818 thoughts on “Questions??? I Have Plenty!!!

  1. patsportal, I wouldn’t take it that far. As I said I doubt if Christine Juhl had anything to do with the crime itself but I do believe she knows something more like the aftermath, she lived with David Spence, she was at the apartment when David and whomever came back that night. And maybe she knows some things that happened before the murders. I do believe she was able to put things together because of what she knew and that is what made her finally decide to leave David Spence less than a week after the murders.


  2. patsportal, to be completely honest a little bit of both. I don’t have time to get into it right now, read the stuff I have written. I will get into more detail tonight.


  3. This is a subject I havn’te gotten into for a while and since I believe it is one of the essential keys to unlocking the truth of what happened on the night of July 13, 1982, a rehashing of information I’ve gone over at length numerous times is in line. When I look at the information involving Christine Juhl in some way, the first thing that jumps out at me is the information Gene Deal gave, he was David Spence’s parole officer. The only terms of his parole that David seemed to follow was informing his parole officer when he moved and this was the case sometime around the time of the murders, Deal made a house visit after David and Christine moved into the Northwood Apartments, the apartment Muneer Deeb had rented for Gayle Kelly in June. The date Deal gives for this visit is July 21st and his observation is that David and Christine were just moving in at that point. The problem, Christine Juhl states she got into a fight with David the night of July 19th and left that night then came back the next day to collect her things, that would be July 20th. Now the difference of dates by one day really shouldn’t be a big issue, something Deal witnessed Christine Juhl say that day is. Deal states that while he was at the apartment Christine and David got into an argument, he didn’t know what the argument was about but Christine said she could say something about the two girls, David shared her down and she shut up. The obvious question, what two girls was she talking about? Of coarse I have asked her about this but she just deflects the question back to the difference she has with Deal with the dates, even when I tell her ok I will accept her date as when this occurred I still can’t get an answer from her, this alone is very troubling. Whom were the two girls she was referring to and what could she say about them?

    Before I get too far into this, I have to admit i’m the only one going down this path and if you have read this story before you might not want to read it again, I believe Jill Montgomery stayed at David Spence’s mother’s house when she ran away in January 1982 and Christine and David were living there at the time. Fast forward 30 some odd years later I start talking to Christine Juhl about how things were going around that time, back in 1982. Over our many conversations she has made many comments that have stuck out, I can’t repeat them all at the moment but there are a few that really got me thinking, such as when she said this on October 4, 2016,” Once David and Clifford started hanging out and using drugs, David would bring his little girls to his mother’s house. David liked younger girls. 15-17″. A couple things to keep in mind, by his own account Clifford Oliver, the Clifford Christine is referring to, returned to Waco around the beginning of 1982, December 81/ January 82. They had been old school friends but he hadn’t seen David in a number of years, they ran into each other at the Dairy Queen, that’s where Clifford’s wife worked, and they started hanging out. David’s penchant for bringing girls over to the house is well documented but it’s not like Christine was accepting of this behavior she had little choice. One time she told me it wasn’t like she was just sitting there reading a book drinking wine. The ugly truth is David was extremely cruel to Christine, he would tie her up either to the kitchen table or would tie her to a tree outside. This leads me to two questions; first what kind of girls would have come over to hang out, party, carry on or whatever with David after they saw how he treated his girlfriend? We really don’t need to get into the answers to that. But more importantly somewhere along the line don’t you think some girl would have seen what was going on and knew something was wrong with this situation and spoke her mind? I feel safe saying yes at some point some girl would have said something. I think a good candidate would be Jill Montgomery, a girl that was known to speak her mind. And when we look at the lives of Jill Montgomery and Christine Juhl at the time we see a common thread, something that could have drawn them to each other, an understanding most of us are unable to grasp.

    When talking with Christine I find that I need to keep in mind that she was only one year older than Jill, she was a young girl at the time also, 17 when she met David, 18 at the time of the murders. At some point she was in love with David, things got bad and she tried and hoped things would get better but they just got worse until she finally came to the realization she needed to extricate herself from this situation one way or another. Maybe she was naive or she made a huge mistake but don’t we all make mistakes in our lives at one point or another. Then we have Jill Montgomery, also 17 and in love with some one that might cause her more problems than she wants; Kenneth Franks. Actually Jill and Kenneth had dated and Jill broke it off when Kenneth got physical with her one time. I don’t think he hit her, I think he slammed her up against the wall and grabbed her around the neck, Jill wasn’t going to put up with this and ended their relationship, she still had feelings for Kenneth, they would date again for a short while in the spring of 82 after Jill had returned to the Methodist Home after she had run away but things still didn’t work out between them but some feelings still remained up until the time they were killed. So we have this girl that runs away, things aren’t going good in her life, she’s in love but the guy just beat her up and she can’t allow that and then she runs off and ends up in a house where a girl her own age is being abused and mistreated by her boyfriend, you don’t think words were exchanged? When Jill ran away there was another girl that ran away with her and it’s the different paths they took after they ran away that hints there is something that happened while they ran away.

    We all have a moment in life that changes our lives or puts us on a different path, sometimes it’s meeting some one that ends up being the love of your life, sometimes it’s just being in the right place at the right time but the reality for most people is it is not some serendipitous moment or some great epiphany that brings this change. More times than not the defining moments of our live’s that indelibly mark us are created from the darkest moments in our lives. I think this could be the case with Jill but we fail to see it because unfortunately her life was terribly and tragically cut short only a few months later. When Jill returned to the Methodist Home after she had run away there was a marked improvement with her attitude and behavior, she had changed. The girl that ran away with Jill was Rhonda Evans, she never returned to the Home, she would go to a juvenile detention center then to a foster home in Axtell and she would remain a friend to David Spence. She was the only girl from the Methodist Home to visit David on death row, this is how I came across her. I asked her about her relationship with David and never really got an answer, she told me she had met David at a party at the lake, something, this was before the store opened, Gayle Kelly would tell me later. Rhonda Evans had left the Home before the store opened, so that definitely couldn’t have been how she met David or built some kind of friendship. Honestly at this point I can’t say what the relationship was between Rhonda and David but I know she still believes in his innocence and remembers him as a good friend that wouldn’t have done this. I doubt if we will ever find what Jill Montgomery thought about David Spence but I think these are the two girls Christine was talking about that Gene Deal recalled. But Christine wouldn’t have known Rhonda from the store, not saying Rhonda never went to the store but she was in a detention center then in Axtell, she wouldn’t have been there as frequently as the other girls from the Methodist Home that were right across the street and came in on a daily basis. So if Jill and Rhonda are the two girls Christine was talking about how did she meet them? She remembered them from when they stayed at her house. The one girl, Rhonda, became good friends with David, the other girl; Jill didn’t like what she saw, she went down the street and called her father, she wanted him to come get her and take her home. We know Jill called from the Rainbow Drive-In and we know her father picked her up on 15th Street only a few blocks away from the store. She wasn’t allowed to return home at that time and she returned to the Methodist Home, she would be one of the girls that would go to the store and when Christine started working at the store in March they remembered each other, David would remember Jill also. The problem with the mistaken identity scenario, other than nobody other than Truman Simons thought Jill Montgomery and Gayle Kelly looked alike, is that David was good at remembering names and faces, Christine Juhl, Clifford Oliver and Kareem Qasem all stated this. Christine Juhl first heard about the murders, well at least Kenneth Franks had been killed from Muneer Deeb sometime the day after the murders, Wednesday July 14th, before the murders became public information. I don’t think Deeb even mentioned Franks by name he referred to him as Gayle’s boyfriend and Christine knew whom he was talking about. Christine states none of the kids from the Home that came in that day said anything about their friends getting killed, so she only knew that Kenneth had been killed, she wouldn’t find out there were two girls with Kenneth that had been killed also, I don’t know when this exactly happened but I guess it would have been Thursday July 15th, the murders would have made the papers by then and I think that is when she started to put things together, She recognized Jill as one of the girls that was killed.

    Again I have to turn to a comment Christine made to me on January 17, 2017,” A few days after the murders I threw his vest away because it stank so bad. It was not until years later that I believe that what I was smelling was sweat and blood. Who’s blood I do not know. David had no injuries during this time frame. He refused to wash it. He wore it constantly. I threw it away in the dumpster behind the Rainbow. the fight over that vest is what lead me to lock myself in the bathroom at the apt and cutting my wrist. It was the day my stepdad took David and I to DJ’s to pick up the car. My stepfather stitched my wrist up. The next day is when I finally left”. I have to admit she had changed her recollection on this a couple times since then. But this does help us with a time line; the kids are killed on Tuesday night July 13, the next day, Wednesday July 14, Deeb tells Christine Kenneth has been killed, the following day, Thursday July 15, Christine finds out Jill and Raylene had been killed with Kenneth and starts to wonder about things. We know David spent the weekend at Dorothy Miles home, he left his bloody vest at home and that’s when Christine got rid of it, Sunday July 18 was his birthday. Christine had bought David a shirt for his birthday and given it to him early, this was the shirt he wore the night of July 13. From the same conversation I had with Christine on January 17, she remembers this,” As far as I knew Clifford and David were together the whole evening. at some point the may have parted ways and reconnected late in the night but they came to the apt together after I had gone to bed. They were together before dark because they passed the store together in a truck before dark. Also when David came into the bedroom that night he was wearing his vest without a shirt and jeans. The next morning I remember being mad because he said he left his shirt somewhere while he was out with Clifford. I remember this because I had just got him the shirt. It was green, short sleeves and had snaps instead of buttons.I even remember where I bought the shirt”. David returns home either Sunday night July 18 or Monday 19 and finds Christine has thrown away his vest and that she has started putting things together, some sort of altercation takes place and finally Christine realizes she needs to get out of this situation anyway possible and tried to kill herself.

    Christine remembers some things but she has blocked out a lot and we can’t blame her for that, there is so much she would just like to forget and that’s the problem. Hey whatever we find isn’t going to change things for Jill Montgomery, Raylene Rice and Kenneth Franks they are gone, at least from this world, forever. It’s the living that are left to deal with the aftermath, the insurmountable grief, the what ifs, the sleepless nights and the questions. Christine Juhl is one of these persons that has to live with the sleepless nights and what ifs.

    Liked by 26 people

  4. Vero, no I’m not saying this is the reason David killed the kids, yes I think there might have been some animosity between the two. I know David or the Melendez brothers weren’t the brightest guys around but I think they did realize they had to kill Gayle to get any money, so if Gayle wasn’t there why not call it off? I think it is possible David was planning on killing Kenneth and when he saw Jill he didn’t mind doing her in as well and he figured he could get Gayle later, which I think he tried to do when Patti’s apartment was broken into and then when he made the threatening remarks to Gayle on her birthday.

    And I know the Truman Simons haters are going to love this, I think this could point to why Truman thought Jill was the target, yes she suffered more damage than the other two victims, so I can see why he thought she was the target and through that we get the mistaken identity theory. He saw Jill had more wounds, the killers had paid more attention to her spend more time with her it looked more personal towards her and yes I think David could have had something against her, especially if she went to his house when she ran away and said something or spoke up for Christine. So Truman believes Jill is the target until he finds out about the insurance policy, then he thinks Jill and Gayle look alike and that gives us his theory. He could have been right about Jill looking like the target but got the rest of it wrong.

    Liked by 3 people

      • Mrs. Thompson, I would like to be diplomatic as possible with this, having said that I wouldn’t be chiseling in stone anything Christine Juhl says at the moment. Let’s look at what she has said how she heard about the murders, the account that is best known and the one she testified to was she heard from Muneer Deeb that Gayle’s boyfriend had been killed, she took this to be Kenneth Franks, she stated this took place on the morning of Wednesday July 14, which would have been before the bodies were discovered. Reading her Grand Jury and also her trial testimony, particularly the defense’s rebuttal to this, this is not what she told Detectives Salinas and Baier in the Spring of 1983, at that time she stated Deeb told her this later in the evening when she went back to work later that day. Depending on when this was, Deeb could have heard about this elsewhere. It was sometime after 6:00 p.m that the call went out about a suspicious or questionable death at Speegleville Park, no specific details there, so even if Deeb some how had heard this at this time and this is when he first mentioned it to Christine it would have been telling that he knew it was Kenneth Franks. The two girls weren’t found until Salinas arrived on the scene with the pictures he had gotten from Detective Trantham which was closer to 7:00 p.m. and the information that there were three victims wasn’t released to the press until 9:00 p.m., so it wouldn’t have made the news before then. Which brings me to Christine’s second explanation for how she heard about the murders; she says she heard about the murders on the radio that morning, we know this cannot be true because the bodies had not been discovered yet and until they were that evening the kids were still just missing persons. Somewhere along the line Christine changed this version to she meant she heard it on the radio the next day, Thursday July 15, which is ok but it still shows Christine in confused and mixed up about the facts and chain of events surrounding these murders. Which brings me to something she said in her Grand Jury testimony, there she states she heard about the murders the following day from a couple of the girls from the Home she knew in particular from hanging out with Gayle, again another version.. Mrs. Thompson I guess some combination of her recollections could be true, she heard about Kenneth first from Deeb and then heard about the girls later from another source and she just can’t remember exactly how, actually I believe this is the case but when and how did she find out about the girls? And that she mentions a couple girls from the Home that she came to know in particular, remember from Deal we hear that Christine would say something about two girls. A couple girls from the Home, two girls this is a common theme with Christine. For some reason two girls from the Home, other than Gayle Kelly, stick out in Christine’s mind, why? Ask her, I have and have never gotten an answer. I asked her about both the girls she was talking about when she testified to the Grand Jury and also about the two girls she said she could say something about when Deal did his spot check on David. And Mrs. Thompson this is not the only thing Christine is confused and mixed up about.

        Christine has told me Clifford Oliver and a girl (I would guess Josie Scionti) came to the apartment with the Melendez brothers the night of the murders, then she said it might have been the other guys I mentioned to her, which were Todd Childers, John Arnett Jr. and Cal Frazier. She states she rode in the back of a truck that morning to go to work, at one time she said she rode in the back of the truck with the Melendez brothers another time she says it was two or three guys she didn’t know. She now says David’s car wasn’t working that night or the following morning. She doesn’t believe David drove Maria, Kareem’s wife, to the airport or bus station so she could go to Mexico to visit her mother, she tried to tell me she never testified to that, which is not true. Now she says it was the early summer 1981 when she went to Speegleville Park in a truck with David and the Melendez brothers, again not what she testified to and really does match known facts. Christine couldn’t have gone to the park with David in June or July 1981, he didn’t get out of prison until July 1981 and he was paroled to Fort Worth, then he requested to return to Waco to live with his mother. Gene Deal would be his parole officer in Waco and he states the first time he saw David was about November, just for argument’s sake let’s say Deal could be off by a couple weeks, early November/late October, that would still put David’s return to Waco in September. Mrs. Thompson I really doubt the state of Texas allows parolees fresh out of the joint to roam around freely without making contact with their parole officer for more than a month, maybe a parolee that has been out a while and had created a stable situation for themselves, something David never did. This all points to David Spence not being in Waco in June or July 1981, either Christine is trying to lie or she is confused, since I’m trying to be diplomatic I am trying to believe the later. There are many other instances where she has mixed up the known facts, it is a pattern with her and it can’t be denied.

