15-03-2010, 02:14 PM
(This post was last modified: 16-03-2010, 06:41 AM by James H. Fetzer.)
I FIND BARB'S ABUSE OF THE MEMORY OF MARY FERRELL ESPECIALLY OFFENSIVE.
My interpretation is that Judyth wrote the note to Mary--here, prefaced by, "Dear Howie--
I don;t know how they did it, but Mary does not believe me. yes, I'm heartbroken, but i
will go on"--in the initial belief that it was authentic but that, after sorting things out, she
concluded that it was a fabrication in which Debra Conway played a significant role. That
appears to be consistent with other points she has made about it, including "IT JUST ISN''T
RIGHT..I FORGAVE HER LONG AGO BECAUSE SHE WAS SICK AND UNDER MEDICATIONS,
AND THEY WOULD NOT LEAVE HER ALONE ABOUT ME..." I am now pursuing confirmation.
JUDYTH REPLIES TO VIKLUND AND JUNKKARINEN (FOR THE UMPTEENTH TIME):
1) PLEASE--TOO MUCH GOING ON AT ONCE. COULD EVERYONE WHO HAS AN
UNANSWERED QUESTION PLEASE REPOST THE QUESTION IN A SINGLE SENTENCE?
THANK YOU.
MR. VIKLUND: THE DOCUMENT
2) WHAT DOCUMENT IS MR. VIKLUND SHOWING PEOPLE? THEY ARE SAYING THEY
SEE IT, BUT I CANNOT SEE IT. WHERE IS IT?
3) MR. VIKLUND HAS NOT YET STATED HIS OCCUPATION, THOUGH ASKED SEVERAL
TIMES NOW. WHAT DO YOU DO FOR A LIVING, MR. VIKLUND? SWEDEN IS A SMALL
COUNTRY AND MY FRIENDS WANT TO MEET YOU!
MARY FERREL: THE ATTACHMENT
A CONCERN: THEY SAY MARY FERRELL HAD NEVER USED AN ATTACHMENT BEFORE.
THAT SHE HAD TO ASK DEBRA CONWAY HOW TO PLACE THE ATTACHMENT ON HER
EMAIL. THIS 'PROVES' THAT MARY CREATED THE ATTACHMENT?
THINK.
MARY FERRELL IS WRITING AN EMAIL THAT SHE CALLED A "STATEMENT." MOST
STATEMENTS ARE SHORT. THEY ARE NOT LENGTHY LISTS. I WAS AWARE THAT
MARY HAD SENT OUT EMAILS TO HER FRIENDS ABOUT ME IN THE PAST. SHE
TOLD ME SO. SHE SAID SHE WAS UNDER CONSTANT PRESSURE FROM HER
FRIENDS OF SO MANY YEARS TO NEVER ENDORSE ME.
NOTE: IN ANOTHER EMAIL, SHE SAYS SHE NEVER POSTED IN HER LIFE TO
A NEWSGROUP, WHEN ASKED IF SHE HAD POSTED THAT EMAIL. WHY DID
SHE THEN ALLOW MCADAMS TO POST THE EMAIL?
NOTE: SHE SAYS IT'S OKAY TO PUBLISH, IN A CONVOLUTED SENTENCE, BUT
ANYONE WHO HAS STUDIED LINGUISTIC PATTERNS CAN SEE THAT THE ORIGINAL
SENTENCE WAS UNLIKELY TO HAVE AN EXTRA 'NOT' IN IT....IN OTHER WORDS,
MARY LIKELY SAID SHE HAD NOT INTENDED TO HAVE IT PUBLISHED. READ THE
SENTENCE AND SEE WHAT YOU THINK.
WE KNOW THE ATTACHMENT ITSELF WAS REVISED EIGHT TIMES,
ACCORDING TO LONG-TIME MCADAMS NEWSGROUP MEMBER, PAUL SEATON,.
THINK:
YOU ARE WRITING AN EMAIL TO YOUR FRIENDS ABOUT A UNPLEASANT MATTER.
YOU WRITE LOTS OF EMAILS EVERY DAY. LOTS OF THEM.
BUT FOR THE FIRST TIME IN YOUR LIFE, ACCORDING TO THEM, YOU CREATE AN
ATTACHMENT, EVEN THOUGH YOU DO NOT KNOW HOW TO ATTACH ONE TO YOUR EMAIL.
IS THAT VERY LIKELY?
WHEN FIRST PUBLISHED, THE FIRST HEADER WAS ORIGINALLY A PHOTOGRAPH.
POSTED ALONG WITH THE EMAIL ON MCADAMS' NEWSGROUP. IT WAS TO PROVE
THE AUTHENTICITY OF THE POSTED EMAIL.
I COPIED THAT PHOTO AND SENT IT, ALONG WITH THE WHOLE EMAIL MESSAGE,
TO SHACKELFORD AND PLATZMAN AND A FEW OTHERS.
THAT PHOTO OF THE HEADER WAS THEN ERASED -- AFTER IT WAS POINTED OUT
THAT IT HAD STAYED IN MIDAIR IN CALIFORNIA, AT AN UNKNOWN COMPUTER,
FOR MORE HOURS THAN TIME ZONES CAN EXPLAIN, BEFORE LANDING ON MCADAMS'
DESK.
IT HAD GONE FROM FERRELL TO CALIFORNIA
AND THEN WAS SENT FROM CALIFORNIA TO MCADAMS.
THAT PHOTO VANISHED, AND DAVE REITZES HAND-TYPED IN A NEW HEADER.
IT WAS DIFFERENT FROM THE ONE NOW SUPPLIED TO READERS. BUT VARIOUS
RECIPIENTS WOULD RESULT IN VARIOUS HEADERS. THE CONCERN IS THAT THE
ORIGINAL HEADER SHOWN WAS ERASED AND DAVE REITZES TYPED IN A NEW ONE.
I AM IN A FOREIGN COUNTRY AND CANNOT SUPPLY THE HEADERS AND MUCH ELSE,
BUT PAMELA MAY ALSO HAVE RECEIVED A COPY OF THAT HEADER AND MAY RECALL
THAT IT WAS ERASED AND ANOTHER ONE SUBSTITUTED.
I DEEPLY REGRET BRINGING MARY INTO THIS, AS I WISH EVERYONE TO REMEMBER
HER FOR THE YEARS OF HELP SHE GAVE RESEARCHERS AND WITNESSES. IT WAS
BECAUSE I BROUGHT UP THE NAME MARY DEAN THAT SHE BECAME UPSET WITH ME
THE LAST TIME WE MET BEFORE SHE SENT OUT THE EMAIL.
I HAVE THE DOCMENTS I FOUND CONNECTED TO 'MARY DEAN.' I PREFER NOT TO MAKE
THEM PUBLIC. IT IS AMAZING TO ME THAT THESE PEOPLE WOULD EXPOSE MARY AS BEING
EITHER A LIAR (TO ME AND OTHERS WHO ASKED HER IF SHE WROTE THE ATTACHMENT AS
IT NOW STANDS) OR A DELIBERATE FABRICATOR OF WHAT SHE HAD BEEN TOLD.
I HAVE WITNESSES TO OUR FIRST MEETING. I EXPRESSED SURPRISE THAT MARY HAD
HER OWN SET OF 26 VOLUMES--I HAD NEVER SEEN ANY PRIVATE PERSON WITH THEM.
