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

[ebfortin76]

I want each of you to think about the loved ones in your life. Think how you would feel reading about a brutally murdered member of your family. The description is published by the former prosecutor, a government employee, tasked with the responsibility of truth, justice, and public safety.

This is an excerpt published in2008 depicting Burke’s supposed conversation with snitch Robert Bond.

1. The reference to picking Joan up around 10:30 is information recently recovered in a police report and information provided by an eye witness. Bond could only learn anything regarding a cab from the police.
2. In the January 14, 1983, interview with the MSP, Bond alleged the MSP suggested Paradiso drove a cab for someone afraid to come forward. Nothing corroborates the assertion.
3. Burke claimed Bond specified Pier 7 even though in the MSP interview, Bond said he had no clue and if it was not Pier 7 that was on the MSP.
4. Bond is making some direct quotes from documents the current DAO has denied to in an FOIA request.
5. Burke describes correct detail of the manner of death. However, the alleged weapon was a whiskey bottle on Paradiso’s boat.
6. Bond’s allegations claimed Paradiso took Joan out on his boat and dumped her in Boston Harbor. Only after Joan’s remains surfaced in 1990 did the story shift to try and fit with the undeniable facts.
7. Bond never made an assertion Paradiso buried the body.

I have to wonder what documents Burke selected for his tome. I am uploading again the certified court records from CR 85-010-S affirming the boat did not exist when Joan disappeared.

How would you feel knowing a prosecutor had so little value for a victim? How would you feel about an authority tasked with justice exploiting the victim? What would you do?

Have you tried to talk with Burke?

Sent from my LG-H831 using Tapatalk

 

[eve carson]

Hi Ebfortin 76,


I reached out in 2006 after the article appeared about Burke’s plans to publish his account. No response.


I faced Burke in 2008 at a signing in Braintree, MA. He could not look me in the eye.


I have emailed Burke with no response.


People caught in lies are not very responsive to someone who can expose them.

 

[ebfortin76]

Let's play Devil's advocate. Why would Burke come forward, years after the fact, to continue to expose a theory that he knows is false?

I don't think it's to make money. So why do that? If he was making sure someone responsible was not prosecuted, why expose himself with a book?



Sent from my LG-H831 using Tapatalk

 

[eve carson]

Hi Ebfortin 76,

That would be the $64 million dollar question. There are several things that come together that probably influenced Burke to publish his account. This is my assessment based on what I have uncovered and encountered.

First is the tendency of the public to trust authorities.

Second, Burke gained a conviction against Paradiso in the Iannuzzi case. Personally, I thought this was a just conviction until I got into the records. I think most people following this and without specific knowledge did.

Third, information was controlled to the media and the public.

Fourth, the current custodian is missing records and not familiar with aspects of the case. The tendency is to circle the wagons to shield misconduct. Because this is an unresolved homicide, it is easier to deny records.

This case was partitioned. I imagine Burke felt confident no one could get to records to expose this case. I am uploading an example. In the epilogue of the book, Burke claims Judge Richard Sterns [sic] imposed sentence in the bankruptcy fraud case in November 1985.

Burke instigated the bankruptcy case. That is documented. Burke was in contact with SA Steve Broce and AUSDA Marie Buckley. That is documented. He provided documents to Buckley for this case during the trial, including a fake boat registration the current custodian does not have. That is documented. Burke had full knowledge of the bankruptcy case, yet he published an incorrect date and the wrong judge. Judge Bruce Selya imposed sentence on May 9, 1985, following the case presented in his courtroom.

Do a quick fact check. The only Judge Richard Stearns is a federal district court judge in MA. He was appointed to the bench in 1993, eight years after the case. Burke is lying. Unless you had knowledge of the case, it would be hard if not impossible to find the records. You can bet Burke would not want anyone to find court records affirming the alleged crime scene did not exist when Joan disappeared.

