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

New Posts

Hi Sweetluv,

My concerns about this incident have come over time and with more and more evidence to fill in the pieces.

Joan travelled alone. Only a very few people can be verified to know where Joan would be. Authorities were involved in interviews at Logan the 1st week of December 1981, including Jack McEwen. That is verified in police records. George and Eleanor were also up in Boston at that time.

Joan was very familiar with Logan. I know from many reports that Joan had collected her suitcase. She would not be reporting missing luggage. She would not need to ask about ground transportation or even where the bathroom was. The person behind the counter would have had to have been someone credentialled to be behind a counter. That would narrow it to an employee, security or law enforcement.

Joan was not reported missing until very late at night on December 1, 1981. The article appeared in the Newark Star Ledger on December 5, 1981. The individual who saw her talking to a man behind the counter was identified. It did not make the news in Boston. Reports began appearing in Boston after Joan's purse and wallet were recovered on December 2, 1981. The first person contacted about Joan's wallet was George Webster, not the police.

The Websters sent news clippings almost every day. This was never among them. I knew nothing about this until I started digging into Joan's case. That is very upsetting to me. First, Joan had just been reported missing. Loving parents would be all over any possible lead. Second, Jack McEwen, the ITT liaison with George Webster, dismissed it and the lead was suppressed. Again, this is all documented in police reports.

Then the police hand delivered the eyewitness lead and composite to Eleanor Webster. This lead was suppressed by the authorities and the Websters. Again, I knew nothing about the cabbie lead and composite until I started to recover documents. All of this was in December 1981 in the first critical days for a missing person.

Knowing all that I know now, I believe this was related to Joan's disappearance. Why hide these facts otherwise? Using some deductive reasoning, the man behind the counter might have been letting Joan know someone was going to meet up with her. What happened next, Joan went out and engaged the cab, her suitcase was loaded in the trunk, The man catches up with her, but she does not seem surprised. She announces the man is with her. The man gets into a verbal exchange with the cabbie, probably a ruse. He then turns to Joan and says "we" don't want to take this cab, and maneuvers Joan to the blue car. Joan disappeared.

The man that met up with Joan in the cab line is the person responsible for her disappearance and murder. He did not act alone. Someone was driving the blue car and knew to be there. The man behind the counter is possibly a third individual involved.
 
Hi Eve. I came across this thread last night and after reading a few of your posts I just had to read this thread from page one to now. I have to say, your determination and incredible ability to keep track of everything involved has not wavered since page one. It is inspiring to read, each post pours not only with your dedication to Joan but also in revealing the truth and I absolutely commend you on it. It cannot be an easy thing to do, especially for such a long time.

After reading all the posts I don't feel like I have much new to add, except the agreement that the swapping of the cab and of course the bearded man is KEY. Going from your descriptions of Joan and her lifestyle, I doubt the bearded man was someone she may have been in a secret romantic relationship with. It just doesn't seem to be the case here and does not align again with her busy lifestyle and what she wanted from life at that time. I wonder whether it may have been someone she knew in terms of an associate of her parents. That way it was someone she recognised and therefore not only trusted to a level of being comfortable sharing a cab with them but also seemed to follow their lead in an authoritative way. I think I read, sorry I may be mistaken, that George would do the airport pick ups, maybe it was a case of "I can't come and get you but such and such can..." Any thoughts on this?

I hope you're well Eve and I hope you are managing to take care of yourself amongst all this work you are doing for justice for Joan.
 
Also, I wonder whether it might be worth trying to submit Joan's case to Kendallrae on Youtube. She has a massive following and a lot of her recent content has been about exposing corruption and mishandling of cases by law officials. She regularly does videos with victim's families too. Just something to consider.
Linking the google form below for anyone who might want to submit Joan's case, of course if you're happy with that Eve.

docs.google.com

General Case Suggestions

This form is open to anyone who has suggestions on specific cases you would like to see Kendall Rae cover. NOTE: If you are someone with a PERSONAL CONNECTION to a specific case, please fill out a Victim Advocate Contact Form: https://forms.gle/ysjFLesK7oauoKrh6
docs.google.com docs.google.com
 
Hi Moonstrawbs,

Thank you for you posts. When you go through a tragedy of a missing family member, later learned to be murdered, you need information to cope. It is a horrible ordeal that is hard to describe. Reliving the case and learning that I was not given truthful answers only compounds the grief. At different points when I discovered new information, I could not even get out of bed. I sobbed, sometimes uncontrollably. For a rogue prosecutor and law enforcement to fabricate a story devalued Joan. These are the people we are supposed to trust to help find justice. They devalued Joan.

