roa_tara - ru - rw - sa - sah - sc - scn - sco - sd - se - sg - sh - si - simple - sk - sl - sm - sn - so - sr - srn - ss - st - stq - su - sv - sw - szl - ta - te - tet - tg - th - ti - tk - tl - tlh - tn - to - tpi - tr - ts - tt - tum - tw - ty - udm - ug - uk - ur - uz - ve - vec - vi - vls - vo - wa - war - wo - wuu - xal - xh - yi - yo - za - zea - zh - zh_classical - zh_min_nan - zh_yue - zu -

Static Wikipedia 2007 (no images)

aa - ab - af - ak - als - am - an - ang - ar - arc - as - ast - av - ay - az - ba - bar - bat_smg - bcl - be - be_x_old - bg - bh - bi - bm - bn - bo - bpy - br - bs - bug - bxr - ca - cbk_zam - cdo - ce - ceb - ch - cho - chr - chy - co - cr - crh - cs - csb - cu - cv - cy - da - de - diq - dsb - dv - dz - ee - el - eml - en - eo - es - et - eu - ext - fa - ff - fi - fiu_vro - fj - fo - fr - frp - fur - fy - ga - gan - gd - gl - glk - gn - got - gu - gv - ha - hak - haw - he - hi - hif - ho - hr - hsb - ht - hu - hy - hz - ia - id - ie - ig - ii - ik - ilo - io - is - it - iu - ja - jbo - jv - ka - kaa - kab - kg - ki - kj - kk - kl - km - kn - ko - kr - ks - ksh - ku - kv - kw - ky - la - lad - lb - lbe - lg - li - lij - lmo - ln - lo - lt - lv - map_bms - mdf - mg - mh - mi - mk - ml - mn - mo - mr - mt - mus - my - myv - mzn - na - nah - nap - nds - nds_nl - ne - new - ng - nl - nn - no - nov - nrm - nv - ny - oc - om - or - os - pa - pag - pam - pap - pdc - pi - pih - pl - pms - ps - pt - qu - quality - rm - rmy - rn - ro - roa_rup - roa_tara - ru - rw - sa - sah - sc - scn - sco - sd - se - sg - sh - si - simple - sk - sl - sm - sn - so - sr - srn - ss - st - stq - su - sv - sw - szl - ta - te - tet - tg - th - ti - tk - tl - tlh - tn - to - tpi - tr - ts - tt - tum - tw - ty - udm - ug - uk - ur - uz - ve - vec - vi - vls - vo - wa - war - wo - wuu - xal - xh - yi - yo - za - zea - zh - zh_classical - zh_min_nan - zh_yue - zu -

Static Wikipedia 2006 (no images)

aa - ab - af - ak - als - am - an - ang - ar - arc - as - ast - av - ay - az - ba - bar - bat_smg - bcl - be - be_x_old - bg - bh - bi - bm - bn - bo - bpy - br - bs - bug - bxr - ca - cbk_zam - cdo - ce - ceb - ch - cho - chr - chy - co - cr - crh - cs - csb - cu - cv - cy - da - de - diq - dsb - dv - dz - ee - el - eml - eo - es - et - eu - ext - fa - ff - fi - fiu_vro - fj - fo - fr - frp - fur - fy - ga - gan - gd - gl - glk - gn - got - gu - gv - ha - hak - haw - he - hi - hif - ho - hr - hsb - ht - hu - hy - hz - ia - id - ie - ig - ii - ik - ilo - io - is - it - iu - ja - jbo - jv - ka - kaa - kab - kg - ki - kj - kk - kl - km - kn - ko - kr - ks - ksh - ku - kv - kw - ky - la - lad - lb - lbe - lg - li - lij - lmo - ln - lo - lt - lv - map_bms - mdf - mg - mh - mi - mk - ml - mn - mo - mr - mt - mus - my - myv - mzn - na - nah - nap - nds - nds_nl - ne - new - ng - nl - nn - no - nov - nrm - nv - ny - oc - om - or - os - pa - pag - pam - pap - pdc - pi - pih - pl - pms - ps - pt - qu - quality - rm - rmy - rn - ro - roa_rup - roa_tara - ru - rw - sa - sah - sc - scn - sco - sd - se - sg - sh - si - simple - sk - sl - sm - sn - so - sr - srn - ss - st - stq - su - sv - sw - szl - ta - te - tet - tg - th - ti - tk - tl - tlh - tn - to - tpi - tr - ts - tt - tum - tw - ty - udm - ug - uk - ur - uz - ve - vec - vi - vls - vo - wa - war - wo - wuu - xal - xh - yi - yo - za - zea - zh - zh_classical - zh_min_nan - zh_yue - zu

Static Wikipedia February 2008 (no images)

aa - ab - af - ak - als - am - an - ang - ar - arc - as - ast - av - ay - az - ba - bar - bat_smg - bcl - be - be_x_old - bg - bh - bi - bm - bn - bo - bpy - br - bs - bug - bxr - ca - cbk_zam - cdo - ce - ceb - ch - cho - chr - chy - co - cr - crh - cs - csb - cu - cv - cy - da - de - diq - dsb - dv - dz - ee - el - eml - en - eo - es - et - eu - ext - fa - ff - fi - fiu_vro - fj - fo - fr - frp - fur - fy - ga - gan - gd - gl - glk - gn - got - gu - gv - ha - hak - haw - he - hi - hif - ho - hr - hsb - ht - hu - hy - hz - ia - id - ie - ig - ii - ik - ilo - io - is - it - iu - ja - jbo - jv - ka - kaa - kab - kg - ki - kj - kk - kl - km - kn - ko - kr - ks - ksh - ku - kv - kw - ky - la - lad - lb - lbe - lg - li - lij - lmo - ln - lo - lt - lv - map_bms - mdf - mg - mh - mi - mk - ml - mn - mo - mr - mt - mus - my - myv - mzn - na - nah - nap - nds - nds_nl - ne - new - ng - nl - nn - no - nov - nrm - nv - ny - oc - om - or - os - pa - pag - pam - pap - pdc - pi - pih - pl - pms - ps - pt - qu - quality - rm - rmy - rn - ro - roa_rup - roa_tara - ru - rw - sa - sah - sc - scn - sco - sd - se - sg - sh - si - simple - sk - sl - sm - sn - so - sr - srn - ss - st - stq - su - sv - sw - szl - ta - te - tet - tg - th - ti - tk - tl - tlh - tn - to - tpi - tr - ts - tt - tum - tw - ty - udm - ug - uk - ur - uz - ve - vec - vi - vls - vo - wa - war - wo - wuu - xal - xh - yi - yo - za - zea - zh - zh_classical - zh_min_nan - zh_yue - zu