MA MA - Joan Webster, 25, Logan Airport, Boston, 28 Nov 1981

[Rhett]

Eve, I am sorry. The link works for me now as well. I'm sure it was computer glitches on my end.

 

[eve carson]

I am currently awaiting confirmation regarding documents. This has been a step-by-step process, one that has been slow and painful.

I am uploading an excerpt from Tim Burke's publication. Apparently, the Websters influenced Burke's decision to publish his theory. Source documents show authorities had exculpatory evidence to know Paradiso was not the culprit. Burke's hubris is very concerning.

As you celebrate Independence Day, take a moment to think about a few things.

A false explanation obstructs justice. Her life was taken and justice denied.

The current custodian files were deficient in numerous vital records that further blocks a path to the truth.

Authorities and the Websters had exculpatory evidence, but did not reveal it.


When authorities lie about murder and cover-up crimes, everyone is vulnerable.

Think about who is vulnerable when the family is not telling the truth about murder. The most vulnerable are those close enough to unravel the secrecy surrounding Joan's case.

Strictly looking at the facts, the Websters wanted a false explanation to satisfy public perceptions of Joan's loss. That leaves people I love very dearly vulnerable. Until verified evidence surfaces that can eliminate concerns, I will continue to #SaySomething

 

[eve carson]

To get to the bottom of what happened to Joan, it takes going over documents many times. When new information is learned, I have gone back to cross check information. I am uploading an article in the Boston Globe dated 1-19-1982. That is early on in the investigation.

Here are some highlights that stood out to me.

First, authorities reported the only good lead was the discovery of Joan's purse and wallet in the Saugus marsh. Authorities planned to hypnotize three witnesses about a rusted out 10 year old tan Chevy found parked along Rte. 107, where the items were found. Note: Tim Burke describes the vehicle as a white taxi. No reports have been recovered that detail three witnesses. However, there is a report that indicates authorities planned to hypnotize a witness, the cabbie at Logan.

The article details who saw Joan on the flight and at Logan. She spoke to a priest and a couple on the flight. She saw friends at the luggage carousel. There was no indication Joan was with someone.

MSP John O'Rourke was involved in the MSP interview of state witness Robert Bond a year later, and came up with a false explanation Joan was raped and murdered by Leonard Paradiso on his boat. Court records affirm the boat did not exist when Joan disappeared.

I agree with one assessment, Joan would not have gotten into a car with a stranger. Jack McEwan of ITT Security, involved in interviews at Logan, suppressed an article that indicated Joan was seen talking to a man behind the counter. Then Joan flags a Town Taxi and her suitcase is loaded in the trunk. She announces someone is with her. The man exchanges words with the cabbie over a heavy suitcase. He announces "WE" don't want to take this cab and maneuvers Joan into another car.

At the end of the article the cabbie and composite are briefly mentioned. It was not disclosed publicly as suggested. The groups that had this information were the MSP, Harvard Campus Police, Saugus Police, and the Websters.

I recovered this article in 2008. That is the first I learned about the composite. I finally recovered the composite templates and had it reconstructed in July 2009. Since then, the current custodian confirmed the composite through their records. Those recovered records affirm an officer named in this article, Neil Meehan, provided disinformation to the public through the media. He lied. He had first hand knowledge about the lead at the airport.

The facts were being distorted and hidden from the start.

 

[ebfortin76]

I've been out of the thread for some time. Had to concentrate on a few things. I see that there's a bit less activity. We need new stuff. We need to have things moving. Where are you with getting your FOIA requested documents?

 

[eve carson]

Hi Ebfortin 76,

Even though I have not posted as frequently, I am still busy getting to the bottom of this.

The current custodian described a report. The way it was represented would support MA authorities involved during the investigation. It was not surprising to me they came back stating they could find no such document. The response twisted the custodian's words during our 2017 meeting. I also sought the report from another department that would have this document if it existed. I received a negative response after several months of waiting. In documenting this request, there is verifiable information that raises concerns about what the custodian told me. I can't begin to describe the level of abuse for authorities to lie to a family member or the public. To me, it seems like they were trying to justify their neglect to investigate authorities who were involved. I guess it is their hubris to think they should not be challenged.

