BBM above - here is an example
Here is Johnny Ray again on newsnation with Brian Entin - take a listen
A few comments-
1. He starts off by saying Asa is conning everybody and she has for years
Uses an example that her husband makes plenty of money - these are not poor people - but she uses food stamps.
(JR knows all about the son's disabilities/eligibilty and food stamps but he wants you to believe that Asa is scamming the system)
Disingenuous at Best - not helpful
2. Then he goes into: you cannot tell me that they live in that little tiny house and how could she possibly in this day and age not have known that Rex was a serial killer. Says it overwhelming possible that she and the other adults in the house (aka the KIDS) knew very well what was going on in that house with Rex and sex in the basement ( still not sure even if that were true that means he is a killer and furthermore that would make his family think he was a killer)
What? - not helpful
3. Says Asa and kids never expressed sympathy for the dead girls /for what their father has done - he prob knows better than most that they were most likely told to not say anything like that by legal counsel-and btw innocent until proven guilty etc - but he says it points to their guilt
What? - not helpful
Finally under What? -not helpful - his very very credible witness who is not coming forward "at this time" who he personally "examined" (not interviewed but examined - his words) for hours. This witness says there were sex workers in the house and it was well known by the family. Once again its a leap from there to serial killing even if true, but hey it's Johnny Ray
IMO Put up or shut up IMO JR. If Asa/kids are complicit aren't you obligated to do the right thing and bring it to LE, don't shovel innuendo on newsnation.
I do notice in listening to him that he takes care to walk a thin line when making all his statements. He says "What I hear" "What I have been told ".
It is clear to me that he wants the family classified as "suspects" so any money can be frozen to preserve it for his clients. He's shady - but he does have a strategy and end game.
So maybe @Ruminations you are correct that what he does could prove helpful - helpful to his clients - its just not necessarily based upon anything in the realm of factual information nor actually helpful to the investigation at this point.
ALL JMO
You are assuming John Ray has not already shared this information with LE.
Wild assumption.
LE has the ability to fact check these claims.
It is very unlikely that there are not cameras all over the public streets of that house covering all entrances and egresses. They had Rex under surveillance for a long time, and no warrant is needed to watch him from public areas. Daily mail would blush.
If only to make it impossible for LE to say to Ray truthfully, "Then why didn't you come to us?" Ray went to them. But if you are right about that, LE has access to fact check what you think they heard in the media.
LE did not share that information. My belief is that John Ray fears LE is deliberately and damagingly ignoring a lead.
I asked for substance, not style. You are right that he name called, was dramatic.
But that does not mean substantively, it is not true that there is a witness with the information that Rex Heuermann brought sex workers into his basement while AE was upstairs.
This does not contradict that she is a victim, and you are reinforcing, by focusing on his style, the narrative that the information could potentially mean this.
I also meant, aside from this information (not style), when has his information been wrong.
Did he get unhelpful depositions? Did he unhelpfully find a way to confirm crucial parts of Mari Gilbert's narrative about Peter by obtaining contemporaneous records of Jersey city LE? Did he not play a role in clarifying who called whom when and preserving phone records? Did he not play a role in getting the truth of the 911 call out, and confirming that certain LE representations of the contents were untrue?
I get it. It's ugly to use some of the words he used. That is why I don't repeat them.
But in the past, he has been accurate. In the present, on his current interview tour, there is no evidence that he has been inaccurate. Ugly is not inaccurate. It's only ugly.
There is also the former escort witness vetted by several news agencies who reported Rex Heuermann pressured her to go to his home. The unnamed witness speaking to John Ray could be another woman who is or was engaged in sex work. One who did go to his home. That sounds plausible to me.
Substance. Facts. Move away from the ugly.
MOO