        Now I said I want to be diplomatic and fair to Christine Juhl. I know at times it seems I’m hard on Christine and I know she feels that way but that’s not my intent, Christine has admitted she can’t remember some things, is confused about somethings and has blocked out somethings but she still tries to reply to my tsunami of inquiries for most part, she gets mad with me at times and becomes difficult, I haven’t talked to her in a while, I don’t know what I said the last time that must have upset her but for most part she has being willing to share, even talking about things and memories that must be painful her to relive and it might seem I’m just trying to humiliate her, I’m not. At times she does give some interesting insight. And Christine is not the only one that has forgotten or blocked out things. Gayle Kelly told me she had forgotten and blocked out things but she doesn’t want to try to remember them, in her mind she has all the answers and she is comfortable with what she believes to be true. I have to respect that. When I talked to Rhonda Evans there were some things she clearly doesn’t remember accurately and when I tried to ask her about this Rhonda replied I was trying to set traps. I’m not trying to set traps I’m just trying to find the truth. We can go through many names connected to this case and see all the discrepancies, inconsistencies, inaccuracies and changing stories and if we are just going to believe everything we hear and have heard we are going to remain in the same situation we find ourselves at the moment ; without answers and things not adding up or making sense. It’s going to take some one filling in those gaping holes, not saying we should take their words alone, we will have to connect it to other information but the information and secrets one may hold could put us on the right track and I do have to give Christine Juhl credit for this although she might not be able to put it together in her own mind or doesn’t want to but sometimes her comments reveal she has some of the answers we are looking for.

        Back to when Christine went to Speegleville Park with David and the Melendez brothers, she testified it was June or July 1982, now she has tried to put it back a year, which just doesn’t add up but Christine said something one time that made so much sense I don’t think she realizes it. I believe there is reason to believe more than one truck was used to move the bodies, remember the only thing we have to go on for this is the ever changing stories of the Melendez brothers, I think the brothers never mentioned the other truck used because their younger brother was in that truck, they wanted to keep his name out of it. When I first told Christine about this a couple years ago she replied she had never heard that or thought about it but thinking about it she did think it would have been impossible to transport the bodies in Gilbert’s truck, the reason she gave; Gilbert’s truck bed was loaded with paint cans and tarps, I will repeat “TARPS”, painters’ tarps!!! How would she know what was is the back of Gilbert’s truck? She was in that truck shortly before the murders, pretty much as she testified to back in 1992. Which leads me to the question if you are carrying three dead bodies in the back of your truck, would you just leave them out in the open or would you try to cover them up? And what would you use to try to cover the bodies, maybe even wrap them up? What about painters’ tarps? Blood is thicker than water but is blood thicker than paint? I know painters put tarps down so they don’t spill paint and other liquids all over the place. Is it possible the victims were covered or wrapped up in tarps to hide their presence? Sounds very plausible to me and this would explain the lack of blood being found anywhere. And maybe they did use more than one truck because one truck just didn’t have the space available, maybe it was pre-planned or maybe it was just a chance encounter when Clifford and company showed up at Koehne Park that night. I can’t say positively without a doubt this is how things went down but I do see it as being very possible, something I never thought about until I heard this from Christine. Thank you Christine Juhl.

        Liked by 3 people

      • rs7236 does this mean you don’t think Brian’s scenario is likely? I would like to ask what do you think about Brian’s theories do you think they have credence or is Brian way off? I don’t know much about the case I read the book, sometimes the book and what’s on here don’t even seem to be dealing with the same case, but to me Brian’s line of thinking makes sense. I know you are are related to one of the victims and are so close to the case it would be interesting to hear what you think of all this. Do you think he is on to something or does his constant questioning get on your nerves?


      • Vero, I can’t speak for Mrs. Thompson but I’m pretty sure I’m not getting on her nerves. She might not agree or probably doesn’t agree with most of what I have to say but I think she can see the relevance and she keeps an open mind.


    • Vero, Christine testified she went to Speegleville Park in a truck with David Spence, Anthony and Gilbert Melendez to shoot guns in early summer 1982 either June or July, she never said whose truck she was in and she was never asked, I don’t think the truck they were in was in question at the time, Gilbert Melendez was the only one of the four that had a truck at the time.

      Liked by 2 people

    • CC, I send a messages to the owner of the property a few times but I have never gotten a response. Asking some one to allow you to come to their home to dig up the remains of a dead dog and hopefully find articles connected to a triple homicide isn’t a great icebreaker.

      Liked by 1 person

  5. bkl67, this site or you state Gilbert’s truck was used the night of the murders, another site states it was impossible that his truck was used, this is very confusing. How can anybody know the truth?


    • awebb90, I would say stop reading the other sight, She doesn’t care about the truth, she’s just into it to get back at her ex-husband, Vic Feazell, for dumping her crazy ass and she still can’t get over it like 30 years later. But more to your point, there are a few out there that try to push the narrative that the killers could not have used Gilbert’s truck that night. And they try to point to Truman Simons buying the truck and having it destroyed as some kind of proof but it’s not. Truman did not buy the truck until after the trials, so it didn’t matter what happened to the truck after that, they don’t like what Truman did but that doesn’t hold any legal value. He could have cut up the truck and sold the pieces as souvenirs, people might not have liked it but it doesn’t prove anything. This is just another example of people like Bernadette Feazell bringing up some irrelevant issue that legally doesn’t mean anything and wouldn’t even be considered in a court of law, so she tries to win the battle in public opinion, that again doesn’t mean anything in the court of law. All it does is further obscure the truth. If the defense ever wanted to question if there was any evidence found in the truck that connected it to the murders they could have and should have during any of the many court proceedings. The Melendez brothers’ family were in possession of the truck the whole time, it wasn’t like the defense couldn’t get access to the truck. And this is probably why the defense never did question the lack of evidence in or on the truck, it was a very weak argument. The prosecutors didn’t find out about the truck until about two years after the murders and from the time Gilbert got arrested in September 1982 for the Darvin Pack incident until after the trials the family had the truck, whom could honestly say what happened with the truck during that time. What the defense did try to argue was the truck wasn’t in running order at that time but they lost that argument and I would say rightfully so, it was proven that the defense’s witness was wrong with his dates.

      Calvin Nesbitt was the defense’s witness on this issue, he was the guy that worked on Gilbert’s truck and it was at his home where Gilbert had left the truck. Mr. Nesbitt stated that Gilbert’s truck was at his house for about two months, testifying that Gilbert brought the truck to his house in early June and Gilbert’s step father, John Arnett Sr., picked up the truck either late July or early August. I know you might have heard that the truck had three flat tires, Mr. Nesbitt would testify the the tires weren’t flat when the truck was first brought to his house, they became flat after the truck had sat there for awhile. Now the problem with Mr. Nesbitt’s story is Gilbert could not have brought the truck to his house in June, Gilbert didn’t buy the truck until July 3rd. The State’s witnesses were Richard and Rhonda Sulak, the couple that sold Gilbert the truck and they had a notarized title transfer that proved they sold the truck to Gilbert on July 3rd. The crux of Mr. Nesbitt’s story hinges on a cook out, he knew the truck was at his house when he had a cook out, he believed it was the forth of July. There wasn’t a dispute that Gilbert’s step dad picked up the truck after Gilbert had been arrested in September, the incident occurred Labor Day weekend, September 5th. I don’t know what day Gilbert was picked up, David Spence was picked up on September 9th. A little common sense and basic math would give you the correct chain of events. Mr. Nesbitt was correct that the truck was there about two months and that it was there when he had a cook out, he was just off on his timeline. Gilbert brought the truck to his house sometime in July, the truck stayed there through August into September after Labor Day when Mr. Arnett came and got the truck, a cook out during the Labor Day weekend was probably the cook out Mr. Nesbitt remembered when the truck was still at his house. Awebb 90 they are the facts, I guess you can question them but they are pretty solid, it was a weak argument back in the 80’s and any alternative views since then hasn’t helped to change that.

      Liked by 3 people

  6. Bakersfield Vero, I will try to answer your question by saying I think I will always listen to anyone who is being truthful with me. So many folks have made promises of proof about the case only for me to realize their “PROOF” was non-existent. After 35 + years, I have learned to listen to those who do not make promises, but continue to thoroughly search for the truth of what happened to Jill and her friends. I am NOT INTERESTED in the soap opera happenings in Waco, TX. People having affairs and the constant stories of whore houses and crooked politics has nothing to do with the death of 3 kids 36 years ago. Just not interested anymore in Fred Dannens’ theories. His promises have caused more anguish than I can begin to explain.
    SO, I say NO, Brian does not “get on my nerves”. I am thankful for his continued efforts.

    Liked by 4 people

  7. Brian yesterday you said;” I wouldn’t be chiseling in stone anything Christine Juhl says”, then in the same post you say;”At times she does give some interesting insight”. See how that can look like a contradiction? Do you just believe the things that fit your theory and disregard the stuff she says that doesn’t? That wouldn’t be open minded and maybe overlooking the truth.


    • Vero, I think you overlooked me saying I can’t say positively this is how it happened but it is possible. I don’t think you can take one statement from anyone and alone take that as the truth, it might give us a piece to the puzzle. Christine Juhl can give us an unique view. she lived with David Spence and for a time Anthony and Gilbert Melendez stayed with them, she worked for Deeb and actually she was friends or at least knew Deeb before she went to work for him and even before she met David and she probably knows more about the friendship between David and Clifford Oliver that anybody else, her perspective could be extremely valuable. But her perspective alone can’t give us all the answers we want and she is not the only one that could give us a unique perspective. Gayle Kelly, knowing both Jill Montgomery and Kenneth Franks from the Methodist Home, could give us a unique view of the relationship between Jill and Kenneth or Gayle’s relationship to both, but again it would just be her perspective and shouldn’t stand alone as the unquestioned truth. Jill and Kenneth had the same counselor while they were at the Home, Mary Bellheimer, she could, and did, give us a different view. All valuable insights but little in the way that helps resolve the issues that remain. Vero if I put what is wrong with this case in a nutshell, I would say it just doesn’t make sense, obviously I would first point to the whole mistaken identity thing, that surely doesn’t make sense, at least the way it’s been told but there are many other aspects of this case that just don’t make sense. The comment I shared that I heard from Christine, I’m not saying it is an undisputed fact but it does make sense. The other problems with this case are the conflicting stories, which are many and contradictory testimony. Somewhere along the line we will have to believe some one, well you have to think at least some one has the story right or is telling the truth, not saying the others are lying, their recollections are just not as clear. Whom do we believe, there isn’t a cure all answer to this, it’s much more complicated than that. What I ask first; does it sound reasonable and/or possible? But even with that there is a lot that remains questionable and I haven’t found a way to determine what is the truth, again we’re stuck with whom to believe, what do we do just pick one? Let me give you prime example and this could lead us to question what we have been told about the mistaken identity scenario.

      There are two versions out there about what occurred the night Muneer Deeb went to the apartment he had furnished for Gayle Kelly, again this is something I would question but it is the story we’ve been told. If we are to believe the story we’ve been told, this should be a central event that we should completely understand but we don’t even have a solid date, we can place this somewhere around June 22 because that’s when Gayle Kelly signed the insurance policy. If this is the event that set the whole tragedy in motion; Deeb became so upset with Gayle he decided to have her killed, wouldn’t it make sense to understand exactly what happened? But we have two different stories, from a number of sources, whom do we believe and why?

      Gayle Kelly and Christine Juhl both have stated and testified that Deeb walked in on Gayle with Kenneth Franks. Their details differ to some degree but pretty much tell the same story. Gayle states she and Kenneth were laying on the floor smoking weed when Deeb walked in on them, Christine has stated Gayle and Kenneth were doing a little more than smoking weed. The other version we get from Muneer Deeb, Kareem Qasem, Maria Qasem, Kebanna Reed, Delores Perez and I think this was Dana Diamond’s account as well, They all say that when Deeb went to the apartment Gayle was having a party and there were a bunch of kids there drinking and getting high and that’s what set him off.. Which story is true, which do we believe? Is there anything out there that could help us determine the truth?

      Humans are creatures of habit, we all have our regular routines we get into our own little grove. Withhold a coffee drinkers coffee the first thing in the morning or cigarettes from a smoker, the rest of their day will be ruined their routine has been disturbed. We create and become comfortable with these patterns in our everyday lives, it is the same with criminal behavior. Criminals will create a pattern of behavior, most of us know this as their M.O.(Modus Operandi). In the three years Muneer Deeb was in America he had created his pattern. When he became infatuated with a girl he would give them money, pay their bills and buy them gifts. We see this with Kebanna Reed, Gayle Kelly and Dana Diamond. Second he would try to interpose himself into these girls lives even trying to finds ways to gain easy access to the girls, this should have been the first sign of his more malevolent behavior, we see this with all three girls. With Kebanna, he tried to get Patty Pick to steal the keys to Kebanna’s apartment from the purse of Kebanna’s sister so he could make a copy. The apartment where Gayle Kelly stayed he had a key, so he could come and go as he pleased, which apparently he did and this is what caused the problem. And with Dana he helped her get the small apartment behind the store so it was easy for him to stop by whenever he wanted, And then finally when Deeb realized he was just being used he would threaten the girls. We see this with Kebanna, she was afraid to go out with other guys, even just guy friends because Deeb would show up, she finally had Deeb arrested. When Dana got involved in a serious relationship with the guy she would marry Deeb threatened to blow up the apartment to kill them both. So the pattern is still consistent with these two girls, and it should be pointed out that the one girl, Kebanna, came before Gayle became entangled with Deeb and Dana came after. If we believe the story we have been told then Deeb broke his pattern with Gayle Kelly, that just doesn’t make sense, even more so when we see his pattern again when Dana came around. So what can we make of this?

      At this time I want point to a couple other things we get from Christine Juhl. Christine has stated she first heard about the murders from Deeb, he came into the store and told her Gayle’s boyfriend had been killed, he didn’t say Kenneth Franks had been killed but that Gayle’s boyfriend had been killed, Christine took this to mean Kenneth Franks. Remember Christine is one of the only two people that gives us the version that Deeb had caught Gayle with Kenneth but how did she know this? Other than her and Gayle all the other people from the store said it was a party not that Deeb had caught Gayle and Kenneth together. As I will show in a little bit she wasn’t even at the store the night this happened so how did she come about this information or was she coached to say this while she was preparing for her Grand Jury testimony? I’m not saying one way or the other I’m just asking. And then there is one of those insights Christine gave me, that could be very meaningful, remind you she knew David Wayne Spence a lot better than any of us will ever be able to understand. On April 25, 2017 Christine told me this,

      “Deeb did not have the backbone to do anything more that stalk or follow them around like a puppy. But what happens when you are too weak to do something yourself? He hired someone else to do his dirty work. But I have long thought that if Spence did not get paid to do the work for any reason he would have killed or extorted Deeb. even if he killed the wrong person. If Deeb indeed had money coming from his homeland David would have extorted money from Deeb. I do believe that Spence was capable of murder…. Deeb was not. But did Deeb snap?”,

      I would pay special attention to ” even if he killed the wrong person”. Again I don’t know if this is true or a fact but it is insightful and Christine did know David a lot better than I.

