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

[Skigirl]

Hi Skigirl,

I agree with you. I don't think the activities of the CIA background or the CIA ITT connection were behind Joan's disappearance. However, I do think it is instructive to understand the mindset of the family. There is a different mentality dealing with those trained in intelligence. I learned that over time. As I stated, I don't want to get off on some political conspiracy.

I never pressed George and Eleanor what they did with the agency. I would not expect a breach of confidentiality. However, the Websters are secretive. That is based on many years of personal experience and the topics they will not discuss. It requires substantive facts to deal with and cope during a tragedy like this. Would you withhold a phone number to check if your child was missing? The Websters did not disclose things I learned in the records. Verified records do confirm they knew at least some of this information.

I am not sure what inaccuracy in police reports you are referring to. When you are suggesting incompetence, you are impeaching a very long list of agencies and departments involved. It is hard to imagine they were all incompetent. I don't need an investigator's license to know you cannot murder someone on a boat that did not exist when the victim disappeared. The body was found more than 30 miles from the alleged location. Joan was not dumped in Boston Harbor as claimed.

The documents recovered on August 7, 2017, are specific, and add greater information to previously obtained records. The report indicates Joan said someone was with her. She either knew that individual or he gained her confidence. In some ways it does not matter. The authorities did not pursue that lead. Authorities maintained their were no leads. That is simply not true. When you go through an experience like this, things get seared in your memory. I was told there were no leads, no record of Joan taking a cab, she simply vanished without a trace. That is also well documented through the media and official documents.

Whether Joan knew the bearded man or not, she ended up missing, and the police had an eye witness providing a description. They did not look for that individual or the car they left in. I am making a reasonable assumption there was a driver in the car they got into. So now there would be two individuals and at least a partial description of the car. The account given by the eye witness was corroborated by a dispatcher. It would be such a gross level of incompetence to think none of the law enforcement looking into the disappearance would look for the bearded man or the car and ask for the public's assistance.

If you are genuinely looking for someone you pursue every lead.

There is no *lead* with her parents though. Just a bunch of insinuations and assertions about their personalities and family dynamics that may or may not be accurate, and that may or may not be relevant. By the terms of service, families of the victim are not to be sleuthed here because they are also considered victims, unless they are named as people of interest by law enforcement. Nothing of the sort has happened as far as I know, and therefore, I do not believe they are fair game.

I think the source documents are very interesting (though my own interpretation of them is quite different) and I hope that this discussion will not be shut down by virtue of violations of the terms of use of Websleuths.

 

[Deleted member 189081]

Hi Reacher,

The project Joan presented was an auditorium architectural design. She presented the 11-week project on Monday, November 23, 1981. She received high marks. I do not know if a copy of the project exists. It may have been returned to the family or kept at the school. After nearly 36 years, it would be tough to track down.

I tried to find the articles I have about the project. I have recovered hundreds of news items. Some of them are in a zip file that I cannot open. I have changed computers since collecting them and updated programs. I will make a trip to the Geek Squad to see if they can help me.

One of the articles quoted classmates who recalled Joan missed Thanksgiving break her first year. The workload was heavy. She forfeited her break to get her assignments done. Classmates commented she worked hard to get the project completed so she could enjoy the break. There are no quotes from classmates indicating Joan planned to meet them on Sunday to work on a project.

Had I of articulated correctly. I suppose I was asking if anyone knew the content of the presentation or paper presented by Joan. Many Thanks for your response Eve.

KR
Reacher

 

[Skigirl]

Seems like Hadden Clark would be the obvious person worth looking into. He admitted to killing a girl named Sarah (presumably Sarah Pryor) in Massachusetts in 1985. Sarah, 9, was last seen alive October 9, 1985. And in 1992 he killed Laura Houghteling, 23, who also had been a Harvard student (she had recently graduated). I figure that Joan's killer, or someone with him, probably started the fire, too.

