More mail from the infamous Free Lisa Lambert.com

fauxreal · Senior Member

RE: More mail from the infamous Free Lisa Lambert.com

bobula · Veteran Member

RE: More mail from the infamous Free Lisa Lambert.

bobula · Veteran Member

RE: More mail from the infamous Free Lisa Lambert.com

fauxreal · Senior Member

As far as the P.C.R.A. hearing in 1994, the first one handled by Jack Keneff and heard before Judge Stengel, Lisa confirmed this by phone yesterday and told me where to look in the transcripts where Donald Totaro brought up an issue about testimony from that hearing. I found that section. It's an on-record, in chambers discussion. Totaro was assisting District Attorney Madenspacher at the Habeus Hearing.

Mr. Totaro: I can't speak for Mr. Kenneff. I did not do the P.C.R.A. for Ms. Lambert in 1994, he did. All I can tell the Court is, I read and reviewed the transcript from the P.C.R.A. hearing at which Mr. Jeffries testified and he testified with regard to an interview that he had with the parents. So what I'm telling you today, I got from reviewing the transcript of the P.C.R.A. hearing with regard to Mr. Jeffries. With regard to that hearing and it's ineffectiveness, our position would be that it was alleged that Shirk was ineffective for failing to call character witnesses for Ms. Lambert.

Dalzell: But that issue is not before me now. In Phase 1, we're only talking about actual innocence and prosecutorial misconduct.

Selene, this is testimony from the Federal Hearing, and you can see that in their own words here, Lancaster prosecutors admit that there was a P.C.R.A. hearing for Lisa Lambert in 1994. I knew there was because Rainville allowed me to read them myself. I think the reason you thought there wasn't one is because Lancaster's finest have tried to bury that as well.

The first P.C.R.A. hearing was handled by Kenneff, that is to say he presented the arguments, and it was heard by Judge Stengel. Naturally, it was quite short and no relief was offered Lisa Lambert. None of the altered documents, missing evidence, perjured testimony, was admitted and/or challenged.

Not until 1997 in Dalzell's courtroom. After wide discovery was granted to Lisa's attorneys.

The above testimony by Donald Totaro is unedited and taken from Monday April 7th , 1997, the fifth day of testimony.

hjj

fauxreal · Senior Member

Bobula, when I lived in Lancaster, I made many friends there who assisted me in trying to understand what in the heck was going on down at the Courthouse. They all spoke of the Mennonite Mafia that controls the show there. Naturally, they aren't all Mennonites. The majority of them are though, and it's common knowlege in Lancaster. The women who work in the office where one goes to gain access to tax-payer funded transcripts from criminal trials particularly, are without a doubt the rudest bunch of broads, I have ever encountered anywhere. When I would tell one of my Lancaster friends about how impossible it was to get any cooperation about virtually anything concerning a trial that was held there, they not only refuse you, they yell at you! My friends would laugh and say, "Oh, yeah, those Mennonite bitches down at the Courthouse". Their words not mine. I heartily agreed. At the time I didn't know they were Mennonites. I certainly hope you aren't that rude.

Clearly, there are all kinds of Mennonites in Lancaster. They grow fabulous produce, particularly tomatoes. Then there are the black-bumper Mennonites. I don't have a clue what kind of Mennonite you are......but the term Mennonite Mafia is truly not new to you, and you surely know exactly what it means. The wealthy , politically connected, and in positions of higher authority.....Mennonites.

As for Christy Mirack's mother. I researched that case as thoroughly as I could. Her mother at that time lived outside the county. She was weary of how the police were handling her daughter's murder. They literally told her to stop bugging them. As for the sperm collection.

Do you really think the all-powerful Robin Weaver is going to give a sperm sample? When Tina Rainville had him on the stand, she referred to his file. The man is so out of control, he was ordered by an Lancaster Judge to get mandatory psychological counseling. He admitted he never did. He was never reprimanded, never followed through on a court order, and this guy is going to give a sperm sample. If he did, I think, just my opinion of course, that the Mirack murder might be solved. I read all the articles from the day her body was found and all the way through the very short period they called an "investigation". I think it was about two weeks.

Then, it was just no longer talked about in the newspapers. It comes up as a newstory every few years because people are still quite disturbed that nobody has ever been charged.

I think it's obvious why. I don't care if you agree with me or not. When I spoke with some of Christy's other relatives, referred to me by her mother, they all agreed that the police did not want to discuss the case with them anymore....and actually were getting irritated with all the questions about why nothing was being done....."we have no leads, end of story". It was depressing.

Robin Weaver has beaten the crap out of numerous suspects. One woman Denise Carbone was in Lancaster County prison on an undisclosed charge. He dragged her by the hair, punched her about the body....in front of numerous witnesses. The retarded man who had merely wandered away from his home, somehow irritated the short-tempered Weaver. He was beaten so badly by him he had to be admitted to the hospital. The family sued. That's when Weaver was ordered to undergo counseling. He never bothered. If you think that man is going to give a sperm sample, you are terribly misinformed about Robin Weaver.