THIS WAS MANGLED. MORE STATEMENTS I MADE WERE SIMILARLY MANGLED.
I AM OFFERING ONE EXAMPLE, BELOW:
===THE "THIS WOMAN'S STORY" NOTE TO FRANK WEIMANN===
IN THE ATTACHMENT, IT STATES THAT MARY WROTE ON A PLAIN PIECE OF PAPER AND THAT
LATER, JUDYTH COPIED IT ONTO PAPER WITH A PHOTO OF HERSELF ON IT. THIS AS THEN
CALLED "A FORGERY BY JUDYTH" BY PEOPLE ON THE FORUM.
I WOULD LIKE TO ADD THAT WE MET WELL BEFORE NOVEMBER,
BUT MARY MAY NOT HAVE TOLD HER FRIENDS.
===PHOTO OF A COPY OF THE NOTE IS ATTACHED===
![[Image: wgyged.jpg]](http://i40.tinypic.com/wgyged.jpg)
THE DATED (NOV. 27, 2000) TEXT READS: 'DEAR FRANK, I THINK YOU SHOULD TAKE A LOOK
AT THIS WOMAN'S STORY. I BELIEVE SHE IS CREDIBLE AND I BELIEVE HER STORY WILL SELL.
BEST REGARDS, MARY FERRELL.
MARY HAD ASKED ME TO GIVE HER A PIECE OF PAPER TO WRITE ON,
AND THERE WAS ROOM ON THE SHEET I HANDED HER TO WRITE HER MESSAGE.
IT HAD A PHOTO OF ME AND MARINA ON IT.
MARY DOES NOT USE MY NAME BECAUSE SHE SEES THE PHOTO, SO SHE WRITES
'THIS WOMAN'S STORY' NOT "JUDYTH BAKER'S STORY."
IT'S JUST COMMON SENSE.
SO IF THIS SMALL MATTER COULD BE BLOWN INTO A BIG, FAT LIE,
WHAT ABOUT THE REST OF THIS EMAIL?
I AM SORRY, BUT IT SEEMS MARY FERRELL'S REPUTATION WAS WORTH ABUSING, IF NECESSARY,
TO DISCREDIT ME. I AM NOT VERY STRONG IN THE BODY, BUT WITH GOD'S HELP, I WILL STAND FIRM.
JVB
[quote name='Barb Junkkarinen' date='Mar 14 2010, 11:15 AM' post='186788']
Why the rerun? I know it is here, I will address sections/issues raised over the next couple of days, no need to repost it again. Below I deal with items 1 and 2.
I came into the Judyth debate in mid-2004. It looks (from google archives) that Cancun and David Lifton's recorded conversation and comments on Judyth's story are what first caught my attention. I had seen lots of threads about Judyth for a few years, but really paid no attention to it all. I am not now, nor have I ever been part of any "team" colluding to get Judyth. As on most issues, researchers network and share information when they have a common interest on a subject. Nothing more that that. I did not know of Glenn Viklund until he posted on the mod group in December of '08. We had a couple of email exchanges during the time he had gotten information about the asylum issue from the migration board in Sweden. I had no further contact with him until I saw his post on the mod group a week or so ago and saw him mention that he would post on the Ed Forum but new members were not being accepted. Since my email bounced (problem it turned out between my server and his) I posted a reply to him asking him to email me. I wanted to give him information about contacting John Simkin to be admitted as a member. I do not attack Judyth as a person, though she and members of her team have certainly made it their business to attack me. That includes you. :-) . I attack her claims, and I undertook trying to fact check, verify ones that can be verified starting in early 2008.
Below is the e-mail that accompanied the attachment I have already posted ... with headers.
I added a couple extra emails .... including Judyth's December response to Mary .... which Mary forwarded on to others and an e-mail from Debra Conway.
Before you get too involved in the tape recording thing, Jim ... you might want to know how it came about, why Judyth said they went there with a tape recorder in the first place, the condition she claims Mary was in when they got there ... and the exact date. It was Sunday April 7, 2002.
I have all of the info including first hand accounts from Judyth ... and a transcript Martin posted a couple of years ago which is nearly useless as the answer to the question they asked was unintelligible after a few words. But do ask her and decide if you think it is wise to go there.
The provenance of Mary's e-mail and attachment was established ... though it is clear from Judyth's e-mails to Mary in both December and March (that one not posted yet, Judyth....again, do you really want to go there on the tape thing?) that had Mary not written and sent the attachment, she would have been totally bewildered as to why Judyth was saying some of things to her, noting that Mary had said them. And the whole world would have heard Mary bellow, and anyone who knew Mary knows that. The headers show the e-mail with the attachment went directly from Mary's computer to being received by John McAdams. Paul Seaton working from the attachment was able to check the Windows properties of said document, and here is what he found, he posted this info in a response to Martin Shackleford on 6-2-08:
Below are the properties of the judyth.doc that was sent out to McAdams et al.
Property Value
Description
Title Wednesday, December 12, 2001
Author Mary Ferrell
Last Saved By Mary Ferrell
Revision Number 8
Application Name Microsoft Word 10.0
Company
Date Created 12/12/2001 9:17 AM
Date Last Saved 12/12/2001 2:34 PM
Last Printed 12/12/2001 1:14 PM
Edit time 12/12/2001 1:14 PM
Please note: Mary Ferrell e-mailed Debra Conway in the middle of this process asking Deb to call her as she had never attached a document to an e-mail before and had some questions. A statement from Debra exists about that .... as well as a screen shot of that e-mail on her screen. I can post that screen shot and Debra's e-mail about it if Judyth insists.
And Mary's computer was password protected, only Mary knew her password.
Here are the December e-mails with headers.
Return-Path: <maryferr@cprompt.net>
Received: from cprompt.net ([199.34.20.66]) by postmarq.mu.edu
(Netscape Messaging Server 4.15 marquette Dec 7 2001
06:47:59)
with ESMTP id GO93R800.052 for <John.McAdams@marquette.edu>;
Wed, 12 Dec 2001 15:59:32 -0600
Received: from mary-xp.cprompt.net [209.51.4.178] by cprompt.net with
ESMTP
(SMTPD32-6.00) id A1F9D9600CC; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 15:54:01 -0600
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20011212154557.01b8ef70@cprompt.net>
X-Sender: maryferr@cprompt.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 15:56:06 -0600
To: [email]dlifton@earthlink.net,rchapman@mem.net,debra@jfklancer.com[/email],
[email]paradigm@gtw.net,PaulHoch@uclink.berkeley.edu,John.McAdams@marquette.edu[/email]
From: Mary Ferrell <maryferr@cprompt.net>
Subject: Judyth Baker
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
boundary="=====================_755792484==_"
Dear friends,
It is with great regret that I send the following attachment.
I feel that the time has arrived to put an end to the Judyth Baker
part of my life. I hope all of you will understand why I am doing
this.