I don’t think Burke came out with this for the money necessarily. He didn’t think anyone could put the pieces together. His back was covered by an inadequate DAO. Burke has demonstrated his hubris and stupidity to publish a book about an unresolved case knowing published information is false.

Why would he do that? Burke gave the final response to that question in his own words. He published his account for the Websters.

 

[ebfortin76]

If we go back to the theory that it was a police informant, can you get a list of the informant at the time? I guess this info is probably very well protected. Years after the fact. So how can we look for one?

My opinion is the guy is dead. He died some months or year after joan death. Maybe that's where we can start the search.

Sent from my LG-H831 using Tapatalk

 

[eve carson]

Hi Ebfortin 76,

Protected informants ranged anywhere from David Doyle to Whitey Bulger. The key is to look at the MSP. What were they involved in? Who were they in contact with? Who was important enough to shield?

Bond was in contact with Palombo and Tammaro. That is where he got his information. Both of these officers worked with Bond to develop his story. It is a reasonable concern one or both of them knew how Joan died. The correct manner of death with correct detail was part of Bond’s statement. If they had knowledge how Joan died, it is reasonable they had some level of involvement. Certainly, they are complicit in a coverup. There is a tendency to shield one of their own, explaining actions of authorities past and present.

I believe it is the core group involved in the investigation that are the key to answering who was responsible. It is the layer that has to be peeled back.

 

[ebfortin76]

But they will never talk. That's why it may be worthwhile to do it the other way around.

Sent from my LG-H831 using Tapatalk

 

[eve carson]

Hi Ebfortin 76,

On October 9. 2009, a PI accompanied me to Shirley MCI to meet with Robert Bond face-to-face. Bond maintained Paradiso murdered Joan. However, Bond made a few statements that caught my attention. Taking Bond's word at face value is not prudent. I looked for corroborating information in other records. Keep in mind, Bond was an informant for the state, so a reasonable person to question.

Bond Comments:

Bond used a nickname to identify an individual that sent people to see him. The nickname left no question who the individual was.

Bond said Palombo corresponded with Bond up to the time Joan’s remains surfaced and instructed him not to change his story.

Bond stated Tony Pisa saw his notes.

Bond said the Websters came to see him the winter of 1987 when Bond was incarcerated at Somers in CT.


I went through records to see what other events matched up to either support or contradict Bond’s assertions.

A meeting was arranged just prior to Bond’s transfer to the Charles Street Jail on December 8, 1982. The person arranging the meeting had a known connection to the nicknamed individual.

The individuals that met with Bond were Burke, Palombo, and Tammaro. They had a known connection to this individual.

Court records affirm this individual spoke to another informant the state relied on, Tony Pisa.

I cannot verify if Palombo became Bond’s pen pal. However, Palombo testified he met with David Doyle 20-30 times in undocumented meetings. A Doyle family member affirmed Palombo and Doyle were friends. Palombo had unsavory associations. A sworn affidavit names Burke and Palombo influencing a witness, Jean Day.

I cannot verify if Pisa saw Bond’s notes. I cannot locate Pisa and do not know if he is still alive. Recovered documents affirm Palombo was in possession of Bond’s notes. Authorities greased the wheels and Pisa walked out of jail for his participation. Burke made court appearances on Pisa’s behalf.

Palombo was identified following Paradiso’s estranged daughter at Logan on December 12, 1982, and giving her aride. This is just after the Bond transfer and working with him to come up with the statement.

I cannot verify if the Websters met with Bond during the winter of 1987. I do know there was a push by authorities at this time to try Paradiso for Joan’s murder. The state had to have Bond’s cooperation to proceed. He did not cooperate after obviously feeling burned by promises made by authorities. The same three names are in a motion Bond filed on November 15, 1985: Burke, Palombo, and Tammaro.

There is a great deal more information about the nicknamed individual Bond identified.