      So we have two stories about what happened at the apartment that night and we can be pretty sure that at least two people were at the apartment that night, Gayle Kelly and Muneer Deeb but they tell us different stories, We can’t ask Kenneth Franks, but I think it’s safe to say he was there but what were the circumstances? Fortunately there was a third person that went to the apartment that night and her testimony and insight is very interesting and intriguing, this would be Maria Qasem. She was Kareem’s wife, we don’t hear too much about Maria she wasn’t at the store as much as Deeb and Kareem and I guess Christine . She and Kareem had a little kid at the time and I think Maria spent most of her time caring for the kid. Also she was in Mexico visiting her mother the night the murders took place. I guess some could question did Deeb set up the murders for this night because he knew Maria would be gone and he and Kareem would have more freedom that night? Anyway, Maria did happen to be working in the store the night this episode happened at the apartment, she was there with Kareem and Deeb, Christine had the night off. Again this would lead me to ask how, where and from whom did Christine hear that Deeb caught Gayle with Kenneth at the apartment that night, she didn’t hear this from the people she worked for at the store because they all say it was a party. So Maria, Kareem and Deeb are working at the store that night, Deeb decides he wants to leave early, go to the apartment and spend time with Gayle. He went to the apartment and this is when he got the shock of his life for whatever reason. Deeb returns to the store extremely aggravated and tells Kareem and Maria that Gayle was having a party and there were a bunch of kids there drinking beer and Deeb wanted to kick Gayle out of the apartment. Maria also testifies, and this is very important, that Deeb told her Gayle was kissing this boy and Gayle trying to calm Deeb down told him it was her brother. Deeb said he didn’t believe her because she wouldn’t be kissing her brother like that. People, Muneer Deeb knew Kenneth Franks by then and knew he wasn’t Gayle’s brother. We know Deeb and Kenneth were already on bad terms prior to this. We get confirmation of this from Lou Booker, Jill and Gayle’s supervisor at Fort Fisher, she told Dennis Baier that Deeb use to come to see Gayle and she remembered an incident when Jill, Gayle and Deeb were discussing Kenneth Franks and Deeb became very agitated. This was before Gayle ran away and there for before she moved into the apartment. If Deeb wasn’t talking about Kenneth Franks whom was he talking about? Maria could have the answer, after seeing how upset Deeb was she decided to go to the apartment to see what was going on. Keep in mind Maria wasn’t fond of these girls like Gayle Kelly and Kebanna Reed or the other girls from the Home coming over and getting stuff from the store for free nor was she fond of David Spence, just hanging around the store, being loud, his language, she felt it was all just a bad situation. So she goes to the apartment and what does she find? No one is at the apartment but she does find Gayle Kelly, she is sitting outside, if I remember correctly she was sitting on a car and Maria states there were two boys with her. Maria didn’t know the boys but she said one was white and the other was Hispanic. I guess we can say the white boy was Kenneth Franks, the Hispanic boy? What about Henry Reyes, Gayle Kelly’s boyfriend at the time, he was Hispanic. Dolores Perez would testify she told Deeb that Henry was Gayle’s boyfriend, I don’t know exactly when but I would guess it was about this time because Gayle was avoiding Deeb at this time and not talking to him, Deeb could have mentioned something to Dolores about what he saw, which seems probable because she is one of those that testified it was a party not that Deeb caught Gayle and Kenneth together. So what story do we believe? I’m not saying this later version of events is the undisputed truth or the undisputed facts but it does make sense,. That Deeb found Gayle kissing her boyfriend not like she would be kissing her brother makes sense. I don’t know if Maria’s recollection is completely accurate but it is insightful and interesting.

      Then we have the statements from Christine Juhl, from her we know that on the day after the murders Deeb thought Gayle’s boyfriend had been killed, she tells us that Deeb didn’t say Kenneth had been killed he said Gayle’s boyfriend, Christine thought he was talking about Kenneth Franks, as Christine has also said Deeb caught Gayle with Kenneth. It is obvious Christine thought Kenneth was Gayle’s boyfriend but was she wrong? And she knew there was animosity between Deeb and Kenneth. If Christine thought Kenneth was Gayle’s boyfriend is it possible that David Spence also thought this? When Deeb talked about killing Gayle and her boyfriend, which would match his M.O. did David believe Deeb wanted Kenneth killed? Remember Deeb was out with Kareem the night of the murders, Kareem would testify they were looking for some one that owed Deeb money, never any mention whom this could have been and the only evidence we have as to when they came home is a phone call from Maria in Mexico which was was between 1:00 a.m and 1:30 a.m.. The kids had been killed by then and David and Deeb would have had time to get together so David could tell Deeb that he had killed Gayle’s boyfriend and given him details, details Deeb was willing to share with anybody that would listen. Deeb goes to work the next day and tells Christine that Gayle’s boyfriend had been killed and he’s happy about it. It would be later when he would find out that it wasn’t Gayle’s boyfriend that had been killed but Kenneth Franks, which Deeb was still happy about, he didn’t like Kenneth already but in his mind he didn’t have anything to do with that murder because that’s not the boy he sent David to kill, something Christine Juhl hints at when she said “even if David killed the wrong person”, does she know something more? And with that we have a case of mistaken identity.

      Vero, so there you have it, two versions of the same event, which one is the truth, which one do you believe and why? I don’t know either way, I don’t know what the truth is, we have valuable insight from people that were there but they have different stories. Each version has it’s own merits, with the first version that Gayle and Kenneth were caught together, you would think Gayle knows whom she was kissing and you would think she would tell the truth because the victims were her friends, Deeb had a problem with Kenneth Franks that existed before Gayle moved into the apartment, so Deeb just seeing him at the apartment could have set him off and Deeb was extremely happy that Kenneth had been killed. On the other hand Deeb going after one of his obsessions love interest fits his pattern, Deeb knew Kenneth wasn’t Gayle’s brother before then, that Christine Juhl believed Kenneth was Gayle’s boyfriend it is probable that David held the same belief. With that David killing Kenneth because he thought he was Gayle’s boyfriend and that was the boy Deeb wanted killed makes a better case and more sense for mistaken identity than David killed Jill because he mistook her for Gayle Kelly. Two girls that no one, other than Truman Simons, thought looked alike. Insight and plausibility, questionable and confirmed they are all pieces to the puzzle.

      Liked by 2 people

  8. Brian, very intriguing, I hope “which one is the truth, which one do you believe and why?” is rhetorical. A lot of stuff I never heard before but are you saying you believe this is a more likely scenario than the theory you have opined for some time? I’ve been following your theory and it starts to sound likely to me then you throw this stuff out there that brings everything I’ve started to believe into question, so now David killed Kenneth when he was suppose to kill another guy that was Gayle Kelly’s boyfriend?


    • Vero, I guess you missed my point, which is understandable, I get rambling and my point gets lost somewhere along the line. What I was trying to say using one particular issue as an example but there are many issues with this case and just as many different stories out there we can question. Unless you are going to collect new DNA samples, which you would have to get a warrant to do so and that the case is closed presents more obstacles and I won’t get into the cost or if you are lucky to find a piece of physical evidence that has been missed and has been just sitting around for 36 years, physical evidence is not going to provide the answers. What you are left with are peoples’ recollections and stories but this isn’t tangible evidence, there isn’t anyway to measure a conversation or a thought, you have to find a reason to believe it or not.

      I Still believe the theory I have laid out and worked on for sometime but there really isn’t any physical evidence to support this and as things stand at the moment I don’t think we will get any but I still believe it seems the most probable to me. Now the scenario I just raised, David killing Kenneth because he thought he was Gayle’s boyfriend, I don’t believe this is what happened mainly because I like my theory better but I have to admit it is possible, I just can’t discount a theory or scenario because it’s not what I believe, that’s what others have done. They had one view and if something came along that contradicted their beliefs they just ignore it or deny it, that’s not looking for the truth that’s pushing a personal agenda.

      With any theory at this point it is important what people said then and say now, what they thought then and think now, and listen to their insights and then you have to reason what you believe and why. With my theory I believe Kenneth wanted to make a big drug deal, I think he probably burned some one before, maybe Muneer Deeb and that was the genesis of the animosity between the two. I believe Deeb wanted Gayle and Kenneth killed and may have used a drug deal to draw them out because they were avoiding him. Kenneth didn’t have the money to make the deal so he called Jill for help, Jill still cared about Kenneth and was willing to help and didn’t realize what she and her friend from Waxahachie Raylene Rice were walking into. That’s the gist of my theory but I have to admit there isn’t any physical evidence that supports this, all I have are statements and even with that there are still plenty of questions and at times it comes down to whom I believe. For instance Jill’s mother sensed something was wrong with Jill after Kenneth had called, it was a feeling you’re not going to get any physical evidence from a feeling and the last conversation she had with Jill hinted Jill had worries and questions about letting her feelings get her into a bad situation, again we can’t get physical evidence from a conversation, but it is insightful and does tell us something. I believe Jill’s mother’s recollections, and her recollections would point towards a premeditated act, unlike the chance encounter the Melendez brothers testified to and that they say the kids got into the car to go get beer, that doesn’t add up or make sense. On the other hand I don’t believe Kenneth’s father, he made it sound like there were no problems with Kenneth, either between he and Kenneth or Kenneth and his father’s boyfriend but that just doesn’t look like the case. There were a number of kids that knew Kenneth that stated this wasn’t the case at all. Again no physical evidence, different stories and insights, with what I have heard I can’t believe Mr. Franks, which is troubling on many levels. But that’s it Vero, we have to put reason to the stories we hear, that was my point. With the two versions we get about what happened at the apartment that night or any conflicting stories we hear it comes down to what we will believe and what I believe will probably be different from what you believe or what some one else believes and that’s OK but you have to be able to explain your reasoning for believing one story over the other. Does that make sense?

      Liked by 2 people

      • Thanks Brian I think I understand, you are just giving us possibilities not that you are given credence to one possibility over another possibility, other than your theory, you are just putting it out there and giving your thoughts. Still very interesting.

        Liked by 1 person

      • If I may jump in here…………I do know that Jill had strong feelings about Kenneth possibly being “bad for her”. (Her words after talking to him on phone the night before she went to Waco). However by the next morning she was very excited and nervous about going. She spent all that morning at my home waiting for Raylene to get off work at noon.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Mrs. Thompson, according to Jill’s mother Kenneth called Sunday night, Jill moped around and wouldn’t talk all day Monday. Jill went to your house Tuesday morning.


      • I thought there was another call Monday. Or at least that is what Jill told me. She was telling me that she was going by the Methodist Home to get some things a girl had of hers (Jills). She said she was going to get her things and said she was not happy with the girl that had them. Of course I realize that could be just “teen talk”.


  9. After almost two years of waiting, I think I filed the request back in the Spring of 2017, I have finally received the files I asked for from the F.B.I. in my F.O. I.A. request. Just taking a glance at them it doesn’t look like they provide much in the way towards what I was trying to find but I want to post them anyway while I still have access to them just in case anyone else is interested in trying this which I feel can be very helpful but can also be a long and extremely aggravating and excruciating process. I guess I should just explain how this all came about in the first place.

    In the last few years those following the case probably have seen issues come up that had never been mentioned before. When we see these issues arise of coarse it leads us to questions. Now I’m all about questions, I ask more than anybody and I question everything. But the reality is sometimes the answers are already out there we just haven’t had access or seen the files or facts that exist that could provide the answers to the truth. There were two issues I had seen brought up over the last few years that I thought probably could be checked. And a little tip for anyone that wants to put in a freedom of information act request from whatever agency you might want information from, you have to be specific about what items you are requesting, you can’t just ask for all the files, you will be told you need to narrow the scope of your request, then you will have to resubmit your request and every time you submit your request that adds time to an already slow process. So going through this I narrowed the scope of my request to two items to start with and with that I was told it could take up to six months. I can’t remember the exact date when I made my original request but I figured I would receive the information by the end of 2017 and here we are today September 25, 2018 and I finally received the files. I have to add when you first receive the files you have access to them for 48 hours then they disappear, I don’t know how they do that, it’s like some mission impossible stuff. the TV show not the movie. So I did receive some notice or files a few months after I send my request but I didn’t know about the 48 hours thing, I received the files on a Friday afternoon and didn’t see it until the following Monday, the 48 hours had expired. Now you get two more chances to have the files sent again without starting the process all over again, so I did that and that didn’t work out for some reason I can’t remember and then I just had to start the process all over again and that’s where we are today after about a year I finally got something.So just a little heads up for those thinking about going this route. Now to what information I requested and why.

    As I said I requested information on two items I knew the F.B.I. had, one probably doesn’t help us much one way or the other but I figured it wouldn’t be an item difficult to obtain and it does help me make my point that there is information out there that can answer or at least shed light and give us a better understanding of things. The item I’m talking about in this case is the suspect profile created by the F.B.I.. Everyone knows the F.B.I. is the world leader in this field, they have the best profilers anywhere and early on in the investigation they were asked to create a profile which they did. The reason I requested this; for a number of years those that believe James Russell Bishop committed the crime always point to the fact that he matches the profile the F.B.I. created. I don’t doubt that, actually I think Bishop was a very good suspect but in the end you just can’t connect him to the victims and if you raped and stabbed a victim you had to be with them and this is very important. F.B.I. profiles don’t give names it provides back ground one would expect to find with their suspect. Yes Bishop would probably match this but so would David Wayne Spence and probably the Melendez brothers. Most crime buffs would be familiar with these profiles, they usually contain common factors, white male between the age 20 to 40, bad with relationships, from a broken family, problems with the opposite sex, can’t hold a job and a strong possibility of problems with alcohol and/or drugs. That might match Bishop and seems it does with what little information we get on him from when the Waco police department looked into him but that matches David Spence to a T. And that brings me to the difference we should see in the profile and the reason I requested it. The type of crime the Lake Waco Murders looks like suggests the person or people that committed these atrocities had committed violent crimes before , this wasn’t their first rodeo, the F.B.I. profile should include, and what I was looking for, is the type of violent crime they thought we should look for in a suspects past and this is where I believe we will see the difference between Bishop and Spence. Like it or not and some people will say they don’t have it in them to kill another person but the truth is under the right circumstances we are all capable of murder, the difference between most of us and the perpetrator(s) of the Lake Waco Murders is if we did kill some one or felt we had to kill somebody for whatever reason we probably would not be comfortable about it and feel bad about it, this doesn’t look like the case with these rapes and murders. Maybe an over simplification but still rings pretty true, if most of us kill somebody we want to get the hell out of there as soon as possible, again it doesn’t look like this happened here, it looks like the killers spent some time with the victims. Unless three killers each took one victim and did their own thing simultaneously and it doesn’t look like this, it was a time consuming crime, participants were standing by holding victims against their will while other victims were getting raped and stabbed crying, begging and screaming for their lives and just stand there knowing this was going to be the fate of all three, even if they did not take part in the actual rapping and stabbing it takes a certain callous person to do this and again the F.B.I. profile should provide us with the type of violent behavior in the suspect’s past we should look for and we will see the difference between Bishop and those convicted of the Lake Waco Murders. Bishop was a gun man, in terms of committing a violent crime this is pretty easy, this is the type of murder we can all commit, we can do it from a distance, we don’t have to get close to the victim and we can easily walk away, this was Bishop, he had a history with guns, he had shot himself. Some would question this because he did rape the two girls in California in February 1983 but in the end to finish it off he returned to his guns and shot the girls, pulling a trigger even multiple times and stabbing some one multiple times is very different, even threatening some one with a sharp object, doesn’t have to be a knife, in different, takes a different mind set from the perpetrator. A subject that displays a sharp object during the commission of a crime has the belief he/she can control the situation with that object and he has to be able to impress this upon his intended victim so he/she has to be willing to use this object, once you have done that you have crossed the line, that invisible line on one can see but once some one crosses it they are open to crossing that line in the future and a more violent outcome is probable, this is a line most of us can’t cross, we might be able to kill but most of us do so because we feel we have lost control of something, the subjects that committed the Lake Waco Murders wanted to show they were in control, if they wanted to just kill the kids why not just do so, the rapes show they wanted to display they had control for some reason, some deep seated physiological reason we will never understand now that the killers have all passed but the rapes leave us with the evidence of this pathology. David Spence had crossed this line in the past, when he robbed the 7-11 in Fort Worth, he used an ax or hatchet, a gun would have been a lot easier but no David wanted to show he could physically control the situation, something we would see again with the Lake Waco Murders and even other events after the murders with Lisa Kader and Darvin Pack. The same can be said with Anthony Melendez and the Corpus Christi robbery where he pulled a knife out and rapped the teenage daughter, when this was suppose to be a simple robbery, Anthony decided to stop and take the time to commit rape, when his cohorts just wanted to get out of there, doesn’t make sense but this is the kind of minds we are dealing with with those that committed the Lake Waco Murders. The F.B.I. profile should tell us what violent behavior to look for, because there are differences, I expect the profile to tells us to look for someone that had a history showing the use of knives or sharp objects to commit their crimes, hence David Spence and Anthony Melendez would fit, James Russell Bishop would not. I guess I should point out Gilbert Melendez had been sent to prison for attempted murder for shooting some one which would be more in line with the profile of James Russell Bishop. This post is getting a little long so I should get into posting the files I received from the F.B.I. because I only have access to them for two days and one day is gone. I will get back into this after i post those.

