SAN FRANCISCO-
John Mark Karr’s own words–written and spoken–landed him in the criminal spotlight, but it was a series of law enforcement failures that let him walk free.
Karr was released from jail Thursday after Sonoma County authorities lost crucial evidence in a 5-year-old child pornography case. His freedom came more than a month after DNA evidence cleared him of suspicion in the slaying of child beauty queen JonBenet Ramsey, whom he claimed to have been with when she died in Colorado.
The case demonstrates the stakes prosecutors face when dealing with high-profile victims or defendants, legal experts said.
“They probably had a sense it might be difficult to patch together a 5-year-old case,” said Joseph L. Stogner, a professor at Empire Law School in Santa Rosa. “But imagine the second-guessing that would take place if they allowed a no-bail arrest warrant to stay outstanding on an international figure who had repeatedly expressed his very fixed interest in very young girls.”
After fleeing prosecution on the misdemeanor porn charges in 2001, Karr, who was living in Thailand, regained the attention of law enforcement authorities this summer. A Colorado journalism professor with whom he had exchanged e-mails reported that Karr claimed he accidentally killed JonBenet during a ritualistic sexual encounter.
Karr was arrested on suspicion of murder and returned to the U.S. in August after telling reporters he was with JonBenet when she died. In Boulder, Colo., authorities acknowledged their investigation was in its “very early stages.” Four days later, they were certain Karr was innocent–his DNA didn’t match the genetic material on JonBenet’s body.
Facing criticism for the costly extradition, Boulder District Attorney Mary Lacy said it was Karr’s confessions and fascination with a young girl in Thailand that led to his arrest. She said she relied heavily on e-mails and phone conversations Karr had with professor Michael Tracey, who produced documentaries on the slaying.
James Hammer, a former San Francisco prosecutor who observed the Karr proceedings in both Colorado and California, said Lacy likely believed Karr was dangerous.
“Maybe that’s not the proper motive for a DA,” he said. “But who wants to be the one to let him go?”
Karr’s fascination with JonBenet had previously gotten him into trouble in California. He was investigated for child pornography possession in 2001 after an informant reported being concerned about his obsession with the 6-year-old girl. Sonoma County sheriff’s investigators questioned him, searched his home and confiscated his computers.
He was charged with five counts of possessing child pornography after authorities allegedly found images of children on one of his computers. He spent six months in jail awaiting trial and was released on Oct. 5, 2001, on a promise to return for a January trial. Instead, he fled.
Once returned to California, Karr faced 5-year-old charges based on 5-year-old evidence. He refused to waive his right to a speedy trial, pressuring prosecutors to establish a case against him quickly.
Missteps ensued.
Prosecutor Joan Risse revealed Sept. 4 that the computer hard drive authorities had seized from Karr was lost. Sheriff’s Lt. Robert Giordano said he realized it was missing Aug. 18, but didn’t tell Risse until Aug. 30 because he was confident it would be found.
Risse told Judge Cerena Wong on Aug. 29 that sheriff’s deputies were still analyzing the hard drive, but defense lawyers argued prosecutors intentionally delayed revealing the missing evidence. The judge disagreed, but not before Risse was forced to take the stand to answer questions from Karr defense lawyer Robert Amparan about what she knew and when.
“There may have been some serious mistakes and missteps, but I don’t believe when you add it all up, it amounts to bad faith,” Wong said.
Then, Risse announced that a “mirror image” of Karr’s hard drive created in 2001 also had been lost. A few hours later, it was found.
“The criminal justice system is still playing catch-up when it comes to Internet criminality,” Stogner, the law professor, said. “People are scrambling to try and get a grip on what Internet crime is and, more importantly, how it can be proven.”
With Karr’s trial scheduled to begin Oct. 2, Amparan again challenged the evidence. He claimed there was no way to know what Karr accessed on his computer and when because the machine was missing and the backup copy had been reused by the sheriff’s department. He said the computer hadn’t worked since 1998, two years before Karr moved to California from Alabama.
Finally, on Oct. 5, prosecutors acknowledged they couldn’t put together a case against Karr that was provable “beyond a reasonable doubt” and asked a judge for a dismissal.
“He’s not a pedophile. He’s not a child molester,” said another of Karr’s defense lawyers, Gayle Gutekunst. “He has no family anymore. He kind of feels like he doesn’t have a country. He’s got no career as a school teacher. He’s got some thinking to do.”
Copyright 2006 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