You are right about the cops not talking. There is evidence of misconduct during the Joan Webster investigation. Deliberate misconduct make Burke, Palombo, and Tammaro complicit in covering up the crime and shielding the offender. They would also be responsible for other criminal acts resulting from a hidden offender.

Facing repercussions as accessories to murder might loosen lips.

 

[ebfortin76]

And who is that nicknamed individual? Can you write it here?

All these connections between the cops, Bond, Pisa and Al. are now known, thanks to you and your work. However these are the people masking the thruth. What I want to know is who are they protecting. Or in better word, what are they hiding that would point to the guy that they protected at some point because he was important to them. We want Joan killer.

Sent from my LG-H831 using Tapatalk

 

[eve carson]

Hi Ebfortin 76,

I pray for justice for Joan’s loss every day. Joan was not the only victim in all of this. The list is quite long.

The Bond disclosures on October 9, 2009, are documented with the PI. However, there are things that cannot be verified, only surrounding circumstances. I have two ongoing FOIA appeals. I received correspondence yesterday there is continued effort for compliance. The documents being sought are an important piece. If the DAO does not have them, Burke has a real problem. He quotes directly from them in his publication. If the DAO has them, they participated in obstruction of justice. Other documents are seeking information about two items belonging to Joan. There are discrepancies where they were actually located.

There are four individuals I will name at this time. The recovered documents expose clear misconduct on a very serious level. The four individuals who should be investigated for complicity in Joan’s loss are Tim Burke, Andrew Palombo, Carmen Tammaro, and SA Steve Broce. I suspect when faced with real penalty for their actions, they will sing so to speak.

There is an individual who warrants review. For now I will just call him Nick. This has been a very difficult onion to peel. I do not want anyone wrongly implicated, so I move forward with caution. I have been victimized by personal attacks, harassment and threats. I don’t take those lightly. When that started, I knew I turned over the right stone. When I expressed concern for some other individuals who are vulnerable, ADA John Dawley told me not to probe so deeply.

I want to be responsible and thoughtful. Joan deserves that. At the moment, the four names listed above have accountability. The person ultimately responsible for Joan’s loss has avoided detection for nearly 36 years. I am focusing on the four that are positively identified through verified records complicit in Joan’s loss. It has been more than 10 years since I started digging into this. The answers have come slowly and sometimes by accident. All of it is painful. I have learned to be patient and persistent. I ask the same of you here.

 

[ebfortin76]

Hi Ebfortin 76,

I pray for justice for Joan’s loss every day. Joan was not the only victim in all of this. The list is quite long.

The Bond disclosures on October 9, 2009, are documented with the PI. However, there are things that cannot be verified, only surrounding circumstances. I have two ongoing FOIA appeals. I received correspondence yesterday there is continued effort for compliance. The documents being sought are an important piece. If the DAO does not have them, Burke has a real problem. He quotes directly from them in his publication. If the DAO has them, they participated in obstruction of justice. Other documents are seeking information about two items belonging to Joan. There are discrepancies where they were actually located.

There are four individuals I will name at this time. The recovered documents expose clear misconduct on a very serious level. The four individuals who should be investigated for complicity in Joan’s loss are Tim Burke, Andrew Palombo, Carmen Tammaro, and SA Steve Broce. I suspect when faced with real penalty for their actions, they will sing so to speak.

There is an individual who warrants review. For now I will just call him Nick. This has been a very difficult onion to peel. I do not want anyone wrongly implicated, so I move forward with caution. I have been victimized by personal attacks, harassment and threats. I don’t take those lightly. When that started, I knew I turned over the right stone. When I expressed concern for some other individuals who are vulnerable, ADA John Dawley told me not to probe so deeply.

I want to be responsible and thoughtful. Joan deserves that. At the moment, the four names listed above have accountability. The person ultimately responsible for Joan’s loss has avoided detection for nearly 36 years. I am focusing on the four that are positively identified through verified records complicit in Joan’s loss. It has been more than 10 years since I started digging into this. The answers have come slowly and sometimes by accident. All of it is painful. I have learned to be patient and persistent. I ask the same of you here.

