Michael Hogan Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 Absolute baloney by you Mike. And you know it. Comparing me and Tom with Doorway Man, you should be ashamed of yourself. Much less member interest. Different styles. Different topic, different people. Same mentality. You left the y off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hogan Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 (edited) Deleted for now. Edited August 23, 2012 by Michael Hogan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tom Scully Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 (edited) Absolute baloney by you Mike. And you know it. Comparing me and Tom with Doorway Man, you should be ashamed of yourself. (quote name='Michael Hogan' timestamp='1345679828' post='258727'] Much less member interest. Different styles. Different topic, different people. Same mentality. (/quote] You left the y off. Michael, you have it exactly backward, upside down, unless you are asserting that popular opinion trumps contradictory, verifiable evidence? If you believe that, why are you actively participating on a JFK Assassination research forum? What could you bring to the table in the threads of such a forum. Here is an example of popular opinion.: Let me try to answer some of the question that the members of this panel have raised, based on my research for my book (tentatively entitled Mary's Mosaic. The question has been asked who really was "William L. Mitchell," the alleged assassin of Mary Pinchot Meyer? What we know about Mitchell is that the day after the murder, he went to police in Washington and told them that he believed he passed Mary Meyer on the towpath as he was running east back to Key Bridge and she was walking west toward Fletcher's Boat House. Mitchell told police that a black man (who just happened to fit Ray Crump's description - the man who was charged with the murder) was following her about six hundred feet behind her. Mitchell told police that he ran the towpath regularly, worked at the Pentagon, and was a part time teacher at Georgetown University. Mitchell testified at Crump's murder trial in July, 1965, but his testimony was largely discredtied by Crump's attorney, Dovey Roundtree, Esq. who became a legend after getting Crump acquitted. Mitchell was listed in the DoD directory in the fall of 1964 as "2nd Lt. William L. Mitchell." But then he disappears from the directory in the winter (1965). He shows up at the trial (July, 1965) and tells reporter Roberta Hornig that he is now a full time teacher in the mathmatics department at Georgetown University (GTU). The only problem with this is that there is no record of any "William L. Mitchell" ever teaching at Georgetown. Leo Damore thoroughly researched this in 1991-2. I again researched it a couple of years ago: there is no record of any "William L. Mitchell" teaching in ANY department at GTU. Mitchell's place of residence was an apartment at "The Virginian" at 1500 Arlington Blvd. in Arlington, Va. Damore researched this address and found evidence that this was a known CIA safehouse. I followed this up two years ago and two former CIA personnel confirmed that it was indeed an agency safehouse, as were certain teaching appointments at GTU. In my possession are several hours of tape recorded interviews between Damore and Crump's attorney Dovey Roundtree, Esq. (Award winning author Katie McCabe is now finishing the authorized biography of Dovey Rountree). Both Roundtree and Damore talk about Mitchell and how "convenient" his testimony was, and they both suspected his involvement. Mitchell never returned any of Roundtree's calls before the trial, and Damore could never locate him. So, as a last resort, Damore wrote Mitchell a letter and sent it to his last known address, the address given in the court transcript. During the very late evening of 3/30/93, "Mitchell" contacted Damore by telephone. The call allegedley lasted more than two hours into the early morning of 3/31/93. At approximately 8:30am on the morning of 3/31/93, Damore called his attorney and good friend Jimmy Smith. Damore started to tell Jimmy about the call and Jimmy started taking notes - 5 pages of them. I have these notes and I have a recorded interview with Attorney Smith going over every detail of his notes. "Mitchell" told Damore that he had been very impressed with his book Senatorial Priveledge (SP) and what he had uncovered. He wanted to tell Damore what happened but did not want to be the fall guy. "Mitchell" told Damore that he had several aliases, had been a former FBI agent, and then was recruited into the CIA. He had been assigned to surveillance of Mary Meyer right after the Warren Commission had been released. The order then came down to terminate her. There are a number of other details that I do not want share at this point because they are central to my book. Damore told his attorney that he had taped the call, but I could never find the tapes. I have substaniated however from talking to two of Damore's closest friends that he became quite anxious subsequent to this call in the weeks following because he believed he was being watched. I have not given up finding the real identity of "William L. Mitchell." But my main military researcher, Roger Charles who won the prestigious Peabody Award for his research with SY Hersch on Abu Ghraib for 60 Minutes II, says the area that Mitchell worked in at the Pentagon was surrounded by other CIA spooks. Charles feels that there is a good case to be make that "Mitchell" was CIA. Ironically, the last job my father had at the CIA was "Director of Personnel" when he died in 1979.....(/quote) Mary's Mosaic: The CIA Conspiracy to Murder John F. Kennedy, Mary Pinchot Meyer, and Their Vision for World Peace (70 customer reviews) 5 star: (52) Customer Review 54 of 56 people found the following review helpful The Murder of Mary Pinchot Meyer, April 12, 2012 By Jacob G. Hornberger ......In Janney's book, there are two revelations about Mary Meyer's murder that I found especially disturbing: 1. The eyewitness who claimed to be jogging on the trail when he saw a black man following Mary Meyer does not seem to be who he claimed to be. The man told the police that his name was William L. Mitchell and that he was a U.S. Army 2nd lieutenant who was stationed at the Pentagon. Janney relates that according to a contemporaneous "news clip" in the Washington Star, by the time the trial began, Mitchell was no longer in the military and instead was now serving as a math instructor at Georgetown University. Janney's investigation revealed, however, that Georgetown had no record of Mitchell's having taught there. His investigation also revealed that the CIA oftentimes used Georgetown University as a cover for its agents. Janney investigated the personal address that Mitchell gave both to the police and at trial. It turns out that the building served as a CIA "safe house." What was Mitchell, who supposedly was a U.S. Army lieutenant and then a Georgetown math instructor, doing living in a CIA "safe house"? Janney was never able to locate Mitchell. You would think that a man who had testified in one of the most important murder cases in D.C. history would have surfaced, from time to time, to talk about his role in the case. Or that friends or relatives of his would have popped up and said that he had told them about his role in the trial. Nope. It's as if William L. Mitchell just disappeared off the face of the earth -- well, except for some circumstantial evidence that Janney uncovered indicating that Mitchell was actually an agent of the CIA. For example, in 1993 an author named Leo Damore, who had written a book entitled Senatorial Privilege about the Ted Kennedy/Chappaquiddick episode, was conducting his own investigation into Mary Pinchot Meyer's murder, with the aim of writing a book on the case. Damore ended up committing suicide before finishing his book. But in the process of his investigation, he telephoned his lawyer, a former federal judge named Jimmy Smith, telling Smith that after a long, unsuccessful attempt to locate Mitchell, Damore had finally received a telephone call from a man identifying himself as Mitchell. According to Smith's written notes of the conversation, a copy of which are at the back of Janney's book, the man purporting to be Mitchell admitted to having murdered Mary Pinchot Meyer as part of a CIA plot to silence her. ...... Here is some evidence contradicting the entire segment in the book review displayed above, a review that "54 of 56 people found the following review helpful." Annual report to the presidentCornell University. College of Engineering - 1961 - Spring Term only) Mr. William Mitchell (5th yr. B.M.E. Candidate. Fall Term only) News and Notices - JStor The Annals of Mathematical Statistics Vol. 34, No. 3 (Sep., 1963), pp. 1133-1146 [...] Mitchell, William L., B.M.E., (Cornell University); Graduate Student, Operations Re- search, Harvard University; 70 Perkins Hall, Harvard University, Cambridge New York mathematical society. List of members, constitution, by-laws American Mathematical Society - 1964 - ... MITCHELL, WILLIAM L. I Pentagon, OR Group, Systems Dept., USADSC, Washington, D. C. l500 Arlington Blvd., Apt. l022, Combined membership list of the American Mathematical Society and ... American Mathematical Society, Mathematical Association of America, Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics - 1965 - ...... MITCHELL, WILLIAM L. I Pentagon, OR Group, Systems Dept., USADSC, Washington, D. C. 1500 Arlington Blvd., Apt. 1022, Arlington, Va. Harvard Alumni Directory (Office), Harvard Alumni Association, Harvard University - 1965 - .... MltcheU, WUliam Lockwood, 1500 Arlington Blvd. , Apt. 1022, Arlington, Va. 22209. g62-63 Statisticians and others in allied professions books.google.comAmerican Statistical Association, Biometric Society. Eastern North American Region, Institute of Mathematical Statistics MITCHELL, Bill. IMS. Assoc Prof, Dept of Management Sci. California State Univ. Hayward. CA 94542, (415) 884 3322 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting (415) 884 3322 end_of_the_skype_highlighting. PhD'70 Calif (Berkeley). MS'63 Harvard. BME'62 Cornell. Directory of Computer Education and Research: Volume 3 T. C. Hsiao - 1973 - 1800 pages MITCHELL, WILLIAM L. - Assistant Professor of Business Administration Department of Management Sciences School of Business and Economics CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, HAYWARD Hayward, California 94542 - July 25, 1939 - BME, 1962, Cornell University; MS, 1963, Harvard University; PhD, 1970, University of California, Los Angeles - Operations Research - ORSA, TIMS, IMS, ACM, SIAM, MAA - Visiting Research Associate, University of Stockholm, Summer 1971; Research Assistant, Operations Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, 1966-70; 1st Lieutenant/Systems Analyst, USADATCOM. U.S. Army, 1963-65. Fullbright Fellow University of London, 1965-66 Optimal service rate selection in piecewise linear Markovian ... books.google.com William Lockwood Mitchell - 1970 - 128 pages Abstract - Operations Research - INFORMS or.journal.informs.org/content/21/4/988.a bstract by B Mitchell - 1973 - Cited by 19 - Related articles Variance Reduction by Antithetic Variates in GI/G/1 Queuing Simulations. Bill Mitchell. California State University, Hayward, California The National faculty directory: Volume 2 books.google.comGale Research Company - 1982 - 3326 pages .....MITCHELL Bill, Oept of Bus Admin. Cal St Univ. 25800 Hillary St Hayward Ca 94542 Directory of Emeritus Faculty - California State University, East Bay http://www20.csueast...toryEmeriti.pdf File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick View Emeritus, 2001. MITCHELL, BILL (1969), Associate Professor of Business Administration: B.M.E., 1962, Cornell. University; M.S., 1963, Harvard University; Ph.D., 1970, University of California, Berkeley. Emeritus, 1989 Now, what is the potential for using the leads displayed in the quote box above, to obtain evidence in detail that will further reduce this contention of Peter Janney in his book, versus the potential for expanding the details Janney describes to the point that there would develop even an equal weight of evidence supporting Janney's contention that William L. Mitchell disappeared (vanished for the next 25 years) after the Crump trial and that he admitted to Leo Damore, 28 years later, that he was a CIA assassin who shot Mary Meyer to death? I am surprised I have to present this exercise to you, Michael. Where has your discernment gone? What is your point, again, that there is more interest displayed by members of this forum triggered by discussion of all things "Doorway Man," than there is about Janney's book of fairy tales? Are you saying that the results of my research into the background of William L. Mitchell have no relevance on this forum? Tick, tock, Michael.: http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKsimkin.htmJohn Simkin : Biography - Spartacus Educational .......Primary Sources (10) John Simkin, JFK Forum (13th October, 2007)It was of course James Truitt who first broke the story about James Angleton and Ben Bradlee’s search and discovery of Mary Pinchot Meyer’s diary in October 1964. In March, 1976, James Truitt, a former senior member of staff at the Washington Post, gave an interview to the National Enquirer. Truitt told the newspaper that Meyer was having an affair with JFK when he was assassinated. He also claimed that Meyer had told his wife, Ann Truitt, that she was keeping an account of this relationship in her diary. Meyer asked Truitt to take possession of a private diary "if anything ever happened to me"..... ........DiEugenio dismisses James Truitt as a unreliable source and cites the fact that he was upset with Ben Bradlee over his sacking in 1969. As part of his settlement he took $35,000 on the written condition that he did not write anything for publication about his experiences at the Washington Post that was "in any way derogatory" of the company. He clearly upset Bradlee by breaking that agreement with his story about how he and Angleton searched and found Meyer’s diary. ....... ......Leo Damore claimed in an article that appeared in the New York Post that the reason Angleton and Bradlee were looking for the diary was that: "She (Meyer) had access to the highest levels. She was involved in illegal drug activity. What do you think it would do to the beatification of Kennedy if this woman said, 'It wasn't Camelot, it was Caligula's court'?" Damore also said that a figure close to the CIA had told him that Mary's death had been a professional "hit". .... .......I am not sure what it is about Truitts’ account that James does not believe. In 1981 James Truitt committed suicide. According to Nina Burleigh (A Very Private Woman) Truitt's wife, Evelyn Patterson Truitt, claimed that her husband's papers, including copies of Mary's diary, had been stolen from the home by an CIA agent called Herbert Burrows. Leo Damore, who worked on the Mary Pinchot Meyer story after Truitt’s story was published, committed suicide in 1995. .... Edited August 23, 2012 by Tom Scully Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Charles-Dunne Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 The level of vexation and vitriol toward Michael Hogan is troubling. Michael Hogan has not, to the best of my knowledge, advocated anything positive about Peter Janney’s book, other than his belief that Ray Crump did not murder Mary Meyer. He has not stated, to the best of my knowledge, that he thinks Janney correct in the "CIA hit" angle of his book. In this, I fully concur with Michael, subject to the emergence of new information suggesting otherwise. I have asked those attacking Michael over this for whatever new information they may have that convicts Crump of the murder for which he was legally found not guilty. Thus far, to no avail. As I have consistently repeated throughout this thread, the fact that Crump didn’t kill Mary Meyer does not mean Mitchell did. Yet the shortcut employed by both Jim and Lisa was to undermine the Mitchell CIA hit scenario by proving Crump guilty, which they’ve yet to do. For example, Lisa wrote: "Let’s start with Mary Meyer’s murder. If Crump was truly framed for a crime he didn’t commit, the CIA theory is at least possible, if not exactly probable. But if Crump actually committed the crime, then Janney’s thesis, and indeed, the thrust of his whole story, goes out the window. So let’s examine that issue first, based on the evidence Janney presents." Rather than do the harder (?) work of proving Janney wrong re: Mitchell, it seemed less problematic to find guilty a man who’d already been tried and acquitted. Tom has likewise concentrated on this, assuming that proving Mitchell was not the killer is somehow synonymous with Crump being the murderer instead. It is flawed logic to assume that the one naturally flows from the other. Moreover, if memory serves, Tom was most exercised with a Forum member who recently suggested that a man depicted fleeing the pergola area might have fired shots at the President. The point was made, if I recall, that it was unfair to accuse a man of murder in the absence of any evidence. However, this is precisely what Tom now seems to argue re: Crump, who was already tried and acquitted. Jim and Lisa Pease are entirely correct to excoriate Janney where he has committed demonstrable offenses against history, to the extent that we can be confident he has done so. I have stated so repeatedly, as I believe Michael Hogan has also done. Yet, the fact that Janney’s story may be a complete fairy tale does not convict Crump. I am unsure why Tom feels insulted that Michael Hogan referred to his discoveries about Mitchell as "Googling." It is precisely the method that Tom employed, and had Janney and others done so - including Jim and Lisa - they might have detected this sooner. But it was felt easier to re-indict Crump than to Google Mitchell. Clearly, they’ve done neither. We now also have evidence that aside from Crump’s fishy "fishing" alibi, which can be seen as an innocuous invention to preclude his wife learning he’d been fornicating with the prostitute, there have been other instances in which Crump and/or Ms. Roundtree told conflicting stories at different times. If she is still alive, which I presume is the case, perhaps overtures can be made to her to determine why those conflicting stories were told, or if there is some way to rationalize them (misquotes, out of context, inventions by police, etc.) That would constitute more than "Googling" and perhaps move the ball further down the field. It is peculiar to me that Michael has also been vilified for something as trivial as posting that the book was being released. Michael also posts on the developments regarding Tom Hanks’ Bug-movie, which demonstrably does not mean he feels the movie will be worthwhile or that he condones its subject matter. Moreover, one wonder how Michael could pre-approve a book not yet published, let alone concur with its hypotheses. Such advance advocacy is seen, however, albeit not by Michael Hogan. Five years ago, well before Janney had even written the book, Jim did an essay on why it should not be trusted, and cast some heavy aspersions toward this Forum’s proprietor in the process. Likewise, Lisa Pease admitted in her review of the book that based upon some of the footnote sources, she immediately determined to her own satisfaction that the book would be rubbish, and then viewed it through that prism. The words ‘Rush To Judgement"take on new meaning in this context. Let me close by saying, yet again, that advocating for Crump’s innocence does not automatically equate with Janney’s Mitchell tale being true. Though that is the flawed position being taken here repeatedly. It is in no way heretical to insist that those who wish to convict Crump in absentia provide more convincing and probative evidence than emerged at trial and result in his acquittal. Those making the charge are responsible for providing proof. Attacking those who ask for the proof is unbecoming. Michael Hogan is owed many apologies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Rago Posted August 23, 2012 Share Posted August 23, 2012 Moreover, if memory serves, Tom was most exercised with a Forum member who recently suggested that a man depicted fleeing the pergola area might have fired shots at the President. The point was made, if I recall, that it was unfair to accuse a man of murder in the absence of any evidence. However, this is precisely what Tom now seems to argue re: Crump, who was already tried and acquitted. Since I am the person to whom you are referring I would like to add this link to the thread in question. http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=19297entry256792 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tom Scully Posted August 24, 2012 Share Posted August 24, 2012 (edited) Although I posted attribution, since I found the posts, on another forum, that display the images of the relevant authors Jim DiEugenio credits me for posting on this thread, I'm making it clear that I did not compile that two post presentation, I found it and thought it relevant. The level of vexation and vitriol toward Michael Hogan is troubling. .......... We now also have evidence that aside from Crump’s fishy "fishing" alibi, which can be seen as an innocuous invention to preclude his wife learning he’d been fornicating with the prostitute, there have been other instances in which Crump and/or Ms. Roundtree told conflicting stories at different times. If she is still alive, which I presume is the case, perhaps overtures can be made to her to determine why those conflicting stories were told, or if there is some way to rationalize them (misquotes, out of context, inventions by police, etc.) That would constitute more than "Googling" and perhaps move the ball further down the field. ........ Consider that this seems a deliberate effort to create a false impression, and it is false, the AP reported Cord Meyer's employment by the CIA in initial reporting of the shooting. The spin has worked so well it has been repeated. Dovey Roundtree won the case, but there seems an agenda to make any CIA link unknown to the defendant Crump and his attorney. Why ? (quote]https://prn.fm/2012/...der-law-083012/ August 5, 2012 Meria Interviews Katie McCabe co Author with Dovey Roundtree of “Justice Older Than Law”. Roundtree's co-author, Katie McCabe, just post the 45:00 mark in the interview : (Roundtree) .....She knew nothing about Mary Meyer's romance with Kennedy. Even the connection to the CIA, there were whispers that Mary Meyer's ex-husband more than just a writer, and the federal employee that was mentioned in the newspapers.... (/quote] ................... http://www.spartacus.../JFKjordanE.htmDovey Roundtree .......No newspaper reports identified the true work of her former husband, Cord Meyer. He was described as a government official or an author. A large number of journalists knew that Meyer had been married to a senior CIA officer. They also knew that she had been having an affair with John F. Kennedy. None of this was reported. In fact, the judge, ruled that the private life of Mary Meyer could not be mentioned in court...... (quote) Georgetown Artist Killed In Robbery . Eugene Register-Guard - Oct 13, 1964 ... of an old canal where she often had strolled with Mrs. John Kennedy. ... er wife of Cord Meyer a writer employed by the Central Intelligence Agency. ... (/quote) Primary Sources (1) Peter Janney, Mary Pinchot Meyer (29th July, 2007) The question has been asked who really was "William L. Mitchell," the alleged assassin of Mary Pinchot Meyer? What we know about Mitchell is that the day after the murder, he went to police in Washington and told them that he believed he passed Mary Meyer on the towpath as he was running east back to Key Bridge and she was walking west toward Fletcher's Boat House. Mitchell told police that a black man (who just happened to fit Ray Crump's description - the man who was charged with the murder) was following her about six hundred feet behind her. Mitchell told police that he ran the towpath regularly, worked at the Pentagon, and was a part time teacher at Georgetown University. Mitchell testified at Crump's murder trial in July, 1965, but his testimony was largely discredtied by Crump's attorney, Dovey Roundtree, Esq. who became a legend after getting Crump acquitted. Mitchell was listed in the DoD directory in the fall of 1964 as "2nd Lt. William L. Mitchell." But then he disappears from the directory in the winter (1965). He shows up at the trial (July, 1965) and tells reporter Roberta Hornig that he is now a full time teacher in the mathmatics department at Georgetown University (GTU). The only problem with this is that there is no record of any "William L. Mitchell" ever teaching at Georgetown. Leo Damore thoroughly researched this in 1991-2. I again researched it a couple of years ago: there is no record of any "William L. Mitchell" teaching in ANY department at GTU. Mitchell's place of residence was an apartment at "The Virginian" at 1500 Arlington Blvd. in Arlington, Va. Damore researched this address and found evidence that this was a known CIA safehouse. I followed this up two years ago and two former CIA personnel confirmed that it was indeed an agency safehouse, as were certain teaching appointments at GTU. In my possession are several hours of tape recorded interviews between Damore and Crump's attorney Dovey Roundtree, Esq. (Award winning author Katie McCabe is now finishing the authorized biography of Dovey Rountree). Both Roundtree and Damore talk about Mitchell and how "convenient" his testimony was, and they both suspected his involvement. Mitchell never returned any of Roundtree's calls before the trial, and Damore could never locate him. So, as a last resort, Damore wrote Mitchell a letter and sent it to his last known address, the address given in the court transcript... (quote name='Tom Scully' timestamp='1344672801' post='258105'] .............................. Harvard alumni directory books.google.com Harvard Alumni Directory (Office), Harvard Alumni Association, Harvard University MltcheU, WUliam Lockwood, 1500 Arlington Blvd. , Apt. 1022, Arlington, Va. 22209. g62-63 (/quote) If I display 1,000 obituaries and other circa 1960's articles will it influence anyone to discount the idea that Janney is to be taken to task for so stridently representing the home address of William L. Mitchell as a "CIA safe house"? Astronautics & aeronautics: Volume 2 American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics - 1964 - Snippet view ....WELSH, DR. EDWARD C., Exec. Secy., NASA Hq., Washington, D.C, Home: 1500 Arlington Blvd. , Arlington, Va. Robert Charles-Dunne, are you serious? You compared my criticism of this "headline" opinion by Mike Rago, "I think this may be the man who shot JFK from the Grassy Knoll" ...to my posting my belief that Crump was not "proven innocent"? You see a double standard, hypocrisy on my part? Do you really think the criticism I directed at Mike Rago was about my objection to him unfairly accusing an unidentifiable blob as an assassin? I was objecting to the problem of the title of (aka) Mike Rago's thread being so far removed from any evidence he could post to support such a declaration in his thread's title. IT IS REASONABLE TO POST THAT CRUMP WAS NOT "PROVEN INNOCENT". Here is support for my contention.: The Secret Parts of Fortune: Three Decades of Intense ... books.google.com Ron Rosenbaum - 2000 - 799 pages - Google eBook - Preview “Without a full confession and witnessing it myself,” remarks Inspector Bernard Crooke, “there's no question in my mind that Ray Crump shot Mary Meyer.” Like the detective in the film Laura, Crooke became somewhat captivated by the victim The case went to the jury on July 29, 1965. After five hours of deliberation the jury foreman sent to the judge for answers to the following questions: “Was Ray Crump right-handed or left handed? Did the police ever permit Crump to show them where he claimed to be fishing and from where he fell?” The judge told the jury they would have to depend upon their own recollection for the answers to those questions. The jury deliberated for a few more hours, then sent a second note to the judge informing him they were deadlocked eight to four .... New times: Volume 7 books.google.com 1976 - Snippet view Hantman decided the only way to prove that Mary Meyer's murderer and Raymond Crump were one and the same man was to ... for a few more hours, then sent a second note to the judge informing him they were deadlocked eight to four. http://educationforu...=45#entry257654 Crump Free In Murder On Towpath By William Chapman Washington Post Staff Writer The Washington Post; Jul 31, 1965; "...The jury, which had deliberated nine hours Thursday and two hours yesterday, filed into the courtroom at 11:35 a.m. and the foreman, Edward O. Savwoir, offered the written verdict. Savwoir would not say later how the jury was initially divided. Asked about the final verdict, he said, "there were many missing links...... we just didn't get the man at the scene." http://educationforu...26 (quote name='John Simkin' timestamp='1320676541' post='237509'] ................. One of the important aspects of this book is that it will show that Nina Burleigh's book on the subject, "A Very Private Woman: The Life and Unsolved Murder of Presidential Mistress Mary Meyer" (1998) was a CIA limited hangout. (/quote] (quote name='John Simkin' date='Aug 9 2005, 11:04 AM'](1) Do you believe Timothy Leary's account of his relationship with Mary Meyer? (post="36373"](/post](/quote] ........... (quote name='John Simkin' date='Aug 9 2005, 11:04 AM'](3) Did you find any evidence that the killing was a CIA operation? (post="36373"](/post] (/quote] No. I can't say I disproved that theory though. There remains, in my mind, a ten percent chance that someone besides Crump did it. ........... I posted a "break through" discovery. (quote) New York mathematical society. List of members, constitution, by-laws books.google.comAmerican Mathematical Society - 1964 - Snippet view American Mathematical Society. MISARE ... AI Math., Computation Lab., Harvard Univ., Cambridge, Mass. ... MITCHELL, WILLIAM L. I Pentagon, OR Group, Systems Dept., USADSC, Washington, D. C. l500 Arlington Blvd., Apt. l022, Combined membership list of the American Mathematical Society and ... books.google.com American Mathematical Society, Mathematical Association of America, Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics - 1965 - Snippet view ...... MITCHELL, WILLIAM L. I Pentagon, OR Group, Systems Dept., USADSC, Washington, D. C. 1500 Arlington Blvd., Apt. 1022, Arlington, Va. MITCHELL, Harvard alumni directory books.google.com Harvard Alumni Directory (Office), Harvard Alumni Association, Harvard University - 1965 - Snippet view 22310. Ed Adm. g25-29 AM 26, PhD 29 MltcheU, WUliam Lockwood, 1500 Arlington Blvd. , Apt. 1022, Arlington, Va. 22209. Directory of Computer Education and Research: Volume 3 books.google.com T. C. Hsiao - 1973 - 1800 pages MITCHELL, WILLIAM L. - Assistant Professor of Business Administration Department of Management Sciences School of Business and Economics CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, HAYWARD Hayward, California 94542 - July 25, 1939 - BME, 1962, Cornell University; MS, 1963, Harvard University; PhD, 1970, University of California, Los Angeles - Operations Research - ORSA, TIMS, IMS, ACM, SIAM, MAA - Visiting Research Associate, University of Stockholm, Summer 1971; Research Assistant, Operations Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, 1966-70; 1st Lieutenant/Systems Analyst, USADATCOM. U.S. Army, 1963-65. Fullbright Fellow University of London, 1965-66 Directory Emeriti - California State University, East Bay www20.csueastbay.edu/oaa/files/docs/DirectoryEmeriti.pdf File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick View Directory of Emeritus Faculty Professors ..... ....... MITCHELL, BILL (1969), Associate Professor of Business Administration: B.M.E., 1962, Cornell University; M.S., 1963, Harvard University; Ph.D., 1970, University of California, Berkeley. Emeritus, 1989 ...