Anyone want to discuss HARVEY & LEE?

[Tom Scully]

..........
You consider interviewing someone "intrusive"? "Put on a budget"? He spent his own money for 12 years tracking down witnesses.
Since your arrival here the only thing you seem to want to do is attack JA's research. Is that why you joined? Just curious.

Dawn

Dawn,

If I had read this before posting my rather tongue in cheek comment comparing resources JA is able to apply to his research efforts, vs. my minimalist approach, I would not have posted it. Please accept my apology, and I hope
John will considering accepting it, as well.
http://digitalcollections.baylor.edu/uti...ge/page/67



I had no intention to join this forum with any agenda other than to post and discuss the facts as I've collected
and sorted them, to gain new ones through discussion and presentation. I want to put what I believe is well supported, to the test.

A primary reason I joined this forum is because Jim DiEugenio seemed to have made it the primary place where
he was making timely posts. He and I have a history, (hang together or assuredly ..... hang separately) and incidently, the following is an example of a tactic to discredit and diminish the deliverer of details an embarrassed individual would rather not see come to light, but has no substantive counterargument.:

At the black mark, lower left.:


I considered what happened here, intrusive, my own opinion fwiw. Again, if I had read JA's candid comments about his purpose and his openness, I probably would have not posted the comment you quoted. :

http://digitalcollections.baylor.edu/uti...ge/page/65
http://digitalcollections.baylor.edu/uti...ge/page/67
Two page letter at links above is related to this letter.:
http://digitalcollections.baylor.edu/uti...ge/page/64

I much prefer to post about and research other issues, and I have not and will not set out to discredit JA's opinions. I will ask those who post them and agree with them to post support for them, as I have asked Mr. Doyle and Mr. Hargrove to do. I only asked them to post a primary source in support of their conclusion that Barry Gray met Rizzuto aka SH Landesberg, face to face.

You are an attorney, Dawn. Is it not considered, in your line of work, that a claim that an FBI report is fake or otherwise unreliable, is an extraordinary claim? What are the obligations (burden of proof) of the party who makes such a claim?

I am banned from the Parker forum, I do not tow a party line there, or anywhere. I've watched members from Parker's forum comment here and conduct themselves in a very similar (predictable) way. It is not my way. The bulk of them hold those they disagree with to a standard of proof they do not hold themselves to as they press their group opinion that PM is LHO as if this was obvious and well supported by available evidence.

They are blind to the observable irony that their belief system related to PM is not founded more soundly on fact than the Harvey & Lee belief system. Anticipated "new evidence," (an elusive, hopefully conclusive, yet to be found (or possibly, rendered via image enhancing software) photo image of a back corner of the TSBD vestibule) is not a justification for an obnoxious, smug, mocking air of superiority. A look in the mirror might do wonders.

I do not, for example, have an adversarial relationship with David Josephs, as I am fairly certain he will confirm.

I did not intend to post a lengthy response to you, Dawn, but I wanted to emphasize that I am not coming here with an agenda and my limited posting history here, initially in a blog post, and in a recent back and forth with Scott Kaiser supports what I am saying to you, and may help answer your question.