Eve, the guy you call Nick. Is he a cop? Legal system? Outsider?

Sent from my LG-H831 using Tapatalk

 

[eve carson]

Hi Ebfortin 76,

The individual I am concerned about was not a member of law enforcement or the legal community. In looking at the behaviors of authorities in the legal and law enforcement circles, I look for some connection between the four named participants to the individual Bond alluded to.

The first two that would have been part of this case are the MSP at Logan airport. The lead was suppressed. Those two individuals are Carmen Tammaro and Andrew Palombo. That means the diversion in the investigation was from the very start. It is reasonable to conclude this was a premeditated crime, or these officers knew right away who was responsible. They are also the logical culprits to project this on a patsy. Palombo was familiar with the Iannuzzi case, he was the lead cop. Tammaro knew Paradiso growing up. Another childhood friend, Patty Bono, made the anonymous call implicating Paradiso. Both of these officers were seasoned officers.

Burke didn’t step into this case until February 1982, after the Bono call. My opinion of Burke is a green prosecutor who could be manipulated. Burke is not that smart. He published an account with false information in an open murder case. Either deliberately or out of ignorance, Burke made a lot of glaring and stupid mistakes in the book, for example, Judge Richard Stearns instead of Judge Bruce Selya. SA Steve Broce was brought into the case on May 3, 1983, when Burke instigated the bankruptcy fraud charges.

The epicenter is Palombo and Tammaro. There is an abundance of evidence in recovered documents to raise concerns Palombo was involved in Joan’s murder to some degree. He has known connections to Logan, where Joan was last seen. He has a known connection to the Lynn Marsh Road, where Joan’s purse was found. He was the lead officer on the Iannuzzi case, and this was a direct route between his house and Logan. He lived in close proximity to the gravesite and west of the roadblocks for theGreat Lynn Fire. He aggressively ignored facts and manipulated witnesses in two homicides to implicate Paradiso. He participated in the story developed with Bond which selected the correct manner of death with correct detail in another wise false allegation. The list goes on. Palombo resembles the composite of the bearded man seen at Logan with Joan.

Now Tammaro’s behaviors make sense shielding his officer. Burke was partnered with Palombo in February 1982, and put forward false representations to the court and the public. Documents affirm Palombo worked with SA Broce on the case centered on the boat, the alleged crime scene. The pieces started to fit when I understood the investigation was the problem.

The only missing component for Palombo is a clear motive. I can’t rule out an incentive or coercion of some sort. That is where “Nick” needs to be scrutinized.

 

[ebfortin76]

Hi Ebfortin 76,

The individual I am concerned about was not a member of law enforcement or the legal community. In looking at the behaviors of authorities in the legal and law enforcement circles, I look for some connection between the four named participants to the individual Bond alluded to.

The first two that would have been part of this case are the MSP at Logan airport. The lead was suppressed. Those two individuals are Carmen Tammaro and Andrew Palombo. That means the diversion in the investigation was from the very start. It is reasonable to conclude this was a premeditated crime, or these officers knew right away who was responsible. They are also the logical culprits to project this on a patsy. Palombo was familiar with the Iannuzzi case, he was the lead cop. Tammaro knew Paradiso growing up. Another childhood friend, Patty Bono, made the anonymous call implicating Paradiso. Both of these officers were seasoned officers.

Burke didn’t step into this case until February 1982, after the Bono call. My opinion of Burke is a green prosecutor who could be manipulated. Burke is not that smart. He published an account with false information in an open murder case. Either deliberately or out of ignorance, Burke made a lot of glaring and stupid mistakes in the book, for example, Judge Richard Stearns instead of Judge Bruce Selya. SA Steve Broce was brought into the case on May 3, 1983, when Burke instigated the bankruptcy fraud charges.