(/quote) Michael Holden responded. : Michael Hogan, on 08 August 2012 - 01:58 PM, said: Tom, could you elaborate on what the speculation was that was presented by Dovey Roundtree? And how the small set of details you linked to demolish her speculation? ...... ....and Michael Hogan Posted 16 August 2012 - 10:38 PM ".....Tom, I know you are proud of your Mitchell googling. So much so that you have taken to posting it onto threads that are unrelated to Janney or Mary's Mosaic. The arrogance you displayed was palpable...." The observations Jim DiEugenio and I are making are that Michael Hogan has posted no criticism of Peter Janney, but he has posted much criticism of Jim and I, despite this "shortcoming" and several others of Janney's. Peter Janney Posted 06 July 2012 - 03:59 PM The Autodafé of Lisa Pease and James DiEugenio: "......In addition, Ms. Pease can’t even seem to fathom or consider how “Lt. William L. Mitchell,” a man who told police he was jogging on the towpath when he passed Mary Meyer – allegedly just before the murder took place – told police that a “Negro male” matching Wiggins’ description was following her in an effort to frame Ray Crump. “Mitchell” would then testify against Crump at the murder trial nine months later in July 1965 as part of the CIA’s assassination operation. It doesn’t seem to matter to Pease that “Mitchell” has never been able to be located since the trial, or that his known address during that time was documented as a “CIA safe house” by three separate former CIA employees........" Mary's Mosaic: The CIA Conspiracy to Murder John F. Kennedy, Mary ... books.google.com Peter Janney - 2012 - Google eBook - Preview "......Further examining other Pentagon directories, Charles discovered that Mitchell's name no longer appeared after the fall 1964 edition. He next investigated ... The phantom William L. Mitchell had indeed evaporated into thin air. “This is a typical At the trial, Mitchell identified himself no longer as a military man but as a mathematics instructor at Georgetown University. He gave the same address he had given to police nine months earlier: 1500 Arlington Boulevard, in Arlington, Virginia, an apartment complex known at the time as the Virginian.73 The presence of Lieutenant William L. Mitchell had troubled Dovey Roundtree from the very beginning. What else ...." Once more, Robert Charles-Dunne, you've posted criticism directed at Jim or at me. Consider that Michael Hogan posted that he read Janney's book. Presumably he is familiar with the assertions by Janney, displayed directly above this paragraph. When I brought this to Michael's attention, he acted as if his main concern was about my lumping Janney and Roundtree together in expressing suspicion about a hidden agenda of William Mitchell.: (quote) New York mathematical society. List of members, constitution, by-laws books.google.comAmerican Mathematical Society - 1964 - Snippet view American Mathematical Society. MISARE ... AI Math., Computation Lab., Harvard Univ., Cambridge, Mass. ... MITCHELL, WILLIAM L. I Pentagon, OR Group, Systems Dept., USADSC, Washington, D. C. l500 Arlington Blvd., Apt. l022, Combined membership list of the American Mathematical Society and ... books.google.com American Mathematical Society, Mathematical Association of America, Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics - 1965 - Snippet view ...... MITCHELL, WILLIAM L. I Pentagon, OR Group, Systems Dept., USADSC, Washington, D. C. 1500 Arlington Blvd., Apt. 1022, Arlington, Va. MITCHELL, Harvard alumni directory books.google.com Harvard Alumni Directory (Office), Harvard Alumni Association, Harvard University - 1965 - Snippet view 22310. Ed Adm. g25-29 AM 26, PhD 29 MltcheU, WUliam Lockwood, 1500 Arlington Blvd. , Apt. 1022, Arlington, Va. 22209. Directory of Computer Education and Research: Volume 3 books.google.com T. C. Hsiao - 1973 - 1800 pages MITCHELL, WILLIAM L. - Assistant Professor of Business Administration Department of Management Sciences School of Business and Economics CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, HAYWARD Hayward, California 94542 - July 25, 1939 - BME, 1962, Cornell University; MS, 1963, Harvard University; PhD, 1970, University of California, Los Angeles - Operations Research - ORSA, TIMS, IMS, ACM, SIAM, MAA - Visiting Research Associate, University of Stockholm, Summer 1971; Research Assistant, Operations Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, 1966-70; 1st Lieutenant/Systems Analyst, USADATCOM. U.S. Army, 1963-65. Fullbright Fellow University of London, 1965-66 Directory Emeriti - California State University, East Bay www20.csueastbay.edu/oaa/files/docs/DirectoryEmeriti.pdf File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick View Directory of Emeritus Faculty Professors ..... ....... MITCHELL, BILL (1969), Associate Professor of Business Administration: B.M.E., 1962, Cornell University; M.S., 1963, Harvard University; Ph.D., 1970, University of California, Berkeley. Emeritus, 1989 ...(/quote) I soon posted, (quote) http://educationforu...36 Tom Scully, on 09 August 2012 - 02:02 PM, said: ...... At the least, Janney seems a gullible fool, and Damore and Luciana Goldberg warrant far more scrutiny. What does Janney now have to offer from Damore's "research" to maintain his issues with his father being in league with a CIA assassin of Mary Meyer? Michael Hogan, on 09 August 2012 - 03:30 PM, said: ....................... It does not escape me that you refer to another EF member as a gullible fool. Other members' posts have been made invisible for less. ..... (/quote) I am becoming conditioned to near incoherent and odd reactions, disproportionate in their cult like trust in whatever Peter Janney has published, new facts be damned. I will stay at this a bit longer, Robert Charles-Dunne, in the fading hope that you will indicate that you understand misgivings posted by Jim and I. What separates Michael's reaction, when you consider what he has been posting, to say....these two? (quote) James H. Fetzer says: What is the point you are making? You believe that the assassin of Mary Meyer is an Associate Professor of Business Administration? Is that your suggestion? Why don't you simply say that? Interesting, but why should it alter my opinion of Peter's book? If he now has a position at Cal State, East Bay, that makes him accessible, not innocent. I do not understand your cryptic style, which does not promote communication or clarity. CIA assassins are often phantoms, so I don't think you have given this enough thought. But thanks for posting this. You are presuming that there cannot be two persons with the same name, of course, which seems rather absurd to me. But it's probably worth figuring out if this guy is our killer. on Aug 19, 2012 3:48:17 PM PDT Posted Douglas says: .... Are you a third party surrogate (or a direct employee) working for the USG whose mission here is to attempt to discredit the confession of a hit-man? The readers of your book review here will not have forgotten that William L. Mitchell (or someone identifying himself as this person) confessed to author Leo Damore---William L. Mitchell himself told Damore that he was Mary Meyer's murderer. This event is well-documented in Janney's book. Your attempt to suggest otherwise, via your citations, conveniently ignores this vital fact. Peter Janney has not identified Mitchell as Meyer's murderer "because Mitchell could not be found," as you claim; rather, he has identified Mitchell as Meyer's murderer because Mitchell confessed this to Damore. All the citations in the world will not erase this fact. ..... Your citations seem to me like the kind of detailed biographical information that would be maintained by the same "outfit" that would have maintained Mitchell's operational file at the Agency. .... Why don't you "get real" and tell us who you are, and how you found your citations? What tools did you use? Did someone lead you to them? Did someone provide them to you? Your postings have the odor to me of a disinformation/spin operation, designed to cast doubt, and to make readers forget the basic fact that a "William L. Mitchell" confessed to murdering Mary Meyer for the CIA, to author Leo Damore. Attorney Jimmy Smith's notes of his phone call with Leo Damore prove that. (/quote) Now, Jim Fetzer posted that response, even after he had been advised of these new details about William L. Mitchell's actual bacdkground, and had time to consider revising his opinion.: “Mary’s Mosaic”: A litmus test of JFK research integrity Started by James H. Fetzer, 03 Aug 2012 Jim DiEugenio has had five years experience with these "shoot the messenger" reactions to what turns out to be impressively accurate analysis and criticism of what Peter Janney has been trying to sell, and of what Leo Damore offered before Janney. Jim did not even have the reinforcing information I am privileged to have the opportunity to bring to his attention. It still seems clear some people, Michael Hogan among them, and unfortunately, Robert Charles-Dunne as well, see little to criticize Peter Janney for writing, but much to criticize Jim DiEugenio for writing in analysis of the same or very similar events and controversies. Jim and I will be adding to the body of the actual record and background of William L. Mitchell. I expect that Janney will mention Mitchell less often, although he seems an important component of the belief system of supporters of Janney's "CIA assassins on the canal towpath" version of the murder of Mary Meyer. As Jim has posted, Janney seems to no longer have a suspect who disappeared and was not who he claimed to be when he testified for the Crump prosecution. So, what does Janney still have to support the CIA angle in his book. His father was CIA, he talked to Ben Bradlee on the telephone on the day Mary Meyer was murdered, "Ray Crump is innocent". "Mary knew too much." Angleton took her diary after her death". Edited August 24, 2012 by Tom Scully Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Rago Posted August 24, 2012 Share Posted August 24, 2012 (edited) Robert Charles-Dunne, are you serious? You compared my criticism of this "headline" opinion by Mike Rago, "I think this may be the man who shot JFK from the Grassy Knoll" ...to my posting my belief that Crump was not "proven innocent"? You see a double standard, hypocrisy on my part? Do you really think the criticism I directed at Mike Rago was about my objection to him unfairly accusing an unidentifiable blob as an assassin? I was objecting to the problem of the title of (aka) Mike Rago's thread being so far removed from any evidence he could post to support such a declaration in his thread's title. Again, I am dragged into this thread. The evidence I present in the following thread is circumstantial evidence, not direct evidence. It is not unlike the evidence that is used in the Crump case, except I have provided images. As I understand it Crump was found in the area within minutes after the murder of Meyer. http://educationforu...97 The man in this picture is seen less than a minute after the fatal head shots to the president. He is on the steps of the pergola shelter on the Grassy Knoll. The previous picture was taken 15 seconds after this picture showing very unusual activity inside the pergola shelter. Here is an enlargement of the shelter doorway. That man on the steps of the pergola shelter did not have time to get there so quickly. He had to have already been on the Grassy Knoll. The important research that is involved here is the placing these images in their proper chronological order. The separation in time of the two images being just 15 seconds and both images occur less than 68 seconds after the fatal headshot. And , in case you missed it, I am identifying two people on the Knoll that appear to come out of no where. And here is the broader view of the area at the time in question. The man on the steps is in the far right of this severely cropped photo.