Sincerely,
Mary Ferrell
Judyth.doc
**************
Return-Path: <maryferr@cprompt.net>
Received: from cprompt.net ([199.34.20.66]) by postmarq.mu.edu
(Netscape Messaging Server 4.15 marquette Dec 7 2001
06:47:59)
with ESMTP id GO9C8V00.FCG for <John.McAdams@marquette.edu>;
Wed, 12 Dec 2001 19:02:55 -0600
Received: from mary-xp.cprompt.net [209.51.4.178] by cprompt.net with
ESMTP
(SMTPD32-6.00) id ACFFF830132; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 18:57:35 -0600
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20011212185718.01ad2350@cprompt.net>
X-Sender: maryferr@cprompt.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 19:02:56 -0600
To: John.McAdams@marquette.edu
From: Mary Ferrell <maryferr@cprompt.net>
Subject: Judyth Baker
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Dear John,
I don't really know what to say in response to your request
about publishing my statement about Judyth. I guess it is inevitable
that it will "get out." I suppose I wouldn't have sent it to you had
I not known that you would want to put it on the Internet.
When I was in the hospital almost all of 1997, you were kind
enough to send me a lovely Get-well card. I did appreciate it. And,
then, recently you asked me my opinion of Judyth and said that you
would keep it in confidence if I asked you to do so. I was terribly
rude and didn't even reply to you.
I appreciate your asking permission now and I guess my answer
is -- use the statement the way you see fit.
Sincerely,
Mary Ferrell
**************
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 16:55:48 EST
From: ElectLady63@aol.com
Subject: Mary, why did you post to the newsgroup?
To: <maryferr@cprompt.net>, <mshack@concentric.net>
Cc: <electlady63@aol.com>
X-Mailer: Unknown (No Version)
X-RCPT-TO: <maryferr@cprompt.net>
Mary, I would never do to you what you did to me.
I can't believe you would post such a long letter, filled with so many
errors, and sign your name to it.
I can't believe you called me 'dangerous.'
I can't believe you think I am so weak I would do harm to myself. I am
weak in that I trusted you, and YOU did harm to me.
I told the truth.
You have been more cruel than all the others, because you said you
loved me.
==j==
*************
Return-Path: <maryferr@cprompt.net>
Received: from cprompt.net ([199.34.20.66]) by postmarq.mu.edu
(Netscape Messaging Server 4.15 marquette Dec 7 2001
06:47:59)
with ESMTP id GOBD8500.V4B for <John.McAdams@marquette.edu>;
Thu, 13 Dec 2001 21:19:17 -0600
Received: from mary-xp.cprompt.net [209.51.4.178] by cprompt.net with
ESMTP
(SMTPD32-6.00) id A9889C8013A; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 16:19:52 -0600
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20011213162046.01adf8f8@cprompt.net>
X-Sender: maryferr@cprompt.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 16:25:13 -0600
To: [email]dlifton@earthlink.net,rchapman@mem.net,caburtc@us.ibm.com[/email],
[email]Joanmellen@aol.com,paradigm@gtw.net,John.McAdams@marquette.edu[/email]
From: Mary Ferrell <maryferr@cprompt.net>
Subject: Fwd: Mary, why did you post to the newsgroup?
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
I have never posted anything to a news group in my life.
Mary
**************************
The December response by Judyth to Mary.
Mary forwarded this to John McAdams.
From: ElectLady63@aol.com
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 02:23:40 EST
Subject: I AM WRITING LARGE SO YOU CAN READ IT EASILY, MARY
To: Howpl@aol.com, maryferr@cprompt.net, jmarrs@ntws.net,
mshack@concentric.net
CC: real@louisiana.edu
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10536
X-RCPT-TO: <maryferr@cprompt.net>
Dear Howie-- I don;t know how they did it, but Mary does not believe
me. yes, I'm heartbroken, but i will go on.
TO MARY FERRELL, WHO I TRUSTED:
Mary, i forgive you for what you have done. You misunderstood many
things. for example, I have the original note you wrote on a sheet of
paper that already had my picture on it. I did not send that out to
others until you gave me permission. You may have forgotten. I don;t
know.
I do know that you treated me kindly. You were almost asleep when I
left. i had rubbed your back. we had watched Jack and the beanstalk
together, and then you were looking for the news. We were peaceful
together. You asked jimmy to show me out because i told you I had to
go home and grade papers. you did not kick me out, as you made it look
to the newsgroup. Jimmy showed me out because it was so late.
Mary, wqorst of all, you NEVER ASKED ONE TIME TO SEE THE BOOK. I
BROUGHT IT OVER SEVERAL TIMES. I STOPPED BRINGING THESE THINGS OVER
BECAUSE YOU NEVER SAW MORE THAN A FEW DOCUMENTS AT A TIME.
FURTHERMORE, I ONLY CAME TO VISIT YOU TO GIVE YOU BACKRUBS. I WAITED A
WHOLE YEAR BEFORE ASKING YOU TO WRITE SOMETHING FOR SANDRA, THE AGENT.
YOU MADE IT SOUND LIKE I MIGHT DO HARM TO MYSELF.
You also made it sound like i was a dangerous person.
You also madeit sound like maybe i was crazy.
I bared my very soul to you about my love for lee, and his for me. We
only had two nights to ourselves, i told you that. we spent some
afternoons in a few hotels together. We spent a few hours in a van
once, you made it sound terrible.
I confided in you. You told me not to tell many things, but you have
exposed me as some kind of psycho to the whole world.
I'm very sad.
All I can say is that I'm not lying.
I may not see in my lifetime Lee vindicated.
The Queen of Spades Louis Girdler told you about happens to be in
bound volume of sort stories. there is NOTHING like Lee's book in that
library. I NEVER said I had never seen the 26 volumes. i had never
seen them in a proivate house before--but what i was really trying to
say is that I had never seen the whole bunch of books before--not in a
house--and i had never read them. you thought I meant the 26 volumes?
well, you are an individual, i had never seen a private person powning
such.
Mary, you also said the university library had all kinds of books
about the assasination. THIS IS NOT TRUE. THERE ARE JUST A FEW BOOKS,
ABOUT THE CIA, THAT I KNOW OF. BESIDES, I SAID I WOULD NOT READ THEM.
THERE WERE A FEW OVER AT THE PUBLIC LIBRARY. DR. JOSEPH RIEHL WILL
TELL YOU HE SAID A BOOK ABOUT MAFIA KINGFISH WAS THERE--I NEVER KNEW
IT.
I NEVER SAID I KNEW MUCH RUSSIAN. I NEVER, EVER COULD THINK IN
RUSSIAN!. I SAID I HAD MADE A HABIT OF SAYING THANK YOU OR COMRADE ALL
THE TIME IN RUSSIAN, IT WAS ONE OF MY HABITS.
YOU NEVER TRIED TO SPEAK ANY RUSSIAN TO ME. YOU NEVER SAID A WORD IN
RUSSIAN.
I NEVER KNEW THE NAME OF THE AUNT. THAT IS WHAT YOU ASKED ME. I DID
WRITE IN THE BOOK TWO YEARS AGO THAT I STAYED ACROSS THE STREET WHILE
LEE WENT INSIDE AND TALKED TO HIS AUNT. THIS WAS ON ST. CHARLES
STREET, WE HAD JUST GOT OFF THE STREETCAR. THIS WAS WHAT I REMEMBERED.
YOU NEVER ASKED ME ANYTHING BUT IF I KNEW HER NAME. I NEVER DID.