A deadline has been missed in another request for very specific documents, a very narrow list. I already have knowledge that some of these documents are in their possession. Since the deadline has been missed, MA is one of the worst states for transparency and recovering records. They have an "F" rating from the Center for Public Integrity. They will need to respond, but it will be very interesting how they answer. They are trying like hell to slow walk this or hope Joan's case just goes away. Not going to happen.

The only way to describe this whole mess is a cover-up. Recovered source documents support this was a cover-up from the start. It continues with current authorities circling the wagons. I'll keep you posted.

When I can get into specifics about the documents requested, I will. For the time, I do know this thread is being monitored by someone who is uncomfortable for Joan's case to be reviewed. I have definitely hit some nerves which is a good indicator I have been looking under the right stones to resolve Joan's loss.

 

[eve carson]

I am uploading an article that highlights the problem I have encountered with current authorities. Tim Burke published his account in 2008. This article appeared in the Boston Globe on September 8, 2008.

Burke indicated ADA John Dawley contacted him a few weeks prior to this article and informed him that several cold cases were being reexamined based on Burke's book. A spokesman for the DAO affirmed three cases were being looked at based on Burke's representations.

The three victims listed had no similarity to Joan's case. I do know from contacts in Boston, officers talked to some individuals looking for a connection to Paradiso. An officer confirmed to me in a meeting on May 20, 2010, that no connection had been been made between Paradiso to the other cases. There has been no resolution in these cases.

It was very indicative to me that the DAO would not respond to Joan's case. In the meeting with ADA John Dawley on May 1, 2017, Dawley stated Joan's case is still technically open, but they are not working on it on any regular basis. This office does not have a cold case unit. The decision to reexamine a case rests with one individual, ADA John Dawley.

Two significant points, Burke's connection to John Dawley and the DAO, and the connection of both to the media to control information. It is important to know within Boston's tightly knit circles, I was denied the right on two occasions, to make a public victim impact statement. Source documents supported my statements. Documents exposed malfeasance of authorities.

On May 1, 2017, ADA Dawley indicated he had not read Burke's book and did not want to be influenced by it. That seems to contradict what is represented in the article. He stated, even if Burke's book was nothing but baloney, he could not come out and discredit the theory. That means he is deliberately ignoring verified documents. That is obstruction of justice. The inference to me was just to ignore Burke's book. That may be easy for him to do, but Burke grossly misrepresents what happened to a murdered member of my family, and denies justice. It infected other cases and created a domino effect of other victims. ADA Dawley has a clear bias and conflict of interest.

Burke's theory was a fabrication that shielded a killer and it still is obstructing the case. Burke is very specific who he wrote the book for.

 

[eve carson]

Quick update. The Superintendent has affirmed the latest appeal to the DAO. I can hardly wait to see how the DAO replies to the request.

There are 13 documents requested. All of these documents have been discussed with the DAO. Once I know how they choose to respond, I will provide greater detail about the requested documents. As the above article suggests, the DAO appears to support Tim Burke's boat explanation instead of source documents and legal evidence.

I am posting the commitment of the DAO as posted on their website.

“Essex District Attorney Jonathan W. Blodgett is committed to holding criminals accountable, securing justice for victims of crime and providing services and drug treatment to non-violent offenders.” The site identifies who the DAO serves, “The Essex District Attorney’s Office prosecutes criminal offenses from the 34 cities and towns in Essex County and provides services and support to the victims and witnesses of those crimes.”

Hopefully, I will receive a response soon, but it has been a painfully slow process dealing with the DAO.

 

[eve carson]

A new report was recovered. After the Bond allegations came out in 1983, ADA Paul Leary placed a phone call. Paul Leary was the first assistant DA in Suffolk County, Tim Burke's superior. The date of the call and the topic are significant. The individual Leary called is very alarming. This individual was then briefed about one critical aspect of the allegations against Paradiso.

The Websters knew Paul Leary. His name surfaces in many aspects of Joan's investigation and entangled matters. This particular call is very disturbing. I have already recovered the alleged evidence that was being presented. Facts were ignored, hidden, or distorted to further the story the state promoted.

