01-10-2009, 03:54 PM
Bernice Moore Wrote:Thanks jack for telling it like it is and should be......this came up in the past on another forum i was hoping you again would fill us in, you have..involvement with any dave perry info etc puts a dark shadow on any documentation or any so called research work connected in any way..and now gary's also imo..by being involved with him and this....in any way..yes some joke...very funny turn on them ..perhaps eh the worm shall get to perhaps turn...i do not think this will be the last we hear of this not with it now in the hands of frog hopefully....that is...take care best b..
Thanks Bernice.
I just received a string of emails from TreeFrog on this subject. Included
was one from longtime researcher Jim Page, which sums up many of my
thoughts pretty well regarding the Bledsoe document:
From: Jimpager7@aol.com [mailto:Jimpager7@aol.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 30, 2009 2:05 PM
To: treefrog@ix.netcom.com
Subject: Re: FW: SFRG Meeting
Mr. Frog,
Did you hear back? Why is this thought to be fake? My guess is its real.
Who would fake it and why? (motive means opportunity) If fake, it causes more "problems" than it fixes.
If fake, where/how was it slipped into the records?
If fake, did the Dallas police investigate its origins? If not, why not?
Is this doc in the Dallas police files today?
I think there is a lot more beneath the surface of Ms. Bledsoe, She's yet another enigma.
Jp