    Liked by 3 people

  10. There is one more but when I try to open it I get an error message that file can’t be found, so I have asked if it can be re-sent. There’s always something it’s never easy!!! Just think what we could accomplish if I knew what I was doing!!!


  11. Now getting back to the information I requested and why. Over the years there has been an endless debate and even some misinformation put out there about the DNA evidence, too many issues to recount them all but I will go over a few that stick out to me. There as been some question about whom holds responsibility for the condition of the DNA evidence that was collected then and why is it now useless in the terms of DNA testing. There are those that will put all the blame on the State and try to say the State did this because they have something to hide and they further this theory by stating this is why the State or the prosecutors from back then won’t ask for the DNA test to be run again. The responsible party is questionable at best which I will get to in a minute but the reasoning for the State’s stance having no interest in running DNA test is much more clear. In the State’s eyes this case is closed, David Spence Anthony Melendez and Gilbert Melendez are guilty and the State was able to prove this in a court of law, I would say they still believe Muneer Deeb is guilty but they just couldn’t meet the burden of proof and with all those responsible for the murders now gone why open up this again although we might disagree with then stance it is correct. And we have to consider the cost of opening this up again and running the DNA test, some one has to bare the financial responsibility the the State doesn’t want this responsibility, they already fulfilled their responsibility, if some one else wants to take on this responsibility let them, no one is going to stand in their way or try to stop them but the State is not going to be jumping up for joy for the opportunity to get into this case again, the first time around was more than enough. The State has nothing left to prove and they have something that is nearly impossible to overcome even if the DNA evidence did go against them; the confessions of the Melendez brothers. This is something that some out there fail to see or understand either they are ignorant, being disingenuous or straight out lying. This might not make sense but the State can still use the Melendez brothers’ confessions even though the brothers recanted. This has to do with Miranda, the warning or rights you are read at the time of your arrest. One of those rights clearly states you have the right to remain silent anything you say can and will be used against you in a court of law. Now if you said something and then changed your mind and decided you didn’t want to say that your left at the mercy of the court and the State for that matter. And changing your mind after you have been sitting in prison close to ten years because you want to go home doesn’t look too promising most of us would be looking for a way out long before then, hell I would be wanted to go home after one day, so the authorities are use to this kind of activity. The second issue that most overlook is when a suspect confesses the police, the State, any investigators no longer need to investigate that suspect, their investigation into the suspect ends with a confession they don’t need to find anything else, so it is unfair if a convict decides to recant a decade later and cry the State or law enforcement didn’t find this or that, they didn’t need to find it at the time because you confessed and asking to do so now is an impossible task. The confessions stand even against DNA evidence,and particularly so in this case because of the type of DNA evidence was collected, evidence collected from the exterior of the victims bodies and entangled in items where the source of those items are still in question unlike DNA evidence you would get from a rape kit, where if your DNA showed up you would be hard pressed to deny you were there. So the State’s stance on this is very strong and they won’t be joining the cheer leading squad to get the DNA tested again and rightfully so. That leaves us with the question whom is responsible for the DNA evidence being useless now? This is a little more difficult to determine.

    There are a couple issues here, first anyone can request to have DNA evidence run but if you make the request you are responsible for the cost and it can be costly, so if you have the time and money you can petition the court. Keep in mind the petitioner should never take possession of the DNA evidence themselves. There is a system in place where there is no need for this, the State or court can’t release the evidence to an approved courier and this courier can directly hand it over to the lab running the test. This is the accepted procedure, there is no need the petitioner should ever come in contact with the evidence they have requested, if they do the chain of custody has been put in question and as we have seen in this case rightfully so. In this case Fred Dannen decided for whatever reason to take possession of the DNA evidence for whatever reason, once he did that the proper chain of custody had been broken and the DNA was now in question that doesn’t even take into the consideration that Dannen and/or people working for him have admitted that that some of the samples spilled out in the back seat of their car, once this happens whatever DNA evidence Dannen had in his possession not only is questionable because of the chain of custody but now it has to be questioned if this DNA evidence has been contaminated, these two issues make this evidence unreliable and not worth testing. So at least at this point Fred Dannen is responsible for the condition for the DNA evidence and why it would be useless for testing. Before that there is some question about the condition of the DNA evidence and what condition it was in and how it came about it got into this condition. It was the third and final lab that determined the evidence had been down graded and contaminated and could not produce results, this was after Fred Dannen had been in possession of the evidence in question. The second lab to be asked to run the test was in Arkansas, the details are a little sketchy with what happened here, the lab ran out of money, so I don’t think this lab even ran any test but they could have and we just never heard any results maybe the lab stopped their work when they ran out of money before they could make any conclusions, so I really don’t know what happened there. That Dannen decided to take it to the third lab tells me he didn’t get the results he wanted from the Arkansas lab. Which brings me to the first Lab and the highly respected Dr. Edward Blake, it was Dr. Blake’s lab in California that the DNA evidence was first sent and here is where we run into the problems. Dr. Blake’s lab is world renown as the leader in DNA testing and for the advancements made in DNA testing. The way this lab makes these advances is running test and experiments on the samples they receive, that’s science trial and error, in doing so the samples become damaged. I’m not a DNA expert far from it but even I can understand this simple explanation. When DNA evidence was first used, specifically hair evidence the hair had to have the follicle to be tested, The follicle is that small meaty tip found at the root of the hair, this could only be tested one time, it would be destroyed during one test, so you got one chance. Now this is not the case because of the work Dr. Blake’s lab has done. We know from the autopsies the M.E. in this case plucked the hairs from the victims because she knew the follicle was needed although DNA evidence testing wasn’t even being used at the time. So it is safe to say the follicles were that were needed to run even the old DNA testing were available at the time the evidence was sent to Dr. Blake. Again there is some question about what evidence was sent to Dr. Blake and again this shouldn’t happen, everything should be sent you don’t go through the evidence and pick and choose. All we know for sure is Dr. Blake’s lab and/or Dr. Blake has stated they found nothing. A rather ambiguous statement, what does he mean exactly. I have asked him , I have sent he e-mails a number of times but I never get a reply. Here is how I take it, I think Dr. Blake was sent samples from the victims and also sent samples for comparison that were collected from suspects or parties of interest, Dr. Blake stating he found nothing means he didn’t find any matches between the samples from the victims and the subjects sent for comparison, the hairs in question did not belong to any of the subjects that had supplied DNA samples. Now unfortunately we probably never get to know exactly what Dr. Blake meant because when Fred Dannen and company didn’t get the results they wanted they wanted the samples backs, Dr. Blake responded that there were no samples to return, which was the regular procedure with this lab because they kept samples to run their test and experiments. Fred Dannen wasn’t happy with this, he had spent $30,000 of his own money to get the results he wanted and needed to write his book and prove his theory, and decided to sue the lab. Some people ask what happened to the DNA evidence for a number of years from the early 2000’s until a few years ago, for many years it was hung up in court when Dannen sued the lab and then again when the Arkansas lab ran out of money. Anyway Dannen sued Dr. Blake’s lab, he won the case and took possession of the DNA evidence. Now I have no doubt Fred Dannen did some questionable things with the evidence once he got a hold of it, hence why he went into hiding in Mexico, tampering with evidence is a crime but I also believe the samples that were sent to Dr. Blake would have been destroyed and downgraded from the test and experiments that lab runs, so by the time Dannen got a hold of them they were already useless. The irony here is now people want to run these advance test on the DNA evidence and these advances were created by the lab that Fred Dannen sued. A bunch of craziness but the question now is where does all this craziness leave those that are still looking for the truth and don’t have personal agendas. We definitely can’t count on any of the evidence Fred Dannen had in his possession for answers, so we have to look for other places that had access to some of the evidence.. After the autopsies were completed the information and evidence that was collected was sent to the F.B.I. and this is what made me decide to send my request. In the last few years I have seen much made about the fibers found on the victims bodies, these were sent to the F.B.I. and for good reason. The fibers were never mentioned during any of the trials, some people question that now but I think the answer could be very simple, the reason the fibers were never questioned in court was because both the State and defense knew it didn’t help their case, the fibers either came from a source that neither side could connect to anyone or the fibers came from a source you would expect the victims came into contact without cause for concern, like an orange carpet fiber from an orange car like a Pinto that we know all three victims were in and it wouldn’t be surprising to find fibers on them. I’m not saying this is the case but it usually is something simple like this and doesn’t become an issue until years later some people try to bend the facts and truth. The F.B. I. would have been able to determine this rather fast long before the trials took place and I believe this is why the fibers were never questioned back when the trials took place, everybody had the answer and knew it didn’t prove anything one way or the other. So that is what I requested and hope to find in the F.B.I. reports; what did they determine was the origin of these fibers, what type of vehicle had that type of carpet. Well I guess I should start reading the files I did receive.

    Liked by 3 people

  12. Brian I’m reading the files you shared and I have already come across something I have never heard about before. The report mentions some one with a maroon truck tagged in Alabama but the name is redacted, do you know who they are talking about?


    • Vero the first person that comes to mind is Donnie Sizemore, he was a early suspect, I don’t know about the maroon truck but he had family in Alabama and when the police were looking for him he was apparently back in Alabama. Sizemore was kind of like a Terry “Tab” Harper type of guy, had a bad reputation and at least one girl called the police and told them they needed to take a look at him. A couple things that stick out in my mind at the moment about Donnie Sizemore. Kenneth Franks had stayed with Sizemore and one of the Dannys, McGennis or McSpaden I always get those two confused. Danny would tell the police that Kenneth stayed with them one night in June (1982) at the Northwood Apartments because he couldn’t go home for some reason, this Danny didn’t know exactly why Kenneth felt he couldn’t go home but this does bring into question Mr. Franks’ statement to police that there were no problems at home between Kenneth and his father and/or his father’s boyfriend. The police had been told there was some problem between this Danny and Kenneth, Danny told police that Kenneth was smoking weed in the apartment and Danny had told him he didn’t allow that in his apartment .and kicked Kenneth out, so that was apparently the problem. Then one time Sizemore and one of the Dannys. again can’t remember which one, maybe the same one I just mentioned or maybe the other went to the Franks’ home to see Kenneth but he wasn’t there, apparently Mr. Franks was intoxicated and made sexual advances towards the boys and this Danny told police he never wanted to go back to that house. So there were some strange occurrences between Donnie Sizemore Kenneth and Mr. Franks. That’s all I can recall at the time I will look into this again and the maroon truck when I get some time.

      Liked by 3 people

  13. Vero, I went back over everything I could and today I read the report from the F.B.I. files that you mentioned. Other than that report I can’t find where a maroon truck is mentioned anywhere, the only maroon vehicle I see ever being brought up was Robert Frueh’s Lincoln Continental. So that leaves us with the Alabama connection and that would still have me leaning toward Sizemore but there are a couple things in the report that give me pause. And being 100% certain about details found in one report alone can be difficult, even a simple straight forward report such as this one. This report is quite simple; the Waco Police Department is making a request to the F.B.I. office in San Antonio to help locate a suspect and for a background check. San Antonio passes along the request to their office in Montgomery Alabama. I see the date on the report was August 2, 1982 and Waco was looking for Sizemore at that time. Actually looking back at the reports they still were looking for him at the end of August. That they still had not been able to locate one of their prime suspects at the end of August and they suspended the case a few days later apparently because they didn’t have any more leads to follow is a total head scratcher. One thing I need to clarify; I usually refer to Sizemore as Donnie, in the police reports both Danny and Donnie are used, I usually stick with Donnie because I have a hard time keeping the details straight about the other two Dannys that are mentioned in association with Sizemore adding a third Danny would just add to my confusion.

    Now to what we see in the F.B.I. report, as I have said it’s the connection to Alabama that makes me think they are looking for Sizemore and the report also states that the suspect’s sister and mother live in Texas. This was true of Donnie Sizemore’s family, his parents David and Norma and sister Dana lived in Axtell, Dana called the Waco Police very early on in the investigation, I will get into the details that are in the Waco Police reports in a bit. These are the things that lead me to believe they are talking about Sizemore but really that’s not a lot to go on. On the other hand there are things that make me question this. Of coarse the truck, the Waco Police talked to a number of people about Sizemore and none of them mentioned Sizemore having any vehicle truck or otherwise, so I don’t know if he did or didn’t. You would think the killers had a vehicle unless you believe the kids just walked off into the woods with their killers, I think this is highly unlikely. So you would think the police would have asked the subjects they talked to what type of vehicle Sizemore had but apparently they didn’t.

    In one part of the report it states that the subject’s mother lived in Texas then in another part of the report it states the F.B.I. has talked to the mother in Alabama. Of coarse this could be the same person, there was a family connection to Alabama, so maybe the mother was visiting family in Alabama when the authorities were finally able to make contact with her. I would have to say this looks a little suspicious, the mother hears the police in Waco are looking for her son and she knows he is in Alabama and she runs off to Alabama. And when the F.B.I. asks to talk to other relatives the mother states she will contact the relatives herself and would not give their names and addresses, very questionable behavior. In this F.B.I. report the mother states her son had returned to Waco in February 1982, remember Gayle Kelly told police Kenneth was planning on making some big money on a drug deal with some one that had recently returned to Waco. According to the Waco Police reports Sizemore didn’t return until Spring, he was discharged from the Army in April or May 1982. This is a slight discrepancy and there could be a simple explanation. Sizemore was discharged from Fort Hood, it is possible and I would say probable that as Sizemore’s discharge date neared the Army stationed him back in Texas to take care of those final details you deal with when you are leaving the service, if he was discharged in April or May returning to Fort Hood in February makes since and once he was there he started making plans to return to Waco and it could be this transitional period that his mother is recalling. Being stationed at Fort Hood is a lot closer to Waco than being stationed in Germany, Japan or Korean you could see how a mother could see that as her son returning home. So that’s a small discrepancy and there’s a reasonable explanation.