After reading this whole thread, I am actually much more interested in Hadden Clark as a potential suspect. He looks quite a bit like the composite to me: http://murderpedia.org/male.C/c/clark-hadden.htm

 

[Coffee56]

It was not my intention to violate any rules or upset any family members. Only to get a sense of the family dynamics in order to try to figure out what happened that holiday weekend. In looking for the why. Something led to a change of plans. What was it? And why? I think the only reason we ask about the family is that was who she had the last solid contact with.

I think all we know is it didn't happen on the boat and she wasn't dumped at sea.

We don't know who the bearded man is. She either knew him or felt he was safe.

If there was a 3rd person involved do we know that the bearded man didn't also become a victim.

 

[eve carson]

Hi Skigirl,

I appreciate your sensitivity to family members. I am a victim, too.

The only suspect authorities ever named publicly is Leonard Paradiso.

Let me remind everyone the condition of Joan's remains. She sustained a blow to the head that left a 2" x 4" hole in her skull. It took out the entire right side of the head. She was stripped of all clothing. None of her clothing or belongings were found in the vicinity after an extensive search. Joan was disposed in a black plastic trash bag. She was located in a remote and heavily wooded area in Hamilton, MA. The grave was in a natural basin often flooded with water. The grave was covered with cut logs on two different occasions. The site was more than 30 miles from the alleged crime scene.

I learned the condition of Joan's remains from retired Hamilton PD Det. Paul Grant. He was part of the recovery team. Our communication is documented. The Websters maintain Paradiso murdered Joan on his boat. These are public statements.

Recovered documents show serious discrepancies with the state's allegations made to the courts, other departments and agencies, and to the public. Recovered records show fabricated evidence and threatened or enticed witnesses. Recovered documents support this was a corrupted investigation. A scapegoat is not justice.

This case sits in voluminous files with the current custodian. I can verify the files are missing numerous items authorities tried to link Joan with Paradiso. Current custodians lack familiarity with the case. I think it is fair to ask what is going on. Joan deserves a truthful answer, value for the person she was.

 

[eve carson]

It is very warming to see interest in Joan's case.

Unfortunately, there are plenty of individuals that are capable of heinous crimes. Plenty have been suggested from the Zodiac killer or Gareth Penn to the Unibomber Ted Kaczinski.

What I look for after reviewing thousands of records is opportunity and similarity of crime or MO.

I looked at Hadden Clark when he was suggested. The known crimes do not fit the same MO. I have not found anything that places him in MA at the time. He would need mobility and extensive knowledge of Boston and the surrounding area. I don't see that Hadden Clark had the ability to baffle the legions of law enforcement and keep his crime hidden for more than three decades.

The glaring question remains, why did the authorities not follow the lead of the bearded man? The composite was suppressed. I am familiar with this case from the beginning. Articles landed on my kitchen table daily. I have checked every news source. The composite was not made public. I learned about the composite in 2009. That's 28 years after the eye witness gave his description. With documents received on August 7, 2017, I know the cabbies name, his description of the bearded man, his cab number, the dispatcher's name, bag descriptions. Joan's bag was in the trunk of his cab. He exchanged words with the bearded man.

This question has to be answered before any suspect can be identified. Hadden Clark does not impress me as someone the authorities would shield.

 

[Coldpizza]

Hi Everyone,

eve carson is now verified family in Joan's case.

Please continue treat eve carson with respect.

Remember eve carson does not need to provide links to her posts and it's up to you whether to believe what eve carson posts or not.

Thank you

 

[eve carson]

Digging into a cold case is daunting and uncomfortable. I have relived very traumatic events. Finding serious discrepancies with what authorities represented to the courts, other agencies, and the public devalued Joan, other victims entangled with her investigation, and left innocent people vulnerable.

It only takes a few bad apples to infect a system. Those are the authorities that must be held accountable, not all of the caring and dedicated officials who truly did try to find answers. Recovered records support this was a diverted investigation.

During the course of digging into Joan’s case, I have endured false personal attacks, harassment, and threats. Some are anonymous and others from known individuals. All of them have been reported to proper authorities. Yes, that adds to the pain of Joan’s loss, but reinforces I found the right stone to turn. The stench is overwhelming and I won’t be deterred.