I TOLD YOU CLEARLY THAT IT WAS MAY 4 AND MAY 5 THAT I FOUND OUT WERE
NOT ACCOUNTED FOR. THIS WAS RECENT. I NEVER, EVER KNEW ANY OF THIS
BEFORE I GOT SOME FEEDBACK FROM MARTIN THAT I HAD HIT SOME DATES
RIGHT, BUT EVEN THEN I DID NOT KNOW WHICH ONES FOR SURE UNTIL I SAW
YOUR CHRONOLOGY. YOU EVEN GAVE ME A FREE COPY OF YOUR CHRONOLOGY AND
MADE ME SO HAPPY.
YOU DID NOT MENTION THE AMERICAN EXPRESS MONEY ORDER OF MAY 27. YOU
MADE ME LOOK LIKE A LIAR, MARY.
I BARED MY HEART TO YOU.
I TOLD YOU MY SOUL ABOUT LEE, AND YOU TOLD ME ABOUT BUCK.
I SENT YOU POETRY THAT I NEVER DARED SHOW ANYONE BEFORE, EXCEPT
HOWARD.
WORST OF ALL, I THINK, WERE YOUR ERRORS. I NEVER SAID RORKE WAS GOING
TO MEET US IN MEXICO. HE HAD DIED BEFORE THAT. I NEVER SAID OCHSNER
GOT ME THE APARTMENT. I NEVER TOLD YOU WHO GOT ME THE APARTMENT. HE
HAD TOLD ME TO MOVE INTO THE 'Y'--WHICH I DID DO.
THE "HAMBURGHER" PLACE WAS HOW I TRIED TO WORK ON MY OWN, HAVING GOT
YTHERE EARLY.
YOU HAVE SWALLOWED THE MISREPRESENTATIONS AND LIES OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE
SWORN THEY WILL NOT ALLOW THE BOOK TO BE PUBLISHED. THEY WILL NEVER
SOLVE THE CRIME AGAINST KENNEDY. NEVER.
I DID INDEED MEET MACKINLAY KANTOR. I have a newspaper article proving
he spoke to my high school class. I was the star writer and was
introduced to him. He was very interested in my dog and horse stories.
He had writren The Voice of Buf=gle Anne and read the entire book to
our class in two hours. I was invited to his home. ASK HIS WIDOW HOW
HE WROTE HIS STUFF. HE WA;LKED AROUND WITH HIS TAPE RECORDER AND SPOKE
INTO IT. Twice i came over and held the tape recorder.
You should know that i try to be friendly. I liked Kantor a great
deal. He had very conservative friends in the military.
You got so many small details wrong that i am embarrassed for you. You
remembered a great deal, but it looks to me like you've been given a
lot of this oinformation, for it is quite skewed form the way it was
given to you.
One last example: I received a short note, hardly a letter, from
Russell. It was basically a quote from one of his lectures. His
secretary, your friend's husband, actually went to court to PROVE he
did not have control of many things Russell wrote. by the time I
wrote to Riussell personally again, he was no longer capable of
replying, and i did get a letter form his secretary. However, I did
receive a note the first time. I am certain i can find other letters
he wrote personally in that same time period, and i will certainly be
able to prove my point, because a bunch of them went on file in the
lawsuit proving Russell was independent and wrote letters of which
Sch. knew nothing or only knew about later.
Where in the world, finally, in closing, did you ever get the idea
that i was dangerous?
i came to see you to ease your pain. i spent hours massaging your
neck, legs, even your feet, because I cared about your pain. I knew i
was taking a risk when once you yelled at me and made me cry, and
then apologized. i realized you might not be the same lady that i
had met over a year earlier. I noticed that you were repeating tings,
and finally did mention these concerns to howard and Martin. but I
felt it was temporary, because you had fallen ill, and because you
missed Buck.
I defended your sanity and reason, mary, when you started crying, and
said, in poresence of me, debbee, and Carole Anne, that "How will BUCK
find me if I move out of this house? HOW will he find me?"
I have to tell howard about this so he will understand that I feel
you have changed, that never in a million years would you have written
that I might 'harmm' myself, or that I was 'dangerous' a year ago.
I have never harmed anyone in my life. You said, indeed, that i had
HEALING HANDS. I have spent hours trying to just give you some
physical comfort. in return, you have accused me on the internet of
being dangerous, even delusional, and all the things that now make me
lok like I am a mental mess.
I have learned my lesson.
I will take what i know to the grave.
You've destroyed my credibility.
forgive you, because i believe you are not the same wonderful lady who
said she wanted to help me get the book published, who even OFFERED
TO BUY ME A NEW CAR, AND I REFUSED TO LET YOU DO THAT. You also
offered to buyDebbe a new car. I suppose carole Anne still wants to do
something 'nice' for Debbee. debbe is a fine woman.
indeed, i have dear, fine friends.
I hope and pray that someday you will rethink out all you have said
and done to me this sad day.
You may have singlehandedly destroyed the last chance for the truth to
come out.
i give up.
==Judyth==
*********************
Subject: Mary Ferrell
Date: 14 Dec 2001 09:02:32 -0600
From: Debra Conway <de...@jfklancer.com>
Newsgroups: alt.assassination.jfk
Folks,
Having spoken to Mary both before and after she posted her email
regarding Judyth Baker, I can tell you she is very sane, coherent, and has all
her mental faculties. I resent Judyth's claims to Mary being unable to
remember what she has been told or what she has said. I've been through this
with Mary every step of the way and believe me, she not only has been
totally truthful in her email, typical of Mary, she has been generous and
sensitive to Judyth. She could have written much, much more.
For Mary's sake, I'm glad this is over. She is too polite sometimes
for her own good and allowed her kindness to Judyth to be misconstrued and
manipulated.
Sincerely,
Debra Conway
***************
These have all been posted on the net for years.
Barb
[quote name='James H. Fetzer' post='186784' date='Mar 14 2010, 06:41 AM']
NOTE: This appears to me to be an acid test of Judyth's critics. We already know that
Junkkarinen, Viklund, and McAdams have been collaborating in attacking her. It now
appears to me that Judyth has proof--in the form of a tape recording--that puts the lie
to this disgraceful abuse of the memory of someone widely admired. If there is a more
dishonorable act than this--for crass political motives--I cannot image what it would be.
RESPONSE TO JUNKKARINEN'S MARY FERRELL POSTING:
TO ALL:
A GOOD RESEARCHER WILL PRESENT INFORMATION IN AN UNBIASED MANNER.
1) BUT BARB DID NOT POST MARY FERRELL'S EMAIL AND ITS ORIGINAL HEADER.
INSTEAD, SHE POSTED AN ATTACHMENT TO IT. WE DISPUTE THE PROVENANCE AND AUTHORSHIP OF KEY PORTIONS OF THAT ATTACHMENT.
2) THE EMAIL BARB DID NOT REVEAL TO YOU SAID THAT MARY EXPRESSED 'REGRET' THAT SHE HAD TO WASH HER HANDS OF ME.
TO MY FACE, MARY TOLD ME THAT SHE COULD NO LONGER BEAR THE RELENTLESS PRESSURE FROM ALL HER OLD FRIENDS. IT WAS DRIVING HER CRAZY AND SHE HAD DECIDED TO STOP DEFENDING ME IF SHE WAS TO HAVE ANY PEACE. SHE RELIED ON THESE PEOPLE FOR TRANSPORTATION, INCOME FROM LANCER, THE MARY FERRELL AWARD AT LANCER, AND SHE JUST COULDN'T KEEP DEFENDING ME ANYMORE.
