Joan Lucinda Webster, this post is dedicated to your memory. You’re the only person that honorably deserves justice.
In a previous post, I indicated not to post again until somebody uploaded a solution to my “map clue” regarding Gareth Penn’s knowledge of your final resting place. No solution, as far as I’m aware, as hitherto been forthcoming! Conversely, barriers were immediately erected by people, mitigating “why” somebody living on the West Coast of the United States “could not” and “did not” have conceivable knowledge relating to your disappearance. These mitigating circumstances were raised because Mr. Penn’s book, Times 17, received, and wait for it, “bad reviews” on the Amazon platform. Subsequently, I raised my concerns about intellectual dishonesty appealing for transparency in the matter. Thus far regarding the latter, it suffices to say that things are quieter than the proverbial church mouse.
Furthermore, it’s alleged that the entire LE brotherhood hasn’t found a single piece of evidence suggesting that Mr. Gareth Penn, or his suspect, a Mr. Michael Henry O’Hare, were at Logan airport on the night of your disappearance. It’s remarkable that nobody’s pondered on the possibility, or asked the question, could either party have traveled under an alias? Joan, I lie! Someone did raise the alias question. Your father, George Webster! In a later he mailed the FBI on April 29, 1982, your father asked them to investigate the “alias” avenue. No one would know for sure if the FBI followed through with your father’s request. No reports substantiating this lead have been forthcoming. Could this explain why the man seen with you Joan, had a heavy suitcase? Did he fly in on the same night?
Be that as it may, Mr. Gareth Penn published his book in 1987. Individuals “contend” that he had ample time to include “known” facts about your disappearance in his narrative. Explicitly, because in April 1982 he “initiated” communication with your parents, Terry and George, and also because the media on the East Coast reported on your disappearance. With the latter, perhaps pigeon post was an effective way of carrying messages from one side of the mainland to the other. The talk around the campfire is that media institutions from both the East and West Coast barely share editorial reports. I should say in fairness to him that in Times 17 he “alleges” having “networks” on the East Coast who kept him up-to-date with what was transpiring in Massachusetts.
Now, Joan, you vanished on the night of November 28, 1981. Between 1981 and 1987 - with 1987 being the year Times 17 was published - the whole world supposed you lay at the bottom of the ocean. There was no indication whatsoever that your final resting place was somewhere near the end of a trail leading off Chebacco Rd, in Hamilton, Massachusetts. However, I strongly disagree! It’s a big call, but I’m prepared to back my claim, and not shout it out from the rooftops! In this instance, unlike others, I’ve researched the subject matter, and the ensuing result, as fate would have it, designate that I’ve been handed the trump card. I’ve discovered something unknown to everybody else except the dealer and me.
Your final resting place was revealed in April 1990, when a veterinarian found your skull purportedly near a drain. Subsequently, the authorities discovered your skeletal remains nearby. It’s recorded that your skull showed trauma with a blunt instrument causing your death. Unfortunately, only you and the criminals know the truth. I mull over the issue why two of your ribs we also found to be broken. Folks claim that “there are two sides to every story.” In your case, however, I believe there are three sides! Your side, conjecture, and the truth!
In Times 17 Mr. Penn enlightens his readers that Delphic utterances are and have been part of life since antiquity. People who’ve read the book (and not reviews) will validate my claim. Unmistakably, the Oracle of Delphi (possibly in a trance-like state when uttering his revelations) although gifted in the supernatural, was also a highly intelligent being.
When I replied in kind to objections made by fellow posters about my epigrammatic style, my retort was promptly removed. In other words, according to forum rules, regulations, and guidelines (which by the way I’ve read and agreed with) my response created perpetual discontent and agitation. I found out the hard way that my lexicon did not conform with regulatory measures. I’ve since apologized for my actions. Only one person was courteous enough to accept my apology. It doesn’t matter. No harm no foul!
Therefore, and fearing to have further posts deleted, henceforth my utterances will be Delphic. It will, I believe, conform to forum rules and guidelines, and I think that I will not be encroaching on them. Furthermore, I hope my preferred choice of the narrative will henceforth halt the humanistic temptation of pressing the delete button on the designated computer device.
Ambiguity is the key to being Delphic. People can mislead without departing from the truth, something that LEA, FBI, CIA, and other governmental institutions, are quite capable of accomplishing. There are however different ways of describing this kind of deception. For instance, an author, and not exclusively Gareth Penn, may choose to allow their audience to deceive itself into thinking that it has the whole story when further work on their part would reveal the whole. Therefore, I need to be careful with my ensuing utterances. Not wanting to seem picayune about definite “rules and regulations,” when members utter “Amen,” a “religious exclamation,” to validate their opinion, it’s entirely okay. In other words, it seems to comply with the stipulated rubrics. I believe in fairness for all and not just a selected few. In other words, what’s good for the goose is good for the gander! However, as previously mentioned, no harm no foul! Please note that I’m not criticizing anyone but merely stating a fact. I believe it falls well inside the allowed parameters of this forum.
