Re: JonBenet: So what if Karr confesses in Boulder?

Robert St. James (la ira de Dios) wrote:
Grizzlie Antagonist wrote:
<...>

Thanks for the in-depth answer. It does look like that he could be lost
in the machinery for quite some time w/o any real determination of
guilt or innocence.



You're welcome. Yes, if the case does proceed, it could take a while.



But no competent defense attorney is likely to just have his client
"confess". And there does need to be an independent factual basis for
a plea of guilty, separate and apart from the plea itself. That
standard is not particularly severe, assuming that a competent
defendant really has made an informed decision to plead guilty.

This is what I'm worried about. Who was Karr? He had nothing. No
wife, court-ordered to stay away from his children. Couldn't go back
to the US or he'd be jailed on the Petaluma flight. Hadn't talked to
his
father for years. Holed up in a dirtbag hotel in the worst part of
Bangkok,
unable to keep a job, and so desperate to go transexual that he was
willing
to go to some butcher for a 1k sex change. This guy was done. Nothing
really to live for. And now? Now he's an international superstar with
reporters
hanging on his every word. Maybe this guy really, really wants to be
guilty.
Hell, hadn't he spent the last four years basically playing that game
w/Tracey?

If the standard is really low, Lacy could argue past the DNA, ignore
the
handwriting, and go with whatever lunatic story he comes up with for
how
he targeted JonBenet and managed to get to Colorado. His ex-wife might
protest for a while, but can she really prove he was there? That might
not
be so easy to do, especially if he decides to claim that she's lying to
protect
him and the DA, for whatever cynical reason, choose to believe him.



Assuming that a competent and fully-informed defendant decides to plead
guilty, the standard is pretty low. The court should only require an
"independent factual basis".

In a normal situation, the court usually just refers to the reports of
law enforcement, though given the charges here and the notoriety of
this case, a judge might well require more.

But the ex-wife shouldn't even come into it if he really does want to
cop a plea. Exculpatory evidence won't even be considered.




This
is JonBenetLand. Things tend to get really, really screwed up. I'm
beginning
to suspect that the DA's office might be happy to help this guy
immolate himself.
It's a win/win--he gets his fame trip, the DA closes on a case that has
been
nothing but a disaster since Day One.
<...>
And if statements made in Thailand WERE admissible, then the defense
would have to explain them away.

Yet they were apparently made to some kind of American official, which
is why I'm really nervous about the ongoing participation of Homeland
Security,
an organization that would seem to have little jurisdiction here. Where
is the
FBI? Don't they normally handle these kinds of extraditions? Why is
Homeland
Security involved, and only HS?


Good question. I don't know.



I really didn't think this case could get any weirder, but I
underestimated just how crazy Boulder's LE/DA can be. Petaluma backed
off. They don't want him. That would suggest Boulder called them to
arrange for Karr to go to Boulder to face the charges. They really do
look like they're going to proceed, and Karr is just smiling and
bubbling away, which doesn't seem consistent with a guy who's changed
his mind and decided to recant.

I hope you're right and a competent attorney is appointed who will
demand some actual proof of guilt. Yet Karr has the right to refuse
legal representation. It can't be forced on him, can it?


RstJ


Ordinarily, a defendant does have the right to represent himself.
Essentially, he would have to be competent and he would have to have
some familiarity with the legal system. Those ordinarily aren't
difficult standards to meet, but again, with this guy, they might be,
especially the competency standard.

And again, given the seriousness of the charges and the notoriety of
the case, I think that a judge would look at the situation long and
hard before allowing this guy to represent himself.

Defendants representing themselves tend to make a mess of court
proceedings and they are a burden that the judge and even the DA isn't
all that eager to take on, but ORDINARILY, a defendant will have the
right to do so. But again, this isn't exactly an ordinary situation.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: double jeopardy
    ... face looks mighty like the face of the defendant; ... after assurance of the cell phone ... Let's call it, then, statistically acceptable evidence, where every ... "reasonable doubt" standard can, and demonstrably does, sometimes ...
    (alt.usage.english)
  • Re: Question about DES-CBC and Iinitialization Vector
    ... They are sponsoring to competent, beside resident, under standard ... dishs. ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: Robert Blake -- It Isnt About Justice
    ... > If the preponderance of the evidence shows that he did it, ... Because the standard of proof is lower in a civil court. ... "preponderance of evidence," the defendant can be compelled to testify ...
    (rec.arts.tv)
  • Re: Thou shalt have no other gods before the ANSI C standard
    ... > guaranteed by the C standard. ... Do you like how he snuck in "competent" in there? ... > of which guarantee ... functional attributes continue to exist even though the latest ISO C99 ...
    (sci.crypt)
  • Re: Electronic drawing standards question
    ... competent. ... As it is, there are so many variations, that all follow the standard, that the interoperability they envisioned is all but impossible. ...
    (sci.electronics.cad)