This article covers sensitive topics that may be disturbing to some readers. Reader discretion is advised.
John Mark Karr has a large amount of evidence against him in the JonBenet Ramsey case.
On December 26, 1996 at 5:52 a.m., Patsy Ramsey called 911 to report her 6-year-old daughter, JonBenet Ramsey no where to be found. Patsy woke up early that morning to find her daughter missing and a ransom note left behind. The note demanded 118,000 dollars in return for her daughter. That year, John Ramsey, JonBenet’s father, had a work bonus in the same amount.
From the initial 911 call, it took detectives two hours to arrive at the Ramsey household. Many issues followed suit, such as only JonBenet’s room was closed off to the family, while the rest of the house was left for people to wander around.
Even at some point, police encouraged John Ramsey to search the house or anything leading to him finding JonBenet. This led John and a family friend to search the basement where they found the body of JonBenet.
JonBenet had a garrote tied around her neck which was used to strangle her. There was also a ligature mark on her right wrist. Her head had serious injuries like a fracture on the right side of her skull. There was bruising on her scalp, right shoulder and at the base of her skull, and there were signs of sexual trauma. Her cause of death was stated as “asphyxia by strangulation associated with craniocerebral trauma.”
Her father, seeing JonBenet on the floor, removed the tape around her mouth and carried her upstairs, contaminating the crime scene.
From the beginning many blamed the Ramsey family for the death of JonBenet. Some people thought that the behavior of Patsy and John Ramsey after their daughter’s death was strange, and the police had a big focus on the parents during their investigation.
One theory focuses on Patsy Ramsey. Claiming that after JonBenet wet the bed, Patsy became extremely angry and accidentally killed her. Another theory focuses on John Ramsey, because John was the one who found the body and contaminated the crime scene and could of destroyed important evidence.
One of the most popular theories revolves around JonBenet’s older brother, Burke. Some think that Burke, in anger, threw a flashlight at the back of JonBenet’s head, because she had ate some of Burke’s pineapple. Which is a ridiculous thing to think. Burke just got angry because JonBenet ate his pineapple, and then killed her? It’s crazy. And to think about the extent of the sexual trauma experienced and to believe that they did that just to cover up for Burke.
In most homicides, the killer is someone the victim knows. So it makes sense to look into the family but there is no true motive for any of the family to kill JonBenet.
While no one has been convicted in the case of JonBenet, one man has been arrested: John Mark Karr. Karr began reaching out to Michael Tracey, a professor at the University of Colorado. Through these emails, Karr admitted to the killing of JonBenet Ramsey. Tracey said that Karr definitely knew about the case, and decided to contact prosecutors. The emails between Karr and Tracey lasted four years, where Karr went into detail about the killing and his ‘love’ for JonBenet.
But when DNA tested, Karr did not match any of the DNA found at the crime scene, and when further questioned about the killing, Karr was unable to provide any new details not released by police.
Most of the signs point to Karr killing JonBenet Ramsey.
For four years, Karr emailed Tracey describing the crime in detail. While some may say that Karr did it for attention. He did everything to keep his identity a secret. He first started emailing Tracey under the name “Daxis.” Furthermore Karr didn’t even go to public media, he emailed a professor privately instead of a newspaper. John Mark Karr never attempted to get media attention for this. It took time to track him down and figure out who “Daxis” truly was.
If John Mark Karr truly wanted media attention, wouldn’t he have come forward in the months after the killing, or maybe within a year of emailing Tracey? Instead, he spent four years emailing Tracey and never tried to go to the media and Karr was only found out when Tracey went to the prosecutors.
John Mark Karr also did know things that weren’t released to the public. Karr knew the nickname JonBenet called her grandmother — a very strange detail for some random man to know.
Karr went into extreme detail about the crime repeatedly. He talked about the garrote and accidentally killing her as he assaulted her. He said that, after the assault, he took a piece of tape from his flashlight and put it over her month. He then covered her with a blanket and beat her with the flashlight. Going into such extreme detail doesn’t seem like something that just anyone would know.
Michael Tracey has even said that Karr convinced him he was telling the truth because of Karr’s knowledge of the crime. The fact that Karr knew details that weren’t released to the public, is pretty suspicious. Someone just ‘really fascinated’ with the case would not know that, so Karr clearly knew more than he was supposed to.
Additionally, DNA evidence has been known to not be completely accurate at times. DNA evidence in the past has incorrectly identified people that were innocent. In 2004 a man was wrongly convicted after DNA evidence linked him to the crime. This DNA caused the man to be convicted when he was truly innocent. This proves that DNA isn’t always 100% accurate.
So, there it is and despite popular belief, all of the evidence points to none other than Karr killing JonBenet Ramsey.