(another issue entirely) The bus going under the underpass is press bus one. That man sticks out like a sore thumb. Everyone is running to the Knoll. That man is already there. Edited August 24, 2012 by Mike Rago Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Charles-Dunne Posted August 24, 2012 Share Posted August 24, 2012 (edited) All of which is well and good, Tom, yet doesn’t place a weapon in Crump’s hand. You seem to imply that I am attempting to defend Janney’s book, or outlook, just as you have done with Michael Hogan. It is a transparent gross mis-characterization. I have disregarded all of it, which is only natural, since I haven’t read it and likely won’t do so. My singular point, which I believe is Michael’s too (he can speak for himself) is that Crump was found not guilty, by legal process, with cause, and nothing you or Jim or Lisa have added changes that most basic fact. Taking a gun out of Mitchell’s hand doesn’t necessitate that it therefor automatically must have been in Crump’s hand. It is my sole argument with what Jim and Lisa (and now you) have written. It is not a defense of Janney, yet you seem determined to prod us into disavowing Janney’s book because of his multiple errors and omissions. How can you expect that of somebody who hasn’t read his book? Does that not seem a little nonsensical to you? As for you taking exception to Mike Rago’s post, it had nothing to do with a blob, and I suspect you do recall that more clearly than you’re currently letting on. When he posted a photo of a running man near the pergola, you said: “....And you would prove it, how? And you would positively identify this person to the point of incriminating him, how?..... No weapon, no face, no connection to anyone or anything does not seem an advantageous starting point.” And yet it is the very same starting point you are at vis a vis Crump. Proximity to the crime is all there is with Crump, and it’s not enough to convict a man for a capital crime, as we saw with the trial’s conclusion. Disprove Janney’s contentions to your heart’s content. They have nothing to do with Crump, who was deemed not guilty decades before Janney wrote word one of his tome, let alone with me. Or Michael. If you feel the need to re-indict Crump as part of that process, I look forward to whatever evidence you might present, if and when you actually locate any. Defending Crump is not defending Janney, nor equivalent to it. Why this self-evident, easily discernible fact seems to have escape you is a mystery to me. Edited August 24, 2012 by Robert Charles-Dunne Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Rago Posted August 24, 2012 Share Posted August 24, 2012 (edited) As for you taking exception to Mike Rago’s post, it had nothing to do with a blob, and I suspect you do recall that more clearly than you’re currently letting on. When he posted a photo of a running man near the pergola, you said: “....And you would prove it, how? And you would positively identify this person to the point of incriminating him, how?..... No weapon, no face, no connection to anyone or anything does not seem an advantageous starting point.” And yet it is the very same starting point you are at vis a vis Crump. Proximity to the crime is all there is with Crump, and it’s not enough to convict a man for a capital crime, as we saw with the trial’s conclusion. You are right, when Tom made this statement the picture he refers to as a "blob" had not been posted. He interjected himself before the evidence was presented. A connection was shown between people in two other images. In case you all missed it, those images which I posted identify ( not by name ) two people on the Grassy Knoll ,within one minute after the murder of the president, who cannot otherwise be accounted for ....(except by the testimony of Lee Bowers) Ignoring important evidence does not make it go away ... This is not the towpath it is the Grassy Knoll. http://educationforu...98 I think we need to start calling what happened to the president a murder, calling it an assassination somehow changes things. Calling it an "assassination" somehow allows it to be viewed as possibly justified by some. We all accept a murder is not justified. I dare say there is more attention paid to the scene of the crime in the Mary Meyer murder than to the scene of the crime in the John F. Kennedy murder. One difference between the assassination of president Kennedy and the murder of Mary Meyer...one is called an assassination and the other is called a murder. knoll = A small hill or mound. towpath = A path beside a river or canal, originally used as a pathway for horses towing barges. Edited August 24, 2012 by Mike Rago Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hogan Posted August 24, 2012 Share Posted August 24, 2012 Although I posted attribution, since I found the posts, on another forum, that display the images of the relevant authors Jim DiEugenio credits me for posting on this thread, I'm making it clear that I did not compile that two post presentation, I found it and thought it relevant. It's apparent that Jim did not read Tom's post carefully enough. He was so thrilled at the possibilty of "impeaching Roundtree" that he became oblivious to the sources. Hence my comment about a Fetzer/Cinque mentality: Tom, that is just excellent stuff by you impeaching Roundtree. I could not have done better myself. It explodes Crump's alibi, and now it appears that Roundtree was a bit too zealous in her defense and smudged certain facts as defense lawyers tend to do. That is why I quoted the part from her book that I did. I suspected she had done something like this, but I could not pinpoint it. You did. Congratulations from me. Hold your breath before you get any credit for some excellent sleuthing from Mikey and Dawn. (Better not do that. Because you will be dead before they congratulate you.) And it is incredible that Janney never brought these key inconsistencies up in his book. Even though he was in close contact with Roundtree, and she acknowledges him in her book. Just superb work by you on both this and Mitchell. And with that work, Janney's book has collapsed like a souffle. It's the Fetzer and Cinque show all over again. Much less member interest. Different styles. Different topic, different people. Same mentality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tom Scully Posted August 25, 2012 Share Posted August 25, 2012 (edited) .............. The thing is the content is important, not just because it impeaches Roundtree--and Janney BTW--since he does not acknowledge it; but it also indicates that 1.) It evolved over time, and 2.) It appears that Roundtree and Crump cooperated on it. ...... Jim, this is included in my last post in this thread. It is an indication, IMO, that Dovey Roundtree's co-author Katie McCabe is cooperating with Janney and the supporters of his fairy tales to create a misleading impression that there was no basis leading up to, and during the Crump trial, for Crump's attorney, Dovey Roundtree to introduce the victim, Mary Meyer's linkage to CIA related arguments. Roundtree appears to have had enough information, courtesy of newspaper reports, to at the least, subpoena Mary's ex-husband Cord Meyer for the purpose of asking him under oath if he had any knowledge of enemies in the course of his employment with the CIA who had a motive to do harm to him or to those close to him. Why does this have the appearance of being important not only to Janney, but also to Roundtree that an impression is crafted of no knowledge existing beyond gossip and whispers, that victim Mary Meyer's husband was employed by the CIA? Why do so few see the obvious, shallow, almost desperate spin projected to keep the Janney tales afloat? Although I posted attribution, since I found the posts, on another forum, that display the images of the relevant authors Jim DiEugenio credits me for posting on this thread, I'm making it clear that I did not compile that two post presentation, I found it and thought it relevant. The level of vexation and vitriol toward Michael Hogan is troubling. .......... We now also have evidence that aside from Crump’s fishy "fishing" alibi, which can be seen as an innocuous invention to preclude his wife learning he’d been fornicating with the prostitute, there have been other instances in which Crump and/or Ms. Roundtree told conflicting stories at different times. If she is still alive, which I presume is the case, perhaps overtures can be made to her to determine why those conflicting stories were told, or if there is some way to rationalize them (misquotes, out of context, inventions by police, etc.) That would constitute more than "Googling" and perhaps move the ball further down the field. ........ Consider that this seems a deliberate effort to create a false impression, and it is false, the AP reported Cord Meyer's employment by the CIA in initial reporting of the shooting. The spin has worked so well it has been repeated. Dovey Roundtree won the case, but there seems an agenda to make any CIA link unknown to the defendant Crump and his attorney. Why ? (quote]https://prn.fm/2012/...der-law-083012/ August 5, 2012 Meria Interviews Katie McCabe co Author with Dovey Roundtree of “Justice Older Than Law”. Roundtree's co-author, Katie McCabe, just post the 45:00 mark in the interview : (Roundtree) .....She knew nothing about Mary Meyer's romance with Kennedy. Even the connection to the CIA, there were whispers that Mary Meyer's ex-husband more than just a writer, and the federal employee that was mentioned in the newspapers.... (/quote] ................... http://www.spartacus.../JFKjordanE.htmDovey Roundtree .......No newspaper reports identified the true work of her former husband, Cord Meyer. He was described as a government official or an author. A large number of journalists knew that Meyer had been married to a senior CIA officer. They also knew that she had been having an affair with John F. Kennedy. None of this was reported. In fact, the judge, ruled that the private life of Mary Meyer could not be mentioned in court...... (quote) Georgetown Artist Killed In Robbery . Eugene Register-Guard - Oct 13, 1964 ... of an old canal where she often had strolled with Mrs. John Kennedy. ... er wife of Cord Meyer a writer employed by the Central Intelligence Agency. ... (/quote) Primary Sources (1) Peter Janney, Mary Pinchot Meyer (29th July, 2007) The question has been asked who really was "William L. Mitchell," the alleged assassin of Mary Pinchot Meyer? What we know about Mitchell is that the day after the murder, he went to police in Washington and told them that he believed he passed Mary Meyer on the towpath as he was running east back to Key Bridge and she was walking west toward Fletcher's Boat House. Mitchell told police that a black man (who just happened to fit Ray Crump's description - the man who was charged with the murder) was following her about six hundred feet behind her. Mitchell told police that he ran the towpath regularly, worked at the Pentagon, and was a part time teacher at Georgetown University. Mitchell testified at Crump's murder trial in July, 1965, but his testimony was largely discredtied by Crump's attorney, Dovey Roundtree, Esq. who