People on this site look for the pieces to find truthful answers. The truth allows for genuine healing. That is what I am looking for. It is important on many levels to find justice for Joan.

 

[eve carson]

Recovered records do not support the Paradiso/boat theory. This theory is still promoted by some. A letter dated August 2, 1982, naming Sgt. Carmen Tammaro alleging Paradiso murdered Joan on his boat. The timing of Tammaro's meeting with Paradiso is affirmed in Bond's statements.

This is a closer look at the events surrounding the introduction of Bond who made allegations that mirrored Tammaro's documented accusations in his meeting with Paradiso on August 1, 1982. I am looking at who was involved constructing this story.

Events in the Timeline Surrounding Bond

The authorities came out with their Paradiso/boat theory through Robert Bond. Events surrounding the introduction of Bond shed some light on the development of the boat scenario.

I am adding documents and excerpts to add context to the introduction of Bond as a snitch. The first document is the submission of Paradiso’s fingerprints to the FBI for comparison in Joan’s case on November 5, 1982.

The second upload is the FBI report dated November 24, 1982. Paradiso fingerprint comparison was negative, NO MATCH. The comparison was made prior to Bond’s introduction and the state’s so-called “break” in the case. The authorities kept their target under the radar until Bond’s allegations.

The next excerpt is from NJ police reports dated November 30, 1982. Jack McEwan, the head of ITT security, scheduled a meeting on December 8 or 9, 1982.

Bond is transferred from Walpole to the Charles Street Jail for the Mary Foreman murder trial on December 8, 1982. He was locked in cell 68 on the third tier. Bond claims Paradiso had Bond moved. Not likely. Also note the redactions in the interview.

I spoke with PI Ray Morgan early in my research. Morgan, now deceased, was an investigator for the defense and never believed Paradiso murdered Iannuzzi or Joan. According to Morgan, the Charles Street Jail was in lockdown on December 8, 1982. Bond was checked in first. Paradiso had been moved out of Charles Street for a short time because of overcrowding. He was returned to Charles Street on December 8, 1982, later in the afternoon. The two men would have never crossed paths that day or had knowledge the other was there.

On December 12, 1982, Palombo followed two women at Logan Airport. They did not know him and turned to confront him. After gaining their confidence he was an undercover cop, he gave them a ride home. The woman he dropped off last was Paradiso’s estranged daughter. She provided a statement to a MA attorney.

 

[eve carson]

Obstacles to Resolution

I am uploading two pages from an FOIA response to the Essex County DAO, custodians of Joan’s case. This is a snapshot to give you a sense of the problems finding a truthful resolve in Joan’s case.

On April 2, 2107, I submitted a narrowed FOIA request to the DAO. I received a response on April 25, 2017. The response uncovers serious problems.

I requested 22 documents or group of documents. In the response, note the DAO did not have 13 of the requested documents. The DAO claimed exemptions for seven documents, and it is unclear if they are in possession of two requested documents.

Most of the exemptions claimed are privacy (c) or investigatory (f). The Superintendent of Records determined the DAO has not met their burden of proof to deny documents under these exemptions.

In item VI., The DAO claims they are precluded from disclosing such material. Under statute, sexual assault victims cannot be disclosed. This is the explanation cited in a later correspondence. The victim in this instance was not the victim of sexual assault. Court records and sworn affidavits provided to the DAO indicate this was a witness who changed testimony and was pressured by the prosecutor and law enforcement.

Item VIII. requested documents related to witness Robert Bond. The DAO cited grand jury records as justification to deny records. Documents provided to the DAO verified the documents requested were not grand jury records exempted by statute. The requested records show methods used by authorities to obtain the Bond allegations.

Item XVIII. reveals another problem. The DAO provided all responsive records in their possession. Court records provided to the DAO affirm the DAO is missing a document Tim Burke submitted to a federal court, influencing the bankruptcy fraud case against Paradiso. The document in question was an invalid boat registration. Supporting documents were missing from the registrar’s office. Other court documents affirm Andrew Palombo participated in obtaining the registration records. The Current DAO is missing critical evidence.