As to all the missing/murdered children. Lancaster has an extraordinarily large number of them.

Why, I don't know. And I never asserted that there was some sort of conspiracy, as you suggest, I wish I knew why there are so many. I have no idea. But it is truly disturbing.

It's good news that Christina Colon's boyfriend or husband has been charged. I read a few weeks ago that was not the case. Many people in Lancaster were disturbed about her horrific death.

I know there are lots of wonderful Mennonite people. They come from all walks of life in Lancaster. Those that operate the courthouse are an extremely powerful group. What is it that you do for a living in Lancaster, if you don't mind my asking?

I'm searching for the Vinnie Orsi discussion from Dalzell's courtroom. Vinnie Orsi was the neighbor whose phone was used to call police, when Christy's boss found her battered, bruised body. He became concerned when she hadn't shown up for work that day.

hjj

fauxreal · Senior Member

Since I'm on the subject of the odious Robin Weaver, here is some of his testimony from the Habeus Hearing. Rainville is asking the questions.

Q. Officer Fassnacht got to the scene of the Show murder before you. Is that right?

A. Yes.

Q. All Right.

A. Just seconds.

Q. And then sometime later, Detective Savage arrived at the scene. Is that right?

A. Yes.

Q. And the first thing that Detective Savage did when he got to the scene, was dismiss Officer Fassnacht, and send him home?

A. I'm sorry. Did you say the first thing he did?

Q. Yes.

A. I don't think it was the first thing, but I don't exactly know when he did that.

Q.Your report that we started off with says: "This officer was dispatched", and that is not a true statement, is that right?

A. (pause, no response). I think it is, yes.

Q. Do you think that the dispatch records are wrong?

A. I don't know why my name doesn't appear. I was there. I went to the scene. I cleared the scene. I'm the one that received the numbers that you see at the top of the report for the incident. I cannot explain why my name is not on the dispatch list.

Q. You do know that Detective Savage dismissed Officer Fassnacht from the scene.

A. Yes.

Q. After he dismissed Officer Fassnacht from the scene, Detective Savage put you in charge of securing the crime scene. Is that right?

A. Yes.

Q. Now, the Christy Mirack murder happened a year later, and again you're the second officer on the scene. Is that correct?

A. Yes.

Q. And again, when Detective Savage arrives on the scene, he dismisses Officer No.1. Is that right?

A. Officer No. 1?

Q. The first officer on the scene.

A. I don't know.

Q. And in the Christy Mirack murder, Detective Savage put you again in charge of all the evidence, is that right?

A. Yes.

Dalzell: Spell that for the record.

Q. M-i-r-a-c-k-..

Q. And also you weren't dispatched to the Christy Mirack murder either, you just showed up?

A. I don't remember the details of that dispatch.

Q. And Christy Mirack just for the Court's information, was raped and murdered. Is that right?

A. To my knowledge, yes.

Q. I'd like to show you P-57. This is the crime scene sign-in-sheet for the Show murder. You were at the Show murder crime scene from 7:45 a.m. until 4:14 in the afternoon. Is that right?

A. I beleive so. I'd have to look at my reports.

Q. Well, do you recall signing this Exhibit P- 57 and putting those times down?

A. Yes, I did that.

Q. Dalzell: Is that your signature where it says sign in and sign out?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. And you were at the crime scene all day, except for when you needed to go outside and make a phone call, is that right?

A. I didn't make a phone call. I went to my car once to make a radio call.

Q. I'd like to show you P-47. This is again a report prepared by you. Is that right, sir?

A. Possibly, I can't see the bottom.

Q. Yes, the bottom appears to be cut off.

A. It looks like a 14 in the corner. That would be my Badge number.

Q. And this is your name up here. Is that right?

A. Yes.

Q. And that's where you put your name when you prepare a report. Is that right?

A. That block is for the investigating officer. It might not be the same as the officer who prepared the record. The block at the bottom, it says investigating officer's signature. That's the one who prepared the report.

Q. And this report, you note that the call to 911 was made by Thomas Chapman. Is that right?

A. That's what I have, yes.

Q. And you understand that to be true when you put it in your report. Is that right?

A. Yes.

Q. Now, you didn't interview Hazel Show that morning, is that right?

A. No.

Q. She wasn't interviewed until Det. Savage got there?

A. That's correct. I spoke to her, but I didn't conduct the interview.

Q. And you heard Hazel Show yell that it was a set-up and Michelle did it, but you never heard her say that Laurie spoke, before Detective Savage got there.

A. In those exact words?

Dalzell: That, I believe is a Yes or No question. Paul, read it back again please.

A. I don't remember.

Q. So as far as you remember, Hazel Show did not tell you that Laurie had spoken the words "Michelle did it" prior to Detective Savage's arrival on the scene?

