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

[Sor Juana]

I think Joan stopping at the desk at Logan was probably where she was alerted. She traveled alone, engaged a cab, and planned to go back to the dorm. The man then appears next to her at the cab. She said he was with her, so was not startled.

I think you can look at a composite and "see" someone you might suspect. A good example of that is the people who believe Gareth Penn was the Zodiac killer and murdered Joan. They send me all kinds of pictures suggesting the bearded man was Penn.

I rely more on the eyewitness description. There are several things that stand out. Certain things can be disguised, others cannot. The stature of the man was important. He was under 6" and approximately 160 pounds. He wore an overcoat. That is not the attire of a student, a cabbie, or a perp randomly looking for victims. The man's demeanor is significant. He was demanding, argumentative about loading a suitcase. Those traits are all very familiar to me and do suggest someone.

Hello Eve,

As I continue reading through the thread, I have a few questions. While I understand that you don't consider Gareth Penn a suspect, did the police ever investigate him at all? His resemblance to the sketch is quite striking. For peace of mind, it might be worth formally checking his alibi and whether he was travelling at the same time as Joan, or if he could have been in the vicinity.

I don't believe he was the Zodiac, but his deep involvement in the Zodiac case seems unusual for an average person. He was notably active around crime investigations, and there must be a reason for that. What is actually known about him, and if he has been officially ruled out as a suspect, are there others who closely match the sketch (which is our only available description)?

Thank you for any insights you can provide.

 

[eve carson]

Hi Sor Juana,

Gareth Penn inserted himself into this investigation based on his Zodiac research. He made contact with the Websters. I believe they strung him along. Based on the Times 17 book Penn wrote, the Websters shared information with him. An example is when George's father sold an expensive painting. Based on my experiences with the Websters, that was nothing more than inflating their importance. It had nothing to do with anything about Joan. According to Penn, Eleanor Webster got her hands on a credit card voucher for Penn's suspect, Michael Henry O'Hare, and sent it to Penn. Did she have the skills to get the voucher? Her intelligence background might explain that. I know she discreetly took something of mine that left me baffled for years. What I do know is that the incident Penn described using the voucher to make a purchase and send it to O'Hare did happen. He claimed he was trying to smoke him out.

I read Times 17. Frankly, it gave me a headache. Penn was certainly obsessed with the Zodiac murders. The FBI had Penn on their radar even before Joan disappeared. Nothing places him in the vicinity of Joan's disappearance. On top of that, he would have had to know where she would be, have her confidence, and set up a situation to have someone waiting in the cab line in another car. Then you have to ask yourself, why would the authorities and the Websters want to shield him. Penn has nothing to do with Joan's murder.

I can look at the composite and see someone else. It's the eyes in particular that haunt me. I think different people looking at a composite could come up with all sorts of people. All of the pieces have to fit. What is distressing is that the Authorities and the Websters suppressed this lead. The Websters had it in hand on December 1, 1981. I never heard word one about this lead. Only in digging out the records did I understand how I was deceived.

 

[eve carson]

Correction. The Websters had the eyewitness lead in hand on December 21, 1981.

 

[eve carson]

​

OK,
I am getting things kicked off. If anyone has any trouble with any of the links, please let me know.

​

Victims of Injustice Speak

The integrity of people in positions of trust is fundamental for a normal functioning society. A dysfunctional system jeopardizes the public, who often have little or no recourse. There is a need for transparency and accountability against public corruption. As a result of my own personal experience, I have set up a new foundation, Victims of Injustice Speak, VOIS Inc., to educate, advocate, and provide a voice for injured parties of public corruption.

Victims of Injustice Speak was born from the tragic 1981 murder of Joan Webster and nearly 20 years of in-depth research into her unsolved case. Recovered source documents exposed a serious level of malfeasance committed by authorities involved during the investigation. Records revealed suppressed evidence, fabricated evidence, threatened witnesses, false witnesses, improperly entangled cases, and a complete disregard for the known facts. Authorities promoted a false explanation that even lacked the alleged crime scene and littered a trail with other victims. The state fabricated a story that denied justice. Today, the current custodians of the Joan Webster case “preserve” a fraudulent case disregarding evidence brought forward from verified sources.

The Joan Webster case is not an isolated instance. The effect of egregious misconduct has a rippling effect and leaves people susceptible. Abuse of authority is a violation of public trust. Failure to hold authorities accountable exposes the vulnerable to a real risk of harm, even becoming victims of crime themselves.