The epicenter is Palombo and Tammaro. There is an abundance of evidence in recovered documents to raise concerns Palombo was involved in Joan’s murder to some degree. He has known connections to Logan, where Joan was last seen. He has a known connection to the Lynn Marsh Road, where Joan’s purse was found. He was the lead officer on the Iannuzzi case, and this was a direct route between his house and Logan. He lived in close proximity to the gravesite and west of the roadblocks for theGreat Lynn Fire. He aggressively ignored facts and manipulated witnesses in two homicides to implicate Paradiso. He participated in the story developed with Bond which selected the correct manner of death with correct detail in another wise false allegation. The list goes on. Palombo resembles the composite of the bearded man seen at Logan with Joan.

Now Tammaro’s behaviors make sense shielding his officer. Burke was partnered with Palombo in February 1982, and put forward false representations to the court and the public. Documents affirm Palombo worked with SA Broce on the case centered on the boat, the alleged crime scene. The pieces started to fit when I understood the investigation was the problem.

The only missing component for Palombo is a clear motive. I can’t rule out an incentive or coercion of some sort. That is where “Nick” needs to be scrutinized.

I can't compute the fact that the Webster's went along with the fake story about Joan's murder is Palombo is the murderer. For me it doesn't make sense. The only thing that would make sense is that he know the killer, he was indirectly involved, and they needed the killer for some other thing. But Palombo being the killer just doesn't link with the Webster accepting a fake story knowing it's fake.

Sent from my LG-H831 using Tapatalk

 

[eve carson]

Hi Ebfortin 76,

I pulled together a lot of information that was compartmentalized throughout the history of this case. The evidence puts Andrew Palombo on the list of suspects. He is absolutely complicit in diverting the investigation. If he was not the offender, I am convinced he knew who did it.

In a previous post, I indicated intelligent people can be deceived. I consider myself reasonably intelligent and I apply a great deal of common sense. Even though everything that kept coming out was sensational, I trusted the information. We are conditioned to trust authorities. Finally, when Joan’s remains surfaced more than 30 miles from the alleged crime scene, I felt the Paradiso/boat scenario was highly improbable. I didn’t know the half of it.

It is hard to compute any parent or family member going along with a fake story about a murdered loved one. The Iannuzzis were intimidated, “persuaded,” and one family member even assaulted to go along with the Paradiso explanation. There are some family members that do believe Paradiso murdered Marie. I am sure, other family members threatened with other things buried the truth. The authorities need Paradiso to explain Joan’s loss. The Iannuzzi’s were denied justice for the sake of “solving” Joan’s case. Recovered documents support a wrongful conviction.

Did the Websters know the bearded man? Did they get the police report detailing the incident with the cabbie? What did they know when Burke and Palombo were partnered? Were they coerced, threatened, or deceived? I did not learn about the composite until 2009. I just got the detail to support that in August 2017. I only learned about the specifics of Joan’s recovery and the condition of the remains in 2009. I obtained certified court records regarding the boat in July 2015. Current custodians have major deficiencies in their files and lack a fundamental knowledge of the case.

I am still waiting on an FOIA appeal. There is an item in question, Burke misrepresented the location of the item. That is already verified. Potentially, the item can place someone in contact with Joan after she landed at Logan.

To get to the center of the storm requires getting through the blustery layers. Right now, recovered documents provide prosecutable misconduct for Tim Burke, Andrew Palombo, Carmen Tammaro, and SA Steve Broce.

Note: Palombo is deceased. He died in a motorcycle accident in 1997. The nature of that accident raised questions as well.

 

[Kiln Wood]

Hi Ebfortin 76,

I pulled together a lot of information that was compartmentalized throughout the history of this case. The evidence puts Andrew Palombo on the list of suspects. He is absolutely complicit in diverting the investigation. If he was not the offender, I am convinced he knew who did it.