A. As far as I remember, she could have or she may not have.

Q. You have no idea one way or the other?

A. I can't remember that specifically, no.

Q. Now, that would have been an important thing for you to put in your Police Report, would it not?

A. What she said?

Q. If she had told you that her daughter had made a dying declaration identifying the killer, that would have been an important thing for you to put in your Police Report?

A. Yes.

Q. So, let's look at your Police Report and see if you put it there. P-48. This is Christmas Day 1991. The second page. Do you see where you wrote: "Hazel Show was yelling "it was a set-up and Michelle did it".

A. Yes.

Q. Let's look at your final report, P-47 prepared by you on January 10th 1992. (almost three weeks after the date of the murder).

Let's go to to the second page. You write: "This officer overheard Hazel Show yell: It was a setup and Michelle did it. Hazel Show also stated: Brad was here. Brad seen it. (Brad Heisler, Laurie Show's boyfriend at the time). So, in your final report you still make no reference to Hazel Show allegedly saying that Laurie Show had spoken.

A. No. I didn't make a reference to it.

Q. And, again, you didn't make a reference to it because Hazel Show never told you that.

A. I don't know for sure.

Dalzell: Is it your testimony that if Hazel Show had told you about a Dying Declaration, that you would not have put it down in that report?

A. Could you repeat that?

Dalzell: Yeah, I'll repeat it. Is it your testimony that if Hazel Show said to you that "my daughter, Laurie said, Michelle did it", that you would not have put it in that report? Is that your testimony?

A. No.

Q. So the fact that you don't make reference to a Dying Declaration, is some evidence that she didn't tell you that. Correct?

A. You can infer that, yes sir.

Q. Oh. I could infer it. Could I infer anything else from that?

A. I don't remember if she said that specifically or not.

Robin Weaver is arrogant, abusive, clearly in control of crime scenes when it suits him and as long as he is in that powerful position, the Christy Mirack murder will no be solved. He and Savage operate as quite an effective team. Savage is now a District Court Judge in Lancaster.

hjj

fauxreal · Senior Member

I had to laugh at you suggestion that I talk to some of the Mennonite women down at the Courthouse, to find out for myself about their culture.....to paraphrase what you said....

I wouldn't spend five minutes with any of them I met, except for the Records Custodian's secretary....she was truly nice and wanted to satisfy my simple request on a particular day.

As I did quite often, one day I rode my bike down to the Courthouse and checked to see what was going on that day. This day, there were several criminal trials taking place. One, the John Golden murder trial. And several others. They, by law, have to list them near the elevator doors on the first floor. I was going to write them down in order of occurance, when the security guard suggested I just go up to the records office and ask for a Xerox copy of that day's scheduled proceedings. I had already been treated like pond scum up there more than once but I was asking for the all sacred UNEDITED transcripts. I find it amusing that all you people can post from any Lancaster trials or hearings, meaning those that took place there, are very selective and biased segments.

I figured this would be pretty easy, just getting a copy of what was already on the poster board downstairs.

Well, I was wrong. I think by now, the Queen Bee up there had a clue who I was, but she never even looked up from her desk when I very politely asked her secretary for a copy of today's scheduled proceedings.

The secretary started to fulfill my request, but her boss stopped her in her tracks. And again, she did not look up from her desk. It was so completely strange I never forgot it. She became furious, and said, "No! Today's trials are none of her damn business, so tell her to just leave!'.

I replied to her, "Well, ma'am, ma'am?.....trying to get her attention.....and she finally looked up. "No need to get angry about it, after all, it's posted right here in your office, and down below for public viewing as required by law". You don't need to give me a copy, I have a pen right here in my purse, and plenty of time. I will write the various cases on the agenda myself.

I then proceeded to do just that. The poor secretary gave me a look like, "Man, if you only knew what it's like to work for this woman".

I proceeded to write everything down, and the Queen Bee came unglued. "Oh for Christ's sakes, she bellowed, "just give her the damn copy and get her out of here!"......

I couldn't help asking her how she got so mean. She just kept busy with something on her desk and the secretary made my copy and smiled at me as I walked out of the office.

Most definitely the nicest Mennonites I ever met in Lancaster....were at the Central Market twice a week when you could buy the most delectable spinach, tomatoes, eggs, vanilla milk, and other assorted breads and goods from these friendly wonderful people.

The Mennonites who own and run Puppy Mills in Lancaster of which there are many, are also not my favorite bunch. The Amish also make their money this way. Not all of them, of course, but your portrayal of these people as all good, all innocent, just planting flowers and pulling the kids in a red wagon, or what have you, is a little misguided. Very misguided.