[........][/quote]
[/quote]
My interpretation is that Judyth wrote the note to Mary--here, prefaced by, "Dear Howie--
I don;t know how they did it, but Mary does not believe me. yes, I'm heartbroken, but i
will go on"--in the initial belief that it was authentic but that, after sorting things out, she
concluded that it was a fabrication in which Debra Conway played a significant role. That
appears to be consistent with other points she has made about it, including "IT JUST ISN''T
RIGHT..I FORGAVE HER LONG AGO BECAUSE SHE WAS SICK AND UNDER MEDICATIONS,
AND THEY WOULD NOT LEAVE HER ALONE ABOUT ME..." I am now pursuing confirmation.
JUDYTH REPLIES TO VIKLUND AND JUNKKARINEN (FOR THE UMPTEENTH TIME):
1) PLEASE--TOO MUCH GOING ON AT ONCE. COULD EVERYONE WHO HAS AN
UNANSWERED QUESTION PLEASE REPOST THE QUESTION IN A SINGLE SENTENCE?
THANK YOU.
MR. VIKLUND: THE DOCUMENT
2) WHAT DOCUMENT IS MR. VIKLUND SHOWING PEOPLE? THEY ARE SAYING THEY
SEE IT, BUT I CANNOT SEE IT. WHERE IS IT?
3) MR. VIKLUND HAS NOT YET STATED HIS OCCUPATION, THOUGH ASKED SEVERAL
TIMES NOW. WHAT DO YOU DO FOR A LIVING, MR. VIKLUND? SWEDEN IS A SMALL
COUNTRY AND MY FRIENDS WANT TO MEET YOU!
MARY FERREL: THE ATTACHMENT
A CONCERN: THEY SAY MARY FERRELL HAD NEVER USED AN ATTACHMENT BEFORE.
THAT SHE HAD TO ASK DEBRA CONWAY HOW TO PLACE THE ATTACHMENT ON HER
EMAIL. THIS 'PROVES' THAT MARY CREATED THE ATTACHMENT?
THINK.
MARY FERRELL IS WRITING AN EMAIL THAT SHE CALLED A "STATEMENT." MOST
STATEMENTS ARE SHORT. THEY ARE NOT LENGTHY LISTS. I WAS AWARE THAT
MARY HAD SENT OUT EMAILS TO HER FRIENDS ABOUT ME IN THE PAST. SHE
TOLD ME SO. SHE SAID SHE WAS UNDER CONSTANT PRESSURE FROM HER
FRIENDS OF SO MANY YEARS TO NEVER ENDORSE ME.
NOTE: IN ANOTHER EMAIL, SHE SAYS SHE NEVER POSTED IN HER LIFE TO
A NEWSGROUP, WHEN ASKED IF SHE HAD POSTED THAT EMAIL. WHY DID
SHE THEN ALLOW MCADAMS TO POST THE EMAIL?
NOTE: SHE SAYS IT'S OKAY TO PUBLISH, IN A CONVOLUTED SENTENCE, BUT
ANYONE WHO HAS STUDIED LINGUISTIC PATTERNS CAN SEE THAT THE ORIGINAL
SENTENCE WAS UNLIKELY TO HAVE AN EXTRA 'NOT' IN IT....IN OTHER WORDS,
MARY LIKELY SAID SHE HAD NOT INTENDED TO HAVE IT PUBLISHED. READ THE
SENTENCE AND SEE WHAT YOU THINK.
WE KNOW THE ATTACHMENT ITSELF WAS REVISED EIGHT TIMES,
ACCORDING TO LONG-TIME MCADAMS NEWSGROUP MEMBER, PAUL SEATON,.
THINK:
YOU ARE WRITING AN EMAIL TO YOUR FRIENDS ABOUT A UNPLEASANT MATTER.
YOU WRITE LOTS OF EMAILS EVERY DAY. LOTS OF THEM.
BUT FOR THE FIRST TIME IN YOUR LIFE, ACCORDING TO THEM, YOU CREATE AN
ATTACHMENT, EVEN THOUGH YOU DO NOT KNOW HOW TO ATTACH ONE TO YOUR EMAIL.
IS THAT VERY LIKELY?
WHEN FIRST PUBLISHED, THE FIRST HEADER WAS ORIGINALLY A PHOTOGRAPH.
POSTED ALONG WITH THE EMAIL ON MCADAMS' NEWSGROUP. IT WAS TO PROVE
THE AUTHENTICITY OF THE POSTED EMAIL.
I COPIED THAT PHOTO AND SENT IT, ALONG WITH THE WHOLE EMAIL MESSAGE,
TO SHACKELFORD AND PLATZMAN AND A FEW OTHERS.
THAT PHOTO OF THE HEADER WAS THEN ERASED -- AFTER IT WAS POINTED OUT
THAT IT HAD STAYED IN MIDAIR IN CALIFORNIA, AT AN UNKNOWN COMPUTER,
FOR MORE HOURS THAN TIME ZONES CAN EXPLAIN, BEFORE LANDING ON MCADAMS'
DESK.
IT HAD GONE FROM FERRELL TO CALIFORNIA
AND THEN WAS SENT FROM CALIFORNIA TO MCADAMS.
THAT PHOTO VANISHED, AND DAVE REITZES HAND-TYPED IN A NEW HEADER.
IT WAS DIFFERENT FROM THE ONE NOW SUPPLIED TO READERS. BUT VARIOUS
RECIPIENTS WOULD RESULT IN VARIOUS HEADERS. THE CONCERN IS THAT THE
ORIGINAL HEADER SHOWN WAS ERASED AND DAVE REITZES TYPED IN A NEW ONE.
I AM IN A FOREIGN COUNTRY AND CANNOT SUPPLY THE HEADERS AND MUCH ELSE,
BUT PAMELA MAY ALSO HAVE RECEIVED A COPY OF THAT HEADER AND MAY RECALL
THAT IT WAS ERASED AND ANOTHER ONE SUBSTITUTED.
I DEEPLY REGRET BRINGING MARY INTO THIS, AS I WISH EVERYONE TO REMEMBER
HER FOR THE YEARS OF HELP SHE GAVE RESEARCHERS AND WITNESSES. IT WAS
BECAUSE I BROUGHT UP THE NAME MARY DEAN THAT SHE BECAME UPSET WITH ME
THE LAST TIME WE MET BEFORE SHE SENT OUT THE EMAIL.
I HAVE THE DOCMENTS I FOUND CONNECTED TO 'MARY DEAN.' I PREFER NOT TO MAKE
THEM PUBLIC. IT IS AMAZING TO ME THAT THESE PEOPLE WOULD EXPOSE MARY AS BEING
EITHER A LIAR (TO ME AND OTHERS WHO ASKED HER IF SHE WROTE THE ATTACHMENT AS
IT NOW STANDS) OR A DELIBERATE FABRICATOR OF WHAT SHE HAD BEEN TOLD.
I HAVE WITNESSES TO OUR FIRST MEETING. I EXPRESSED SURPRISE THAT MARY HAD
HER OWN SET OF 26 VOLUMES--I HAD NEVER SEEN ANY PRIVATE PERSON WITH THEM.
THIS WAS MANGLED. MORE STATEMENTS I MADE WERE SIMILARLY MANGLED.