The response to item XXII. is vague. I have found no indication the state ever conducted a hearing or inquiry after Joan’s remains were recovered in April 1990. However, authorities continued to maintain Paradiso murdered Joan on his boat in November 1981.

On a personal note, the ADA response indicating it was a burden on their office is offensive. It is their responsibility to seek truth and justice for a homicide under their stewardship. The office to date has not demonstrated an earnest commitment to resolve Joan’s case or value for a victim.

 

[eve carson]

The DAO, custodian of Joan’s files, have nine banker’s boxes filled to the hilt about Joan’s case. This is per their description. In January 2017, I received a minimal index of their files in response to an order from the Superintendent of Records. The order issued on August 10, 2015, gave the DAO 10 days to respond. It took almost a year and a half.
Based on the response, I submitted a narrowed FOIA on April 2, 2107. The response is posted in the previous post. Now I want to go into some detail about what was missing from their voluminous files.

What Was Missing

Item I. requested documents from the bankruptcy fraud case against Paradiso, CR 85-010-S.

Former ADA Tim Burke, by his own admission, instigated this case that dealt with Paradiso’s boat, the alleged crime scene. The DAO had none of these records in their files. They are available at the NARA center in Waltham, MA, just down the road.

During a face to face meeting with the DAO on May 1, 2017, ADAs viewed documents from the certified court records. Records were later provided by email so I had an accurate record of documents provided. ADA John Dawley affirmed all documents were received. Neither ADA I met with seemed to know about this case.

I provided the certification of the records, title pages from each of three sessions, and pages 128 & 129. Judge Bruce Selya affirmed the crime scene did not exist by August 1981 when Paradiso filed for bankruptcy. This is prior to Joan’s disappearance. The evidence was undisputed.

In Tim Burke’s published account in 2008, he stated Judge Richard Sterns [sic] sentenced Paradiso in the bankruptcy case in November 1985. Burke gives the incorrect date. The trial was in April 1985 and sentencing on May 10, 1985, Judge Bruce Selya presiding. Court records show Burke was in contact with the prosecutor trying the case at the time. Burke has knowingly made false representations about an unresolved homicide. Judge Richard Stearns is a federal district court judge in MA. The case was moved to RI because of publicity. If anyone wants to do a quick fact check, Judge Richard Stearns was appointed to the bench in 1993, eight years after this case. Anyone looking for these records without knowledge would never find them. Burke lied.

These records also contain other documents specifically requested. I will cover those in later posts. The DAO was not in possession of any records from case CR 85-010S including confirmation the Websters were in contact with the USA office of William Weld, the office prosecuting the case.

It is pretty reasonable to conclude, the DAO will not find a resolve in this case missing relevant documents. Joan was not murdered on a boat that did not exist when she disappeared on November 28, 1981. If the custodian maintains the possibility Paradiso murdered Joan on his boat, they put more credibility in two-time convicted murderer Robert Bond instead of a federal district court judge with the evidence in from of him.

Why was the DAO, custodian of Joan’s files, missing critical records?

 

[eve carson]

What Was Missing?

Item II. requested an FBI report dated October 4, 1983. The report was obtained through an FOIA to the FBI. Although, I was already in possession of three copies of the report, with different redactions, I requested the item from the custodian of Joan’s records. They did not have this report. I am uploading some excerpts.

The first excerpt shows this report was filed with the Personal and Financial Crime Units of the FBI. However, the document lists Joan as the victim. This added new case numbers that blurred the case. Documents related to Joan’s case were very partitioned or fragmented.

The second excerpt specifies what this case was about. The Financial and Personal Crime Units were tasked with a bankruptcy filed by Leonard Paradiso in August 1981, months before Joan disappeared. Paradiso did not list his boat in the filing. The boat was already gone. He had not received the insurance before filing for bankruptcy. The bankruptcy had nothing to do with Joan’s case, but it effectively hid records.