The Amish and ex-Amish are into all kinds of multi-million dollar enterprises. There are very few child labor laws enforced, and the kids who work the sawmill machinery when making furniture for which the Amish are famous, including custom kitchens for Hollywood Heavyweights, get their fingers cut off, get their legs and arms cut open......the guy who lived next door to me in my apartment on West End Ave. near the Manor Shopping Center, worked at one of the local hospitals, I won't say which one......told me of endless kids coming in with severe injuries...Amish kids who worked their butts off after school, either plowing or working with very dangerous machinery.

hjj

itsybitsy · Senior Member

Fauxreal, Did you recieve my email response to you? I have been waiting . Now Heather if you are going to be the Judge , Jury and such you need fo recieve facts that "your supposed sources" are misleading you, There are certain people you spoke with that did NOT know Gerri. Don't missunderstand me here we need as much supporters and God knows all the help we can get . But I will tell you one more time .. Gerri Faye Butts death was not a Meth overdose or at a meth cooks house . She was in her own home , kids bathed, and dressed for bed as were the kids. She was in her sleeping clothes so therefore she was most probably asleep also. Keep listening to Mr. Jones and you will be laughed off the internet. Yes the man has every right in the world to be angry but he needs to focus his anger , channel it to do something constructive. You show me the key that Samuel Rich holds that shows him and walraven having anything to do with her and her daughters being involved with walraven ... I won't say for sure that Mr. walraven wasn't doing some dirty dealings , because that dude got away with his little Meth lab for a long time. Mr. Jones ' son happened to be at the wrong place wrong time . Was he snitchin? Did Sam think he was? there is no telling but none of it makes it right .

THE BUTTS CASE IS ABOUT A GIRLFRIEND AND BOYFRIEND THAT GOT VOLITILE WITHIN A MATTER OF MOMENTS. I Please do email me at itsybitsy1@hotmail.com or itsybitsy632000@yahoo.com .

Thanks for your time,

God Bless

Donna

-- Edited by itsybitsy at 20:59, 2004-10-13

fauxreal · Senior Member

Here's a particularly gruesome bit of testimony elicited from Rainville from the odious Robin Weaver.

They are talking about the wonderful and thorugh investigation done by mostly Weaver, Savage and John Bowman. The morning of the murder.

Rainville is asking the questions. Dalzell also, when it becomes so incredulous, he feels it necessary to inquire further. Something you won't find Stengel doing. I would love to see how his Federal cases are going since being appointed by Dubya, this year.

Q. Then at 9:43, State Trooper Reeves placed the victim's hands and feet into bags, is that right?

A. Yes.

Q. And then at 9:49 State Trooper Reeves and the Coroner Barry Walp, bagged the victim's body, do you see that?

A. Yes.

Q. So at 9:53 that morning, four minutes later, the victim's bagged body was removed from the bedroom and placed in the dining room?

A. Yes.

Q. And it was after that point that you examined and collected the physical evidence in the dining room?

A. Yes.

Q. And it was after that point that you examined and collected the physical evidence in the bedroom?

A. Yes.

Q. That was from 10:18 in the morning until 11:20?

A. Yes. I think there was three articles that were collected at a period later in that day. I think.

Q. Now, I find it odd, Officer, that hours after the victim is placed in a bag at 11:41 you make a detailed inspection of the body. Isn't that what your report says?

A. Yes.

Q. So is that when you took the victim out of the body bag and brought her back into the crime scene to rearrange the evidence?

A. No.

A. I could have taken notes about the stab wounds in her back when she was picked up and moved, I could have done it then. I might have examined them when she was in the bag. The bag was open.

Q. It was a zip bag?

A. I believe so.

Q. Was she on her back in the bag?

A. Yes.

Q. So if you unzip the bag, you could examine the wounds on her front, is that right?

A. Or her back. I could have lifted her up.

Q. You could lift her within the bag and flip her over in the bag, is that your testimony?

A. I could have lifted her up, yes.

Q. Is this what you did or is this what you are wishing you did?

A. I am not sure when exactly I examined the stab wounds in her back. I did make an examination while her body was in the dining room, that's true and correct.

Q. And then, after that is when Trooper Suber videotapes the crime scene?

A. Yes.

Q. So, theoretically then,when Trooper Suber does the videotape, you should not hear someone taking photographs of the body?

A. I don't know.

Q. Well, doesn't your report say that the photographs had been taken between 9 and 10 A.M? That morning?

A. Yes. Trooper Suber took photographs at that time.

Q. And it is some 7 or 8 hours later when he does the videotape of the crime scene, is that right?

A. Correct.

Q. So, therefore, you should not hear in the videotape someone taking photographs of the body?

A. I don't know.

Q. Videotape being played in Courtroom at this time.

Dalzell: Your attention is being called to the videotape being played, Mr. Weaver.

Q. Is this the crime scene video that you recall?

A. I don't recall. I don't know if I have ever seen it.

Dalzell: What are we looking at here, Mr. Weaver?

A. The back of the condo.

Q. I would like the record to reflect the camera zooms in, you can hear sounds that appear to be coming from the condo. (videotape continued to be played)

Dalzell: You obviously have studied this carefully. What do they say? I heard "Smile".