This brings me to my next point.
To some extent, I think that people participate in forums because they feel that they are the cynosure of all eyes. I also believe that to some degree forum participation is an indication of loneliness. It took great courage and perseverance to join this forum. I prefer sitting on the boundary line examining people’s discussions and having thought experiments. These cost nothing and are extremely rewarding. Ask Einstein about them. I joined the theatre because I believe that I’ve uncovered “truths” regarding your case that nobody else knows. You’re not the only one I’m doing this for. There’s another. But you’re in Heaven so you should know that, right?
There are two groups of people in the world. The “great pretenders” (it has nothing to do with Freddy Mercury’s song) people who blend in with their surroundings so convincingly that they are nearly impossible to investigate thus pretend to offer a wealth of expertise and experience when, in fact, their work is a never-ending merry-go-round. Few ever produce solid “evidence” corroborating their claims. They chose however to criticize those who can and those who can back their declarations with solid proof. The latter in other words, those who put their money where their mouth is, are the “achievers.” I believe that I fall into that category. I’m not sure about others.
Reports uploaded to this forum (together with a book and additional websites) suggest that members of your family may have conspired in your demise. If that’s proven accurate, your loved ones could not be trusted.
Thus, who can we trust?
Should surviving members of your family be trusted? Ex-CIA operatives in the family circle are both an alarming and mysterious status quo. But then again George Webster was an administrator at the CIA, not an agent. He had no operational connection with either intelligence acquisition or intelligence analysis.
Who’s telling us the truth, and who’s not? Who’s evil and who’s not? Why were you killed? If your parents were involved, why? What secrets did you know that it was decided to terminate your life? If any? Was your murder part of a bigger scheme that didn’t necessarily involve your family? Is there still a scheme in place, and one that consists of several entities? Where you at the wrong place at the wrong time and your parent’s links to the CIA, or secrets, were irrelevant to your fate? These are the central questions that remain to be answered.
As I previously mentioned, there’s your side of the story, conjecture, and the truth! It’s left to us mere mortals to put the pieces of the puzzle together.
Below is the map in question. It’s the map that veils the clue to your final resting place in Chebacco Rd., Hamilton. In other words, it’s a Delphic utterance. It’s found on page 203 in Times 17.
To the untrained eye Joan, the map seems harmless enough not to warrant further investigation. I provided the clue to solving this mystery when I informed everyone that by extending the axis of 8:22 line all the way across the right-hand-side of the map in an ENE direction, something interesting would be revealed. However, not a single soul attempted my exercise but instead decided to mitigate reasons for their lack of judgment and apparent nescience apropos the subject matter.
Unfortunately, I’ve been unable to find an exact copy of Mr. Gareth Penn’s map. He used a USGS map of the Concord area. Thus, I had to make due and relied on the accuracy of Google maps to help me along. I assure you that my exercise is solid, and the same result will be achieved when using Mr. Penn’s USGS map. I took great care when attempting the exercise and requested the assistance of a qualified surveyor living in my complex. Initially, he was skeptical about the exercise. We made several enlargements of both maps (Mr. Penn's copy and Google’s) and extrapolated the position of both apexes on my Google maps copy using Mr. Penn’s reference as a starting point. Furthermore, to deem the exercise foolproof, I placed a red rectangle demarcating Chebacco Rd’s entry to the north (rectangle left side) and exit to the south (rectangle bottom). The blue piece inside the rectangle is the full extent of Chebacco Rd.
When I explained the reason for this exercise, and after seeing the results, the surveyor was left speechless. In his professional opinion, this exercise could not be possible unless Mr. Gareth Penn used his Artillery Surveying qualifications to guide him along. He indicated that the likelihood that two arbitrary lines positioned on a USGS map of the Concord area resulting in one of the lines intersecting directly over Chebacco Rd. in Hamilton being a random happenstance is impossible. And he indicated that the rectangle validates my claim because there’s a high degree of accuracy involved. In other words, if Mr. Penn had placed both arrows (x like format) another 10° higher or lower, the extension of the 8:22 line in an ENE direction would have missed Chebacco Rd. completely. Using Mr. Penn’s analogy, it’s like firing a 155mm Howitzer shell, and landing it on a dime!
I challenge any qualified surveyor, either military or public, reading this post to disprove my claim and exercise!
However, there are further Delphic utterances that indicate Mr. Penn was aware of your resting place long before your body was discovered. Recapitulating, ambiguity is the key to being Delphic, and people can mislead without departing from the truth.