I AM OFFERING ONE EXAMPLE, BELOW:
===THE "THIS WOMAN'S STORY" NOTE TO FRANK WEIMANN===
IN THE ATTACHMENT, IT STATES THAT MARY WROTE ON A PLAIN PIECE OF PAPER AND THAT
LATER, JUDYTH COPIED IT ONTO PAPER WITH A PHOTO OF HERSELF ON IT. THIS AS THEN
CALLED "A FORGERY BY JUDYTH" BY PEOPLE ON THE FORUM.
I WOULD LIKE TO ADD THAT WE MET WELL BEFORE NOVEMBER,
BUT MARY MAY NOT HAVE TOLD HER FRIENDS.
===PHOTO OF A COPY OF THE NOTE IS ATTACHED===
THE DATED (NOV. 27, 2000) TEXT READS: 'DEAR FRANK, I THINK YOU SHOULD TAKE A LOOK
AT THIS WOMAN'S STORY. I BELIEVE SHE IS CREDIBLE AND I BELIEVE HER STORY WILL SELL.
BEST REGARDS, MARY FERRELL.
MARY HAD ASKED ME TO GIVE HER A PIECE OF PAPER TO WRITE ON,
AND THERE WAS ROOM ON THE SHEET I HANDED HER TO WRITE HER MESSAGE.
IT HAD A PHOTO OF ME AND MARINA ON IT.
MARY DOES NOT USE MY NAME BECAUSE SHE SEES THE PHOTO, SO SHE WRITES
'THIS WOMAN'S STORY' NOT "JUDYTH BAKER'S STORY."
IT'S JUST COMMON SENSE.
SO IF THIS SMALL MATTER COULD BE BLOWN INTO A BIG, FAT LIE,
WHAT ABOUT THE REST OF THIS EMAIL?
I AM SORRY, BUT IT SEEMS MARY FERRELL'S REPUTATION WAS WORTH ABUSING, IF NECESSARY,
TO DISCREDIT ME. I AM NOT VERY STRONG IN THE BODY, BUT WITH GOD'S HELP, I WILL STAND FIRM.
JVB
[quote name='Barb Junkkarinen' date='Mar 14 2010, 11:15 AM' post='186788']
Why the rerun? I know it is here, I will address sections/issues raised over the next couple of days, no need to repost it again. Below I deal with items 1 and 2.
I came into the Judyth debate in mid-2004. It looks (from google archives) that Cancun and David Lifton's recorded conversation and comments on Judyth's story are what first caught my attention. I had seen lots of threads about Judyth for a few years, but really paid no attention to it all. I am not now, nor have I ever been part of any "team" colluding to get Judyth. As on most issues, researchers network and share information when they have a common interest on a subject. Nothing more that that. I did not know of Glenn Viklund until he posted on the mod group in December of '08. We had a couple of email exchanges during the time he had gotten information about the asylum issue from the migration board in Sweden. I had no further contact with him until I saw his post on the mod group a week or so ago and saw him mention that he would post on the Ed Forum but new members were not being accepted. Since my email bounced (problem it turned out between my server and his) I posted a reply to him asking him to email me. I wanted to give him information about contacting John Simkin to be admitted as a member. I do not attack Judyth as a person, though she and members of her team have certainly made it their business to attack me. That includes you. :-) . I attack her claims, and I undertook trying to fact check, verify ones that can be verified starting in early 2008.
Below is the e-mail that accompanied the attachment I have already posted ... with headers.
I added a couple extra emails .... including Judyth's December response to Mary .... which Mary forwarded on to others and an e-mail from Debra Conway.
Before you get too involved in the tape recording thing, Jim ... you might want to know how it came about, why Judyth said they went there with a tape recorder in the first place, the condition she claims Mary was in when they got there ... and the exact date. It was Sunday April 7, 2002.
I have all of the info including first hand accounts from Judyth ... and a transcript Martin posted a couple of years ago which is nearly useless as the answer to the question they asked was unintelligible after a few words. But do ask her and decide if you think it is wise to go there.
The provenance of Mary's e-mail and attachment was established ... though it is clear from Judyth's e-mails to Mary in both December and March (that one not posted yet, Judyth....again, do you really want to go there on the tape thing?) that had Mary not written and sent the attachment, she would have been totally bewildered as to why Judyth was saying some of things to her, noting that Mary had said them. And the whole world would have heard Mary bellow, and anyone who knew Mary knows that. The headers show the e-mail with the attachment went directly from Mary's computer to being received by John McAdams. Paul Seaton working from the attachment was able to check the Windows properties of said document, and here is what he found, he posted this info in a response to Martin Shackleford on 6-2-08:
Below are the properties of the judyth.doc that was sent out to McAdams et al.
Property Value
Description
Title Wednesday, December 12, 2001
Author Mary Ferrell
Last Saved By Mary Ferrell
Revision Number 8
Application Name Microsoft Word 10.0
Company
Date Created 12/12/2001 9:17 AM
Date Last Saved 12/12/2001 2:34 PM
Last Printed 12/12/2001 1:14 PM
Edit time 12/12/2001 1:14 PM
Please note: Mary Ferrell e-mailed Debra Conway in the middle of this process asking Deb to call her as she had never attached a document to an e-mail before and had some questions. A statement from Debra exists about that .... as well as a screen shot of that e-mail on her screen. I can post that screen shot and Debra's e-mail about it if Judyth insists.
And Mary's computer was password protected, only Mary knew her password.
Here are the December e-mails with headers.
Return-Path: <maryferr@cprompt.net>
Received: from cprompt.net ([199.34.20.66]) by postmarq.mu.edu
(Netscape Messaging Server 4.15 marquette Dec 7 2001
06:47:59)
with ESMTP id GO93R800.052 for <John.McAdams@marquette.edu>;
Wed, 12 Dec 2001 15:59:32 -0600
Received: from mary-xp.cprompt.net [209.51.4.178] by cprompt.net with
ESMTP
(SMTPD32-6.00) id A1F9D9600CC; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 15:54:01 -0600
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20011212154557.01b8ef70@cprompt.net>
X-Sender: maryferr@cprompt.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 15:56:06 -0600
To: [email]dlifton@earthlink.net,rchapman@mem.net,debra@jfklancer.com[/email],
[email]paradigm@gtw.net,PaulHoch@uclink.berkeley.edu,John.McAdams@marquette.edu[/email]
From: Mary Ferrell <maryferr@cprompt.net>
Subject: Judyth Baker
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/mixed;
boundary="=====================_755792484==_"
Dear friends,
It is with great regret that I send the following attachment.
I feel that the time has arrived to put an end to the Judyth Baker
part of my life. I hope all of you will understand why I am doing
this.
Sincerely,
Mary Ferrell
Judyth.doc
**************
Return-Path: <maryferr@cprompt.net>
Received: from cprompt.net ([199.34.20.66]) by postmarq.mu.edu
(Netscape Messaging Server 4.15 marquette Dec 7 2001
06:47:59)
with ESMTP id GO9C8V00.FCG for <John.McAdams@marquette.edu>;
Wed, 12 Dec 2001 19:02:55 -0600
Received: from mary-xp.cprompt.net [209.51.4.178] by cprompt.net with
ESMTP
(SMTPD32-6.00) id ACFFF830132; Wed, 12 Dec 2001 18:57:35 -0600
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20011212185718.01ad2350@cprompt.net>
X-Sender: maryferr@cprompt.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Wed, 12 Dec 2001 19:02:56 -0600
To: John.McAdams@marquette.edu
From: Mary Ferrell <maryferr@cprompt.net>
Subject: Judyth Baker
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Dear John,
I don't really know what to say in response to your request
about publishing my statement about Judyth. I guess it is inevitable
that it will "get out." I suppose I wouldn't have sent it to you had
I not known that you would want to put it on the Internet.