There are a lot of high level people whose names are identified with some connection to Joan's investigation. Those names include William Webster, then Director of the FBI, and William Weld, USA MA who later went on to become Governor of MA, and VP candidate in 2016 on the Libertarian ticket. Other names identified in records went on to be judges appointed in MA. Many of these people have strong public images including the newly identified contact of Paul Leary. It reinforces the current authorities are circling wagons to shield misconduct.

Paul Leary called Tim Burke at one point after Burke had left the Suffolk County DAO. He was slamming Burke for "giving away" the recovered boat to an investigator working for the Suffolk County DAO, Anthony Pascucci. The witness who answered the call coming in for Burke has reported the incident. Burke can only be labeled as inept to give away the alleged crime scene. However, Burke had all the reports to know that the boat had no evidentiary value and a federal court affirmed the boat did not exist when Joan disappeared. To preserve the fabricated explanation though, it was reckless to give the alleged crime scene away.

I do not want to identify the person Leary called (other than Burke) at this time, I know this thread is being followed by another individual interested in maintaining the Paradiso boat theory. However, the person Leary contacted is a well known person, a very big name. That individual was briefed and raises a major red flag that the fix was in against Paradiso.

The newly recovered report was not obtained from the current custodian. They are still dragging their feet to respond. It is a verified document from a reliable source with an evidence stamp on it.

 

[eve carson]

To expand a little on the recent finding, I am adding a timeline around the Paul Leary phone call.

On July 11, 1983, SA Steve Broce interviewed Elaine Covino. Covino had previously been interviewed by the MSP. I am adding an except of the interview. Covino was with Paradiso when he discovered his boat, the alleged crime scene, was missing. Based on her recollection, the boat was gone in July or August 1981, several months before Joan disappeared. That is consistent with other reports. The interview with MSP took place on April 7, 1983. Therefore, the MSP and Tim Burke had this information.

I am uploading the confirmation that Broce interviewed Covino. Note: Broce was identified as someone who interviewed Charlene Bullerwell. Bullerwell testified she was pressured by the FBI. Authorities made promises to her for testimony. Allegedly, according to FBI reports, she was photographed in Joan's jewelry and knew where Joan's body was dumped. Her testimony alleged Paradiso was a hitman for the mob who chopped up bodies, tied cinderblocks to them, and sank them in the ocean. She did not have Joan's jewelry, Joan was not chopped up, and Joan was not in Boston Harbor as claimed. The excerpt is from Broce's sworn affidavit.

I am also uploading an excerpt that Broce provided vehicle registrations to the federal court during the grand jury for the bankruptcy case. Broce obtained these from Tim Burke. The registrations included an invalid registration. The current custodian does not have supporting documents in their files. The fake ID had a hand written number. The prosecutor claimed she had just received these during the trial in April 1985. However, Broce's statement affirms the court had these registrations much earlier. The fake ID was not submitted for analysis.

On July 12, 1983, Tim Burke held a Jane Doe grand jury session regarding Joan Webster. Note: Joan was still listed as a missing person.

The public was not aware a grand jury was being conducted into Joan's case, neither was I. I am uploading an excerpt from a sworn affidavit from Tim Burke. Since no charges were ever filed, records are not obtainable. It may be, not charging the crime was by design to prevent access to records.

On or about July 13, 1983, ADA Paul Leary, Burke's superior, placed a phone call.

The contact was briefed on aspects of Joan's case on July 15, 1983. This contact would have had access to records or the information contained in reports.

As background information about SA Steve Broce, I am adding a link. Broce seems to lack character. Note: The whistleblower was the one to suffer consequences demonstrating a dysfunctional system that I too, have encountered.

FBI WHISTLEBLOWER SAYS HE WAS FIRED AFTER REPORTING SEXUAL MISCONDUCT - Whistleblower Litigation Legal Blogs Posted by David J. Linesch - Lawyers.com

The Paul Leary phone call is significant; the contact is very concerning.

 

[eve carson]

FOIA update

The current custodian has been ordered to respond to my FOIA request. I hope to have their response in the next few days. The response should be very enlightening.

I am still researching the call placed on July 13, 1983. The contact is very concerning to me. Joan's investigation was reaching some very high levels.

 

[Janet]

I want to introduce you to Joan Webster.

