27-07-2012, 01:18 PM
Jim DiEugenio Wrote:Nice one Phil. Erle Stanley Gardner is a godo comparison for Janney's fiction.
Dawn:
Mitchell was a witness at the trial.
He, like Wiggins, identified someone who fit Crump's description.
Now, if you are talking about the whole Georgetown professor matter, and Damore couldn't find him, I mean please.
I would not trust Damore to find anyone. Even if he had a description and directions to his house.
And please don't tell me you believe that whole nutty story about him writing a letter to a safehouse and the guy returning it and then talking on the phone with him for hours and then meeting him?
You don't believe that do you? Please tell me you don't. I mean if you do, maybe I should just drop this forum and go to Spartacus full time.
Jim
The witnesses did NOT fit the description. Not the height or the weight and most of all their time was all off. Did you read a different book from me? They lied their asses off. (And what happened to the Nash Rambler? Yet another Rambler).
I have not gotten that far in the book , I saw something on a review yesterday about MItchell and I read his testimony and felt he reeked but I see it is later in the book that the efforts to find him occur. So after I have read the rest of the book I will respond. I am taking it to court with me today.
But I note you answer my question WITH questions. Why was the Defense attorney getting midnight but no-one- there calls every time she visited the alleged crime scene? Is she untrustworthy too?
That is funny, so you are saying if I shoud disagree with you on somethig in this book you will just leave? That's a joke right?
One m ore question: Why did the state bring in the big guns for this case if it was just a routine murder case? Opps two, why was the couple at the the scene not identified? We do not even know if they were actually there.
Who called Ben Bradley right after it happened? Ok that's three questions. As I said yesterday, I have more but I did not take notes. I was too engrossed in the story. Yes there are holes but I think there is way more truth in this book than you and Lisa find. And I am not alone. Look at the reviews on Amazon. Some heavy hitters from the ARRB for starters.
I will answer your questions after I have read that part. And I hope you will answer mine. Because if Crump did it then there would be no reason to spook Ms. Rountree. Of course if Crump did it all the rest IS fantasy, the love affair etc and I do not believe that at all. I think there is plenty of good evidence for the closeness between Maty and JFK that does not rely on the acid king.
Dawn