    Then on the last page of this report or at least the last page I received it states the Waco Police had determined that this truck had spent the nights of July 12th and July 14th at Speegleville Park, I have never seen it mentioned in the Waco Police reports. I know the Waco Police checked how many over night passes were issued for the night of July 13th, there were two, I can’t remember the name of one of the campers but the other pass was issued to the Hadley’s and the Waco Police did talk to Barbara Hadley. She was the lady that told the police she saw a white truck with two males speeding around the park on the afternoon of July 13th. Now it would make sense for the police to obtain the information on the people that had over night passes the nights either side the night of the murders, I would think more so the night before, I’m not sure if you killed three people you would want to stick around and camp out another night after the murders, unless you are a total psychopath. Either way the police probably had this information and didn’t do anything with it until a subject’s name came up, like Sizemore, and they noticed he had camped out at the park around the time of the murders and it peaked their interest and they passed this along to the F.B.I.. I see two problems with this,; first Sizemore’s name came up very early on, why would it have taken until August to put it together? And then none of the people that the police talked to about Sizemore remembered seeing him in Waco around the time of the murders, I think the closest was more than a week before, you think if he was in Waco at the time some of his friends and that included Kenneth Franks would have seen him and some one would have said something about this. So that’s what we get from the F.B.I. report and again it’s not much to go on, one way or the other and this is why you just can’t go by the information from one report or one source, the Alabama connection is what make me think of Sizemore but that is a very narrow view. Now onto what’s in the Waco Police reports.

    Liked by 3 people

  14. Danny Sizemore came up a few times during the Waco Police original investigation from July 14th to September 3rd when the case was suspended, it is a little sporadic and some is very far fetched but I thought I would just put it all out there and everyone can see and judge for themselves what the Waco Police were working with. The first time we see Sizemore’s name is in Detective Ramon Salinas’ report for July 17th, as usual with Salinas’ reports there is some confusion he states at 9;20 a.m. dispatcher received call but he doesn’t give the date but if you look at the full report it looks like he is putting things in chronological order and if this is the case then the call came in at 9:20 a.m. on Thursday July 15th, the day after the murders occurred, more correctly the day after the bodies were discovered. The Dispatcher had received a call from an unknown female giving information on Danny Sizemore stating Sizemore had bought dope from the victim and Sizemore had made statements to the caller that he had killed people before. Salinas ran a check on Sizemore and nothing came up, no arrest record for Sizemore, not a good start. And if this call did come in on the morning of the 15th, this would have made Sizemore one of the first persons of interest, his name was brought forward before others like Terry “Tab” Harper. And I guess I have to keep hammering on this point but this is just another thing that shows how weak the whole Tab Harper story was. The calls about Harper started coming in on Friday July 16th, if as the rumor that was going around, and found not to be true later on, was true, that being Rebecca Desmarias told Rusty Escott before noon of July 14 that Tab Harper knew about the murders, one of the kids that heard this wouldn’t have waiting two days to give this information to the police. Even if a few kids hesitated and wanted to think about it for a while you would think at least one would have said something in the two days, that all the kids waited two days to say something doesn’t add up. The reason the calls about Harper didn’t come in until the 16th was because the kids hadn’t heard the rumor Rusty started until after he talked to Rebecca on Thursday even though he told everybody it was Wednesday including the police until Salinas interrogated him and he admitted he lied and it was Thursday when he talked to Rebecca and she had talked to Harper Wednesday night after the bodies had been discovered. Sorry I hadn’t been on that rant for a while. Anyway Danny Sizemore looks like one of Waco’s first suspects.

    The next time we hear about Sizemore actually comes from a call from his sister Dana. Salinas’ report for July 20 states 8:50 a.m., again no date but again looks chronological so Monday July 19th, Dana tells him she had gotten a call from a girl named Donna Olson on July 18th between 7:00 and 7:30 a.m.. Olson said she wanted to talk to Dana’s brother Donnie (that’s how it is in the report) about the murders. Dana informs Donna that her brother is not there, so the two girls struck up a conversation, Donna really didn’t say anything to Dana about Danny or at least Dana didn’t tell Salinas. Donna told Donna about some things she felt were strange when she went to the Franks’ home and things Mr. franks said. The police would talk to Donna Olson a few times and there is nothing in the reports that state she has anything to say about Danny Sizemore she appears to be more concerned with Mr. Franks. Olson had gone to the home to give her condolences on the 15th and noticed the boat was gone, which she thought strange because Kenneth loved going out on the boat and at the time Mr. Franks had said something about Midway Park. Then Olson attended the funeral on the 17th and at that time Mr. Franks had said something about camping where the bodies had been discovered. Ms. Olson didn’t give much more info and nothing about Danny Sizemore.

    In his report of July 27th Salinas states he contacted Kenneth Adkinson on July 23rd, he was a kid from the Methodist Home. Salinas had talked to Adkinson earlier and at that time Adkinson really didn’t have any information on the murders he gave information about Kenneth Franks’ apparent drug activity. Now Salinas asked him if he knew Sizemore, Adkinson stated he did but he hadn’t seen him in a while but Adkinson added if Sizemore was in town Christine Hart would know. Christine Hart was another kid from the Methodist Home. Salinas asked Sargent Holly Holstein to check this out. Holstein calls Christine and Christine states the last time she saw Sizemore was about 3 weeks before in front of the Burger King on Valley Mills.

    Holstein would follow up this lead per her report of July 27th; on July 26th Holstein contacted Joy Thrasher, at this point I don’t know how Holstein came across Joy Thrasher her name hadn’t come up it would in the future, I would guess Holstein found her name in Kenneth Franks’ papers that Mr. Franks brought to the police station. Thrasher stated she knew Sizemore and that he and Kenneth Franks were the best of friends.and ran around together quite a bit. As far as Thrasher knew Sizemore was still in Alabama, the last she heard of Sizemore being in Waco was back in April. She had talked to Sizemore’s parents on Monday July 19th and they told her they had talked to Danny of Friday July 16th and that he was in Alabama. Holstein was unable to make contact with Sizemore’s parents. After this Holstein brought Christine Hart to the police station. Again Christine stated she had seen Sizemore in front of the Burger King on Valley Mills 2 or 3 weeks ago, She was sure it was Sizemore, she had known him for years and she had talked to him that day. It was Hart that gave the police the names of Danny McGinnis and Danny McSpaden as friends that ran around with Sizemore and Kenneth Franks. Christine said they smoked weed and took pills and played wild games, this included a deadly game of hide and seek. According to Christine the kids would get into a maze, blind fold one of their friends, hand him a loaded pistol, the other kids would run and hide and when the blindfolded kid heard a noise he would shoot in that direction. Christine told Holstein she didn’t know where Sizemore was at the time but if he was in Waco she believed he would be staying with Danny McSpaden. Well I guess Holstein and Salinas thought they had just entered the Twilight Zone and didn’t want anymore because after this you don’t here anything about Sizemore for a couple weeks. But seriously this was the time the Waco Police sent the request to the F.B.I. for help, August 2, Waco still hadn’t been able to make contact with Sizemore nor his parents. The F.B.I. made contact with the mother. The next time we see Sizemore in the Waco reports is in Holstein’s report of August 11th, the day before she contacted Bradley Porter of the criminal investigation division at Fort Hood and requested all information they had on Sizemore.

    Also in that same report of August 11th Holstein states he talked to a Weldon Bounds, maybe Jr.. Bounds related to Holstein that he had talked to Joy Thrasher at the Northwood Apartments on August 9th. and Thrasher had told Bounds that Sizemore’s parents knew where he was, Bounds felt Joy knew Danny’s whereabouts as well and had talked to Danny in the last couple weeks, he also felt Thrasher was indicating that Sizemore knew something about the murders but he had no basis for this it was just a feeling. Bounds asked not to have his name mentioned if the police talked to Thrasher.

    Salinas had talked to Weldon Bounds, maybe Sr., on August 6th, this would be in his August 16th report. At that time Bounds stated he knew Danny Sizemore and knew the police were looking for him. He also told Salinas that Sizemore had an uncle connected to the mafia that was a very blood thirsty subject and Bounds had seen this subject in Waco four or five times in the last three to five years and knew he was from Florida. Bounds said Joy Thrasher was Danny Sizemore’s ex-girlfriend and she was suppose to have seen him back in June. It was from this Bounds that Salinas found out that Sizemore had been discharged from the Army in the Spring, hence Holstein’s call to Fort Hood on the 10th. And finally Bounds informed Salinas that Thrasher lived with her sister at the Northwood Apartments. A short while after Salinas talked to Bounds Sr. he received a call from his son David. David stated the talk from the kids around China Springs and Valley Mills was that Danny Sizemore had committed the murders. David Bounds didn’t have any specific information he just said it was the talk going around and David believed Sizemore was capable of committing the murders.

    In case you have lost track; the police in Texas, nor the police in Alabama nor the F.B.I. had been able to locate Sizemore, the Waco police were about to get a break from an unlucky source but it didn’t help’ Salinas’ report of August 20th states he contacted Danny’s sister Dana on August 19th and she told him Danny was in Enterprise Alabama and was a maintenance worker at a hospital. Dana also provided information about the relationships between her brother, Kenneth Franks, Danny McSpaden and Beth Bramlett. Dana had talked to her brother, he had asked her what type of gun had been used to kill Beth Bramlett. According to Dana, Mcspaden was mad at Beth because they had dated and Beth had broken up with him and he hated Kenneth Franks because Danny Sizemore had stopped hanging with McSpaden and started hanging out with Franks. Dana told Salinas where he could find McSpaden. With this information Salinas calls the Enterprise Alabama P.D. and talks to Sargent Moore and asks him to check out the information he has gotten from Dana. Moore would call back and talk to Lt. Horton and inform him that he couldn’t locate Sizemore but he had stayed and worked at the apartments he and Salinas had discussed earlier and Sizemore had been there with another subject but Moore couldn’t find a place of employment for this subject.

    Holstein tracked down McSpaden on August 19th and this is when McSpaden told the story about Kenneth staying at his apartment back in June and kicking him out for smoking weed. The reason he didn’t like Kenneth was because Kenneth was a braggart and liar, And that he and Sizemore had gone to the Franks’ residence and Mr, Franks came on to them and he never wanted to go back. He had been Beth Bramlett’s boyfriend but she had dumped him before he left high school in 1981 and he had not been present at the party when Beth had been killed. Holstein also contacted the other Danny; Danny McGinnis on August 20th and he stated he hadn’t seen Kenneth Franks in two or three months about, a month before the murders, he couldn’t provide much information about the murders but it was McGinnis that gave Holstein the name of Robert Watts.

    Finally the last we would see of Danny Sizemore in the Waco Police reports is Salinas’ report for August 31st and unfortunately it is unclear because Salinas typed some of the information outside the box. Anyway on August 31st Lt. Horton receive another call from Sgt Moore from the Enterprise Alabama P.D., Moore had found that Sizemore had been kicked out of the apartments mentioned before on July ??? ————– July 15th————————— a black subject. Moore had received information that Sizemore was a homosexual and was living in another city nearby in Alabama. However Lt. Horton had received information on Monday August 30th that Sizemore had been seen running or jogging on Bosque Blvd last week. This would be the last time Danny Sizemore would be mentioned in the Waco reports, at the time of this report of August 31st the Waco Police could not determine if Sizemore was or was not in Waco at the time of the murders and had yet to locate him and they would suspend the case three days later.

    Liked by 3 people

    • bkl67, before you said the Waco police didn’t check out Robert Frueh until months after his name came up. They didn’t come up with James Russell Bishop until early 1983 and now you have suspect Danny Sizemore that they could never find. You talk about possibilities and probabilities, don’t you think it is possible or probable that if they didn’t get stuck on David Spence and looked more into these suspects the outcome would have been different?

      Liked by 1 person

      • awebb90, the sooner you talk, question and investigate a suspect of course will change things, guilty or innocent stories will change people forget things, you can expect the guilt to try to create alibis or craft their story to try to prove their innocence and the more time they are given the more details they can create to sell their story. But we can’t lump all the suspects together each has to be dealt with independently, there are huge differences between the suspects you mentioned. One thing about your question,” if they didn’t get stuck on David Spence”, I guess you are talking about Truman Simons because the original investigators never looked into Spence nor Muneer Deeb, although they were given information or leads they should have followed up. So even in the case of David Spence and Muneer Deeb if the investigators had investigated or questioned them earlier than they did they probably would have found different answers than we have now.

        Getting into the suspects you mentioned because their circumstances are widely different. I will start with James Russell Bishop. The Waco Police never came up with Bishop until February 1983 because his name didn’t come up until he committed the crime in San Diego and the police from San Diego called Waco for background information. Bishop’s name never came up before then and even after the Waco Police heard his name they could not connect him to the Lake Waco Murders. Spence’s defense team tried but that turned into a disaster for them They tried to connect Bishop to Ronnie Brieten and connect Brieten to Jill Montgomery and Raylene Rice because it was his wife Joyce that cashed the girls’ checks that day at the Piggly Wiggly, very weak but that’s the best the defense could come up with. Breiten probably could be connected to Bishop from the pool hall where Bishop worked but Spence was connected to Bishop the same way. Bishop told the Waco investigators he knew Spence when they went to California to talk to him. I asked Christine Juhl if she was familiar with Bishop, she told me she wasn’t but she thought it made sense that Bishop would have known David from that pool hall because that pool hall was close to where they lived and David would go to that pool hall. So in Bishop’s case I think there was just nothing there to look into, his name never came up into the investigation because there just wasn’t any connection. Bishop surely had his own problems, they had nothing to do with the Lake Waco Murders.

        On the hand with Robert Frueh it is a little more difficult to determine the truth and is a great example why the police should have talked to him much earlier than they did, they first heard about him on July 16 but didn’t talk to him until November. This gave Frueh time to either forget things or give a timeline that would point towards his innocence. Frueh knew Kenneth Franks, he exhibited very questionable behavior, had a history with drugs and had been seen in the park that night, and that is what it comes down to; when was Frueh in the park. One girl stated she saw Frueh in the park after 9:00 p.m., then there was another witness that stated he saw Frueh in the park around 1:30 a,m,. When the police questioned Frueh he stated that he had been at the park at 1:30 a.m. and had talked to some one but denied being at the park earlier. So had Frueh forgotten about being in the park earlier or was he trying to hide something? When the police came looking for him, he probably realized some one had given his name so he knew he couldn’t deny he was there at the later hour because he had talked to some one and given them his phone number but he didn’t stop and talk to anyone, well anyone that is still alive, and could deny that because it would be his word against the witness’ word and since he was being honest about when he was there later and there was a witness that supported his story it makes him look credible. And this is what happened in the end the police decided his story matched the one witnesses’ story, that Frueh had been there at 1:30 a.m. and just forgot about the girl that stated she had seen him earlier. That’s what giving time gives a person of interest; a chance to think about the answers they will give. Now I don’t believe Frueh had anything to do with the murders but I understand why people still have questions and yes if the police would have talked to him much earlier I believe they could have answered many of those questions.

        And then we have Danny Sizemore. Before I read the reports from the F.B.I. last week, and that’s if they are talking about Sizemore, I didn’t think Sizemore was much of a suspect, I figured the Waco Police concluded he was in Alabama at the time of the murders which apparently wasn’t the case and I didn’t know that he had camped out at Speegleville Park the nights of July 12th and July 14th. But again it is only one report and we don’t get very much information, more questions than information. A couple things that stick out to me, Waco, Alabama nor the F.B.I. had anything on Sizmore, that would tell me he didn’t have a criminal record. Since my request was about the profile the F.B.I. created and that’s where this stuff about the suspect I think is Sizemore is, in one part the Waco Police are asking does this suspect fit the profile but we don’t see the F.B.I.’s reply. That Sizemore didn’t have a criminal record or at least any violent behavior that was recorded and he wasn’t from a broken family and was only 18 or 19 at the time which would have put him on the younger end of what one would look for in age of the suspect roughly 20 to 40, all those factors would lead me to believe he wouldn’t match the F.B.I. profile. Unless something came back from Fort Hood about his time in the military but we don’t have that report either and that he was 18 or 19 at the time he was discharged would show that the reason he left the military was less than honorable. But again we have only one report to go by and so many more questions. So yes again he was another suspect that should have been talked to but at least the Waco Police put in an effort and were trying to find him until they suspended the case. the same can’t be said about Deeb and Spence.