Below is a copy of a paragraph taken from page 290 in Times 17.
Once again Joan, to the untrained eye, it reads nothing more than gobbledygook. The author describes what someone named Charlie found in the middle of the woods behind Fenn School, in Concord, Massachusetts. Proceeding forth, remind yourself of what Delphic utterances are all about. Mr. Penn is correct when he claims, and I quote “that scenario didn’t make much sense…” What the heck was a boat, a balsam tree, and 329 pieces of paper inside a manila envelope doing in the middle of the woods in Concord? Unless the boat stayed there after the waters receded immediately after the Great Flood, when God told Noah to build the ark, there’s no conceivable explanation to corroborate the find. And 329 pieces of paper inside a manila envelope? Yeh, right! I can live with the balsam tree because there’s evidence suggesting that they’re found in the state of Massachusetts. But, there’s more to the mystery about a “young” balsam tree whose parents were nowhere to be seen, then meets the eye.
Research is paramount when investigating sensitive matters. Without it, you’re up S creek without a paddle!
Here’s a question I want to ask everyone who’s dedicated “valued” time to your cause, Joan. Before asking the question, I’m prepared to bet everything I own that not a single soul attempted the exercise. Two have, but not the others. If you’re reading this, and you’ve followed Joan’s case, irrespective of when you began your journey, do you know the meaning of Chebacco? Have you ever opened a dictionary looking for the meaning of the word? Have you perhaps Googled the word? Thomas Jefferson once said, and I quote “honesty is the first chapter in the book of wisdom.” Be honest with your evaluation of the problem. Don’t worry about researching the subject matter. It’s too late now. I’ll save you some time.
The Merriam Webster dictionary defines Chebacco as
a narrow-sterned BOAT formerly much used in Newfoundland fisheries.
I find it astonishing that good old Charlie found a “misplaced boat” in the middle of the woods in Concord. And a boat that has direct links to Chebacco. Both words are an interwoven lexicon. Wow, it seems that the principles of Delphic utterances are evidently at work here, don’t you agree? However, it’s imperative that we test our theory making sure that boat/Chebacco wasn’t a quirk of nature.
What could 329 pieces of paper mean? According to Mr. Penn, perhaps they were “garbage.” And I tend to agree with him. They are garb
AGE! Wow, has the author uttered another Delphic announcement that nobody’s understood? Until now, that is? Is he misleading people without departing from the truth? Garbage is an anagram for BRAG AGE. In other words, “bragging about age.” But how could he possibly “brag about age” using Delphic pronouncements? And whose age was he bragging about? That’s the $329 question! The secret lies within the manila envelope!
Why squares of paper? And why 329? Do yourself a favor and peek at a calendar you may have nearby. How are the days of the year depicted? Yes, you’re correct, in little “squares.” And back in 1981, what day of the year was represented by the “329[SUP]th[/SUP] square of paper?”
Day 329 fell on November 25, (11/25) of that calendar year (1981). If I’m correct with my analogy, and I believe that I am, Joan you disappeared in November (11) 1981, and you were twenty-five years old (25) at the time of your disappearance, right? I believe I don’t need to say anything else about the 329 squares of paper. I’ve made my point and provided the solution to the exercise.
What do we know thus far?
Boat = Chebacco
329 squares of paper = 11/25 (month and age of your disappearance)
Balsam tree =?
There’s the little problem surrounding the little balsam tree. How did the oracle mislead without departing from the truth? Using the same device, he utilized when uttering the word “garbage.” In other words, an anagram.
Balsam = lambsa, and,
LAMB SA = LAMB(SA)CRIFICE
Here, allow me to show you what I mean. Reread the following sentences;
- “What I had was a young balsam tree, a boat, and a manila envelope stuffed with little squares of paper.”
- “…then slid the envelope under this boat sitting out in this clearing next to a young balsam tree whose parents were nowhere to be seen.”
Now read them again but with the solutions to the Delphic utterances.
- “What I had was a young lamb sacrifice (balsam tree), a Chebacco (boat) and a manila envelope stuffed with 11/25 (329 square of paper)
- “…then slid the envelope under this boat sitting out in this clearing next to a young lamb sacrifice (balsam tree) whose parents were nowhere to be seen.”
And that’s how Delphic pronouncements are made!
Finally, below is an image comparing the withheld sketch (guy seen with Joan) and Mr. Gareth Penn.
If this post hasn’t raised the air on the back of your necks, I don’t know what will. Furthermore, there’s no hocus-pocus at work behind my solutions. They’re logical and presented in an easy to understand way. They prove without a shadow of a doubt that there’s more to this case than what most people are prepared to accept. Neglect these facts at your peril. I can’t be held responsible for choices you may or may not make.
I’m doing this for Joan.
I rest my case!