Rainville: "Smile", "Say cheese", then snickering.

Dalzell: Then snickering.

Rainville: Yes, sir.

Did you recognize the voice that said, "Smile, say cheese?".

A. No, I did not.

Q. Do you have any explanation for why you hear someone saying, "Smile, say cheese", at the time the crime scene video is being filmed?

A. I have no explanation. I don't know who it is.

Dalzell: Wasn't there something in there also: "Go in there Ernie, he'll take your picture, before the "Smile,say cheese?".

Madenspacher: There was Your Honor. Something to that effect.

Dalzell: Let's play it again. I think it said: "Go in Ernie, he'll take your picture". (video being replayed)

Dalzell: Yes. That's what he says. Voice: "Smile, say cheese".

Rainville to Weaver: Was there anybody named Ernie on the investigation?

A. No. I think it's just onlookers.

Q. Onlookers with a camera?

A. Neighbors, whatever. I don't recognize the voice. I don't know anybody named Ernie.

Dalzell: Neighbors? This was a crime scene. Correct? The Show crime scene?

A. Yes, sir.

Q. You wouldn't just let anybody into a crime scene at this point, would you?

A. It sounded like they were behind the camera. Weren't in the field of view.

Dalzell: Are we done for a moment with the video?

A. Yes, but I will get back to it.

Hey Selene, Hey Kate, does this sound like a even a novice demonstration of "the worst crime in the history of Lancaster County? Is it any wonder, Selene, that you knew nothing about the first P.C.R.A. hearing? Any wonder that the Attorney General's office would like us all to think that this testimony was illegal, which it wasn't, or worse yet, never even happened? It's downright chilling.

Smile, and say cheese? While posing over Laurie Show's dead and wounded body? Neighbors and people walking through the crime scene...onlookers even? What in the hell is he talking about? This was the biggest crime scene in Lancaster County History, to hear Kate talk about it. Did you know they were laughing and taking pictures of one another at this bloody crime scene that day, Kate? If you did, then shame on you for continueing to defend this totally bogus and shocking investigation.

Digest this and I'll come back with some more reasons why I continue vigorously in my defense of not only Lisa Lambert, but Christy Mirack and so many many others.

This isn't the work of amateurs, dear readers. These people are just plain evil. Not the people of Lancaster, but Robin Weaver, Ronald Savage, John Bowman, Trooper Suber, Trooper Reeves, Judge Stengel..........I don't care if he was appointed King of the Jungle.....Federal Judge? Lord have mercy.

hjj

fauxreal · Senior Member

Donna Dear! I did e-mail you back. I told you here and in private, my dear, and I do so admire what you are trying to do. I don't think Geri Butt's death and the death of her two adorable children had anything with her being on drugs, whatsover. I think Kevin Hailey might be working for the Drug Task Force, which means he gets to do the drugs so he can turn others in who are selling the drugs. The Drug Task Forces today are taking in loads of assets. Cars, boats, planes, it's a freakin free for all!

I spoke to Mr. Jones only once, and haven't spoken to him since. He seemed nice enough, and he is more focused understandably on what happened to his son. The Coroner in Cass Co. wanted to say that his son died from a 3 wheeler accident. The autopsy clearly showed it was a drug overdose.

I'm not in discussion with anybody anymore about the Butt's case and have been trying to just read what is available on the internet as on the Jameson site.

I would gladly like to resume discussion about this case as Lisa's is long from being over. I will go now and try to read the transcripts that you spoke about the other night.

Once again, I don't think for a minute that Geri Butts was involved in drugs except for a little marijuana dealing. God, that's a far cry from being a Meth dealer.

Itsy, I'm on your side in this pursuit. I'm going to the Jameson site. Be right back.

Love, Heather J.

fauxreal · Senior Member

Hey Donna, I just read the affadavit......and I can't for the life of me figure out why Kevin Hailey has not been charged for this murder. It totally escapes all logic. His public hairs with Louse sac , were found at the scene.

Unfortunately, Grand Jury proceedings are sealed, always, in every state. It would be wonderful and valuable to be able to read what transpired in those hearings.

I'm wondering just what Kevin Hailey is doing now, for work I mean.

Clearly, there was a dispute about money. The dispute about some land holdings where Geri was the lone holdout, sound completely ludicrous and merely a clever way to divert attention away from Kevin.

Bottom Line: His dad is a deputy Sheriff. He has other relatives high up in law enforcement.

His mother reminds me so much of Jackie Peterson, Scott's mom. Anything her son does is a O.K. Most women aren't deserving of their precious sons.

Most women in their eyes are "whores" and "sluts". Sound crude? It's the truth. When they say the apple doesn't fall far from the tree, they are talking about not just dear old Dad. But mom as well.

Mothers who have been abused in the presense of the son for so many years, by the father, set the tone for what the son thinks about women and how they should be treated.