        Liked by 3 people

    • awebb90, that’s hard to say and this is just my personal opinion. I think there are a couple things that most people by a wide majority would agree on, one; that at least one of the victims knew as least one of their killers, I think most people believe the kids left the park with some one they knew they just wouldn’t have gone off with a total stranger. Second I think most agree there was more than one person involved, maybe just one person did the actually killing, all the stabbing and maybe even the rapes but that more than one person was there I think most can agree on. Having said that we know at least Kenneth knew Frueh, Harper and Sizemore, more doubt about Bishop like I said before a connection couldn’t be made but with him working in the pool hall, it is possible he could have met Kenneth there at some point. With Frueh, Bishop and Sizemore we have to ask whom would have helped them carry out this crime. With Harper he hung out with a rough crowd, a few that did commit murder using knives, including himself, so finding co-conspirators for Harper isn’t hard to do. At one point Harper was a good suspect but the police chased down that lead even after they realized the the information they had received didn’t match the facts, so by the time they suspended the case they knew he wasn’t responsible for the crime, the police did a thorough investigation into him, doesn’t mean he wasn’t a good suspect. I don’t know what to say about Frueh, he had some very questionable behavior and might have been a little creepy but does one person’s uncorroborated story make him a good suspect. I’m just not sure if Frueh had that kind of violence in him I seriously doubt it. In this case you are looking for a certain type of violent behavior. And with Bishop it is the same thing he had some problems, even some violent behavior but he was a gun man and again we don’t have the connection to at least one of the victims we need. So does the information we have on Frueh and Bishop make them good suspects or do the things we can’t answer absolve them? I lean toward the later but that is just me.

      On Sizemore I can’t say at this point, I just read that report last week, That he camped out at Speegleville Park around the time of the murders and could have been in Waco at the time of the murders does peak my interest in him, again I have been following this case for about 25 years and this is the first time I ever heard this. That’s what happens when you get new information, it can change your view and it has to be looked into and there is so much information out there, remind you the case files consist of about 40 boxes of material and that covers everything, I probably have seen not even one box full. And with anything you get 36 years later where to you go to get it straight. I have to take it for fact that Sizemore was at Speegleville when the Waco Police state I don’t think they just made that up. And then if
      the Sargent from the Enterprise Alabama P.D. is saying that Sizemore was kicked out in July before the murders and returned July 15th, depending on what that first date is because of the way Salinas typed it up in his report you can’t see what he is saying,; you can see July and then July 15th but you can’t read what is between those two words, well I can’t.That could possibly match Waco’s timeline, Sizemore got kicked out of the apartments in early July, returned to Waco, camped at Speegleville the nights of the 12th and 14th then returned to Alabama on the 15th. That would be very interesting but is that enough and where would I go to get more information, maybe talk to some one that saw him during that time but no one ever came forward before and said they saw him. Let’s say his family gave him cover back then, would they change that now, I doubt it. So now Sizemore is interesting but does it make him a good suspect or a better suspect, I don’t know. Harper was a good suspect at one point, I thought Bishop was a good suspect and there were plenty of questions about Frueh, I would say the same about Richard Kranks. And I still believe Clifford Oliver, Todd Childers, John Arnett, Cal Frazier and the Gutierrez twins; James and Terry are all good suspects at this time..

      Liked by 3 people

      • Mrs. Thompson that is the last post, I think you missed earlier post, the post with the F.B.I. files but I see those have expired. I have requested to have them sent again. I will post them again when I receive them.


  15. Since I haven’t posted anything in awhile and I’m trying to keep the conversation going, I figured I would put out there something I’ve had conversations about recently and see what others think and have to say about it. All are aware that I believe David Spence, Muneer Deeb, Anthony and Gilbert Melendez are guilty of committing the Lake Waco Murders and some wonder; so why am I here. My simple reply would be there is a subtle difference between beyond a reasonable doubt and questions, I have questions but they don’t take me to the point beyond a reasonable doubt. I think many people have a problem with this case because of the lack of physical evidence, that doesn’t bother me, there are plenty cases on the books that were adjudicated without physical evidence, it’s nice to have physical evidence but sometimes it’s just impossible to do so , we don’t live in a perfect world if we did we wouldn’t have murder. So without physical evidence what are we left with? Circumstantial evidence and a circumstantial case and that’s what we have here and therein lies the problem and the questions. I don’t have a problem with a circumstantial case generally, the State provides enough pieces to give us enough of the picture it can alleviate doubts that might linger. But building a circumstantial case one has to built one piece of information with another and another,even if those additional pieces are also circumstantial, you put enough of those together it becomes difficult to doubt the narrative that is being spun, well beyond a reasonable doubt. I think that is what is missing with this case, there are way too many holes in the picture even for a circumstantial case, the pieces weren’t put together, there’s more questions than answers. How did we get here? As with a lot of cases and especially true of circumstantial cases you have to count on people you otherwise probably wouldn’t be dealing with in your everyday life and now in a small span of time you either have to trust these people or decide they can’t be trusted, the cast of this case is full of these charterers. Example; I often get asked how did I get interested or involved in this case. Like most people I read Careless Whispers back in the 80’s, I liked reading true crime novels and I saw this book had just won the Edgar Allan Poe for best True Crime novel, so I thought it would be a good read and it was. Years go by and the internet is launched in 1993 and I’m on-line and I see articles reporting Muneer Mohammed Deeb has won his appeal and has been released from custody. I remembered the name and I couldn’t believe they let that fool out and once he was out the flood gates opened up, the Melendez brothers, started crying they were innocent although they had confessed and made plea deals and then if that wasn’t enough Amnesty International and other human rights groups were treating Deeb as if he was some kind of human rights hero, he was getting trips to Europe to speak for these organisations and I was wondering had people totally lost their minds, Muneer Mohammed “Lucky” Deeb a human rights hero, the man that stalked and threatened teenage girls he couldn’t get his way with is some kind of hero and no he wasn’t found innocent he was found not guilty. He was far from innocent, the state just couldn’t meet the burden of proof to convict him, again the world is not perfect. But it’s the likes of people like Muneer Deeb that we are dealing with and it doesn’t look like his cohorts were much better and not as lucky. But whom were these people and the people that were involved in their lives, the same people we would have to listen to on the stand and trust, in the end that’s the balance of the case, the Clifford Olivers. the Christine Juhls, The Gayle Kellys, Dorothy Miles, The Kebanna Reeds, the Lisa Kaders, the Dana Diamonds and we can’t forget the parade of jailbirds, these are the people the juries had to put their faith in and many of them present serious problems. You could pick any one of them and seriously question their testimony. For my purposes I’m going to pick Gayle Kelly.

    Before anyone blows a gasket let me explain the reason for my choice. All of us know or have come to realize that the whole mistaken identity story is a bunch of crap but there are plenty parts of this story that just don’t add up. One of the other parts of the story that didn’t make sense to me right from the beginning was the failure of the police to talk to Gayle Kelly A.S.A.P.. Even before the police realized they had a triple homicide on their hands they were interested in talking to Kenneth Franks’ friends, actually when Mr. Franks met the police at Midway Park when he reported Clifford Oliver’s vandalized car approximately at 6:30 a.m and he told the officers his son and friends hadn’t returned home the night before, the officers told him to check with Kenneth Friends and one of Kenneth’s best friends, Patrick Torres, came to the park to talk to the officers. Then when the bodies were discovered later that evening about 12 hours later the police still wanted to talk to Kenneth’s friends, a few would go to the police station the next day. The police were obviously clear they wanted to talk to all of Kenneth’s friends and they asked the friends what other friends Kenneth had and everyone mentioned Gayle Kelly, common sense would dictate they would want to talk to this girl but it looks like they didn’t try. Even the next day Officer Porterfield goes to the Methodist Home to get information on Jill Montgomery and the counselor for Jill and Kenneth mentions Gayle Kelly and tells him Gayle is also a resident of the Home but he doesn’t try to talk to her. On the 19th Lisa Kader, another girl that lives at the Home and lives on the same unit as Gayle Kelly, which was the same unit Jill had stayed on while she was there, came into the police station and told the police Muneer Deeb had killed Kenneth Franks because of Gayle Kelly and they should talk to her, still the police do nothing. I can’t understand this, this just doesn’t make sense, the police want to talk to Kenneth’s friends and everyone is mentioning Gayle Kelly and they even get a strong tip why the murders happened and do nothing, I just couldn’t believe it when I first read this in the police reports, Barney Fife would have done a better job than this. You want to talk to witnesses as soon as possible, people do forget things and their stories will change over time and that’s with the people that truly want to be totally cooperative and honest, something Gayle Gayle wasn’t for whatever reason. And there it is, Gayle Kelly’s story developed and changed over time, the police didn’t talk to her until July 20th when she came into the police station with Patti Deis to report Patti’s apartment had been broken into, this was the day after Lisa Kader had come to the police station but the police never asked Gayle about Muneer Deeb nor did they ask her if Kenneth was having any problems with anybody, actually the police didn’t ask any of Kenneth’s friends if Kenneth was having any problems with anybody, they were so busy asking about his other friends they might be able to talk to they forgot to ask about his enemies. I don’t know if Gayle Kelly’s story is true, when I first got into looking into this case I leaned towards it not being true, I thought that had to be the answer why the police weren’t able to talk to her until 5 days after the bodies were discovered, they just couldn’t find her, my view has changed on that, it’s just something the police missed, they should have talked to her no later than July 15th, the delay in doing so creates the questions. So what was Gayle Kelly’s story when she finally was sat down and seriously questioned by Truman Simons and Dennis Baier on September 12th?

    According to Gayle she hadn’t seen Kenneth for about a week before he was murdered, she couldn’t remember the date but she remembered it was the Monday after the Forth of July, she remembered this because that was the day she returned to the Home. Gayle had a history of running away from the Home, she states that Kenneth had talked her into turning herself in to avoid further trouble, it would be a lot better for her if she returned on her own account, which she apparently did. Her punishment for running away was two weeks restricted to the grounds of the Home. Gayle also says when those two weeks were up she ran away again and went to stay with Patti Deis and right after she moved in the apartment was broken into the first time. Although Gayle doesn’t give dates we know when the apartment was broken into, the night of July 19/20 and if she had been on restriction at the Home for two weeks, that would take us back to July 5th and that was the Monday after the Forth of July. So Gayle Kelly’s story matches up, She hung out with Kenneth Franks over the Forth of July weekend and he talks her into turning herself in, which she does that Monday, it would be the last time she would see Kenneth, she was on restriction for two weeks which ended on July 19th and she ran away again and went to Patti Deis’ and that night some one broke into the apartment. The story she has had time to develop adds up, so do we believe the rest of her story? That’s where we run into problems with Gayle Kelly and her story, Gayle talked to police officers at least three times during the original investigation in July and there are serious discrepancies and questions about what she told them and what she would tell Simons and Baier in September and what she would later testify to. TO BE CONTINUED…………………

    Liked by 2 people

  16. Getting back to my questions about Gayle Kelly, her story and testimony. I mentioned earlier how Gayle Kelly’s stated timeline for July 5th through July 19th adds up, she was supposedly restricted to the grounds of the Methodist Home during that whole time, so she would have had limited contact with any of the victims or killers during that time. According to her, when she got off restriction she ran away again and went to stay with Patti Deis and got a job at IHOP and started that night, working the night shift; 11:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.. It would be the morning of the 20th when she returned from work that the girls found Patti’s apartment had been broken into and this is when they first went to the police. My first question about this is; if Gayle had just gotten off restriction from the Home and ran away that day, the 19th, and got a job and started that same night, whom would have known she had run away and moved in with Patti within those few hours?

    July 20th would be the first time the police would talk to Gayle Kelly, she and Patti Deis had come to the police station to report the break-in. Gayle would talk to the police three times in the next 8 days. She talked to a number of officers that first day, we get the most information from the report of Mike Nicoletti but we know she also talked to Sargent Holstein before she talked to Nicoletti. When the girls first came to the station Nicoletti and Salinas were looking for Patti and had gone to her apartment and when they arrived that noticed the apartment had been broken into and called it in, that’s when they were told the girls were at the station. Nicoletti and Salinas returned to the station and interviewed the girls. In essence this is what information we can gather from Nicoletti’s original interview with Gayle that day. Gayle stated Kenneth was planning to make some big money on some drug deal, Kenneth wouldn’t tell her whom he was planning to make the deal with, due to concerns for her safety, but it was some one she knew and some one that had returned to Waco recently. Nicoletti failed to ask Gayle anything about Muneer Deeb, even though the police were told the day before Deeb had killed Kenneth because of Gayle but he did ask her about Tab Harper, this was at the time when Harper was still on the top of their suspect list. Gayle told Nicoletti Kenneth liked dealing with Harper because Harper always had the good stuff. What most people miss about this is this should have discounted Harper at that point, Gayle knew Kenneth and Harper did drug deals together, the subject Kenneth told her about was some one they knew but for some reason didn’t feel safe dealing with and he wouldn’t tell her whom it was, it was some one she didn’t know Kenneth would be dealing with, this surely wasn’t the case with Tab Harper. There is something Nicoletti didn’t put in his report but apparently he and Gayle talked about and would cause some confusion later. Nicoletti went into detail with Gayle about the number of wounds each victim suffered

    There would be a second break-in of Patti’s apartment a few nights later, the night of July 22nd/23rd, Patti didn’t want to return to the police station but she did call Salinas to report it. Salinas told her she should come to the station but Patti declined. At this time the girls are on edge and rightfully so, Gayle Kelly decides to return to the Home, at least she is safe there. Nicoletti heard about the second break-in and that Patti Deis didn’t want to come to the police station and that Gayle had returned to the Methodist Home, he decides to go talk to Gayle at the Home on July 23rd. Two of her friends have been killed, now there have been two break-ins into her apartment, the perpetrator took out all the knives in the kitchen and laid them out in a line on the table and had left notes that they would see you the next time or get you the next time, does Gayle have any idea to whom might be doing this. Gayle tells Nicoletti on July 21st when she was running around town three black males in a Blue Plymouth Duster were following her around and when she told Patti about it Patti informed her that the same three black males in a blue car had followed her around on July 20th. Nicoletti recalled Salinas had interviewed a black subject that was in Koehne Park in a Blue Duster the night of the murders; Ronald Robinson, so Nicoletti passed this information onto Salinas. This would lead to the third interview the police would have with Gayle Kelly.

    When Gayle returned to the Methodist Home on July 23rd she would only stay for a few days, her seventeenth birthday was coming up, either July 26th or July 27th, and she was done with the Methodist Home, she ran away again and went back to Patti’s. Salinas and Holstein would go to the girl’s apartment on July 28th to try to talk to them again. Ronald Robinson was interviewed a second time and his story had changed from the story he told when he was first interviewed. By this time the police had come up with another person of interest, Salinas and Holstein wanted to ask the Girls about. There was a Robert that was connected to Jill Montgomery in some way and the police had come up with a couple subjects. One of the subjects. Robert DeLaRosa, the police asked Gayle kellly if she knew anything about, she replied Jill was seeing this Robert on the sly, but she really didn’t know anything about him, she said she never had met him nor knew what he drove, apparently Gayle was lying. When I asked Gayle about this she told me Robert DeLaRosa was her husband’s uncle, well her boyfriend back then. And that’s the problem with Gayle Kelly she was not very cooperative or totally honest with law enforcement for some reason and that has to raise questions.