In a previous post, I indicated intelligent people can be deceived. I consider myself reasonably intelligent and I apply a great deal of common sense. Even though everything that kept coming out was sensational, I trusted the information. We are conditioned to trust authorities. Finally, when Joan’s remains surfaced more than 30 miles from the alleged crime scene, I felt the Paradiso/boat scenario was highly improbable. I didn’t know the half of it.

It is hard to compute any parent or family member going along with a fake story about a murdered loved one. The Iannuzzis were intimidated, “persuaded,” and one family member even assaulted to go along with the Paradiso explanation. There are some family members that do believe Paradiso murdered Marie. I am sure, other family members threatened with other things buried the truth. The authorities need Paradiso to explain Joan’s loss. The Iannuzzi’s were denied justice for the sake of “solving” Joan’s case. Recovered documents support a wrongful conviction.

Did the Websters know the bearded man? Did they get the police report detailing the incident with the cabbie? What did they know when Burke and Palombo were partnered? Were they coerced, threatened, or deceived? I did not learn about the composite until 2009. I just got the detail to support that in August 2017. I only learned about the specifics of Joan’s recovery and the condition of the remains in 2009. I obtained certified court records regarding the boat in July 2015. Current custodians have major deficiencies in their files and lack a fundamental knowledge of the case.

I am still waiting on an FOIA appeal. There is an item in question, Burke misrepresented the location of the item. That is already verified. Potentially, the item can place someone in contact with Joan after she landed at Logan.

To get to the center of the storm requires getting through the blustery layers. Right now, recovered documents provide prosecutable misconduct for Tim Burke, Andrew Palombo, Carmen Tammaro, and SA Steve Broce.

Note: Palombo is deceased. He died in a motorcycle accident in 1997. The nature of that accident raised questions as well.

Would you care to elaborate, eve carson?

 

[eve carson]

Hi Kiln Wood,

Palombo attended a fireworks display in Lynn, MA on July 3, 1997. He and a friend were riding their motorcycles and headed to his daughter’s residence in Lynn. Even though it was around 11 pm, there would have been quite a bit of traffic, but this was a very familiar area for Palombo. He grew up in Lynn. He was turning right at an intersection; the speed would not have been that fast. Palombo hit a patch of oil and missed the curve in the road. He skidded into a guardrail. Alcohol and speed were not a factor. It seems like a bit of a fluke accident for an experienced rider at low speeds in a very familiar area.

If you recall from past posts, Palombo followed Paradiso’s estranged daughter and her friend at Logan on December 12, 1982. He gave the two young women a ride from the airport. Paradiso’s daughter knew Palombo after that. She indicated Palombo approached her in 1996 and wanted to talk. He said things were falling apart. She avoided him and never did speak with him. At that time, there was a lot of misconduct being exposed surrounding Whitey Bulger and the mob. The encounter and comment are not verifiable.

According to Tim Burke, he met Palombo before they partnered on Paradiso matters. They met during Bulger activities. Burke states he wrote a warrant to have Bulger’s garage bugged. The scheme had a couple parking a van in Bulger’s garage overnight. A trooper was hidden inside and planted devices after hours. Burke describes a large, long haired, undercover cop as the man driving the van in with an attractive assistant from his office. The incident happened, but the participants cannot be verified. The wiretap did not work; Bulger was tipped off.

Remember from a previous post, Carmen Tammaro, Palombo’s superior, met with Paradiso at the Charles Street Jail on August 1, 1982. Paradiso documented the meeting where Tammaro leaked FBI activities against the mafia. There is some corroboration for that meeting. Bond refers to a meeting at that time between Paradiso and the MSP. Tammaro and Palombo worked with Bond to get his statement. Other information documented in the letter proved to be true such as the arrest of the Angiulo’s.

