MA MA - Joan Risch, 30, Lincoln, 24 Oct 1961

bliveng1 said:

I think the barkers did not want to move and were able to work out a deal. Attached is a 1976 deed that shows the transfer of the property to the government, and lays out conditions for the barkers to continue to live at the house. They must have really liked the house!

Click to expand...

dogperson said:

The people who saw a woman who might have been Joan walking beside the road said she had a coat on. I was thinking maybe the coat hanger found on the car was the hanger the coat had been on. She could have grabbed the coat, hanger and all, as she came out of the house, putting it on in the driveway.
I truly believe she was confused and disoriented, maybe even having trouble keeping her balance. That would explain the blood smears near the rear of the car. Do we know whether any blood was on the coat hanger? This thread is so long I can't find whether that has been discussed.

Click to expand...

bliveng1 said:

I did not see the hanger discussed in any of the police documents or articles, so we dont know if there was blood on it. I think either:
A. like you said, Joan put it their on her way out.
B. The police or someone else was going to use it to get into the locked car. Maybe the police wanted to look in the car, but didnt want to wait for martin to get back.

Click to expand...

jgfitzge said:

Pretty interesting, a 1940 house declared a historical landmark. I guess since my house was built during the JFK administration I am out of luck OK, for those folks in the in the tax field, if you are an owner of a house declared a historical landmark isn't there favorable tax advantages? Could the Barkers still be owners? You found a street number attached to the home. In all references to the homes on Old Bedford Rd I never saw a street number mentioned. I was always under the impression the Barker home was a few houses up. On the Risch house, I thought the actual structure was moved. Now some reports say "South Lincoln", other say Lexington.

I know the area fairly well, live in the Boston area and drive through the area often and always felt Joan walked to 2A but either voluntarily or involuntarily got into a car and ended further up 128.

Click to expand...

ChuckMaureen said:

bbm



It is a safe assumption LE would not 'alter' a crime scene before completing photographic evidence. If that photo of the vehicle is the only visual evidence (at least from that angle) then we should assume the hanger / location were found as-is.

Click to expand...

Stella said:

About the coat hanger located on top of Joan's car; it looks to be in perfect condition. Had it been used for an abortion, it would have been unwound and shaped like a shoe horn. If it had been used to jimmy the car open, again it would have been unwound and straightened with a little loop at one end to grab ahold of the lock button to pull it up to the unlocked position.

Click to expand...

Stella said:

About the coat hanger located on top of Joan's car; it looks to be in perfect condition. Had it been used for an abortion, it would have been unwound and shaped like a shoe horn. If it had been used to jimmy the car open, again it would have been unwound and straightened with a little loop at one end to grab ahold of the lock button to pull it up to the unlocked position.

Click to expand...

bliveng1 said:

The last sighting of joan was on the edge of the road on route 128 (today its 95) by trapelo rd. If you google map this, you will see that is right beside the cambridge reservoir. One of the FBI docs(p.28) says that police have "divers searching nearby reservoir." If she fell in, maybe the divers were just unable to find her. Im not sure what the success rate is of finding a person after they go into a large body of water.

Click to expand...

jgfitzge said:

Her being disoriented and falling into the reservoir is one of the unfortunate outcomes I hold further up the possibility chain for me. The main reason is the sighting of her stumbling along and then...gone. I am not sure of the depth. I know they thought of it and they did search it. But, as you mentioned,
am not sure of the success rate when one dives into a reservoir to find a body, especially in 1961.

Click to expand...

jgfitzge said:

Pretty interesting, a 1940 house declared a historical landmark. I guess since my house was built during the JFK administration I am out of luck OK, for those folks in the in the tax field, if you are an owner of a house declared a historical landmark isn't there favorable tax advantages? Could the Barkers still be owners? You found a street number attached to the home. In all references to the homes on Old Bedford Rd I never saw a street number mentioned. I was always under the impression the Barker home was a few houses up. On the Risch house, I thought the actual structure was moved. Now some reports say "South Lincoln", other say Lexington.