Excerpt three spells it out. The bankruptcy and the boat were critical to bring the Webster and Iannuzzi cases to a “successful” conclusion according to the FBI. The boat had nothing to do, even by innuendo, with the murder of Marie Iannuzzi. The FBI effort was intended to place pressure on Paradiso and his girlfriend. Her name is redacted in this copy of the report. The report also states there was missing jewelry in both the Webster and Iannuzzi cases, an MO being attributed to Paradiso. There was no missing jewelry in the Iannuzzi case or any other alleged victims of Paradiso. Joan’s bracelet was missing, an item not publicly known.

The fourth excerpt names Tim Burke specifically and discussed with members of the MSP. Andrew Palombo was the lead officer. This excerpt identified a photo recovered during the Iannuzzi search warrant executed on April 25, 1983. The photo is significant and will be discussed in a later post. The redacted portions visible in other copies of this report identify Charlene Bullerwell. Other copies of the report reveal Tim Burke made a false representation to the FBI regarding this witness.

The fifth excerpt affirm this report was kept confidential and not disseminated outside the FBI.
The report names ADA Tim Burke. Information from a “confidential source” is also referenced in the report. The “confidential source” claimed Paradiso lavished a girlfriend with jewelry stolen from his alleged victims. The "confidential source" went on to claim Charlene Bullerwell knew the location of Joan's body. Note: Bullerwell testified she was pressured by the FBI and made the sensational claim Paradiso chopped bodies, tied cinderblocks, and dumped them in the ocean. That is not where Joan was found.

Copies of the FBI report dated October 4, 1983, were provided by me to the DAO. They were no more aware of this report than they were about the federal court records affirming the boat did not exist when Joan disappeared.

 

[eve carson]

What Was Missing?

I approached the DAO for the first time in 2006. I asked about an extortion incident. The incident was not in the media, it was not publicly known. It was a dramatic incident that took place on October 15, 1982. An earlier post detailed the event.
I asked about the incident when I met with the DAO on May 20, 2010. I provided a document for their review. They did not bother to ask for a copy of the FBI report.

I requested any documents about this incident in item VII. The DAO had no documents related to the extortion incident. It came up again when I met with the DAO on May 1, 2017. They did not seem to know what I was talking about and the FOIA revealed they did not have the records.

Think about it. Going back to 2006, I am asking about a very dramatic event that the custodian had no knowledge of. A witness coming forward with information not known to the public. You would think they would pay attention. It sounds sensational; it was sensational. Without prior knowledge, the DAO dismissed my input. This was a big problem in this case, information was fragmented or compartmentalized. After the May 1, 2017 meeting, I provided the DAO with multiple documents regarding the incident. I am uploading one report here. This report dated October 20, 1982, was initialed by William H Webster. At the time, he was the Director of the FBI. Oliver Revell is also on the routing. He was the number two at the agency.

The extortion did not prove to be the right answer. However, this event is critical in other ways. First, the custodians did not know about it. Why not? Second, an identified individual that did know about this situation claimed not to know about anything like that. The conversation is documented and verifiable. Now there is a name of an individual who does not want the truth to come out in this case.

In other words, I caught someone in the small circle with knowledge lying.

 

[eve carson]

What Was Missing?

I requested a copy of the Iannuzzi search warrant obtained by Andrew Palombo on April 25, 1983. Item IX. in the FOIA request sought the warrant submitted to the Federal District Court of RI during the bankruptcy case CR 85-010-S. The custodian of Joan’s records was not in possession of this document. The DAO was provided a copy of the warrant after our May 1, 2017, meeting with the certification.

Items sought by the Iannuzzi search warrant have nothing to do with the Iannuzzi case. It is reasonable to be concerned the Iannuzzi case was a smokescreen to obtain items woven into the Paradiso/boat scenario regarding Joan. The objective in Iannuzzi documents was the Joan Webster case.