When I was in the hospital almost all of 1997, you were kind
enough to send me a lovely Get-well card. I did appreciate it. And,
then, recently you asked me my opinion of Judyth and said that you
would keep it in confidence if I asked you to do so. I was terribly
rude and didn't even reply to you.
I appreciate your asking permission now and I guess my answer
is -- use the statement the way you see fit.
Sincerely,
Mary Ferrell
**************
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 16:55:48 EST
From: ElectLady63@aol.com
Subject: Mary, why did you post to the newsgroup?
To: <maryferr@cprompt.net>, <mshack@concentric.net>
Cc: <electlady63@aol.com>
X-Mailer: Unknown (No Version)
X-RCPT-TO: <maryferr@cprompt.net>
Mary, I would never do to you what you did to me.
I can't believe you would post such a long letter, filled with so many
errors, and sign your name to it.
I can't believe you called me 'dangerous.'
I can't believe you think I am so weak I would do harm to myself. I am
weak in that I trusted you, and YOU did harm to me.
I told the truth.
You have been more cruel than all the others, because you said you
loved me.
==j==
*************
Return-Path: <maryferr@cprompt.net>
Received: from cprompt.net ([199.34.20.66]) by postmarq.mu.edu
(Netscape Messaging Server 4.15 marquette Dec 7 2001
06:47:59)
with ESMTP id GOBD8500.V4B for <John.McAdams@marquette.edu>;
Thu, 13 Dec 2001 21:19:17 -0600
Received: from mary-xp.cprompt.net [209.51.4.178] by cprompt.net with
ESMTP
(SMTPD32-6.00) id A9889C8013A; Thu, 13 Dec 2001 16:19:52 -0600
Message-Id: <5.1.0.14.2.20011213162046.01adf8f8@cprompt.net>
X-Sender: maryferr@cprompt.net
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Version 5.1
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 16:25:13 -0600
To: [email]dlifton@earthlink.net,rchapman@mem.net,caburtc@us.ibm.com[/email],
[email]Joanmellen@aol.com,paradigm@gtw.net,John.McAdams@marquette.edu[/email]
From: Mary Ferrell <maryferr@cprompt.net>
Subject: Fwd: Mary, why did you post to the newsgroup?
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
I have never posted anything to a news group in my life.
Mary
**************************
The December response by Judyth to Mary.
Mary forwarded this to John McAdams.
From: ElectLady63@aol.com
Date: Thu, 13 Dec 2001 02:23:40 EST
Subject: I AM WRITING LARGE SO YOU CAN READ IT EASILY, MARY
To: Howpl@aol.com, maryferr@cprompt.net, jmarrs@ntws.net,
mshack@concentric.net
CC: real@louisiana.edu
X-Mailer: AOL 6.0 for Windows US sub 10536
X-RCPT-TO: <maryferr@cprompt.net>
Dear Howie-- I don;t know how they did it, but Mary does not believe
me. yes, I'm heartbroken, but i will go on.
TO MARY FERRELL, WHO I TRUSTED:
Mary, i forgive you for what you have done. You misunderstood many
things. for example, I have the original note you wrote on a sheet of
paper that already had my picture on it. I did not send that out to
others until you gave me permission. You may have forgotten. I don;t
know.
I do know that you treated me kindly. You were almost asleep when I
left. i had rubbed your back. we had watched Jack and the beanstalk
together, and then you were looking for the news. We were peaceful
together. You asked jimmy to show me out because i told you I had to
go home and grade papers. you did not kick me out, as you made it look
to the newsgroup. Jimmy showed me out because it was so late.
Mary, wqorst of all, you NEVER ASKED ONE TIME TO SEE THE BOOK. I
BROUGHT IT OVER SEVERAL TIMES. I STOPPED BRINGING THESE THINGS OVER
BECAUSE YOU NEVER SAW MORE THAN A FEW DOCUMENTS AT A TIME.
FURTHERMORE, I ONLY CAME TO VISIT YOU TO GIVE YOU BACKRUBS. I WAITED A
WHOLE YEAR BEFORE ASKING YOU TO WRITE SOMETHING FOR SANDRA, THE AGENT.
YOU MADE IT SOUND LIKE I MIGHT DO HARM TO MYSELF.
You also made it sound like i was a dangerous person.
You also madeit sound like maybe i was crazy.
I bared my very soul to you about my love for lee, and his for me. We
only had two nights to ourselves, i told you that. we spent some
afternoons in a few hotels together. We spent a few hours in a van
once, you made it sound terrible.
I confided in you. You told me not to tell many things, but you have
exposed me as some kind of psycho to the whole world.
I'm very sad.
All I can say is that I'm not lying.
I may not see in my lifetime Lee vindicated.
The Queen of Spades Louis Girdler told you about happens to be in
bound volume of sort stories. there is NOTHING like Lee's book in that
library. I NEVER said I had never seen the 26 volumes. i had never
seen them in a proivate house before--but what i was really trying to
say is that I had never seen the whole bunch of books before--not in a
house--and i had never read them. you thought I meant the 26 volumes?
well, you are an individual, i had never seen a private person powning
such.
Mary, you also said the university library had all kinds of books
about the assasination. THIS IS NOT TRUE. THERE ARE JUST A FEW BOOKS,
ABOUT THE CIA, THAT I KNOW OF. BESIDES, I SAID I WOULD NOT READ THEM.
THERE WERE A FEW OVER AT THE PUBLIC LIBRARY. DR. JOSEPH RIEHL WILL
TELL YOU HE SAID A BOOK ABOUT MAFIA KINGFISH WAS THERE--I NEVER KNEW
IT.
I NEVER SAID I KNEW MUCH RUSSIAN. I NEVER, EVER COULD THINK IN
RUSSIAN!. I SAID I HAD MADE A HABIT OF SAYING THANK YOU OR COMRADE ALL
THE TIME IN RUSSIAN, IT WAS ONE OF MY HABITS.
YOU NEVER TRIED TO SPEAK ANY RUSSIAN TO ME. YOU NEVER SAID A WORD IN
RUSSIAN.
I NEVER KNEW THE NAME OF THE AUNT. THAT IS WHAT YOU ASKED ME. I DID
WRITE IN THE BOOK TWO YEARS AGO THAT I STAYED ACROSS THE STREET WHILE
LEE WENT INSIDE AND TALKED TO HIS AUNT. THIS WAS ON ST. CHARLES
STREET, WE HAD JUST GOT OFF THE STREETCAR. THIS WAS WHAT I REMEMBERED.
YOU NEVER ASKED ME ANYTHING BUT IF I KNEW HER NAME. I NEVER DID.