became a legend after getting Crump acquitted. Mitchell was listed in the DoD directory in the fall of 1964 as "2nd Lt. William L. Mitchell." But then he disappears from the directory in the winter (1965). He shows up at the trial (July, 1965) and tells reporter Roberta Hornig that he is now a full time teacher in the mathmatics department at Georgetown University (GTU). The only problem with this is that there is no record of any "William L. Mitchell" ever teaching at Georgetown. Leo Damore thoroughly researched this in 1991-2. I again researched it a couple of years ago: there is no record of any "William L. Mitchell" teaching in ANY department at GTU. Mitchell's place of residence was an apartment at "The Virginian" at 1500 Arlington Blvd. in Arlington, Va. Damore researched this address and found evidence that this was a known CIA safehouse. I followed this up two years ago and two former CIA personnel confirmed that it was indeed an agency safehouse, as were certain teaching appointments at GTU. In my possession are several hours of tape recorded interviews between Damore and Crump's attorney Dovey Roundtree, Esq. (Award winning author Katie McCabe is now finishing the authorized biography of Dovey Rountree). Both Roundtree and Damore talk about Mitchell and how "convenient" his testimony was, and they both suspected his involvement. Mitchell never returned any of Roundtree's calls before the trial, and Damore could never locate him. So, as a last resort, Damore wrote Mitchell a letter and sent it to his last known address, the address given in the court transcript... (quote name='Tom Scully' timestamp='1344672801' post='258105'] .............................. Harvard alumni directory books.google.com Harvard Alumni Directory (Office), Harvard Alumni Association, Harvard University MltcheU, WUliam Lockwood, 1500 Arlington Blvd. , Apt. 1022, Arlington, Va. 22209. g62-63 (/quote) If I display 1,000 obituaries and other circa 1960's articles will it influence anyone to discount the idea that Janney is to be taken to task for so stridently representing the home address of William L. Mitchell as a "CIA safe house"? Astronautics & aeronautics: Volume 2 American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics - 1964 - Snippet view ....WELSH, DR. EDWARD C., Exec. Secy., NASA Hq., Washington, D.C, Home: 1500 Arlington Blvd. , Arlington, Va. ...and of course, a high level NASA executive, at the height of NASA's elevation as a top propaganda definition of a model of national purpose, would naturally be expected to keep his family residence located at what Janney declares is without question, a CIA safe house. Edited August 25, 2012 by Tom Scully Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hogan Posted August 25, 2012 Share Posted August 25, 2012 You cannot be serious Mike. But the thing is, I think you are. Tom fished this out of another forum, fine. You didn't. (Quite naturally.) Neither did I. Neither did RCD. And you won't give him credit for even that. Guess this is more of your "Googling". The thing is the content is important, not just because it impeaches Roundtree--and Janney BTW--since he does not acknowledge it; but it also indicates that 1.) It evolved over time, and 2.) It appears that Roundtree and Crump cooperated on it. And all Mikey can do is say, well it wasn't original. Keep on deliberately missing the point MIkey. Your credibility will sink even further than it has. Which is underwater. No, What I can say is you weren't perceptive enough to recognize it was another person's post from another forum. Some of us have seen that stuff long ago. Maybe it's you that has the man crush: Tom, that is just excellent stuff by you impeaching Roundtree. I could not have done better myself. It explodes Crump's alibi, and now it appears that Roundtree was a bit too zealous in her defense and smudged certain facts as defense lawyers tend to do. That is why I quoted the part from her book that I did. I suspected she had done something like this, but I could not pinpoint it. You did. Congratulations from me. Hold your breath before you get any credit for some excellent sleuthing from Mikey and Dawn. (Better not do that. Because you will be dead before they congratulate you.) And it is incredible that Janney never brought these key inconsistencies up in his book. Even though he was in close contact with Roundtree, and she acknowledges him in her book. Just superb work by you on both this and Mitchell. And with that work, Janney's book has collapsed like a souffle. It's the Fetzer and Cinque show all over again. Much less member interest. Different styles. Different topic, different people. Same mentality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tom Scully Posted August 25, 2012 Share Posted August 25, 2012 (edited) Jim, a review of Michael's rules. : These examples get hall passes from Michael : The Autodafé of Lisa Pease and James DiEugenio: Tomas de Torquemada and the Spanish Inquisition return in a new era of suppression of freedom of thought and adherence to a rigid dogma – namely their own prejudices! .....In addition, Ms. Pease can’t even seem to fathom or consider how “Lt. William L. Mitchell,” a man who told police he was jogging on the towpath when he passed Mary Meyer – allegedly just before the murder took place – told police that a “Negro male” matching Wiggins’ description was following her in an effort to frame Ray Crump. “Mitchell” would then testify against Crump at the murder trial nine months later in July 1965 as part of the CIA’s assassination operation. It doesn’t seem to matter to Pease that “Mitchell” has never been able to be located since the trial, or that his known address during that time was documented as a “CIA safe house” by three separate former CIA employees. At the time of trial in July 1965, Mitchell told a reporter that he had since retired from the military and was now a mathematics instructor at Georgetown University – yet no record of his employment there could ever be located, nor was there ever any bona-fide military service record located for “Mitchell,” either in the Pentagon where he was listed in the directory at the time of the murder, or in the main military data base in St. Louis. This was thoroughly researched by the Peabody Award-winning journalist Roger Charles, as discussed in my book, a fact that Pease fails to mention in one of her many deliberate omissions, which also included Damore’s consultation with L. Fletcher Prouty (as documented by Damore’s attorney James H. Smith) to finally understand who “Mitchell” was, before Damore confronted him. Of course, Lisa Pease is entitled to whatever flawed point of view she wants to embrace, but she’s not entitled to her own set of facts..... (quote] http://www.spartacus.../JFKjordanE.htm Dovey Roundtree .......No newspaper reports identified the true work of her former husband, Cord Meyer. He was described as a government official or an author. A large number of journalists knew that Meyer had been married to a senior CIA officer. They also knew that she had been having an affair with John F. Kennedy. None of this was reported. In fact, the judge, ruled that the private life of Mary Meyer could not be mentioned in court...... (/quote] (quote]https://prn.fm/2012/...der-law-083012/ August 5, 2012 Meria Interviews Katie McCabe co Author with Dovey Roundtree of “Justice Older Than Law”. Roundtree's co-author, Katie McCabe, just post the 45:00 mark in the interview : (Roundtree) .....She knew nothing about Mary Meyer's romance with Kennedy. Even the connection to the CIA, there were whispers that Mary Meyer's ex-husband more than just a writer, and the federal employee that was mentioned in the newspapers.... (/quote] Mary's Mosaic: The CIA Conspiracy to Murder John F. Kennedy, Mary ... books.google.com Peter Janney - 2012 - Google eBook - Preview 60 Neither paper mentioned his real work as a highlevel operative within the CIA's Directorate of Plans, though in Mary's obituary in the New York Times the following day, Cord was said to be employed in New York by the Central Intelligence These examples only attract Michael Hogan's scorn : (quote name='Jim DiEugenio' timestamp='1344189640' post='257683'] Ron, that is a very long reply which ultimately says you want to ignore that piece of libel in which Janney did do all those things to CTKA because we gave him a bad review. You also fail to point out any errors in my part 2, and you also fail to acknowledge the howlers i pointed out about the book. Or maybe you really think JFK and Mary Meyer were talking about NSAM 263 at Milford in September of 1963. Or that Mary Meyer did in two weeks what it took Salandria months to do--without the evidence. OK, fine. By the way Torquemada was responsible for the deaths of about 2, 000 people. We know what the Nazis did. And off of that fruitcake comparison you compare me with Fetzer. Wow. (/quote] Ever heard of Robert Crump, Jim? Mimi Alford and NSAM 263 have nothing do do with him. Can't you get that? The idea that you are not going to take me seriously if I don't agree with you is straight out of Fetzer's playbook. I can show you if you want. And I can show you a mistake or two in your article. Keep prodding me and I will. My name is not Ron. ................... "But Crump did have a misdemeanor record: two drunk and disorderly charges and a conviction for petit larceny. Convicted of shoplifting, he'd been sentenced to sixty days in jail, a substantial sentence for a first offense." It's not so much that Lisa made a sloppy and telling error, but that she or Jim DiEugenio failed to retract it (or even acknowledge it) when it was pointed out to them. It is Crump's misdemeanor record that Jim DiEugenio has used as an indicator that Crump was capable of murdering Mary Meyer. Lisa Pease agrees with him, calling Crump's misdemeanor record "crucial." Crucial? Please. Lisa Pease self-described her approach to Mary's Mosaic as "cool and analytical." There are other adjectives that would be more accurate and complete. Jim DiEugenio is quick to criticize others, quick to voice his conclusions on so many things (like Crump's alleged guilt), but has been shown to have a very thin skin when someone does not agree with him. When I was critical of his Haslam review, he totally misrepresented what I wrote and accused me of being unfair. His recent accusation that Dawn Meredith smeared him was churlish and uncalled for. Many times on the Education Forum I have praised Jim for the work he has done on this case. More than once, I've thanked him for his considerable contributions. This is not one of those times. (quote name='Michael Hogan' timestamp='1344430703' post='257936'] Tom, could you elaborate on what the speculation was that was presented by Dovey Roundtree? And how the small set of details you linked to demolish her speculation? The small set of details that demolish the speculation presented by Janney and Dovey Roundtree : (quote] Annual report to the president books.google.comCornell University. College of Engineering - 1961 - Snippet view Spring Term only) Mr. William Mitchell (5th