This is an old document and may not be easy to read. The items requested in Palombo’s warrant are:

- Navigational aids, compasses, depth finder, and other contents of the boat
- 1 textbook re: Maya Civilization
- Assorted photographs of boats, personal pictures of Leonard Paradiso and Joan Webster look alike photograph

The current custodian was missing the supporting documents revealing how items were obtained that Burke claimed as “evidence” linking Paradiso to Joan. Current custodians had no clue how Joan’s case was constructed.

I am interested in your thoughts. This is very questionable conduct by the authorities when reviewed with other documents recovered.

 

[eve carson]

What Was Missing?

Former ADA Tim Burke alleged Paradiso used a gun to force Joan onto his boat on November 28, 1981. Burke asserted a “confidential source” provided information leading to the discovery of the gun in the water at Pier 7, under the previous mooring site of the alleged crime scene. Burke identified the source of John O’Connell. See the earlier post about this witness.

I requested the 302 FBI report of the O’Connell Seafood Company in item X. of the FOIA. In item XI., I requested documents regarding the discovery of the fake, but realistic, .357 magnum at Pier 7 on October 20, 1983. The custodian of the Joan Webster case did not have the 302 or records related to the gun.

Testimony on March 7, 1984, from the Iannuzzi pretrial, given by BP diver Nick Saggese was provided to the DAO. The FBI 302 was provided to the DAO.

I am uploading excerpts. The first is the item found by O’Connell Seafood Company divers at Pier 7. The FBI 302 document is initialed by SA Steve Broce who Burke contacted for the bankruptcy case. The divers did not report finding a gun. The report is dated August 12, 1983. The document was part of the certified court records for CR 85-010-S. The report is prior to the recovery of the boat, the alleged crime scene, so it is more than suspect that Burke takes his own diver to the location on October 20, 1983, to bring up a gun.

The second excerpt is the Nick Saggese testimony on March 7, 1984, at the Iannuzzi pretrial. Note: there were assigned divers still in the water using equipment to continue the search. Burke instigated this dive separately.

The third excerpt is from a warrant sought by Burke and Palombo in December 1984 and January 1985 for a surgical removal of presumed splinters in Paradiso’s finger. In paragraph 13 of Palombo’s warrant supplement, he claims the discovery of the gun justifies the search warrant for splinters.

It is reasonable to be concerned the gun was planted, fabricated evidence to further the state’s explanation. The current custodian had no information regarding the gun Burke claimed was used to force Joan on the boat that certified court records affirm did not exist when Joan disappeared.

I am leaving you with an image. The photos are facsimiles of what O’Connell divers found in the water at Pier 7 when they worked there and what Burke claimed they found.

 

[JenaTaoson]

Following.

Sent from my SM-J727V using Tapatalk

 

[eve carson]

What Was Missing?

The current custodians were missing items XII. & XIII. The request for photographs of items Burke represented to the FBI are not in the files to supports Burke’s allegations.

The first photo detailed in the FBI report on October 4, 1983, was a photo of Charlene Bullerwell. The photo was recovered in the April 25, 1983, search at the Weyant (Paradiso’s girlfriend) home under the Iannuzzi search warrant. According to Burke, Bullerwell was photographed wearing a bracelet identical to Joan’s missing one-of-a-kind bracelet. Bullerwell’s testimony discredited the assertion she had Joan’s bracelet. This was false information provided to the FBI during an ongoing criminal investigation. You can view excerpts from the FBI report dated October 4, 1983, in a previous post.

The second photo requested was a black and white photo of a jewelry pouch confiscated in a search warrant executed on July 27, 1983, of the safety deposit box jointly held by Paradiso and his girlfriend. Burke claimed a black and white photo, concealing the color, was shown to an individual, unidentified, that identified it as something Joan kept her pearls in. FBI reports describe the item and the description matches an item that was part of a set.. Remaining pieces of the set were still held by the rightful owner. This item did not belong to Joan. Again, Burke is making false representations to federal authorities during the ongoing criminal investigation of a felony. An excerpt from an FBI report dated October 11, 1983, affirms Burke’s representation.