To learn the family had information they did not share is frightening. It's one thing not to know and be misled, but the Websters were not. George and Eleanor had the eyewitness lead in December 1981. They communicated with the DOJ during the bankruptcy fraud case that affirmed the boat did not exist when Joan disappeared. To me, those are not just red flags, those pieces clearly indicate to me that the family did not want people to look in their closet, and not want people to know what really happened to Joan. That leaves people very vulnerable.

Thank you for the suggested link. I will check it out.
 
Thank you Sweetluv, and everyone for remembering Joan. I remembered Joan on the 42nd anniversary of her loss by giving an interview with Doug Llewelyn. Some of you may remember him from Court TV. As a result of that interview, I was contacted by a network producer. Planning is going on right now to bring more national exposure for Joan's case.

I honestly broke down and cried after that call. Finally, things are starting to move in a bigger way. It takes time to put pieces together, but I will keep you posted.

The custodian is still in violation of MA law by not responding to FOIA requests and appeals. I think it is reasonable to conclude that the custodian is not in possession of documents that would support the bogus boat story authorities and the Websters maintained. In fact, the eyewitness report they did have discredits the scenario that Paradiso murdered Joan. The man that maneuvered Joan to the blue car was much smaller in stature than Paradiso. That man at Logan was the one responsible for what happened to Joan. This is a cover up, then and now.

Here's the interview if you missed it.

CUTV Radio Interview with Doug Llewelyn
 
eve carson said:
Thank you Sweetluv, and everyone for remembering Joan. I remembered Joan on the 42nd anniversary of her loss by giving an interview with Doug Llewelyn. Some of you may remember him from Court TV. As a result of that interview, I was contacted by a network producer. Planning is going on right now to bring more national exposure for Joan's case.

I honestly broke down and cried after that call. Finally, things are starting to move in a bigger way. It takes time to put pieces together, but I will keep you posted.

The custodian is still in violation of MA law by not responding to FOIA requests and appeals. I think it is reasonable to conclude that the custodian is not in possession of documents that would support the bogus boat story authorities and the Websters maintained. In fact, the eyewitness report they did have discredits the scenario that Paradiso murdered Joan. The man that maneuvered Joan to the blue car was much smaller in stature than Paradiso. That man at Logan was the one responsible for what happened to Joan. This is a cover up, then and now.

Here's the interview if you missed it.

CUTV Radio Interview with Doug Llewelyn
Click to expand...
Thank you for sharing, Eve -- it was a great interview, very clear and presented well, and I appreciated hearing it in your voice.
 
This article caught my attention. MSN

Carol Stuart was murdered in Boston in 1989. Her husband alleged a black man shot him and his pregnant wife in an attempted carjacking. The police and Suffolk County (Tim Burke's office) aggressively accused a suspect. The husband's brother eventually came forward and identified the husband as the offender. The husband spoke with his attorney and then went out and committed suicide.

I've mentioned this case before. The husband's attorney was John Dawley. Dawley refused to disclose his conversation with Carol Stuart's husband, an act of compassion to help Carol Stuart's family have some closure. Dawley cited ethics, attorney client privilege, as his reason for his silence. His former client was dead.

If you go back a few posts, I added audio clips of my meeting with John Dawley on May 1, 2017. John Dawley joined the Essex County DA Office, the custodian of Joan's case. During that meeting, Dawley said he would not renounce the Paradiso boat theory. That would allow for a proper investigation to get to the bottom of Joan's murder. He stated he knew Tim Burke and did not want to focus on him. Unfortunately, that's exactly what needs to happen to resolve this case. He said he could not do that and cited ethics.

If you follow cases, honest authorities reject false or disproven theories all the time. The Boston mayor's apology emphasizes that. This circumstance also emphasizes just how damaging false accusations can be. It has a domino effect.