    Gayle Kelly wouldn’t be interviewed again until Truman Simons and Dennis Baier took over the case on September 10th after it had been suspended on September 3rd and they interviewed or talked to Gayle a number of times on September 12th. And it would be at this time we get the story that is close to the story she would testify to during the trials and it was also when she called Truman Simons to tell him Muneer Deeb had admitted to her and Patti that he had killed the kids. There was no mention of being followed by three black males. Simons and Baier did ask her about Muneer Deeb and she told them that there was animosity between Deeb and Kenneth. She went on to explain Deeb would give her and the other girls from the Home soda, cigarettes and drugs and that Deeb had asked her to marry him for $500 and had rented an apartment for her but then Deeb caught her and Kenneth together and she moved out. Then Deeb gave the apartment to David “Chili” Spence. This is when Gayle mentions being followed and harassed but now it’s not three black males but it is biker’s from David “Chili” Spence’s gang, she states they are hanging around the apartment, sitting on the railing outside of the apartment and would follow her and Patti whenever they were out and about. I have to add that Gayle had been asked about bikers before when she was first interviewed by Nicoletti on July 20th, at that time she said Kenneth didn’t deal with the bikers, the only time he had any dealings with the bikers was when he did deals with Rebecca DesMarias, Becky was the girl that had been rumored to have talked to Tab Harper about the murders on Wednesday morning July 14th , which turned out not to be true, but she had also run away shortly after the murders and was staying with a biker. And this is when Gayle Kelly first reported the incident that happened at the 7-11 where she and/or Patti were threatened. She didn’t give the date when she talked to Simons and Baier and she would testify she wasn’t sure of the date but when I talked to her she told me this happened on her birthday, again either July 26 or 27, which was one or two days before she talked to Salinas and Holstein but she never mentioned this to them. What Gayle told Simons and Baier was that one of the bikers from Chili’s gang came up to Patti in the 7-11 and asked her, “wouldn’t it be nice to live to see 18” and then the biker walked out without buying anything. Patti Deis would confirm this, at least that is what the report says. Later Gayle would testify she went into the store and Patti stayed in her car and when Gayle came out of the store David with Gilbert Melendez and “Susshine”, Sunshine was Cindy Quick and Cindy Quick was James Jordan’s old lady, sorry biker term don’t know if girlfriend or wife, and Jordan was one of the jailbirds that testified against Spence. Apparently Spence attacked “Sunshine” that night. Anyway Gayle testified when she came out of the 7-11 she saw David Spence standing beside Patti’s car and that’s when she heard, ” wouldn’t it be nice to live to see 18″, but she states she didn’t know if it was directed towards her or Patti, then Spence walked up to her and said,” This is the bitch we’ve been looking for”, then said some stuff about Deeb and Gayle not giving him any and that maybe she should try a real man and then asked her out. So that was her final story. Back on September 12th when Simons and Baier talked to her, again multiple times, she told them that the harassment from the bikers went on for a couple weeks until Deeb started staying at the apartment with the girls. It was during this time that Gayle states Deeb had told her and Patti that Kenneth had been killed slowly, shallow stabs around the heart not to kill him but to cause pain and Gayle says Deeb knew how many times Kenneth had been stabbed. This is where the confusion is with what Nicoletti had told Gayle about the wounds of the victims. Gayle admitted Nicoletti had told her the number of stab wounds each victim had endured but she was positive Deeb had told her this also. The one thing Gayle had failed to tell the police at anytime was that she had worked at Fort Fisher with Jill Montgomery, Baier would find this out in November when he interviewed Lou Booker, she was the girls supervisor and told Baier that she remembered Deeb coming to the Fort to see Gayle and she remembered one incident in particular when Gayle, Jill and Deeb got into a heated exchange about Kenneth Franks, Deeb had become very agitated at the time, this was before Gayle had run away from the Home and Deeb had taken her to Fort Worth or Grand Prairie or wherever and before Gayle had moved into the apartment Deeb had rented for her. Simons and Baier weren’t told this when they talked to Gayle on the 12th, but she told them she and Patti were planning to go to the movies with Deeb later that night, the officers asked her not to say anything to Deeb about them looking at him in possible connection to the murders. A few hours later Gayle Kelly would call Truman and tell him Deeb had confessed to the murders. Does anyone else find this a little strange or have questions, of coarse you know I do.

    So this is the story we have and it was very crucial for the original convictions of David Wayne Spence and Muneer Mohammed Deeb. there was this girl, Gayle Kelly, she was a very close friend to Kenneth Franks and Jill Montgomery, these two friends are totally brutalized with another girl, Raylene Rice and left laid out in some secluded corner of a public park. Strange things start to occur in Gayle Kelly’s life around the time of the murders, there is this older guy from some far off country that becomes infatuated with her, he gives her things, offers her $500 to marry him, rents an apartment for her, Gayle’s close friend Kenneth doesn’t like this guy, Deeb and Kenneth have some run ins, apparently Deeb catches Gayle and Kenneth together in the apartment he has rented for Gayle and she moves out and decides to move in with a friend, the same day she moves in, the apartment starts getting broken into, where messages are left “see you” or “get you the next time”, a bike gang starts harassing her and following her around for what ever reason, a member of this so called gang, David “Chili” Spence confronts her and states she is the bitch they have been looking for, then Deeb starts hanging out with her again and the harassment stops and during this time when they start hanging out again Deeb gives her precise details of the murders and she knows Kenneth and Deeb didn’t get along and had problems, all this and she says nothing? Salinas and Holstein talked to her a couple days at the most after David had confronted her at the 7-11 and apparently the bikers were following her and harassing her at this time and the police are asking her if she has any idea whom could be doing this and she says nothing nor does she say anything about any of this to Nicoletti. She doesn’t say anything about this to anybody until law enforcement in the form of Simons and Baier inform her they are looking at Deeb and within hours she calls to tell them Deeb has confessed. Now Deeb does admit he did tell Gayle and Patti that he had committed the murders but he used his usual excuse that he was just joking just like he did when he asked David Spence if he could find some one to kill Gayle Kelly for insurance money, he was just joking. Doesn’t this sound strange? I asked Gayle Kelly about this, I asked her when Deeb gave her the details of what had been done to Kenneth and she knew that they didn’t get along it never crossed her mind that Deeb might have had something to do with his murder? I didn’t get an answer, well I got an answer but it wasn’t helpful to any degree, she told me I was too young to understand, she knew what happened and I needed to leave it to the adults. Well that might be but even at 16 or 17 I would have had enough wherewithal to see there was something wrong when some one is sharing details of a unsolved murder and find it suspicious when some one isn’t totally honest or straight out lies to law enforcement. Also I should add I asked Christine Juhl roughly the same question about when as she testified to that Deeb came into the store in the morning of July 14th and told her Gayle’s boyfriend had been killed, I asked her; at that time it never crossed her mind that he might have had something to do with it, remind you the bodies had not been discovered by this time. She told me physically Deeb couldn’t have killed the kids the way they were killed, he was too weak and had a physical impairment. I reminded her that on the morning of the 14th not only didn’t anyone know the kids had been killed but only those involved would have known how they were killed. So either Deeb or some one else involved in the murders would have had to tell her how they were killed no later than that morning which again was long before the bodies were discovered for her to believe he wasn’t physically capable or she didn’t know how they were killed that morning which then would lead me back to my original question. Now on that one I didn’t get a reply.

    I started this diatribe questioning the circumstantial evidence or the lack thereof and I’ve ended up going all over the place like I usually do and my point gets lost somewhere along the line. My point was with a circumstantial case you have to build one circumstantial piece of evidence or information with another piece of evidence or information even if it is also circumstantial and how the passage of time even a short period of time, like weeks, makes this all the more difficult and I see this is a huge problem with this case. Hey I don’t know if the story Gayle Kelly testified to is true but what if it was, what if she had told Nicoletti on July 23rd or Salinas and Holstein on July 28th that Chili’s biker gang were harassing her, following her around and hanging outside her apartment? They could have asked other tenants of that apartment complex if they had noticed if some bikers were hanging around the complex, again this would have been circumstantial but it would be building a narrative and this would have put David Spence on their radar and put that with Spence’s parole officer calling in stating Spence had stated to him he knew something about the murders and then add to that that Spence was staying in an apartment in that complex rented by Muneer Deeb and Spence hung out at the store Deeb owned because his girlfriend worked for Deeb and Lisa Kader had just days earlier told the police Deeb had killed Kenneth, you have the start of a strong case even if it is only circumstantial. But this is not how it went down, a couple months would go by and the original investigators were never able to put these things together and they suspended the case. Then Simons and Baier take over the case and all this just falls into their lap, they know its strong, if they did fail in one aspect it’s that they didn’t go back and strengthen all the circumstantial evidence that was available to them and in doing so left holes in the case and those holes have left those that care or want the whole truth many questions. I have questions, not so much doubts definitely not beyond a reasonable doubt, Spence, Deeb and the Melendez brothers are guilty, there were probably others involved to some degree; Clifford Oliver and company but with the passage of time will we ever be able to prove it. So that’s my thoughts and feelings about the state of this case, sometimes I wonder if I am the only person out there that sees these things the same way I see them, I just find it so hard to believe this is the case but it seems that way. I would love to hear what others think and have to say. .

    Liked by 2 people

      • Vero, I guess I can’t totally discount it but I seriously doubt it, to many things just don’t add up. And remember we have only been told what happened that night by the Melendez brothers and they changed their stories a number of times. Now I’m not like others out there that believe this is evidence of their innocence, they wanted to minimize their involvement, remind you they were planning with the plea deal they made to get parole in about 10 years, that was stupid on their part, you rape and brutally kill three kids and you really think you are going to do only 10 years, this is when I can honestly ask what were those brothers smoking they really needed to stop because it was totally messing up their perception of reality. Maybe if they were gangsters and killed a whole lot of other gangsters and made a deal they could have done a short bit because they had killed gangsters and gangsters had chosen that life style but not killing three teenagers,10 years that would have devalued the sanctity of life. Either way the brothers got a good deal and in doing so got to tell their side of the story and that is the only story we have. Even with all it’s inconsistencies this is the official story no matter how many times it had to change to get there, remember Gilbert was originally offered immunity to testify and that deal was removed because he couldn’t tell the truth. Was Gilbert really lying just to lose any deal or was he trying to see what he could get away with telling or not telling and then maybe he just couldn’t remember. And if Vic Feazell removed the immunity deal because Gilbert was caught lying do you really believe Feazell was trying to get Gilbert to lie? That doesn’t make any sense but we are still left with a story that just doesn’t add up. And that’s one of the reasons I’m against the death penalty, I believe David Spence would have talked at some point when he came to senses, if he had any sense, and realized the only chance for mercy he had was if he told the truth. I think that’s what Truman Simons was trying to do with David, with months going by and this case not getting solved, Truman thought as I think most officers would have thought the only way this case was going to get solved is if some one confessed and to get that confession they would have to make a deal and David was Truman’s first choice, he thought he could break down David. I don’t know what David was thinking, if he never intended to help Truman or law enforcement he should have just kept his mouth shut. But if David would have told his side of the story I could guarantee it would be a lot different from the story we got from the Melendez brothers.


  17. bkl67, in your earlier posts you stated how you find somethings strange, don’t you find anything strange or have problems with the way Truman Simons worked this case and other cases like Juanita White’s murder?


    • justin, Harold Windham was the brother in-law of the girl Clifford Oliver was seeing at the time. This girl, Josie Scionti, would call the crime stoppers hotline in December 1982 and report she knew where the murders had occurred and that Clifford Oliver had told her this and that he said David Spence had told him. There is a little confusion about exactly what happened. As I just said Josie didn’t contact the police until December but Clifford might have said something to her shortly after the murders which would lead one to ask why did she wait so long to say anything?

      Here’s the story as best as I can put it together at the moment. Clifford Oliver left Waco shortly after the murders, early August and went to California, this was after he had tried to pull off an insurance scam with his car much like Muneer Deeb and David Spence had tried to do in the beginning of July. Clifford returned to Waco late September or October 1, to depart for the Navy which he did on October 1. After he finished his basic training he returned to Waco for about two weeks. During this time he got back up with Josie Scionti. According to Josie at some point Clifford came around and the subject of the murders came up somehow and this is where the stories greatly differ. Josie states; she along with her sister Diane and her sister’s husband Harold Windham went to both Koehne Park and Speegleville Park with Clifford Oliver that night and it was at this point Clifford told them that David Spence had shown him where he had killed the kids and then they went to Speegleville Park and Clifford took them to where the bodies had been dumped. The Waco Police weren’t really interested in this information, David Spence was Truman Simons’ guy, so this information was passed on to Truman and the Sheriff’s Office and they handled things from here. Interviews were set up for both Josie and Clifford. I would have to add Clifford missed his first scheduled interview, he decided to go talk with one of the guys he was with the night of the murders so they could get their stories straight. Josie came in, gave her information and then took the officers out to the parks and this is when her story becomes very intriguing.

      I have stated this many times but I will again because to me it is the deciding factor in trying to determine whom is telling the truth. I have never been to Koehne Park or even Waco, I have looked at many maps and they have changed over the years. But just by looking at the maps you can see if the killers picked up the kids in the park and then drove them in the woods some one would have had to seen this, not that they would have necessarily known what was going on but they would have seen a car pull into the woods. The park wasn’t very big, about the size of a football field and there was a hill as you came into that part of the park that would give anyone sitting on the hill a panoramic view of the whole park and the police talked to about a dozen people that were sitting on that hill that night and not one recalled seeing a car pull into the woods, Josie Scionti had the answer. The killers didn’t enter the woods from the park, they left the park. took a right, went a short distance and took another right on to a small dirt road, the woods and Koehne Park were to the right, a golf course was to the left. this is the route the killers had taken to get into the woods. Josie took the police to a tree Clifford had taken her to, later when the Melendez brothers were taken out to the park, remind you when they were taken out to show where the murders had occurred they were taken to Koehne Park and entered the woods from that direction, not from the golf course side and both brothers came with in a few feet of the same tree Josie had shown the police. I believe Josie Scionti was telling the truth.

      There was some other information Josie gave that she stated Clifford had told her but it looks like Clifford told her this when Clifford and Josie were still running around together in July 1982 before he went off to California. Josie reported that Clifford had told her that the night he was with David, which was the night of the murders that he had gotten sick and vomited, again a little fuzzy on the cause; was it because he drank too much that night. that doesn’t look to be the case because Clifford and David Spence continued drinking all that night and well into the next day or was it because of something he saw. Remember the vomit found under the head of victim Raylene Rice that has been falsely reported as coming from Raylene. It came from a outside source as if some one was carrying her, got sick and dropped her right there. The more you hear of Josie’s story the more it rings true. So you may ask why haven’t we heard more from Josie?

