|
|
Post by Hope on Oct 2, 2021 5:26:50 GMT
  Wonder what the rest of her statement said? Not sure why it is cropped like that and a page is missing. Here are the PON & timeline entries on Jan:STITES, JAN At M. Bell's night of 4/11/81, Meeks & Grubert came to see them, 4/12/81 found Shearer's belongings & half can of beer at Methodist Church <MARINOVICH> Timeline A: 12:30 - 1:00AM Dale Meeks leaves Jan Stites and Mary Bell's house next door, and goes home. Time unknown On Sunday morning, 4-12-81, Jan S. went to church at the Methodist Church on Church Street. When she arrived, a group of women told her that they had found Phillip S. sleeping in the high school room. Jan went to the high school room and found that pillows or cushions had been fashioned into a bed. Also she could smell Phillip's body odor. She also found his possessions and a half can of beer |
|
|
|
Post by snoho17 on Oct 6, 2021 5:38:24 GMT
"Wonder what the rest of her statement said? Not sure why it is cropped like that and a page is missing." Because A) It was released redacted and someone doesn't want that known or B) There's info in there that contradicts the preferred narrative
|
|
|
|
Post by joemcplumber on Mar 11, 2022 1:49:40 GMT
I assume this is from David's forum, and his most recent abuse of these images went to prove that Blaine Gruebert had no alibi for saturday night. I have a screen cap of the thread. In this rant Dave cites Jan as saying that Blaine slept at Mary's but there's no file posted to this effect. The document he did choose to post says that Mary said Blaine slept with Mary but i guess Mary couldn't actually have known this since she was asleep at the time.
For his own part in another document Blaine said that after the card game he "fell asleep" but apparently made no mention of going home to do this.
How Dave's reasoning produces his conclusion i have no idea. That's gotta cause some serious cognitive dissonance. But to the point here, Dave is citing a "page 2" of the document which is either not posted or is only represented in part. The filename progression goes from "Jan-xxx-on-Wade-Blaine-Phil-1" to "Jan-xxx-on-Wade-Blaine-Phil-3" but there is no "Jan-xxx-on-Wade-Blaine-Phil-2", at least not in this post. I'd love to see what's missing too but yeah, it is probably top secret classified so as the liars can trip over their lies.
BTW there is no version of reality wherein Mary lived in that shack behind the Meeks home. She lived upstairs in the apartment bldg to the east of the Meeks, her door was kitty-corner across the hall from Blaine and almost directly across from Jan. Sorry if it upsets any narratives but this is how the historical fabric of reality is woven, regardless of how one might choose to interpret the word "house".
|
|
|
|
Post by kmik on Mar 11, 2022 2:54:49 GMT
What's missing is probably an explanation of the living arrangements but Dmac's spent more hours cropping reports and rewriting his own spin on reports just to keep from posting the actual report - and we all know why.
His "deduction" now that Blaine is knee deep in the murders along with half of Quincy and Keddie is nothing more than a plea for Blaine to participate in his forum again. I highly doubt that dmac really believes half of his own theory/ theories.
It's nice to hear from somebody who actually knows something
|
|
|
|
Post by joemcplumber on Mar 11, 2022 6:13:48 GMT
I was suspecting Jan said something more directly affirmative about Blaine's whereabouts saturday night. Whereas Mary's statement, as it is recorded, is a bit confusing and easier to spin.
Note i said "as it is recorded". Almost all of these reports are really sloppy. They're far from transcriptions of conversations and many aren't even linear. Some not-insignificant number of them i have reason to believe were written ex post facto, i.e., recollections of interviews where no notebook was even present. And i have reason to believe at least one "interview" of record never happened at all. Not sure yet, not sure if i will ever be sure, but the implications are unsettling. In all cases it makes objective analysis difficult. And as demonstrated here, omissions can be every bit as deceptive and confusing as inclusions.