Joan was my sister-in-law. Her loss was devastating.

Joan was a student at the Harvard Graduate School of Design. She was in her 2nd year of a three year program with a bright future ahead of her. Joan was loved and valued by her classmates and peers. At 25, she had her whole life ahead of her.

On Saturday, November 28, 1981, Joan boarded Eastern flight 916 from Newark to Logan Airport in Boston. She returned early from a Thanksgiving break at the home of her parents in NJ. Joan arrived at Logan around 10:30 pm and was reportedly last seen at the luggage carousel. She planned to take a cab to her room at Perkins Hall. She never arrived.

A classmate notified the family on December 1, 1981, that Joan had not returned to class. Family members filed two missing person reports, one in Massachusetts, and one in New Jersey. On December 2, 1981, a clam digger found her purse and wallet in a marshy area that spanned on both sides of a split roadway, Route 107 also known as the Lynn Marsh Road.

An extensive search ensued and the media reported the story. According to contemporary news accounts, authorities allegedly recovered her suitcase at the Park Square Greyhound Bus Station in Boston, and held a major media event around the 1st week of February 1982.

Joan also carried a tote bag. The bag and contents, according to media accounts, were never recovered. The mysterious disappearance baffled everyone who knew her.

Joan's parents made themselves available to the media. They taped an appeal for information broadcast throughout New England on Christmas Day 1981. On January 19, 1982, they offered a $10,000 reward. The reward was increased up to $50,000 in October 1982.

On April 18, 1990, a veterinarian walking her dogs in Hamilton, MA discovered a human skull. The location was more than 30 miles north of the airport in a remote and heavily wooded area. Weather conditions in an area sometimes flooded caused the skull to come to the surface. After an extensive search of the area for the next week, searchers discovered the gravesite. Most of the remains were recovered.

The condition of Joan's remains, information I did not learn until 2009, were horrific. The cause of death was blunt force trauma to the head. She sustained a 2" x 4" hole on the right side of the skull. The blow, inflicted with tremendous force, took out the entire right side of her head. Joan was stripped of all clothing. No clothing or personal belongs were found in the area except a gold neck chain and a gold amethyst ring both found on the skeleton. Joan Webster was disposed in a black plastic trash bag and discarded in a basin often covered with water. The gravesite was covered with cut logs in the area. At some point, later in time, a second layer of logs was piled on the site. Joan was positively identified through dental records.

All the while Joan remained a missing person, this case received high visibility and sensational coverage. More than three decades later, the case is still the subject of a lot of speculation and public representations of the case. Personal experiences and factors learned many years later created an urgency to know what happened to Joan. The explanations did not add up and the case remains an open investigation today.

In 2006, I began to dig into the case. I did not have any idea what I would find and did not know what to expect. This has been a painful journey, but the answers are there. For those of you who have suffered the tragic loss of a loved one, you understand the suspended grief, the questions, and the need for answers to heal. For a long time, it was two steps forward and ten steps back. Trying to find information was trial and error until I gained better skills of researching a cold case.

This case is important on many levels. I will be posting here as often as I am able. I welcome all input as long as it is respectful. I have recovered thousands of pages of relevant documents in the case and have a clear understanding of the obstacles to justice. I have actual documents that I will post and explain the significance.

What I will say is the case is solvable. It took peeling back many layers. It is an ongoing process and it is up to those in positions of responsibility whether Joan will receive justice or not. All crimes have an answer. The answers are not always easy to find. The answers are always painful in such a loss. It has taken many sleepless nights and a torrent of tears to get to this point.

Please say a prayer for Joan, all of the victims impacted by this case, and others in pain after traumatic loss senselessly altered lives forever.

I remember hearing about this case. I'm sorry for your loss. I lived in Lynn until I moved to Florida 16 years ago. Around that same time I went to KFC on Squire Rd in Revere. When I came out my car wouldn't start. A man helped me try to start my car, but it didn't start. He offered me a ride home and I accepted out of desperation. As we were driving down the Marsh road it was pitch black and I started thinking how crazy I was for accepting his ride. I had my hand on the door handle just waiting for him to make a turn down a side road so I could jump out. Anyway he drove me close to my house and I thanked him. Also Thanking God for protecting me from what could of happened.