yr. B.M.E. Candidate. Fall Term only) News and Notices - JStor The Annals of Mathematical Statistics Vol. 34, No. 3 (Sep., 1963), pp. 1133-1146 www.jstor.org/stable/2238500 Mitchell, William L., B.M.E., (Cornell University); Graduate Student, Operations Re- search, Harvard University; 70 Perkins Hall, Harvard University, Cambridge New York mathematical society. List of members, constitution, by-laws books.google.comAmerican Mathematical Society - 1964 - Snippet view American Mathematical Society. MISARE ... AI Math., Computation Lab., Harvard Univ., Cambridge, Mass. ... MITCHELL, WILLIAM L. I Pentagon, OR Group, Systems Dept., USADSC, Washington, D. C. l500 Arlington Blvd., Apt. l022, Combined membership list of the American Mathematical Society and ... books.google.com American Mathematical Society, Mathematical Association of America, Society for Industrial and Applied Mathematics - 1965 - Snippet view ...... MITCHELL, WILLIAM L. I Pentagon, OR Group, Systems Dept., USADSC, Washington, D. C. 1500 Arlington Blvd., Apt. 1022, Arlington, Va. MITCHELL, Harvard alumni directory books.google.com Harvard Alumni Directory (Office), Harvard Alumni Association, Harvard University - 1965 - Snippet view 22310. Ed Adm. g25-29 AM 26, PhD 29 MltcheU, WUliam Lockwood, 1500 Arlington Blvd. , Apt. 1022, Arlington, Va. 22209. Directory of Computer Education and Research: Volume 3 books.google.com T. C. Hsiao - 1973 - 1800 pages MITCHELL, WILLIAM L. - Assistant Professor of Business Administration Department of Management Sciences School of Business and Economics CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY, HAYWARD Hayward, California 94542 - July 25, 1939 - BME, 1962, Cornell University; MS, 1963, Harvard University; PhD, 1970, University of California, Los Angeles - Operations Research - ORSA, TIMS, IMS, ACM, SIAM, MAA - Visiting Research Associate, University of Stockholm, Summer 1971; Research Assistant, Operations Research Center, University of California, Berkeley, 1966-70; 1st Lieutenant/Systems Analyst, USADATCOM. U.S. Army, 1963-65. Fullbright Fellow University of London, 1965-66 Directory Emeriti - California State University, East Bay www20.csueastbay.edu/oaa/files/docs/DirectoryEmeriti.pdf File Format: PDF/Adobe Acrobat - Quick View California State University, Northridge. Emeritus, 2007. FAUST, JUDITH (1997), Librarian: A.B., 1968, College of William and Mary; M.L.S., 1971,. University of.... Directory of Emeritus Faculty Professors ..... ....... MITCHELL, BILL (1969), Associate Professor of Business Administration: B.M.E., 1962, Cornell University; M.S., 1963, Harvard University; Ph.D., 1970, University of California, Berkeley. Emeritus, 1989 (/quote] (/quote] I knew I had posted about Dovey Roundtree's role in good faith, and now that I can support that I did, I find your obfuscation and attempts to generally discredit me even more troubling. And, Michael, you'll be demanding a retraction from John Simkin with regard to inaccurate details in his excerpted Spartacus piece displayed above, and of Peter Janney for his description of Crump trial witness William L Mitchell,: "....It doesn’t seem to matter to Pease that “Mitchell” has never been able to be located since the trial, or that his known address during that time was documented as a “CIA safe house” by three separate former CIA employees....." ...and of course, Michael, you will be giving credit to me, where credit is due, especially since this is a research forum, and I perform and share research. What is it again, that you do here? Edited August 25, 2012 by Tom Scully Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tom Scully Posted August 25, 2012 Share Posted August 25, 2012 (edited) In his recent "Torquemada" barrage fired at Jim and Lisa, author Peter Janney angrily assserted : Jim, a review of Michael's rules. : These examples get hall passes from Michael : The Autodafé of Lisa Pease and James DiEugenio: Tomas de Torquemada and the Spanish Inquisition return in a new era of suppression of freedom of thought and adherence to a rigid dogma – namely their own prejudices! .....In addition, Ms. Pease can’t even seem to fathom or consider how “Lt. William L. Mitchell,” a man who told police he was jogging on the towpath when he passed Mary Meyer – allegedly just before the murder took place – told police that a “Negro male” matching Wiggins’ description was following her in an effort to frame Ray Crump. “Mitchell” would then testify against Crump at the murder trial nine months later in July 1965 as part of the CIA’s assassination operation. It doesn’t seem to matter to Pease that “Mitchell” has never been able to be located since the trial, or that his known address during that time was documented as a “CIA safe house” by three separate former CIA employees. At the time of trial in July 1965, Mitchell told a reporter that he had since retired from the military and was now a mathematics instructor at Georgetown University – yet no record of his employment there could ever be located, nor was there ever any bona-fide military service record located for “Mitchell,” either in the Pentagon where he was listed in the directory at the time of the murder, or in the main military data base in St. Louis. This was thoroughly researched by the Peabody Award-winning journalist Roger Charles, as discussed in my book, a fact that Pease fails to mention in one of her many deliberate omissions, which also included Damore’s consultation with L. Fletcher Prouty (as documented by Damore’s attorney James H. Smith) to finally understand who “Mitchell” was, before Damore confronted him. Of course, Lisa Pease is entitled to whatever flawed point of view she wants to embrace, but she’s not entitled to her own set of facts..... ................................... ................... "But Crump did have a misdemeanor record: two drunk and disorderly charges and a conviction for petit larceny. Convicted of shoplifting, he'd been sentenced to sixty days in jail, a substantial sentence for a first offense." It's not so much that Lisa made a sloppy and telling error, but that she or Jim DiEugenio failed to retract it (or even acknowledge it) when it was pointed out to them. It is Crump's misdemeanor record that Jim DiEugenio has used as an indicator that Crump was capable of murdering Mary Meyer. Lisa Pease agrees with him, calling Crump's misdemeanor record "crucial." Crucial? Please. Lisa Pease self-described her approach to Mary's Mosaic as "cool and analytical." There are other adjectives that would be more accurate and complete. Jim DiEugenio is quick to criticize others, quick to voice his conclusions on so many things (like Crump's alleged guilt), but has been shown to have a very thin skin when someone does not agree with him. When I was critical of his Haslam review, he totally misrepresented what I wrote and accused me of being unfair. His recent accusation that Dawn Meredith smeared him was churlish and uncalled for. Many times on the Education Forum I have praised Jim for the work he has done on this case. More than once, I've thanked him for his considerable contributions. This is not one of those times. ....................... And, Michael, you'll be demanding a retraction from John Simkin with regard to inaccurate details in his excerpted Spartacus piece displayed above, and of Peter Janney for his description of Crump trial witness William L Mitchell,: "....It doesn’t seem to matter to Pease that “Mitchell” has never been able to be located since the trial, or that his known address during that time was documented as a “CIA safe house” by three separate former CIA employees....." A few years back, Janney claimed only two CIA personnel confirmed 1500 Arlington Blvd. was a CIA safehouse. Let me try to answer some of the question that the members of this panel have raised, based on my research for my book (tentatively entitled Mary's Mosaic). . The question has been asked who really was "William L. Mitchell," the alleged assassin of Mary Pinchot Meyer? .... Mitchell's place of residence was an apartment at "The Virginian" at 1500 Arlington Blvd. in Arlington, Va. Damore researched this address and found evidence that this was a known CIA safehouse. I followed this up two years ago and two former CIA personnel confirmed that it was indeed an agency safehouse, as were certain teaching appointments at GTU. .....................Mary knew too much. As someone once said, "she knew where all the bodies were buried....." They had to get rid of her because she was too independent and could not be controlled. Think of the trouble she would have caused. I have not forgot about further comments about Timothy Leary and the CIA and will tackle that one shortly. This is some fancy writing on Peter Janney's part, he dances around, even sharing with us the coincidence that his friend and fellow author, H.P. Albarelli, once resided at 1500 Arlington Blvd., as if to give the impression that Albarelli, too is supporting Janney's claim that 1500 Arlington Blvd. was a CIA safehouse. Considering that Janney emphasized, in his, WHAT ARE YOU CRAZY? I AM PETER JANNEY, DO NOT CRITICIZE ME, scold of Jim and Lisa, that he now had three sources confirming that 1500 Arlington Blvd. was a CIA safehouse, read closely and you will find there is one name providing confirmation that 1500 Arlington Blvd. was a CIA safehouse. So with just one source for this "fact" aside from the very questionable olde assertions from Leo Damore, allegedly quoting the 74 years old, "aka William L. Mitchell," Peter Janney misled all who read his recent condemnation of Jim and Lisa by claiming he had three confirming sorces.: Mary's Mosaic: The CIA Conspiracy to Murder John F. Kennedy, Mary ... - Google Books Result books.google.com/books?isbn=162087282X Peter Janney - 2012 - Biography & Autobiography Mitchell, said Damore, had confessed to him a few hours earlier that morning: The murder of Mary Meyer had been “a CIA operation” in which Mitchell had been the assassin.24 “Mitchell” confirmed that his name, “William L. Mitchell,” was an alias and that he now lived under another alias in Virginia. He said his position at the Pentagon in 1964 had been just “a light bulb job,” a cover for covert intelligence work. He had done stints in the Air Force, the Army, and the Navy, he told Damore, all of which were also part of his cover, and he had also been “an FBI man” when circumstances required it. His listed residence at 1500 Arlington Boulevard in Arlington, Virginia, Mitchell told Damore, was in fact a CIA safe house. He was now seventy-four years old and had five children. It had been “an operation,” Mitchell disclosed. He had been “assigned” in September 1964 to be part of a “surveillance team” that was monitoring Mary Meyer. Mitchell appeared to suggest that the trigger for the surveillance had been the release of the Warren Report: “24 Sept Warren Report. She hit [the] roof.” Damore reiterated that Mary had bought a copy of the paperback version of the Warren.... Mary's Mosaic: The CIA Conspiracy to Murder John F. Kennedy, Mary ... books.google.com Peter Janney - 2012 - Google eBook - Preview Sometime in 1992, Damore interviewed former CIA contract analyst David MacMichael, who still lived in the Washington area. The two soon became friends. “Leo wanted to know who this guy [William L. Mitchell] really was,” said MacMichael in 2004 during an interview for this book. He was sure he [Mitchell] had misrepresented himself as to his real identity.” On one occasion, MacMichael recalled, he and Damore drove out to Mitchell's former address, the apartment building at 1500 Arlington Boulevard in Arlington, Virginia. There, MacMichael confirmed to Damore that the address had been a known “CIA safe house.”12 That observation was further corroborated by another former CIA operative, Donald Deneselya, who added that during his employment at the Agency in the early 1960s, the CIA regularly used faculty positions at Georgetown University as covers for many of its covert operations personnel. That fact was further substantiated by former disaffected Agency veteran Victor Marchetti, whose books—The CIA and the Cult of Intelligence and The Rope Dancer—the CIA had tried to suppress from publication.13 Any trail of Mitchell's identity or subsequent whereabouts, however, appeared to have vaporized. ................................ Still searching for Mitchell in early 2005, I was introduced to military researcher and investigative journalist Roger Charles. A former lieutenant colonel in the Marine Corps, Charles was a NavalAcademy graduate who had been a platoon leader in Vietnam before serving under the late colonel David Hackworth as part of the organization Soldiers for the Truth (now called Stand for the Troops). Early in his journalism career, Roger Charles had fired his first salvo with a Newsweek cover story entitled “Sea of Lies.” The story exposed the Pentagon's attempted cover-up of the US Vincennes's downing of an Iranian civilian airliner in 1988. In 2004, Charles had been part of a 60 Minutes II team headed by Dan Rather that aired the first photographs to reveal some of the most unconscionable American military behavior since the My Lai Massacre during the Vietnam War: the prisoner abuse in Iraq at Abu Ghraib. Charles had been an associate producer for the 60 Minutes II segment, “Abuse at Abu Ghraib.” He and his colleagues provided the viewing public with a picture of the horrors inflicted by American soldiers on Iraqi prisoners. That year, the segment would win the prestigious Peabody Award.14 Roger Charles had learned his craft under the tutelage of former marine colonel William R. Corson, author of the controversial book The Betrayal. Courageously exposing President Lyndon Johnson's corrupt, deliberate deception during the Vietnam War in 1968, Corson created a huge crisis that nearly brought him a court-martial. However, had Corson not done what he did, the Vietnam War would undoubtedly have been even further prolonged. Corson went on to write several more books, including The Armies of Ignorance, Widows, and The New KGB: Engine of Soviet Power, which he coauthored with Robert T. Crowley, an elite operative in the CIA's covert action directorate and a close colleague and friend of Jim Angleton's. (All three individuals will be discussed further in the next chapter.) Not only did Roger Charles become Corson's protégé and chief research assistant, but a trusted confidant, and eventually the executor of the Corson estate. With regard to William Mitchell, Roger Charles was asked to review Mitchell's office listing in the 1964 DoD telephone directory. Through his own channels, he sent an inquiry to the U.S. Army military database in St. Louis for any “William Mitchell” who was stationed at the Pentagon in 1964. There was none. Further examining other Pentagon directories, Charles discovered that Mitchell's name no longer appeared after the fall 1964 edition. He next investigated the military personnel who were located physically adjacent to Mitchell's alleged office (BE 1035), creating a list of approximately twenty individuals. Fifteen of those individuals could be verified through their military records, but none of the other five servicemen—Mitchell and four others in adjacent offices—had any military record in any service database. The phantom William L. Mitchell had indeed evaporated into thin air. “This is a typical pattern of people involved in covert intelligence work,” Charles later reported to me. “I've come across this kind of thing many times. People like this don't want to be found. They're taught how to evade all the conventional bureaucracies and channels. They don't leave any traces. These people work undercover in places like the Pentagon all the time. Given what I see here—the fact that he's got no matching military record I can locate—it's almost a certainty this guy Mitchell, whoever he was or is, had some kind of covert intelligence connection It's very strong in my opinion.” 15 Sometimes serendipity entwines with providence. In December 2009, I read H. P. Albarelli's recently published book, A Terrible Mistake: The Murder of Frank Olson and the CIA's Secret Cold War Experiments. Albarelli's magnum opus took me by the hand and held me hostage for several days. Extensively researched, the book not only provided the most convincing account of how the CIA “terminated” one of its own, but possibly the best history ever written of the Agency's infamous MKULTRA program. Albarelli and I soon began talking, and he inquired about my progress. I mumbled something about the trail having ended at “1500 Arlington Boulevard” in Arlington, Virginia. After a moment of silence, Albarelli told me he had lived at that same address when he was a student at George Washington University many years ago. I then mentioned my phantom—William L. Mitchell—and some of the dead-end information I had amassed. "William Mitchell ?” Albarelli repeated. He said he would get back to me later; he thought he had come across the name before. Indeed, he had. An important Albarelli source—someone whom the author had known for many years and whose information had been corroborated by other sources—had revealed in September 2001 something more about the identity of William Mitchell. The source, whose name Albarelli did not want to reveal, specifically.... ....When Albarelli called back later that day, he reported he did finally reach the source, but he wasn't amenable to talking about Mitchell, or even acknowledging whether Mitchell was still alive. Did Mitchell have kids? Albarelli asked. “Yeah, he had a few kids but I never met them or his wife,” the source replied. (The reader will come to know why this question was important.) Bluntly, Albarelli then asked whether he remembered telling him in 2001 that Mitchell had killed Mary Meyer. “Heard he killed a lot of people,” replied the now tightlipped source. “What difference does it make now?” 18 .... I strongly suspect Janney is drinking his own koolade and believes he has three confirming sources. He wrote of only one. If Michael Hogan is committed to fairness and consistancy, he will post a call for a retraction of Janney's claim of three sources in his http://educationforu...58 The Autodafé of Lisa Pease and James DiEugenio: Edited August 25, 2012 by Tom Scully Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Hogan Posted August 25, 2012 Share Posted August 25, 2012 (edited) A lot of vitriol is being spewed here, between good researchers, over an issue that is ultimately pretty insignificant. Jim D. is right to point out that relying on discredited sources taints Janney's work. ......I have great respect for the views of Michael Hogan and Jim DiEugenio. It's a shame to see them bicker over something so inconsequential to the big picture. Jim Fetzer's support of Janney doesn't discredit him. Janney's fixation with Mary's bare backside doesn't discredit him. As I noted, I haven't read his book, and from many of the sources he used, I probably would reject his premise on that basis alone. However, I don't believe it necessarily follows that Mary Meyer's murder was committed by a common street criminal, and that there were no political motives behind it. Don, I am not a researcher. I haven't authored any books, don't have a website or a blog. I don't appear on any internet radio shows or belong to any other JFK forums. I don't have a book in the works. You enjoy a reputation here as one who is well informed and relatively even-handed. Dawn Meredith and Robert Charles-Dunne enjoy the same reputation for the same reasons. Surely you've seen their comments on what is causing the hostility on this thread. They're not the only ones. Jim, you are a talented writer and an energetic researcher and your knowledge of the JFK assassination is vast. You are also totally clueless about the fact that your constant attitude of “my way or the highway” towards many others who write on the topic is self-defeating when by your merely showing common courtesy and self-restraint would end any criticism by those upset with your methods. Such a change in methods would undoubtedly engender even wider admiration and recognition of your work. In critiquing Peter Janney's book, Jim and Lisa seem to want to throw out the baby and the bathwater, adding gratuitous insults along the way...... When this thread began back in May, I had just finished reading Mary's Mosaic. I commented that I thought Janney did a good job of sourcing his material. It was Jim DiEugenio that then first brought up the topic of Raymond Crump with me, even though Crump had little or no relevance to what I wrote. It was impossible not to notice a total lack of any objectivity on Jim's part. I offered an excuse to withdraw from the conversation and I did so. I ended with a suggestion to Jim: It's clear you have antipathy for him (Janney) and his research, but you should not let that spill over to members posting here. I didn't post again on this thread for two months. During that time Lisa Pease's CTKA article came out, Janney posted his reply to it. Then Jim posted his reply to Janney. One of Jim's bullet points dealt with Raymond Crump. Robert Charles-Dunne authored a response to that bullet point and that point only. Robert's post was thoughtful, well written and went straight to the point about the lack of objectivity shown by Lisa and Jim when it came to Crump. Surprisingly or not, Jim made no effort to speak to the points made by Robert, I stayed on the sideline for another month until Jim accused Dawn of smearing him. That motivated me to make a post a that contained this conclusion: As it pertains to Raymond Crump, Lisa Pease's unqualified rejection of Janney's footnotes is unwarranted, unfair and untrue. Predictably, Jim went off on me. Despite the fact that it was Jim that brought up the subject of Crump in the first place, and Lisa devoted a significant part of her article to Crump, and my criticism was confined to a very narrow part of her Crump comments, Jim declined to discuss that with me. He preferred to berate me because I did not criticize Janney. From there it escalated into what we have today. Edited August 25, 2012 by Michael Hogan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now