Documentation was provided to the current custodian that these items should be in their files.

There is a big problem of missing items from the DAO records to support Burke’s continued accusations.

 

[eve carson]

What Was Missing?

The DAO affirmed in our meeting on May 1, 2017, the Marie Iannuzzi case was entangled with Joan’s case. However, I requested trial transcripts in item XIV. from specific witnesses during the July 1984 Iannuzzi trial. They did not have them.

The documents are relevant. The same team of ADA Tim Burke and Tr. Andrew Palombo handled both investigations. They both alleged the same suspect was responsible for both crimes. The investigations ran concurrently and were mingled in press reports. The cases were mingled in documents filed with the courts and other agencies. Since Joan’s case was never taken to trial, there were never any charges, the Iannuzzi case was the logical place to examine the practices and methods of the investigatory team handling Joan’s case. Discrepancies in recovered records was staggering and support a wrongful conviction in the Iannuzzi trial.

I asked for testimony from court records in the Iannuzzi trial from the following witnesses and am posting examples of the problems found. It is just a tip of the iceberg.

Robert Bond testimony is loaded with problems, but I am uploading Bond’s claim placing Paradiso at the bar with Marie Iannuzzi at 11 pm on August 11, 1979. This allegation is made on numerous occasions. The excerpt is cross examination by Steve Rappaport on July 16, 1984.

Vincent Milano attended the wedding house party of his brother on August 11, 1979. Marie Iannuzzi’s boyfriend David Doyle was Milano’s cousin. A first hand witness testified on July 17, 1984. He answered questions on direct from Steve Rappaport and placed Paradiso and his girlfriend in Saugus at his parent’s home, a half hour away from where Bond placed them.

Carol Seracuse was a bar patron at the Cardinale’s Nest Bar. She told police at the time she saw Marie Iannuzzi in the bar at 1:30 am on August 12, 1979. The story promoted by the state through Robert Bond alleged Paradiso was seen holding the door as Marie exited between 12:30 and 1 am on August 12, 1979. A first hand witness saw Marie back in the bar later. There were three other witnesses who also placed Marie back at the bar close to closing at 2 am on August 12, 1979. She testified on July 18, 1984, on direct by Steve Rappaport.

I will post some additional examples in the next post. The allegations the state promoted through Bond are contradicted by testimony of first hand and more credible witnesses. Recovered documents support the Iannuzzi case was a wrongful conviction.

 

[eve carson]

What Was Missing?

The DAO files did not have vital records from the comingled case of Marie Iannuzzi. In item XIV., I requested very specific testimony regarding witness Jean Day, the victim’s stepsister.

I am uploading excepts to reveal problems with the state’s case, both for Marie Iannuzzi and the influence this case had on perceptions about what happened to Joan.

The fist excerpt is from the Iannuzzi trial transcripts on July 18, 1984. Jean Day arrived at the courthouse. The process server had not been able to locate her prior to the trial. Note: Jean Day’s testimony during the grand jury on March 5, 1982, implicated the boyfriend David Doyle. She gave very damaging testimony contradicting the state’s premise implicating Paradiso for Marie’s murder. This excerpt indicates the defense had trouble locating a witness, pages 8-99 and 8-100.

In the second excerpt on pages 8-175 and 8-176, Steve Rappaport questioned Day. There is irrefutable indication the witness changed testimony. That is a problem that will be more apparent in upcoming posts.

In excerpt three on pages 8-189, 8-190, and 8-191, Burke brings forward evidence this witness and family member was harassed and even assaulted. Burke did not provide supporting documents like a police report of an incident. He did indicate he and Palombo has photos of the assault.

I am adding a final page on the next post.


Documents were provided to the current custodian after our meeting on May 1, 2017. There is evidence of an intimidated witness who changed testimony.

 

[eve carson]

The final page of the testimony regarding Jean Day is uploaded here from page 8-191 of the Marie Iannuzzi trial transcript.

The next two documents missing from the custodian's records will expose the serious level of the problems discovered in recovered records.