By William Tucker on 8.30.06 @ 12:09AM
The useless press has no one to blame but itself for the John Mark Karr fiasco.
About ten years ago, while writing a book on crime, I attended a
district attorneys' convention in Las Vegas. I wasn't supposed to
be there -- they don't like the press -- but I managed to sneak
into the back of the hotel ballroom.
After the first speech I struck up a conversation with the
assistant district attorney sitting next to me. He was a young
black man, neatly dressed, with a trim mustache.
"What's the biggest thing you've learned as an ADA?" I asked
him.
He twirled his mustache for a moment, reflected and said,
"People are capable of anything."
I wish that lesson had penetrated the head of Boulder County
District Attorney Mary Keenan. We might have been spared the last
two weeks' farce in the JonBenet Ramsey case.
Was there ever any question that John Mark Karr, the 41-year-old
schoolteacher paraded before the TV cameras for the last two weeks,
was making the whole thing up? Did his professions of undying love
for the victim ring one bit true? Or was he just a partially
deranged weirdo obsessed with the case? To my mind, the only
serious question was whether he was a true publicity-hound or just
seeking plane fare back from Bangkok.
What the whole incident revealed is the grotesque ignorance of
the American press. Nobody has the slightest knowledge of police
investigations. As any police detective can tell you, people
confess to high-profile crimes all the time. Sometimes the
investigators have to throw them out of their offices. God knows
what motivates these people but it certainly has nothing to do with
solving crimes. Yet newspapers and TV stations across the country
immediately took the whole confession at face value. Across the
country, newspapers wiped the dreary reports from Israel and
Lebanon off their front page and ran nothing but "investigations"
into this guy's sorry sex life.
One afternoon the New York Post ran six full pages
about Kann's private life. "PERV'S LAIR. INSIDE JONBENET SUSPECT'S
SEEDY BANGKOK DEN OF SIN," trumpeted the Daily News. "SEX
CHANGE SHOCKER" came next. (The word "shock" is the key to tabloid
reporting, with "Britney Baby Shocker" the ideal headline. One new
publication is dispensing with pretense altogether and naming
itself "Shock!") Now I realize you can't expect much from the
News and Post but unfortunately both are coupled
to rather sensible editorial pages -- and remember, the alternative
is reading the New York Times.
The real fault, however, was with the prosecutors. From the
beginning, a cloud of suspicion hung over the parents, John and
Patsy Ramsey (who died last June of cancer). The Ramseys originally
reported their daughter missing to friends and the police after
finding a ransom note. The note, from a "small foreign faction,"
was an implausible garble of bravado and nonsense -- the kind that
people make up when trying to cast suspicion elsewhere. When a
cursory police search produced nothing, John Ramsey led another
expedition that quickly discovered the body in the closet -- and
messed up the crime scene in the proceedings. There was no sign of
forced entry to the house. There was snow on the ground outside but
no footprints.
The couple clammed up early, hired lawyers, and refused to be
interrogated or take lie-detector tests. The paintbrush used to
garrote the victim came from Patsy Ramsey's paint box. The writer
of the ransom note knew weird details about John Ramsey --
including that he had a business, used an attache case, and was
from the South. The ransom demand for $118,000 was surprisingly
small but exactly matched a bonus John Ramsey had recently
received. Patsy's handwriting matched the note in some significant
respects. Still, the DA's office could not put together a
convincing case and a grand jury refused to indict. Two years ago
Boulder police announced they would not investigate further.
In pointing the finger, the Ramseys ended up accusing Chris
Wolfe, a Boulder reporter, of being the killer. Wolfe sued the
Ramseys for damages but lost. In issuing a decision, however,
federal judge Julie Carnes noted, "[T]he weight of the evidence is
more consistent with a theory that an intruder murdered JonBenet
than it is with a theory that Mrs. Ramsey did it." This inspired
Boulder District Attorney Mary Keenan to reopen the case. Her
keystone cops office soon settled on Karr, who had been sending
lurid e-mails to University of Colorado professor Michael Tracey.
Karr fit the profile of an ideal intruder -- a middle-class white
male pedophile -- and so he was arrested on nothing more than his
own words. The newspapers took it from there.
It's worth following up all possibilities and if anyone else
wants to confess to the murder, they should be checked out as well.
But the facts of the case remain hard to avoid. The overwhelming
evidence is that John and Patsy Ramsey somehow acted in concert in
the murder of their child. The most likely scenario is that the
father was sexually abusing the daughter and the mother killed her
out of jealousy. Not even a marital bond would be likely to keep
one of them from cracking unless both were involved.
It's not a pretty story, but this is police work, not the movies
or tabloid journalism. In trying to fathom a case like this, it's
worth remembering the hard-won wisdom of that assistant district
attorney back in Las Vegas: People are capable of anything.
topics:
Business, Movies, Law, Israel