I know the area fairly well, live in the Boston area and drive through the area often and always felt Joan walked to 2A but either voluntarily or involuntarily got into a car and ended further up 128.

Click to expand...

Skigirl said:

My house is a national historic landmark house and a contributing structure in a historic district. It was built in the 1930s. Basically, any house that is 50 years or older is old enough to qualify (and houses newer than that do not qualify), but not every house that's at least 50 years old will qualify. It has to be an example of some sort of archtecture, typical for its kind, be part of a historically significant neighborhood, etc.

There are no tax advantages at the federal level, but many states (including mine) do have some tax breaks for restoration projects and the like. Right now, I can deduct 10% of the costs of an exterior restoration project that I did. The project had to be approved by the state to qualify, and they had some say over what I did (I removed vinyl siding and restored the original siding underneath, and had had real shutters built and hung and a few miscellaneous things to bring the house closer to its original appearance).

Click to expand...

Recent past

​

In American historic preservation, the fifty-year rule is the generally held belief that a property cannot be listed in the National Register of Historic Places unless it is at least fifty years old.[SUP][31][/SUP] Actually, this rule is not a hard rule at all; it is an exception to the National Register's criteria for evaluation. As stated by John H. Sprinkle, Jr., Deputy Director of the Federal Preservation Institute, "this 'rule' is only an exception to the criteria that shape listings within the National Register of Historic Places. Of the eight 'exceptions' [or criteria considerations], Consideration G, for properties that have achieved significance within the past fifty years, is probably the best-known, yet also misunderstood preservation principle in America."[SUP][32][/SUP]
With each passing year, a new group of resources crosses the fifty-year threshold, that were before considered "too recent" for listing on the National Register of Historic Places (unless they were exceptionally significant). The preservation of these "underage" resources has gained increasing attention in recent years.

Click to expand...

Criteria

For a property to be eligible for the National Register, it must meet at least one of the four National Register main criteria.[SUP][23][/SUP] Information about architectural styles, association with various aspects of social history and commerce, and ownership are all integral parts of the nomination. Each nomination contains a narrative section that provides a detailed physical description of the property and justifies why it is significant historically with regard either to local, state, or national history. The four National Register of Historic Places criteria are the following.

• Criterion A, "Event," the property must make a contribution to the major pattern of American history.
• Criterion B, "Person," is associated with significant people of the American past.
• Criterion C, "Design/Construction," concerns the distinctive characteristics of the building by its architecture and construction, including having great artistic value or being the work of a master.
• Criterion D, "Information potential," is satisfied if the property has yielded or may be likely to yield information important to prehistory or history.[SUP][21][/SUP]

The criteria are applied differently for different types of properties; for instance, maritime properties have application guidelines different from those of buildings.

Click to expand...

Sutton said:

Snipped. The PDF at this link ^^ is a must read. It is 57 pages, of which about 40 are the original police logs and photos, and excellent newspaper articles. The other 17ish pages seem...misplaced. How are they are related, other than by geography?

The compiler of the PDF did a good job, and he presents the first part of how he thinks the events played out near the end of the document. It is the only thing I've ever read that makes sense.

Telephone

Handle = part you hold in your hand, includes the mouth and ear pieces

Cradle = part attached to the wall, where the dials are, where the handle sits when not in use

Cord = spiral cord that attaches handle to cradle

The telephone was the type that was affixed to a wall, not the kind that sits on a table. The cord and handle had been detached from the cradle.

I found pics online that show some older phones with the 'quick connect' cords and some with permanently attached cords.

Did someone just disconnect the cord from the cradle? Or did they grab the cord and yank hard to rip the wires from the cradle?

A small trash pail (size of a bathroom trash can) had been moved to the middle of the kitchen floor. It was full and the handle of the phone was hung on the rim of the can. Newspaper reports said the mouth piece, the spiral cord, and the cradle portion (dials) all had blood on them.

The whiskey bottle and beer in the trash can is explained by Jane's husband--They purchased beer that weekend when they had company, and he made himself and Jane a drink the previous evening, finished the last of the whisky.

View attachment 85405

Click to expand...