Whistling in the Dark

I lived two blocks from the Benet-Ramsey house for over a year and a half. Which was kind of cool. That thing was fucking enormous - one of the largest houses I've seen in my life. So yeah, I found their story plausible, but for the most part....

...I really didn't give a fuck one way or another.

And this is why I try to avoid making cracks about Simpson or Jackson.

I had to read up on the OJ thing when a mag started asking me to do an article on it in 98, but that didn't pan out.

That OJ did it is of damned near no question whatsoever to anyone who was involved in the investigation. The only person who says someone else did it is OJ, or the people who were paid grand chunks of fat to say it for him. Unfortunately, the LAPD fucked up his case so badly that there was no way he could get a fair trial. Every bit of evidence custody, every bit of legal filing in that case was done with such incompetence that it really boggles the mind - it turned a cut-and-dried case of murder into a fucking three-ring circus.

You said it.

What I read they have no 100% proof yet, but I do hope this closes the case finally. It should just be closed, not dragged around more. At least there is an arrest finally.

I will say that Americans aren't the only ones to screw up in this way. Just recently (don't ask why, I don't remember) I had the urge to read up on the whole 'Dingo ate my baby' case. http://www.crimelibrary.com/notorious_murders/not_guilty/chamberlain1/1.html. It's very similar in that the parents were accused with little to no real evidence. Half of what fueled the case against the parents was the media fever over the story.

I think with this particular case, what was most damning against the parents wasn't any evidence against them in the murder of their daughter, but the freak show pageants that they had their daughter involved in. People saw the pictures of a tarted up toddler and had a visceral reaction against the people who had obviously made the decision to have her involved in that. Because they were involved with a 'fringe' element of society, the sympathy the public might have had for them evaporated in suspicion and misunderstanding.

At least, it seems, she was under consultation about the possible murderer before her death, so at least she had hope.. As for me, I did believe that they might have something to do with it, but I never expressed a concrete opinion on it, because I didn't care to do all the research on it. In addition, I was in middle school.

You said it well and cut to the heart.

I was kind of facepalming at "They only just NOW caught that poor child's murderer?!"

And now I feel guilty for thinking it.

I thought the American Way was the more money you have, the more likely it is that you're innocent of a crime. It seems to work out that way, in any event.

Police caught the murderer. Who confessed to the murder.

Devil's advocate here;
Police have a suspect. Karr has also that same presumption of innocence of which the Ramseys have been lamenting a lack.

Yes he's confessed to "some aspects of the crime." However, people confessing to high profile crimes that they didn't commit is nothing new.
On the flip side, murder is most frequently committed by close relatives. It was not unreasonable to suspect the Ramseys of being involved.

Having said all that, I totally agree with your position that trial by media is both incredibly unjust, and much too common in today's world.

In a perfect world, no innocents would ever be convicted, and no guilty parties would ever go free. Being as this isn't a perfect world, I doubt we'll be able to eliminate trial by media comletely, but perhaps if we speak up often enough, we can at least force people to look at all the facts first.

Who was it that said the justice system was terrible, and the only thing worse would be anything else in the world? (Or something like that. Churchill?)

Democracy is the worst form of government except from all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.

Winston Churchill, speech in the House of Commons, 11 November 1947

That's true. I hadn't seen that. I'd only gone by Eric's posted link which didn't specify that.

Of course, the statement still holds true that he's innocent until proven guilty, just as anyone else is, regardless of what we may "know" about the case.

Just an update; Apparently there's no evidence or details left which haven't been made public.


However, it does look like he'll at least get a little jail time for child porn charges.

Personally... I hate this 'trial of the media' on everything. Every media outlet has to be first with whodunit.

Any case can become a circus overnight, and those evil clowns on the TV, radio, even in the newspapers, will be right there. I love the ones that talk about how sick someone is, how twisted, how evil, how there isn't a single shred of mitigating evidence, and then tack on the statement 'Of course so and so is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law'. (You know who I'm talking about. Well, there is more than one of the normal bunch that does that...)

In point of fact, I am somewhat open minded of this guy they caught. He confessed. To whom? The Thailand police? Will that stand up in a US court? I don't know about Thailand specifically but I am aware that with a little 'physical persuation' you can get anyone to confess to anything, and many countries are somewhat well known for their willingness to resort to violence.

What's gonna be interesting is when the papers/tv/etc get sued for wrongful death. What do I mean? Let's put forth a scenario:
Person (hereafter refered to as Victim) is brutally murdered.
Police don't quickly come up an arrest, doing little more than affirming that yes, they indeed are looking at these people who were close to the victim, which they do as a matter of course.
The media fingers Victim's brother/son/husband/father Bob, and you get the standard feeding frenzy and conviction in the press. Rallys protesting he still is going free, etc..
Nutjob Sam comes along, and for great justice, kills Bob.
Police arrest John over there, who had no real connection with the victim, but whom DNA evidence convicts (or some such).
They also arrest Sam for the murder of Bob on live TV or something.

Bob and Victim's next of kin sue the pants off of (insert numerous media outlets here) because if they hadn't been so quick to say 'Bob did it' this nutjob would never have gotten the idea that Bob had to die.

Anyway... I've had my fill of mankind for the day. Goodnight.

Let's not forget the American Way, Stage 2, in which John Ramsey sues the fuck out of the tabloids for all they've done to smear him and Patsy.

What is the statute of limitations on libel, anyway?

The thing about irony is it's just so damned ironic.

Warning on JonBenet speculation

The US district attorney investigating JonBenet Ramsey's murder has warned against speculation about the possible guilt of suspect John Mark Karr.

"John Mark Karr is presumed innocent," Mary Lacy said, adding that the public must not "jump to conclusions".

[…]

Paraded briefly before reporters on Thursday, Mr Karr, when asked if he killed JonBenet, said: "No, I did not. It was an accident."

"I was with JonBenet when she died. Her death was an accident."

Gotta watch out for those accidental beatings and stranglings…