We have all heard the adage, “When you see something, say something.” When victims speak, they should be heard. I invite you to join with Victims of Injustice Speak, VOIS, Inc. with your support, your experience as a resource, and with your donations.

Victims of Injustice Speak VOIS Inc. is a 501(c)(3) organization registered with the IRS under the laws of the state of Indiana. All donations are tax deductible. Donations to VOIS will support community outreach, promotional materials, research, educational materials, establish conference and speaking opportunities to address public corruption, victim services, and develop a team of support advocates and resources. BE A VOIS.



Thank you,

Eve Carson
Founder
www.beavois.org
info@beavois.org

 

[lisette]

Let me add some personal dots so you get a sense of my concern. I am not going to air dirty laundry. These are things that I think are relevant to the discussion. If they are verifiable, I will note it with an *

* Let me begin with the fact that I was pregnant when Joan disappeared. I had a miscarriage the same night she disappeared. I felt a special bond with Joan because of that, but as I have looked at records and my personal experiences, I do think it is relevant.

On Christmas 1981, George said, "She is gone, we have to move on." No tears, very stoic.

In August of 1990, after Joan's remains surfaced, Eleanor told a family member that Paradiso's girlfriend had one of Joan's rings. Paradiso, nor anyone associated with him had anything belonging to Joan. (That would have been a slam dunk case)

My former brother-in-law suspected Anne, Joan's sister, had been molested. He could never get her to talk about it.

* Steve used to get naked in the hot tub when my adolescent girls and friends were around. He got out once when a teen who had been watching the dogs came to get paid. She was visibly shaken when he said turn around and got out naked. Her mother was livid. I tried to no avail to work with counselors about his behavior that it was not appropriate. (This was not long before we divorced). When I raised the issue with Eleanor for her help, she said it was his house. The Websters do not have healthy boundaries.

In a discussion about discipline, I asked Steve if his parents ever disciplined him. He said his father hit him so hard one time it sent him to the ER for something he did to Anne. He would not elaborate.

* In 2001, Joan's first cousin John Reed was convicted of sexual assault of children. He is listed on the sex offender registry. No one ever mentioned a word to me about this. As a note, Eleanor's sister Marge, Joan's aunt and John Reed's mother was also reported to the police at this time because of her behavior with grandchildren.

* In 2001 I found the Letter to God with allegations against Steve. The letter and the author are verified and notarized. There is contemporaneous and corroborating evidence. This was reported to professionals and authorities. There is a police file.

My children were very hostile toward me and had a "war room" set up. Among the things they kept in a locked closet was the scrapbook I kept with articles about Joan.

At Christmas 2002, Eleanor called me a "whistleblower" with such disdain it sent a chill up my spine. It was in regard to speaking out about hazing that was going on at my children's swim club.

Steve's hallmark phrase was "Don't tell." He would say it to me and say it to our children.

* In 2003 I found my children's journals. There is corroborating evidence in them. I did provide information from these to the family counselors and police. (NOTE: The letter to God made allegations about Steve. There is one journal entry on a page where my children were venting about me. My child appeared to be blaming me for Steve's behavior.)

* One of my children felt responsible to keep me alive.

* On January 22, 2009, I received a hand delivered anonymous letter to my mailbox. It made allegations I was delusional or disturbed.

On Christmas Eve 2009, I took small gifts for my children to the house. I could see George in the family room. When he realized it was me at the door, he ran and hid.

* In July 2010, I received a flood of emails to two emails used exclusively to communicate with the Websters. It contained the same insinuations that I was not right in the head (to put it nicely). The IP address was linked to a Webster family member.

* On Christmas night 2012, I received a profanity laced email from George wishing me to die. The IP address was identified and implicates another member of the Webster family.

* On October 22, 2014, I received an email from Anne. The bullying tactics were on full display.

* On December 8, 2014, I received an anonymous letter, mailed from out of town. Very demeaning and wishing me to die. (NOTE: People connected to this investigation got anonymous letters, Paradiso and his girlfriend Candacy Weyant.) (I am aware of an incident where Steve sent an anonymous letter smearing a coworker.)

* On November 28, 2006, George and Eleanor publicly supported Tim Burke's fallacious book.