Authorities in Boston have yet to be honest and accountable for Joan.

I hope everyone has a very blessed holiday. Cherish the time you have with family and friends.
 
Thank you everyone. I have not posted in a while, but I have not been idle.

First, Let me share a link for an upcoming interview on Close Up TV and Radio. This will be a radio interview with host Jim Masters. It will be two part: Wednesday, March 13, 2024, and the second on Wednesday, March 20, 2024, bath at 7p.m. EST. Details can be found on the link below. It is a live broadcast if anyone is able to listen. After the program, I will get a link to post.

I also did an extensive on camera interview with them and am currently waiting for the film editor finishing the project.

Interview with Close Up TV and Radio

More news to come soon
 
Eve, I bought your book and am about halfway through, just starting chapter 10. Your writing is so clear and concise, it's very well done!
 
I did an interview with retired homicide detective Steve DeBoard on April 6, 2024. You will note in the interview, I am in the process of setting up a foundation, Victims of Injustice Speak, VOIS (voice). I will provide information on this once we get approval. I recently held our first meeting with board members and papers have been filed. I was advised the approval process can take two months or more. I'm learning as I go and welcome any thoughts or guidance anyone would like to share.

Running Toward Evil Podcast

I am often asked if the Websters colluded with authorities to promote a false story about Joan's murder. There are two things, perhaps three, that stand out to me.

First, Tim Burke and Eleanor Webster made similar allegations alleging that a "girlfriend" was in possession of an item of Joan's jewelry. In an FBI report dated October 4, 1983, Burke told agents that a woman who dated Paradiso infrequently was photographed wearing a bracelet identical to Joan's. Joan's missing bracelet was a one-of-a-kind gold charm bracelet. Current authorities have not produced that photo, but it is referenced in FBI records. The woman, Charlene Bullerwell's testimony debunks that suggestion.

After Joan's remains surfaced in 1990, a family member asked Eleanor why she believed Paradiso was still the guilty party for Joan's murder. She responded that Paradiso's girlfriend had one of Joan's ring. There was a generic ring found on Joan's skeletal remains. The ring I recognize that was missing was her signet ring. The bracelet and the signet ring were both identifiable items of Joan's.

The two stories are too similar to have been a coincidence. Documents revealed authorities were trying to tag Paradiso as someone who took jewelry from his victims. That was not the case in the Iannuzzi murder he was convicted for, nor any of the other victims Burke tried to pile on. Evidence supports Iannuzzi was a wrongful conviction. If anyone associated with Paradiso was in possession of anything belonging to Joan, this would have been a slam dunk prosecution. The Websters were smart people to fall for such a story.

The second concern is Burke's indication that he met with the Webster's in 2005. In a Boston Herald article on November 25, 2006, Burke announced writing his book after that meeting and the Webster's are quoted supporting the tome. What loving parent of a murdered child supports a false narrative?

Maybe a final straw are the Webster comments posted on two different sites. Eleanor wrote a piece posted on the murder wall at POMC, Parents of Murdered Children. It's on panel 1 if you want to read it. Eleanor claimed there was scanty evidence as the reason they did not go after Paradiso for Joan's murder. In truth, there were efforts to get Robert Bond to testify in a case, but efforts stopped abruptly after Joan's remains surfaced. In fact, there is no evidence that I can find that connects Joan to Paradiso in any way. And The Websters and authorities were in possession of exculpatory evidence favoring Paradiso's innocence. An abbreviated version of Eleanor's "tribute" was posted on Garden of Peace in Boston which has been folded into the MA GOV website. In both pieces, the Websters claim that they are in agreement with the authorities that Paradiso murdered Joan. That small circle consisted of Tim Burke, Andrew Palombo, Carmen Tammaro, George and Eleanor Webster.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

DNASolves

Who is Escambia County John Doe (1989)?

Members online

... and 80 more.
Total: 3,238 (members: 81, guests: 3,157)

Online statistics

Members online
81
Guests online
3,157
Total visitors
3,238
Totals may include hidden visitors.

Forum statistics

Threads
592,492
Messages
17,969,828
Members
228,789
Latest member
Soccergirl500
Back
Top