Add Kevin's Meth use to the picture, and you have a murder just waiting to happen. Kevin Hailey was volatile, challenged by Geri Butts for a miniscule amount of money, but that's not the point. Not to them. These guys don't want to be challenged by any woman, ever.

To make a comparison if I may. Christy Mirack was charmed by the pumped up and rather handsome, but odious Robin Weaver. She wanted to end the relationship because she knew it was going nowhere. He is married. He has children. But that's not enough. Egos as big as Kevin Hailey and Robin Weaver feel a sense of "entitlement", as in the world owes them a living. They are used to feeling priveleged.

Donna, how do you feel about Mike Dupree? He seems to have alot of say as far as the evidence is concerned?

Any feelings about that one way or the other?

hjj

fauxreal · Senior Member

In the meantime, Bobula, I've tried twice to go to the PDF document regarding the Third Circuit's decision, but each time I get "Your computer has performed an illegal operation".....

I'll try again tomorrow.

Donna, let's talk more tomorrow. I would like to add something about the Butt's case on my site.

Are you up to writing an essay about how you knew her and what a good friend she was to you?

Try to do this for me, O.K.? What needs to be done is to personalize the Butts family and bring them back to life, as they once were. You were her friend, and what you need to do is this: Concentrate on the details of your friendship. Her favorites foods, what you two did together, what her kids were like, their favorite games, movies, activities.

It's Kevin Hailey who is getting all the attention, and made to seem like the unfairly targeted suspect. There doesn't seem to be any other though.

Plus, I don't understand why the Attorney General doesn't want to get involved in any way.

It's very suspect. But when an entire family has been slaughtered, as in this case, it makes you wonder why the Attorney General is looking the other way.

Very strange.

Talk to you tomorrow.

Love, Heather J.

one_eyed_Jack · Veteran Member

Kevin Hailey hasn't been working for awhile. He's in jail for an attempted murder because of a stabbing in a brawl outside of a bar. His mom is in there with him because her other son, Chad, tape recorded her confessing to killing her deceased husband and making it look like a suicide. They are both awaiting their trials.

The prosecutor has recused himself, he says, because he was an investigator on the case. He said he was going to turn the case over to the Attorney General's office ages ago, but he never did. The AG's office won't take it, Randal Lee has to ask for help, which he won't do or explain why not.

fauxreal · Senior Member

Hey OEJ, that is quite a family, the Hailey's. I understand the father is a deputy Sheriff, which immediately throws a bolt into the works when there is an investigation focusing on the son as the most likely suspect.

The more I educate myself about the Butts case, the more it seems that Geri didn't have any enemies. She had a lot of friends who loved her and her children and I'm glad they are not giving up the fight to bring her killer to justice.

As for Lisa Lambert's latest appeal denial, I have the 70 page decision up on my site.

This case couldn't be more complicated. Jesus H. Christ!

It would confuse anybody there are so many cases cited to prove each point.

On both sides.

I'm going back to finish up trying to wade through it all, but I wanted to check in with my friends here at Justice Junction.

hjj

Jillybean · Senior Member

Heather,

You're welcome for not banning you, but I wouldn't have banned you anyway. Regardless of what has happened between us in the past, I firmly believe that every person has a right to their own opinion, regardless of whether or not I agree with it. I sincerely hope that we cab bury the hatchet so to speak and work together to find out who REALLY killed Laurie Show. I can't really do anything now - with school, five chidren and my in laws coming to stay with us, I jsut don't have the time - but I would like it if you would write up a few pages from your point of view so that I can give readers both sides. Something along the lines of : Read both sides of the Murder of Laurie Show - Lisa Lambert Innocent or Guilty? Click Here and Decide. Maybe not exactly that, but something along those lines. If your up for it, just let me know. My email is jillmaloy@msn.com or just post it here. The site may be coming down for about a week or so - we are turning it all over to sold fusion technology. So if anyone comes in and the site isn't here, don't panic - it will be up by the beginning of the month!

I would also like to give you my aplogizes for my actions early on. I had just written the series of articles regarding Laurie Show and was emotionally charged to say the least. I let my emotions get the better of me, something that I just don't do very often. So I sincerely hope that you will accept my apology.

Now, I must get back to school work - I'm going to school for my AAS in Criminal Justice, then my BS in Criminal Justice then it's on to law school for me. Good luck in whatever it is that you choose to do Heather.

Jill

-- Edited by Jillybean at 01:22, 2004-10-21

one_eyed_Jack · Veteran Member

I'm so glad you posted Jillybean. I haven't seen a post from you since I joined, and it was a little like being at someone's home when they are not there. I really do like your place.

one_eyed_Jack · Veteran Member

Whoa. I've been reading the testimony of the first EMT, Mr. Zeyak, that arrived at the scene of Laurie Show's murder. He testified that when he checked Laurie Show there was no pulse and the carotid artery was cut accounting for the massive amount of blood loss. He even took the time to write down his notes that night on what he had observed. The first time he had ever been questioned about it was when his deposition was being taken for the Habeus hearing. He said he had no recollection of ever talking to Ronald Savage and that he didn't make the statements attributed to him in Ronald Savage's report.