This is to give you a glimpse behind closed doors with the Websters. They have a strong public persona. They care about image. My experience was much different, but it became more apparent over time.

There are two incidents that I am not going to discuss here, but they leave me scared stiff. At the time, there was some sort of explanation, but with the benefit of the lens I have now, certain family members scare me to death.

Eve, I have read this thread with much interest and empathy for you and your situation. I would like to know, if you feel free to share, how your relationship with your children is now? Hopefully ,you are not still estranged.

 

[eve carson]

Hi Lisette,

My children are in a very difficult position. They were not born until several years after Joan's disappearance. What they know about Joan's case is from the family. They have been left very vulnerable just as I was. The Webster family has been very hostile that I have dug into this case. That puts my children in the crosshairs. I am very sensitive to that. They are acutely aware it might expose things they do not want people to know. It's not a good place to be. I understand the sensitive nature of family secrets.

At one point, they had a "war room" with details how to undermine me. When I found it, one of the items they had in the locked closet was the scrapbook of articles about Joan. That was a puzzling item for them to have stashed in the closet. I have received an apology from one of them for the lies and treatment I endured. My children had nothing to do with what happened to Joan. Their greater concern is what could come out. I walk a tightrope. The circumstances have not allowed for positive healing and appropriate help.

The truth allows for genuine healing. Being under the influence of family that were not truthful about what happened to Joan, and framing a scapegoat are the concerns I have now. We all know the adage, "When you see something, say something." I believe that is the right path.

 

[lisette]

Hi Lisette,

My children are in a very difficult position. They were not born until several years after Joan's disappearance. What they know about Joan's case is from the family. They have been left very vulnerable just as I was. The Webster family has been very hostile that I have dug into this case. That puts my children in the crosshairs. I am very sensitive to that. They are acutely aware it might expose things they do not want people to know. It's not a good place to be. I understand the sensitive nature of family secrets.

At one point, they had a "war room" with details how to undermine me. When I found it, one of the items they had in the locked closet was the scrapbook of articles about Joan. That was a puzzling item for them to have stashed in the closet. I have received an apology from one of them for the lies and treatment I endured. My children had nothing to do with what happened to Joan. Their greater concern is what could come out. I walk a tightrope. The circumstances have not allowed for positive healing and appropriate help.

The truth allows for genuine healing. Being under the influence of family that were not truthful about what happened to Joan, and framing a scapegoat are the concerns I have now. We all know the adage, "When you see something, say something." I believe that is the right path.

Thank you for replying. God bless you as you navigate this difficult path with your children. I do hope that someday, if not now, they will understand the importance of what you have and are trying to do and respect you for it. If I read between the lines a little, it seems that some of this involves their father, so I can understand denial. But, as you said, only the truth can set one free. I plan to order and read your book soon. Again, may God bless you on your journey to exposing the truth.

 

[eve carson]

Hi Lisette,

Thank you for your kindness. It has been a difficult walk. Trust in the Lord are very appropriate for me. I am grateful to have a rock-solid foundation to help me through all of this. The Good Lord has carried me on his shoulders for a long time.

 

[eve carson]

After relentless efforts to obtain records from the current custodian of Joan's case, I have come to some conclusions. The custodian claims they have provided all responsive requests for records about the boat, the alleged crime scene. They only provided a boat registration. That is not evidence that the boat was a crime scene. The FBI conducted extensive testing on the boat. The custodian does not have this in their files, so they claim. They do not have the warrant to search the boat. They do not have any records from case CR 85-010-S that affirmed the boat was sunk four months before Joan disappeared. They did not have the snitch Robert Bond's statement or MSP interview, the foundational documents to allege Paradiso was the culprit. I brought all of this to the attention of the custodian. Still, they claim these records are not in the files. The current custodian was grossly deficient in relevant records.

All of these records are exculpatory in favor of Paradiso's innocence. One document the custodian did have was the eyewitness description of the man with Joan at Logan who maneuvered Joan to a different car. That man was definitely not Paradiso. He was much smaller in stature than Paradiso. Even though the current custodian is missing many records, they did have evidence that discredits the Paradiso theory.

The Joan record files were shifted to the current custodian in 1990 when Joan's remains surfaced in their jurisdiction. This was the third DAO to handle the case. Tim Burke's office of Suffolk County was exposed in 1991 of hiding exculpatory evidence and indicated it impacted cases from 1980-1988. The aggressive pursuit of Paradiso was right in the heart of this malfeasance.