But just f'rinstance, Mary lets on where Blaine slept only at the very end of that record. As if it weren't discussed previously and it's the last thing they asked, almost as an aside. That provided the ambiguity that Dave leveraged in his (still nonsensical) reasoning because the narrative then was disordered. This sort of thing happens all. the. time. and it isn't only Dave who picks it up and runs with it.
I don't necessarily buy the corruption narrative. I don't know if i'd call PCSO or even Doug Thomas "corrupt" but would i say "imprecise"? Absolutely. Imprecise bordering on negligent? Yup. Irresponsible? Yeah, and this train of thought is heading towards "incompetent".
It's important because people are always mucking about in the minutiae of this case and i think doing so should call for an extra effort at precision, to offset the imprecision we're working with. Or at least, to not amplify it and make it worse. And it's important because i think the first order of business is to deconstruct the mess that's been made by both law enforcement and by Dave. Which i've seen done very nicely on at least one thread so far so it's looking hopeful.
I think i like this forum. I've not read much yet but it appears to have a thoughtful hierarchy and a sturdy framework which i would like to see fleshed out. Kudos to whoever doing this. So maybe you'll see more of me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hope on Mar 11, 2022 6:59:51 GMT
And that sums the problems with this case up perfectly. Hopefully people will start checking these claims out for themselves instead of believing what someone says. There are many details passed off as fact that are nothing more than speculation & opinion. His interpretation only. And that interpretation is based on how it can fit the prevailing theory. Most of the time a certain person is lying, but if one of their statements can be useful then they are telling the truth. Then there's the reverse alibis and a lot of "they said this but this is what really happened". Things someone who wasn't there couldn't possibly know. And of course any report that doesn't fit the theory is falsified.
I agree completely, if a claim is made and no file is posted to back it up, then it's not true. He's had no problem repeatedly posting Blaine, Mary, & Jan's other statements, which include nothing the least bit suspicious btw.
The prevailing theory originated 15-20 years ago & without all the facts of the case. As more information comes to light, instead of taking a step back and reevaluating all this information, the theory instead has evolved by adding more & more people. It continues to become more & more convoluted and ridiculous. It is a prime example of making the evidence fit the theory & sadly innocent people are being dragged through the mud.
P.S. Thanks for joining! Glad to have you here
P.P.S The report posted is obviously missing pages/information. I believe this was a file Josh originally posted. And anytime a report is posted like this, everyone should be suspicious. Not against the person but what they had to say. I see no reason to crop any report, unless there was something in there that would cause people to question to the narrative/theory being pushed.
|
|
|
|
Post by Hope on Mar 11, 2022 7:19:41 GMT
I agree completely Joe. PCSO were in over their heads and mistakes were made. This department had likely never experienced a crime like this but they still worked the case. It appears leads were coming in from every direction and they were following up on them. Yes, reports could have been written better, statements followed up with pertinent questions asked at that moment & more details included, but things weren't being ignored. There are thousands of pages of reports from the investigation, if they were attempting to cover up this case why even bother with any of that? The FBI & DOJ were called in to assist, again why even bother if the investigation was nothing but a sham? The more people involved, the harder it would be to control the supposed cover up.
It's been said that was all for show, but for who? PCSO never expected these files would be made public one day. Not to mention if they immediately knew Marty was responsible, then why is his name all throughout these case files? Not doing a very good job in their coverup I suppose. If he was being protected, his name would have been wiped from the files, there'd be no need to search his cabin, his prints wouldn't have been sent off for comparison - how did they know he didn't leave prints at the crime scene? I think the claims being made are insulting to those that worked the case. Again, definitely not a perfect investigation but not a coverup.
To me, the biggest question is why can't this case be solved today? Forensic technology in 1981 isn't even comparable to today's technology. With all the items of evidence collected from that cabin how is it possible nothing of value has been identified? What is the status of those evidence items?
Also 100% true. This case desperately needs a fresh start. Top to bottom, every claim & every minutiae detail.
|
|