Ooops. No one from the police department talked to Kathleen Harrison, either, until after Lisa Lambert's trial. Ms. Harrison was questioned by Ronald Savage before Tabitha Buck's trial concerning bloody initials on the closet door. Harrison could not say they were intitials but Savage referred to them that way. It was her testimony that she believed she saw blood on the wall leading to the front door. She also testified that she looked at the cut on Laurie Show's leg and did not notice a telephone cord. She didn't recall seeing a phone in the room at all. It is also Kathleen Harrison's testimony that the carotid artery was severed, and she had no discernable pulse. In her opinion, Laurie Show was dead.

Oh my goodness. Now, Harrison is being questioned about Ronald Savage's report wherein she states to him that Laurie appeared alive and states in court that she did say that to him. The court reminds her she is under oath, and she then says she cannot totally recall her conversation with Ronald Savage. Now, she is saying she can't recall seeing the carotid artery at all.

Now, she says she does remember seeing the carotid artery and that it was severed. Judge Dalzell is trying to clarify her testimony and seems slightly frustrated with this witness. Even Mr. Madenspacher declines to cross examine her.

Is this you, Kate??

one_eyed_Jack · Veteran Member

Heather, my dear, the editorial comments in the transcript is distracting.

bobula · Veteran Member

RE: More mail from the infamous Free Lisa Lambert.

one_eyed_Jack · Veteran Member

RE: More mail from the infamous Free Lisa Lambert.com

fauxreal · Senior Member

Hey OEJ, you are right. I did do some editorializing. It stops though, so keep reading. I just got so mad reading some of the testimony. I couldn't be there for all of it, and Glick's i was reading for the first time. He acted like the Chief from the land of the Brain Dead.

When Bobula suggests you do your own research into those who obviously have past records because it is revealed through testimony and their employment histories......forget it.

You cannot do any research into their histories. The Federal Hearing is as close as you are going to get into "research", involving those who framed Lisa Lambert.

For example, if you do a search on Robin Weaver, do you really think his beating of the retarded man is going to come up? Of course not. Do you think the Judge's order than he get psychological counseling is going to come up? Of course not.

Do a search on Robert Reed. Do you think it's going to reveal that he plead the 5th amendment 59 times at the P.C.R.A. hearing? Doubtful.

Research on the internet is interesting. Facts can be removed easily. Others inserted as it suites whomever. Unedited transcripts are still the most reliable account of what happened in a particular case. Keep reading. You will see what I mean.

Bobula claims these people would not put their careers on the line by framing the suspect, Lisa Lambert.

Their careers were hardly on the line for doing this. Savage and Hazel were involved in a movie contract with Republic Pictures during the investigation for crying out loud.

You can read about that during Savage's testimony. The only time these investigators thought their careers were on the line is when they were unexpectedly caught like "deer in the headlights" when Rainville came to town with her power of "wide discovery". Believe me, it spread like wildfire, and that's when documents began to disappear, sweatpants replaced, etc. etc.

Careers on the line? Even after Dalzell reported the obvious misconduct, their "careers" were not, in the end, on the line.

These people have been conducting business under their own rules for decades.

As for Eugene Hasenfus. He was from Quarryville, alright. The internet research is sketchy, and can be changed at anytime. I stand by my own integrity. If someone tells me something wrong, and you can prove it, fine. It happens. But when it comes to the really relevant details in the Lambert case, the Federal Hearing transcripts truly tell the tale.

The book, Dark Alliance, had some detailed info about Eugene, but it's now "this page no longer available".

That's the problem with internet research. When it becomes controversial, it's removed.

When you tell Bobula to research those involved in Laurie Show's murder investigation, don't waste your time.

Anything you find will be generated from the Lancaster County District Attorney's Office. Or, worse yet, the Attorney General's Office.

Do a Google Search for example of George Retos or Golden Falcon and see if Alvin B. Lewis or Richard Sprague's name come up. He was one of the huge cocaine smugglers they vigorously defended in one of their Landmark cases.

Keep reading, OEJ, I was told by my website designer that we got 4 thousand hits the other day! Not bad, seeing as how we're not in the search engines till next week!

hjj

one_eyed_Jack · Veteran Member

That's great about the traffic to the site, Heather. I'm sorry you've been ill and am glad you have a physician father to talk to. You do need to talk with one!

The best research, of course, is through sworn documents. That is how the information came out about the misconduct of the officers and how it was or was not handled. There are tons of transcript pages to go through, so it will take me awhile. I started reading a little on the latest hearing, but had to go back to the Dalzell hearing in order to lay the foundation.