The final piece I will comment on here is a meeting with ADA John Dawley on May 20, 2010. A PI attended with me. MSP Lt. Det. Norman Zuk was also in attendance during that meeting. The circumstances of Palombo’s death came up. Zuk subtlely threatened the PI’s license. That was documented immediately following the meeting. Keep in mind, more recently, Dawley suggested I not probe so deeply.

I do not want to side track into all sorts of conspiracies, but it is important to note there was a lot of nefarious behavior in Boston at that time. I do not see any connection with Joan and underground activity. The important takeaway for me was that these authorities were up to their eyeballs in a broken system.

I am trying to give all of you pieces that go into a more complete picture. This case went off in all sorts of wild speculation. I prefer to stick with things that can be verified and corroborated.

 

[ebfortin76]

Hi Ebfortin 76,

I pulled together a lot of information that was compartmentalized throughout the history of this case. The evidence puts Andrew Palombo on the list of suspects. He is absolutely complicit in diverting the investigation. If he was not the offender, I am convinced he knew who did it.

In a previous post, I indicated intelligent people can be deceived. I consider myself reasonably intelligent and I apply a great deal of common sense. Even though everything that kept coming out was sensational, I trusted the information. We are conditioned to trust authorities. Finally, when Joan’s remains surfaced more than 30 miles from the alleged crime scene, I felt the Paradiso/boat scenario was highly improbable. I didn’t know the half of it.

It is hard to compute any parent or family member going along with a fake story about a murdered loved one. The Iannuzzis were intimidated, “persuaded,” and one family member even assaulted to go along with the Paradiso explanation. There are some family members that do believe Paradiso murdered Marie. I am sure, other family members threatened with other things buried the truth. The authorities need Paradiso to explain Joan’s loss. The Iannuzzi’s were denied justice for the sake of “solving” Joan’s case. Recovered documents support a wrongful conviction.

Did the Websters know the bearded man? Did they get the police report detailing the incident with the cabbie? What did they know when Burke and Palombo were partnered? Were they coerced, threatened, or deceived? I did not learn about the composite until 2009. I just got the detail to support that in August 2017. I only learned about the specifics of Joan’s recovery and the condition of the remains in 2009. I obtained certified court records regarding the boat in July 2015. Current custodians have major deficiencies in their files and lack a fundamental knowledge of the case.

I am still waiting on an FOIA appeal. There is an item in question, Burke misrepresented the location of the item. That is already verified. Potentially, the item can place someone in contact with Joan after she landed at Logan.

To get to the center of the storm requires getting through the blustery layers. Right now, recovered documents provide prosecutable misconduct for Tim Burke, Andrew Palombo, Carmen Tammaro, and SA Steve Broce.

Note: Palombo is deceased. He died in a motorcycle accident in 1997. The nature of that accident raised questions as well.

I see what you mean, but still some logic analysis can, with a certain degree of probability, tell us the more probable course of events. To be deceived the Webster would have to close their eyes on years of contradictory information. And people that could have warned them at several point in time. For that reason, and other, I think Palombo is not the killer, BUT he knew very well who that killer was.

Sent from my LG-H831 using Tapatalk

 

[eve carson]

Hi Ebfortin 76,

George and Eleanor Webster are very intelligent people. They are educated and had the unique background in intelligence. They are organized and very detail oriented. I posted their itineraries on the frig. Recovered documents confirm their frequent trips to Boston.

There were individuals who told the Websters Bond was not the likely culprit. PI Ray Morgan, Det Gordon Richards of the Beverly PD, and officers from the Hamilton PD were among them.

Palombo is still on my list. There are some other details that keep him there. The evidence item I referred to previously is something I factor in. While I wait patiently for the FOIA appeal, I prefer not to go into what the item was. Burke misrepresented the item. Recovered documents affirm Burke’s representation was false. The current custodian was missing so many items, it is important to see whether their files contain this item and where it was recovered. Current custodians claim exemptions trying to deny information that was obtainable from another source. It is a fair concern, things do not match up in the files.