Conclusion 1: The current custodian did not receive complete records.
Conclusion 2: The current custodian is ignoring verified evidence brought forward.
Conclusion 3: The current custodian is "preserving" a fraudulent case.

The five people who aggressively influenced the Paradiso boat theory becomes the focus of any legitimate investigation. Tim Burke, Andrew Palombo, Carmen Tammaro, George and Eleanor Webster. Source documents affirmed all of these individuals were in possession of exculpatory evidence favoring Paradiso's innocence. Two of them, Palombo and Tammaro, knew the correct cause of death with correct detail more than seven years before Joan's remains surfaced.

I was warned by ADA John Dawley not to probe so deeply. This was clearly a cover up at the time and continues to be covered up by the current custodian.

 

[deadfoot13]

After relentless efforts to obtain records from the current custodian of Joan's case, I have come to some conclusions. The custodian claims they have provided all responsive requests for records about the boat, the alleged crime scene. They only provided a boat registration. That is not evidence that the boat was a crime scene. The FBI conducted extensive testing on the boat. The custodian does not have this in their files, so they claim. They do not have the warrant to search the boat. They do not have any records from case CR 85-010-S that affirmed the boat was sunk four months before Joan disappeared. They did not have the snitch Robert Bond's statement or MSP interview, the foundational documents to allege Paradiso was the culprit. I brought all of this to the attention of the custodian. Still, they claim these records are not in the files. The current custodian was grossly deficient in relevant records.

All of these records are exculpatory in favor of Paradiso's innocence. One document the custodian did have was the eyewitness description of the man with Joan at Logan who maneuvered Joan to a different car. That man was definitely not Paradiso. He was much smaller in stature than Paradiso. Even though the current custodian is missing many records, they did have evidence that discredits the Paradiso theory.

The Joan record files were shifted to the current custodian in 1990 when Joan's remains surfaced in their jurisdiction. This was the third DAO to handle the case. Tim Burke's office of Suffolk County was exposed in 1991 of hiding exculpatory evidence and indicated it impacted cases from 1980-1988. The aggressive pursuit of Paradiso was right in the heart of this malfeasance.

Conclusion 1: The current custodian did not receive complete records.
Conclusion 2: The current custodian is ignoring verified evidence brought forward.
Conclusion 3: The current custodian is "preserving" a fraudulent case.

The five people who aggressively influenced the Paradiso boat theory becomes the focus of any legitimate investigation. Tim Burke, Andrew Palombo, Carmen Tammaro, George and Eleanor Webster. Source documents affirmed all of these individuals were in possession of exculpatory evidence favoring Paradiso's innocence. Two of them, Palombo and Tammaro, knew the correct cause of death with correct detail more than seven years before Joan's remains surfaced.

I was warned by ADA John Dawley not to probe so deeply. This was clearly a cover up at the time and continues to be covered up by the current custodian.

How frustrating!!

 

[eve carson]

Hi Deadfoot 13,

More than frustrating. They do not demonstrate the commitment to seek justice. That's why I have started the foundation above. I am currently reaching out to build a list of resources. Following the protocols of the state does no good if they are only interested in sweeping justice under the rug. I hope everyone will take a few minutes to check out the site. If you have suggestions of anyone that has the background to be a resource, let me know. You can contact me privately through the contact page. I am scheduled to do another interview mid-August about the foundation.

 

[STLBlues]

Hi Eve. I discovered this thread/case the other day and just finished reading the entire thing. I must say, I truly admire your dedication and tenacity. Thoughts and prayers with you as you continue to seek justice for Joan.

 

[eve carson]

New Interview with Retired FBI Special Agent and attorney Aleks Litts Just One More Question

 

[LoisLane47]

Hello, Eve:

You write that it is significant that Joan's "meet the parents" visit for her beau was cancelled in the days before her death. If I recall correctly, you state that "something" must have happened. What does the beau say? Does Keith say Joan called him with an explanation?

 

[cenazoic]

Hi Eve - thanks for posting the podcast. As an aside, it’s one if the very few I’ve been able to listen to - they start right off with a comprehensive yet briefish summary of the case, no awkward/inappropriate joking around for interminable minutes, just well done, “Just One More Question “!