I TOLD YOU CLEARLY THAT IT WAS MAY 4 AND MAY 5 THAT I FOUND OUT WERE
NOT ACCOUNTED FOR. THIS WAS RECENT. I NEVER, EVER KNEW ANY OF THIS
BEFORE I GOT SOME FEEDBACK FROM MARTIN THAT I HAD HIT SOME DATES
RIGHT, BUT EVEN THEN I DID NOT KNOW WHICH ONES FOR SURE UNTIL I SAW
YOUR CHRONOLOGY. YOU EVEN GAVE ME A FREE COPY OF YOUR CHRONOLOGY AND
MADE ME SO HAPPY.
YOU DID NOT MENTION THE AMERICAN EXPRESS MONEY ORDER OF MAY 27. YOU
MADE ME LOOK LIKE A LIAR, MARY.
I BARED MY HEART TO YOU.
I TOLD YOU MY SOUL ABOUT LEE, AND YOU TOLD ME ABOUT BUCK.
I SENT YOU POETRY THAT I NEVER DARED SHOW ANYONE BEFORE, EXCEPT
HOWARD.
WORST OF ALL, I THINK, WERE YOUR ERRORS. I NEVER SAID RORKE WAS GOING
TO MEET US IN MEXICO. HE HAD DIED BEFORE THAT. I NEVER SAID OCHSNER
GOT ME THE APARTMENT. I NEVER TOLD YOU WHO GOT ME THE APARTMENT. HE
HAD TOLD ME TO MOVE INTO THE 'Y'--WHICH I DID DO.
THE "HAMBURGHER" PLACE WAS HOW I TRIED TO WORK ON MY OWN, HAVING GOT
YTHERE EARLY.
YOU HAVE SWALLOWED THE MISREPRESENTATIONS AND LIES OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE
SWORN THEY WILL NOT ALLOW THE BOOK TO BE PUBLISHED. THEY WILL NEVER
SOLVE THE CRIME AGAINST KENNEDY. NEVER.
I DID INDEED MEET MACKINLAY KANTOR. I have a newspaper article proving
he spoke to my high school class. I was the star writer and was
introduced to him. He was very interested in my dog and horse stories.
He had writren The Voice of Buf=gle Anne and read the entire book to
our class in two hours. I was invited to his home. ASK HIS WIDOW HOW
HE WROTE HIS STUFF. HE WA;LKED AROUND WITH HIS TAPE RECORDER AND SPOKE
INTO IT. Twice i came over and held the tape recorder.
You should know that i try to be friendly. I liked Kantor a great
deal. He had very conservative friends in the military.
You got so many small details wrong that i am embarrassed for you. You
remembered a great deal, but it looks to me like you've been given a
lot of this oinformation, for it is quite skewed form the way it was
given to you.
One last example: I received a short note, hardly a letter, from
Russell. It was basically a quote from one of his lectures. His
secretary, your friend's husband, actually went to court to PROVE he
did not have control of many things Russell wrote. by the time I
wrote to Riussell personally again, he was no longer capable of
replying, and i did get a letter form his secretary. However, I did
receive a note the first time. I am certain i can find other letters
he wrote personally in that same time period, and i will certainly be
able to prove my point, because a bunch of them went on file in the
lawsuit proving Russell was independent and wrote letters of which
Sch. knew nothing or only knew about later.
Where in the world, finally, in closing, did you ever get the idea
that i was dangerous?
i came to see you to ease your pain. i spent hours massaging your
neck, legs, even your feet, because I cared about your pain. I knew i
was taking a risk when once you yelled at me and made me cry, and
then apologized. i realized you might not be the same lady that i
had met over a year earlier. I noticed that you were repeating tings,
and finally did mention these concerns to howard and Martin. but I
felt it was temporary, because you had fallen ill, and because you
missed Buck.
I defended your sanity and reason, mary, when you started crying, and
said, in poresence of me, debbee, and Carole Anne, that "How will BUCK
find me if I move out of this house? HOW will he find me?"
I have to tell howard about this so he will understand that I feel
you have changed, that never in a million years would you have written
that I might 'harmm' myself, or that I was 'dangerous' a year ago.
I have never harmed anyone in my life. You said, indeed, that i had
HEALING HANDS. I have spent hours trying to just give you some
physical comfort. in return, you have accused me on the internet of
being dangerous, even delusional, and all the things that now make me
lok like I am a mental mess.
I have learned my lesson.
I will take what i know to the grave.
You've destroyed my credibility.
forgive you, because i believe you are not the same wonderful lady who
said she wanted to help me get the book published, who even OFFERED
TO BUY ME A NEW CAR, AND I REFUSED TO LET YOU DO THAT. You also
offered to buyDebbe a new car. I suppose carole Anne still wants to do
something 'nice' for Debbee. debbe is a fine woman.
indeed, i have dear, fine friends.
I hope and pray that someday you will rethink out all you have said
and done to me this sad day.
You may have singlehandedly destroyed the last chance for the truth to
come out.
i give up.
==Judyth==
*********************
Subject: Mary Ferrell
Date: 14 Dec 2001 09:02:32 -0600
From: Debra Conway <de...@jfklancer.com>
Newsgroups: alt.assassination.jfk
Folks,
Having spoken to Mary both before and after she posted her email
regarding Judyth Baker, I can tell you she is very sane, coherent, and has all
her mental faculties. I resent Judyth's claims to Mary being unable to
remember what she has been told or what she has said. I've been through this
with Mary every step of the way and believe me, she not only has been
totally truthful in her email, typical of Mary, she has been generous and
sensitive to Judyth. She could have written much, much more.
For Mary's sake, I'm glad this is over. She is too polite sometimes
for her own good and allowed her kindness to Judyth to be misconstrued and
manipulated.
Sincerely,
Debra Conway
***************
These have all been posted on the net for years.
Barb
[quote name='James H. Fetzer' post='186784' date='Mar 14 2010, 06:41 AM']
NOTE: This appears to me to be an acid test of Judyth's critics. We already know that
Junkkarinen, Viklund, and McAdams have been collaborating in attacking her. It now
appears to me that Judyth has proof--in the form of a tape recording--that puts the lie
to this disgraceful abuse of the memory of someone widely admired. If there is a more
dishonorable act than this--for crass political motives--I cannot image what it would be.
RESPONSE TO JUNKKARINEN'S MARY FERRELL POSTING:
TO ALL:
A GOOD RESEARCHER WILL PRESENT INFORMATION IN AN UNBIASED MANNER.
1) BUT BARB DID NOT POST MARY FERRELL'S EMAIL AND ITS ORIGINAL HEADER.
INSTEAD, SHE POSTED AN ATTACHMENT TO IT. WE DISPUTE THE PROVENANCE AND AUTHORSHIP OF KEY PORTIONS OF THAT ATTACHMENT.
2) THE EMAIL BARB DID NOT REVEAL TO YOU SAID THAT MARY EXPRESSED 'REGRET' THAT SHE HAD TO WASH HER HANDS OF ME.
TO MY FACE, MARY TOLD ME THAT SHE COULD NO LONGER BEAR THE RELENTLESS PRESSURE FROM ALL HER OLD FRIENDS. IT WAS DRIVING HER CRAZY AND SHE HAD DECIDED TO STOP DEFENDING ME IF SHE WAS TO HAVE ANY PEACE. SHE RELIED ON THESE PEOPLE FOR TRANSPORTATION, INCOME FROM LANCER, THE MARY FERRELL AWARD AT LANCER, AND SHE JUST COULDN'T KEEP DEFENDING ME ANYMORE.
[........][/quote]
[/quote]