 

[eve carson]

Today is Joan's birthday. She would have been 62 today. Take a moment to remember her.

Thank you Janet for remembering Joan. The media covered this story extensively and it gave all of us pause. Every year I gathered with the family out east, I looked down into the water and wondered if Joan was there. It gave me shudders up until the time Joan's remains surfaced in April of 1990. At that point, I understood the boat the Paradiso theory was not plausible. Now I know it is impossible.

I have received a response from the current custodian. There is a clear resistance to addressing certain documents relevant in the case. Investigating their own seems to be a problem for this office. They have already made statements that demonstrate a conflict of interest or the appearance of a conflict.

I can see what is in these records. I will not back down or be intimidated to remain silent.

The July 13, 1983 Paul Leary call is still a point of concern. There was undue pressure and influence to reach predetermined outcomes.

 

[eve carson]

The documents currently under an FOIA appeal from the current custodian of Joan's case are listed below. These documents were requested for a very specific purpose. The latest response from the custodian demonstrates a continued pattern that conflicts grossly with the stated commitment of their office.

I. Saugus PD report
A. Report from eyewitness Fenton Allen Moore signed by Neil Meehan
B. Composite from witness description
C. Any other reports related to witness Fenton Allen Moore

II. Marie Iannuzzi grand jury
A. Page 1 dated March 5, 1982 cause # 038655
B. Page 1 dated April 5, 1982 cause # 038655

III. Leonard Paradiso parole officer notes entry dated March 11, 1982

IV. FBI fingerprint report for Leonard Paradiso
A. Submission for comparison in Joan Webster case dated November 5, 1982
B. FBI results dated November 24, 1982

V. State Witness Robert Bond
A. MSP interview with Bond
B. Bond written letter regarding Joan Webster murder
C. Bond motion and affidavit dated November 15, 1985

VI. FBI report regarding boat theory dated August 5, 1983

VII. Case CR 85-010-S in the Federal District Court in RI, Judge Bruce Selya presiding
A. Certification
B. Title pages Vol I
C. Title Pages Vol II
D. Pages 128 & 129 from Vol II
E. Title pages sentencing

VIII. FBI consensus report dated July 24, 1985

IX. Boston Herald article dated July 15, 1991 “Prosecutors Conflict over Slay Case Files”

X. Webster letter to

XI. Boston Herald article dated November 28, 2006 “Tome Seeks to Close Book on Murder”

XII. George Webster email response to Eve Carson dated December 25, 2012

XIII. Anonymous letter and envelope sent to Eve Carson received December 11, 2014

The current custodian has some explaining to do.

 

[ebfortin76]

You seem to be making very good progress Eve! The stalling techniques on your FOIA request was to be expected.

However I am very curious about that phonecall. How did you get this info? Police documents?

 

[eve carson]

Hi Ebfortin 76,

You are absolutely correct that the stall tactics are expected. There is a very ugly mess surrounding this case. It infected other cases as well. The overkill of allegations against Paradiso helped expose what was going on. Those cases had to be looked at to get a greater understanding.

The phone call was revealed in a case record compiled by a prosecutor. It was found in court records and has an evidence stamp on it. Let me review the timeline surrounding the call and add some additional context.

July 11, 1983: SA Steve Broce interviewed Elaine Covino, friend of Paradiso.
July 12, 1983: Tim Burke holds Jane Doe grand jury regarding Joan Webster.
July 13, 1983: Paul Leary, Burke's superior, places call. Contact then made an inquiry to the prosecutor compiling the report.
July 14, 1983: Prosecutor has discussion with Tim Burke.
July 15, 1983: Prosecutor briefs Paul Leary contact.
July 15, 1983: Prosecutor received additional "leads" from Tim Burke.
July 18, 1983: Appointment with Tim Burke.
July 27, 1983: Candace Weyant granted immunity regarding Joan Webster.
July 28, 1983: Prosecutor reports to Tim Burke seized items from search warrant.
August 12, 1983: Candace Weyant takes the fifth during Jane Doe grand jury. Weyant was not immunized for Marie Iannuzzi.
August 15, 1983: Prosecutor has discussion with Tim Burke and informed Paradiso's girlfriend was given immunity and scheduled before the Jane Doe grand jury again on September 6, 1983.