Anyway, towards the end you discussed how there’s no seeming accountability/oversight for the DA’s office.

I wonder if you’ve ever tried approaching a law school proposing some sort of case file review of what you have as a project for students. (I hear there’s some law schools in Boston ). This wouldn’t get you any accountability per se, but it might get the case some exposure and/or interesting outside insights into either your research or the legal maneuverings that have gone on.

 

[eve carson]

Hi Lois Lane 47 and Cenazoic,

Let me give you a brief overview of Keith. He was a fraternity brother of my brother's in his undergrad years. He was in my brother's wedding. I have known him for many years. After he graduated, he went to Harvard Business School where he met Joan. At the time Joan disappeared, Keith had graduated and was living and working in Detroit.

One thing I learned about the Websters very early on was that they make their plans down to the minutest details. It was really obsessive. I remember my first visit. I got a letter with dinner seating charts, where I would sit in the car driving into NYC, and on and on. Over time, I learned just how aggravated George and Eleanor were for any diversion from their plans. George read me the riot act that we left our summer Nantucket visit sooner than he wanted. School was starting, but George found that an imposition.

Keith spoke with my brother about the cancelled visit, but did not elaborate about any explanation. I'm sure Joan would not have made much more of it than plans changing. In the Webster world, any change of plans would have been dictated by George and Eleanor. Everyone abided by George's schedule, so it was most likely George's plans that changed. One detail that was never divulged in Joan's case was that George travelled that same weekend. That was not characteristic for him to cut his holiday weekend and plans short to travel.

Eleanor actually confirmed my recollection many years later in a statement she made in a published interview in Boston Magazine. It's a red flag when you realize the family influenced a false narrative about Joan's disappearance and murder.

I think it would be excellent for a law school to take this case for a case study. That's not easy in MA. Anyone looking into this case logically turns to the current custodian. They are running interference. They have blocked me from making victim impact statements publicly. They are ignoring FBI reports and certified court records. They have circled the wagons.

Although I will continue to try to reach out to law schools or similar curriculums, I can tell you there is currently a review of the case. I only know that the request is still open. The wheels of justice move very slowly, and you have to pray for a dedicated public servant who is committed to the truth.

 

[LoisLane47]

Hi Lois Lane 47 and Cenazoic,

Let me give you a brief overview of Keith. He was a fraternity brother of my brother's in his undergrad years. He was in my brother's wedding. I have known him for many years. After he graduated, he went to Harvard Business School where he met Joan. At the time Joan disappeared, Keith had graduated and was living and working in Detroit.

One thing I learned about the Websters very early on was that they make their plans down to the minutest details. It was really obsessive. I remember my first visit. I got a letter with dinner seating charts, where I would sit in the car driving into NYC, and on and on. Over time, I learned just how aggravated George and Eleanor were for any diversion from their plans. George read me the riot act that we left our summer Nantucket visit sooner than he wanted. School was starting, but George found that an imposition.

Keith spoke with my brother about the cancelled visit, but did not elaborate about any explanation. I'm sure Joan would not have made much more of it than plans changing. In the Webster world, any change of plans would have been dictated by George and Eleanor. Everyone abided by George's schedule, so it was most likely George's plans that changed. One detail that was never divulged in Joan's case was that George travelled that same weekend. That was not characteristic for him to cut his holiday weekend and plans short to travel.

Eleanor actually confirmed my recollection many years later in a statement she made in a published interview in Boston Magazine. It's a red flag when you realize the family influenced a false narrative about Joan's disappearance and murder.

I think it would be excellent for a law school to take this case for a case study. That's not easy in MA. Anyone looking into this case logically turns to the current custodian. They are running interference. They have blocked me from making victim impact statements publicly. They are ignoring FBI reports and certified court records. They have circled the wagons.

Although I will continue to try to reach out to law schools or similar curriculums, I can tell you there is currently a review of the case. I only know that the request is still open. The wheels of justice move very slowly, and you have to pray for a dedicated public servant who is committed to the truth.

Thank you for your response. Given the allegations you have made regarding prosecutorial misconduct, it would seem the Massachusetts board of overseers of the bar would investigate. You mentioned at one point that all of the prosecutor's cases were jeopardized at some point by his alleged misdeeds. Was this investigated? I'm also curious as to why the mainstream media has not reported on this as you seem to have amassed excellent documentation.