I'm reading out of order because the broad discovery issue is fascinating. I'm sure they were not expecting that in Lancaster. After Dalzell, I'll go look up the first trial trancripts assuming they are available.

Take care of yourself, Heather. You don't sound well.
OEJ

fauxreal · Senior Member

Hi, OEJ, thanks for your concern about my health. I feel good enough to go to the hairdresser today, which I'm gonna do shortly. Hopefully I'll still have some hair when I get back.

I have to maintain my sense of humour until I go to the doctor next week.

I wanted to let you know, that unfortunately, the original trial transcripts from 1992 are not available. I was able to read them in Tina Rainville's office, and they are amazing..........

I think it lasted all of about 7 days. I tried to get them through the freedom of Information Act, when I lived in Lancaster. They should be available for public viewing, as they are tax-payer funded documents.

Like I have said before, I was told when I politely asked for them, "You have no right to that information, now get the hell outa here!".

The portions of transcripts from the P.C.R.A. hearing, number two, that are available online are the parts favorable to the prosecution's position that Lisa is guilty. Tabitha Buck's testimony, for example.

Amazingly enough, although Tabitha only spoke once, in 1998, under oath in court, her own attorney James Cullen, at her 1992 trial in Easton County, 80 miles outside of Lancaster, called Yunkin a manipulative liar. Tabitha never even took the stand in her own defense. Cullen told her not to. If her 1998 story is now to be believed, you can bet she would have told it in 1992. Her testimony portrayed her as an "accomplice". There's no reason in the world to think she would not want to help herself if her story was real. Her original attorney, Cullen, is now a Judge.

For her own attorney to call Yunkin a liar, contradicts what she said about Yunkin 6 years later in 1998. That lie being that he was never in the condo.

Baloney. And she knows it.

hjj

fauxreal · Senior Member

Hi OEJ, I'm so glad you are reading the transcripts. I don't think Bobula has read them. If she has, she certainly is being quiet about it.

The saga of Robert Reed is most interesting. He was tried twice for the molestation of his stepdaughter. On the second time around he was finally convicted.

I believe I have mentioned this before, but his testimony was the first I heard when I arrived in Lancaster to sit in on the second P.C.R.A. hearing. I got there late, about 6 o'clock in the evening. I called the Courthouse just to find out if the Lambert matter, as they called it, was still in session. Turns out, it was running late because Reed had to confer with his attorney for about an hour.

When I walked in, the door in the back of the small Courtroom opened and out came this sweaty, fat, unkempt man in prison garb. Handcuffed and shackled, he took a seat, was sworn in and Rainville began asking him questions. He couldn't stop twitching. It was surreal, almost.

It took about 20 minutes for Rainville to get through 59 questions. He just looked straight ahead and repeated the same refrain for each one. "I refuse to answer under the 5th amendment". The questions were for example: "Did you find a man's hi-top sneaker in the search for evidence at the Susquehana river?" "Did you testify at Lisa's trial in 1992 that you never found a sneaker at the river?"..... It went on and on like that.......you could have heard a pin drop except the floor was carpeted.

Then, Rainville wheeled a television monitor over towards Reed and place the screen right in front of him. Then she pushed in a videotape (the edited version where there is no sneaker and no pink garbage bag) Reed just looked at the carpet as if he was studying a piece of lint on the floor or something. He was asked if he had edited the video that was being played. He refused to look at it. Then she played the original and asked him why the discovery of evidence had been edited. He refused to look at that one too. Still, both videos were played in their entirety.

If you do "research" on Robert Reed, as Bobula suggests, who knows what will come up.

In Stengel's grandiose second "opinion", which was published as a seperate "newspaper" when he finally was done "writing" it, (he got a 60 day extension to do so) he explained Robert Reed away by saying "he didn't plead the 5th because he didn't want to incriminate himself, he was just "mad" at the Commonwealth, and didn't feel like answering).

hjj

Enigma · Senior Member

Does anyone know what happened to this website? Seems it no longer exists. I have not followed this case very closely. I have however read the book, saw the AJ documentary and saw the made-for-tv movie. Just wondering what was happening.

Jillybean · Senior Member

Hi, it's nice to meet you! My name is Jill and I own and TRY to operate Justice Junction as time allows. The site is still very much alive, though I haven't really had a chance to work on it. I go to college full time and am raising five children to boot so I don't have a lot of time to work on the site right now. There are many many stories that need to be added to the site, but as I said, I just don't have time right now. I hope to be able to add to the site again soon. Thank you for hanging in there while we are going through this transition! If you have any other questions, feel free to email me at jillmaloy@msn.com

Jill

AKA Jillybean

Dimples · Pre-Newbie

Thank you Supreme Court!!!!! Lisa Michelle Lambert is where she belongs for life, behind bars without the possibility of parole! She now has no appeals left. May Laurie now rest in peace. And my all of her family and friends have peace in their lives as well. I will never forget Laurie and our time as Library aides together.