The timeline is compiled from multiple reports, but it is important to see what was going on. Going back to the Paul Leary phone call, the contact made is significant. What it indicates to me is that this case was being influenced and monitored at very high levels. Under ordinary circumstances, it is unlikely Paul Leary would have made this call. On the surface, it might seem like cooperation between departments, but when the actual evidence is examined, it becomes clear this was a predetermined outcome. Paradiso was framed.

 

[eve carson]

No matter where I look, there are problems with Tim Burke's case. Elaine Covino was a witness already on record affirming the boat was gone in July or August 1981. Another witness, Charlene Bullerwell, testified SA Steve Broce was one of two individuals who interviewed her on October 4, 1983. A confidential source reported to the FBI that Bullerwell knew where Joan's body was located. Bullerwell testified she was pressured by the FBI. Her testimony claimed Paradiso was a hit man for the mob, chopped bodies, tied cinderblocks to them and dumped them in the ocean. That is not what happened to Joan.

Candy Weyant took the fifth until the September 6, 1983 grand jury. Burke tried to badger her that the boat existed. She testified again during the Iannuzzi trial to the same questioning. She helped Paradiso strip the boat in July 1981. Weyant did not see the boat go down, but it was gone after the couple stripped it. The boat was registered in her name; the insurance claim was in her name. The Iannuzzi testimony was all over the papers.

I approached this case in a different way. I reconstructed and examined the investigation itself. The Paradiso boat theory was a tactic to divert attention away from what really happened to Joan. They projected the crime onto Paradiso by fabricating an explanation, fabricating pieces to fit into their story, and ignoring legitimate evidence.

Is there evidence this was completely a manufactured explanation? The answer is yes. It is included in documents requested in the FOIA still under appeal. The most logical next step is to examine the people involved who lied.

 

[eve carson]

Quick update on the FOIA. Stalling tactics continue as I have been required to jump through another hoop. It is becoming abundantly clear the current custodian is shielding misconduct.

This case was sensational and chaotic. Source documents cleared up a lot of confusion that I believe was by design. I am actually down to a single fact evident in records that the DAO is avoiding. It is really not possible to defend it with any type of rationale. This miscarriage of justice could have been exposed a long time ago.

The same methods to ignore evidence or manufacture pieces to make the story "fit," is the same pattern followed by the contact of the July 13, 1983 call.

Joan's case is solvable.

 

[eve carson]

The current custodian continues to stonewall. Not surprised. I received verified confirmation individuals are monitoring posts.

For the benefit of anyone not familiar with some legal terms, I am providing some definitions here.

Complicit:
Choosing to be involved in an illegal or questionable act, especially with others; having complicity

Accessory:
An accessory is a person who assists in the commission of a crime, but who does not actually participate in the commission of the crime as a joint principal

Accessory after the fact:
An accessory after the fact to an offence is one who, knowing that a person has been a party to the offence, receives, comforts or assists that person for the purpose of enabling that person to escape

Abuse of Power:
Abuse of power, in the form of "malfeasance in office" or "official misconduct," is the commission of an unlawful act, done in an official capacity, which affects the performance of official duties

All of these definitions apply to Joan's unresolved homicide based on evidence in source documents.

There is no statute of limitations for murder. Joan's case is solvable.

 

[eve carson]

Another round still dealing with the latest FOIA. The excuses will break down. It is more and more obvious what the current custodian does not want to disclose. The only ones shielded by a lack of transparency are the authorities themselves.

Holding a case in an unresolved and open status poses an obstacle to justice. Denying records is misapplying the law that only serves to shield misconduct in this case.

Justice is denied to the victim(s). Think about that.

 

[ebfortin76]

A question that has been bothering me for some time is why frame this thing especially on Paradiso. And why use the boat theory when it was verifiable that the boat didn't exist anymore? It would have been easier to just invent something else. Or maybe since the boat didn't exist anymore, and they could play with the timeline, then it was easier to make sure no evidence of the absence of evidence could be uncovered. Anyway it bothers me. On the top of my head, I would have chosen something more plausible.