I agree that Palombo knew who murdered Joan. I think it is a reasonable conclusion Tammaro also knew. I doubt Burke knew at least initially. I don’t view Burke that smart based on what I have seen. He did know he was putting false information out there, not only to the public, but also the courts and other agencies. I will reinforce that with an example in a later post. I have serious concerns Palombo was present when Joan was killed. Did he project the crime on someone else with the Websters? He did project this crime onto Paradiso in the public, courts, and other agencies.

 

[ebfortin76]

Hi Ebfortin 76,

George and Eleanor Webster are very intelligent people. They are educated and had the unique background in intelligence. They are organized and very detail oriented. I posted their itineraries on the frig. Recovered documents confirm their frequent trips to Boston.

There were individuals who told the Websters Bond was not the likely culprit. PI Ray Morgan, Det Gordon Richards of the Beverly PD, and officers from the Hamilton PD were among them.

Palombo is still on my list. There are some other details that keep him there. The evidence item I referred to previously is something I factor in. While I wait patiently for the FOIA appeal, I prefer not to go into what the item was. Burke misrepresented the item. Recovered documents affirm Burke’s representation was false. The current custodian was missing so many items, it is important to see whether their files contain this item and where it was recovered. Current custodians claim exemptions trying to deny information that was obtainable from another source. It is a fair concern, things do not match up in the files.

I agree that Palombo knew who murdered Joan. I think it is a reasonable conclusion Tammaro also knew. I doubt Burke knew at least initially. I don’t view Burke that smart based on what I have seen. He did know he was putting false information out there, not only to the public, but also the courts and other agencies. I will reinforce that with an example in a later post. I have serious concerns Palombo was present when Joan was killed. Did he project the crime on someone else with the Websters? He did project this crime onto Paradiso in the public, courts, and other agencies.

The other thing we need to understand is why Paradiso. They didn't choose someone at random. Even though he has nothing to do with two murders, they went at great length to pin then on him, not someone else.




Sent from my LG-H831 using Tapatalk

 

[eve carson]

Hi Ebfortin 76,

There are several contributing factors. The pile on Paradiso was incredible.

Paradiso was vulnerable. He had a record for assault. At the time he was a parolee. Note: I have not reviewed case records for Paradiso’s conviction in the Constance Porter case. I have no intention to exonerate Paradiso for any legitimate offenses he may have committed. However, everything being spread during Joan’s investigation does not withstand scrutiny of the records.

Palombo and Tammaro both were familiar with Paradiso. Palombo became lead cop on the Iannuzzi case in February 1981. Tammaro grew up with Paradiso in the North End. I learned anecdotal information there may have been tension or rivalry between the two. Again, these are not incidents that can be corroborated.

Tammaro did affirm an incident from his high school years being arrested after a brawl on a Harbor cruise. The different pieces I learned suggest Patty Bono was also on the cruise. The NE was a neighborhood where vendettas festered. I also heard about a cop beating up Paradiso at a later time, jealous over a girl. I share this here so you understand the other pieces that provide a more complete picture of what I have gathered. In analyzing the case, I am going by documented facts I can verify.

There were two suspects named right away in the Iannuzzi case. David Doyle was the boyfriend. Paradiso attended the same wedding and was seen returning items to Marie at the bar. He was a parolee at the time. He was a reasonable person to look at. The police picked their scapegoat out of another case and then aggressively pursued a conviction. The authorities had and still have nothing to connect Paradiso to Joan. They created the perceptions by demonizing him in other matters.

In looking at the timeline and the misconduct evident in records, I have considered Paradiso was targeted right away or prior to Joan's murder. That indicates premeditation in Joan's loss. I cannot establish if that was the case. What is clear is that authorities were looking for someone to take the blame for Joan's loss beginning with the suppressed lead of the bearded man.

This case was an aggressive witchhunt. It was sickening to see how dirty this was.