      Unfortunately Josie Scionti was never heard in court, during pre-trial motions David Spence’s attorney Russ Hunt was able to have all enhanced interviews (Hypnotism) barred. There were nine subjects that were hypnotized including Josie Scionti and Clifford Oliver. Clifford was allowed to testify after some legal argument because one; there was question if he actually went under when they tried to place him under hypnosis and two he had interviews with Truman Simons and Naval Intelligence before they tried to hypnotize him, it was decided Clifford could testify to the information he gave both to Truman and the Navy prior to the hypnosis session. The State of Texas has changed their stance on enhanced interrogations and did so shortly after the trials for Lake Waco Murders, information gained from a witness under hypnotism is now permissible in the State of Texas, If this case was ever reopened and taken back to court we could hear Josie’s story and Clifford’s denials and inconsistencies. Hell he couldn’t keep his story straight the first time around and Vic Feazell and Ned Bulter knew he was lying but Clifford got a walk anyway. When I looked into this I found it was decided Clifford could not be charged with insurance fraud on his car because the insurance had run out before he claimed it had been stolen and all they could charge him with at that point was filing a false police report and that was deemed a waste of time, maybe he was given a break because he had joined the service, I don’t know but it seems very fishy to me, there was a lot of lying going on for some one just trying to get off the hook for filing a false police report.

      I have talked to Clifford Oliver and he can’t keep his story straight now any better than he tried to do in front of the Grand Jury or David Spence’s first trial. He does admit he got up with David Spence late that night, about 2:00 a.m., which would have been after the murders. Christine Juhl states she knows and saw David and Clifford together much earlier in the night, sevenish, and she says that’s why David didn’t pick her up from work that night because he was out drinking with Clifford. But Christine also says David’s car wasn’t in running order that night and that’s why he was with Clifford, so go figure. I have tried to talk to Josie, at first it seemed she was willing but for some reason she changed her mind and disappeared. I also contacted her sister Diane to no avail. The last I found on Harold Windham was he is in prison in Florida. so I haven’t been able to make contact with him. I would like to hear what all these people have to say, ditto with the guys that were with David Spence and Clifford Oliver that night, Todd Childers, John Arnett Jr. and Cal Frazier but it seems no one wants to talk for some reason, I find that very strange, a lot of times when you dig into old cases you always find some one that will talk, usually more than one person, there is always some one that feels jilted by the system, someone that feels they weren’t heard or no one listened the first time around, I just haven’t found that in this case and I know people like Josie Scionti weren’t heard.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Mr. Windham, I would really like to talk to your family, I have contacted your mother and Aunt Josie in the past, I didn’t try to contact your father due to his circumstances at the time. I thought at one time your aunt would talk to me but then she suddenly disappeared, only in about the last year did she resurface, well at least in regards to me and this case but she still hasn’t responded. Mr. Windham I don’t know how much if anything you know about all this, other than maybe what you have read here. It was your Aunt Josie that gave law enforcement the location of the murders, she said she got that information from Clifford Oliver and he told her he had gotten it from David Spence. Of coarse Clifford Oliver denies this and says Josie was lying about this and was just trying to get the reward money. As I explained to your aunt when I first contacted her most people are unfamiliar with this part of the story, it was never brought up during the criminal trials, the only place it is mentioned is in the Grand Jury testimony and it was sealed until Spence’s first appeal was heard in 1988 or 1989 and by that time the four had been convicted and the Melendez brothers had cooperated and told their versions of the story and the signifiance of what Josie had to say was forgotten. She was not allowed to testify during the trials, during pre-trial motions Russell Hunt, Spence’s attorney, successfullly had those that had been hypnotized barred from testifying, at the time the state of Texas did not allow enhanced testimony, that would apply to a witness that had been placed under hypnotism. One thing I find strange though, is there were 9 people law enforcement had hypnotized and listed by Russell Hunt, the State or the D.A. argued to allow a couple on that list to testify and were successful, one being Clifford Oliver. To me and this is just my opinion I can’t state that strong enough, Josie’s story or information was the most damaging to the defense, if the state was going to fight to get these other witnesses that had been hypnotized able to testify why not Josie? I understand there were legal issues at play but it is something I still question. And now after the Melendez brothers and most of the jailbirds have recanted, your aunt’s story holds even more importance and signifigance. And I guess I need to say “If it is true”. It’s obvious that I believe Josie’s story, it’s the detail that does it for me but I also know it takes giving precise details to make a good lie. So of coarse I would like to talk to your Aunt Josie about some of those details but I would also like to ask your parents if they remember anything about this, according to Josie they were there that night in December 1982 when they went out to Lake Waco with Clifford. It is the one thing Clifford and Josie agree on. They both agree that in December 1982 after Clifford had returned to Waco after completing his basic training with the Navy they got together at I guess what would be your grandfather’s house, Diana and Josie’s father. Josie stated that from there the four of them, Clifford, Josie, Diana and Harold went out to the lake to party. Clifford agrees that he went to Josie’s father’s house and that Diana and Harold were there and they were sitting around outside and then Josie, Diana and Harold started talking about the murders and David Spence and how they knew Clifford was good friends with David and that Clifford had been with David the night of the murders. Clifford says they were giving him a hard time about it and he left, he denies going anywhere with them, not out to the lake nor any of the parks, he didn’t go out partying with them. Mr. Windham as Ned Bulter pointed out to Clifford when he was questioning him during the Grand Jury, some one is clearly lying and your parents or aunt might not want to rehash all this, maybe Clifford is telling the truth, Josie and your parents were joking around giving hin a hard time about David Spence and somehow that turned into the terrible decision to call the crime stoppers tip line and it’s not my purpose nor place to cause problems for people that might have done something stupid in the spur of the moment decades ago but questions about the truth still remain. Earlier I stated it was the detail Josie gave that convinced me she was telling the truth, especificly how they got into the woods. She stated and at some point took law enforcement out there to show them, Remind you I have never been to Waco but she stated they left the park (Koehne) and turned down a road that was more like a path than a road. When I first read this back in the late 90’s I decided to check out some maps of Waco to see if I could find what she was talking about and I found some older maps of Waco that showed exactly what she was talking about, there was a dirt road/path on the edge of the woods after you left Koehne Park headed south. It looked like maybe a maintience road for the golf coarse that was right there. And then the detail she gave about turning by a blue house, in the old maps I saw there wasn’t any blue house but there was definitely one there by the time of the murders, it is mentioned during the trials and you can clearly see it on newer maps. Now Mr. Windham, again not sure how much you know about this case, but there has been much made about the Melendez brothers’ less than accurate recollections; point in case: Gilbert was never actually clear on what vehicle they were suposedly in the night of the murders, not in any of his confessions/statements nor in the two trials he testified in. In both trials he testifies he thinks or believes they were in a Pontiac, Clifford Oliver had a Pontiac. Christine Juhl, David Spence’s girlfriend that he was living with at the time, has said David was with Clifford that night in Clifford’s car because David’s car was not in running order the night of the murders and it was Clifford’s vandalized car that was found at Midway Park the morning after the murders that started the whole investigation and then about two weeks after the murders Clifford Oliver tried to get rid of the car and reported it stolen. Many attribute the Melendez Brothers’ lapse in memory to being feed facts by those responsible for their prosecution. And one of the areas of particular concern is where the actual murders took place; around Koehne Park as presented by the State and testified to by the Melendez brothers, Speegleville Park or somewhere else completely unknown. The Truman haters will eagerly point to Truman feeding the Melendez brothers the location he wanted but that view overlooks the fact that when the Melendez brothers went out to Koehne Park they were never alone with Truman Simon, other officers/deputies from the Sheriff’s Office were present, can’t recall all their names, I remember Dan Weinburg, I probably have that name wrong as well but he testified during the trials. And the officers that were there state that the area both Melendez brothers went to, which were at different times, were consistant with the information they already had, which we know they got from Josie. One brother was about 5 feet and the other within 15 feet of where Josie had shwon to be the location of the murders. I guess one question would be whom other than Truman Simons accompanied Josie Scionti out there when she gave her information? Mr. Windham your parents could help provide some of the truth by answering one simple question did they go out to the Lake in December 1982 with Josie and Clifford as Josie states? With your Aunt Josie it’s a little more complicated, it might just be something that needs to be clarified, during the questioning of Clifford Oliver in front of the Grand Jury it seems they are talking about two different ocassions, the night in December and then a night during the summer of 1982 shortly after the murders. Clifford testifies that he and Josie went and saw David sometime after the murders but before he moved out of the Northwood Apartments which would have been the end of July, apparently Christine had moved out by then, she moved out either July 20 or July 21. I would add Christine has told me she remembers Clifford bringing Josie to the apartment but she can’t remember if it was before or after the murders, Christine only stayed in that apartment for about 10 days. Anyway it seems Clifford and Josie might have talked about the murders or something Clifford had gotten mixed up in with David that summer before he left to go to California in early August and Clifford said something to the effect that what he had seen that night had made him so sick he threw up. Mr. Windham I could be wrong and this could have all part of the conversation they had that night in December and that’s why I would like to talk to your Aunt Josie or your parents to clear it up.


  18. awebb90, Clifford Oliver deserves a much deeper level of scrutiny as do the guys that were with him. When Gilbert stated he was trying to protect his brother when he wasn’t being totally truthful in the beginning, it wasn’t his brother Anthony he was trying to protect, it was the brother that was with Clifford Oliver.

    Liked by 1 person

  19. Brian do you think it is possible that Clifford, his friends, including the younger brother of Anthony and Gilbert committed the murders with David, without Gilbert and Anthony and they got caught up in it just because of their association with David?


  20. Seasons greetings to the faithful few, it’s been awhile probably too long but things have been slow, all I’ve been able to do is contact people that say they are not the people I’m looking for, that’s always fun spending the time tracking some one down and thinking you finally have been able to find them only to be told they aren’t the person I was looking for, total bummer. So that’s been my life the last couple months. Until today, the gift that keeps on giving returned, yes that would be crazy Bernadette Feazell/Harry Storm. And as you all know I usually don’t post nor reply to her craziness but she did say something new today that definitely needed attention. I don’t think she even has enough sense to realize what she said, the anger and bitterness she still holds inside because her ex-husband moved on to better things has left her blinded to reality. So in keeping with the season I thought I would be nice and try to help her see the reality and truth she just can’t grasp. Here is what Bernadette Feazell/Harry Storm wrote in one of her last post:

    “Perhaps Truman Simons will have some new theory, “we always knew there were four more killers”, or something akin to that”.

    Really, Bernadette this is the first time I’ve seen you admit there were four other killers, I’m not sure if they actually took part in the killing but they were involved some how. Sister I’ve been preaching this for about 20 years now, it’s so obvious. Do the names Clifford Oliver, Todd Childers, John Arnett Jr. and Cal Frazier mean anything to you? Yes the same boys that were with David Spence that night. The Clifford Oliver that lied during his Grand Jury testimony and Vic Feazell and Ned Butler both knew this and commented on it but some how it all got swept under the rug. Even months later when Clifford and Todd were testifying during David’s first trial they couldn’t keep their stories straight even though the State had months to prep them for their testimony. And whom were the Mexican men in the white truck the boys ran into when they went to Koehne Park that night, that Todd testifies to?

    Bernadette/Harry, I know you like to run a publicity stunt of putting out lies and disinformation as you have tried to do with Gilbert’s white truck and saying that truck wasn’t in running order at the time. It was proven in court that wasn’t the case, Calvin Nesbitt was confused in his time line, he believed Gilbert brought the truck to his house at the beginning of June and Gilbert’s stepfather picked up the truck a bout a couple months later after Gilbert had been arrested. Well we know Gilbert couldn’t have brought the truck to the house in June because he didn’t buy it until July 3rd and we also know Gilbert wasn’t arrested until after Labor Day and that”s when his step father came and got the truck. Bernadette/Harry I know you don’t have any answers for any of this so I will move on.

    There was something else you wrote that got my attention and I have some questions about. You wrote,”Unlike the rest of us, Anthony Melendez had a hard time giving up on Waco Attorney Walter Reaves, but once he made his decision and hired Mr. English he spent the rest of his days with a lot more relief and the knowledge that even though he would be gone, the truth would someday come out. Jay English has no idea the happiness, faith, and comfort he brought to Tony and the people who believed in his innocence”.

    Yes there were people that had some doubts and yes maybe even put faith in Tony’s innocence. People mostly led by the schemes put forward by people like you (Bernadette Feazell/Harry Storm) and Fred Dannen, parties that were more interested in their own agendas like money and revenge much more than the truth and justice. I feel fortunate that I was never one of those people that put any credence in anything you said, from the very beginning it was obvious you were guided by anger and jealously, it would be better to be led through hell by Helen Keller. So I haven’t been one of those that believed in the innocence of those convicted and I probably should not try to speak for some of those I know that did give time and heartfelt reflection on the convictions of David, Gilbert and Tony. Those people are more reserved and more dignified, maybe their silence speaks volumes but then there are people out there like you that will trample those good people with your lies, distorted facts and misinformation. Bernadette/ Harry you know one person I am talking about and I hope I don’t upset her by trying to talk for her now but we all know she listened to your and Fred Dannen’s stories, she had faith, she had questions prior to your involvement and she carefully listened to your side of things, she even started communicating with Tony, again Bernadette/Harry you know you initiated this contact. Well the years have gone by she put aside the grievances in her own family over this whole tragedy, she put faith in you and Fred and she got nothing, she still has the same questions, what do you say to her? You know I’m talking about Mrs. Thompson and I know you don’t have anything useful to say to her. And this is what I can’t understand; some one like you that bloviates about truth and justice as much as you does so little in the way of trying to find it actually you stand as an obstacle to the truth. To prove my point let me ask you a couple questions.

    Bernadette could you tell me in the many years that Mrs. Thompson had contact and communications with the Arnett’s, something you helped initiate by asking Mrs. Thompson to talk to Tony, they never mentioned to her that John Jr. was with David Spence that night?

    Or why did the Arnett’s try to tell Mrs. Thompson Gilbert never had a truck, we know that is a lie.
    Or why don’t the Arnett’s talk to Mrs. Thompson now, after years of communication, now she has some questions they don’t want to answer they don’t have time for her. Does that sound like people that are interested in the truth?

    I will finish this rant by repeating I should not speak for Mrs. Thompson, she is such a nice and classy lady to go on a rant like this, I just feel it is necessary for the people that are honestly interested in finding the truth, they should hear the whole story not just the musings of an angry ex-wife, i.e. Bernadette Feazell/Harry Storm.

    Liked by 3 people

  21. Well I didn’t want to go down this hole, you can’t reason with crazy and everything becomes more about personalities instead of facts and the truth and in the end that gets nowhere. But since I did respond to Bernadette Feazell/Harry Storm’s last rant and put it out there for all to see I feel compelled to share her latest rant, so this is the last rant I got from the ring leader of Cirque de Loco Bernadette Feazell/Harry Storm:

    16 hourslakewacotriplemurder.wordpress.com

    You want to whine about Jan Thompson, at least she knows who I am and I’m not lying to her, Christine or others about being Vic Feazell. You’re embarrassed? So was I September 17, 1986. You’re not funny, your stuff is long, tedious, and boring. You’re mean to women who write you then wonder why they are not your little fans anymore. It’s because you basically like your women unconscious and unable to speak or move. I thought about how ironic it is that you represented the victim of the Baylor rapist. Do you think she’ll ever forget about being semi conscious and having sex? You have a lot of nerve. Fuck you. Even Cecelia knows the truth about you. Texas Forensics Commission is your ultimate fate. Oh, and Harry Storm.

    And she posted this on her page:

    12h ago
    I confess, I’m angry

    One of my friends sent me a post by Vic Feazell aka. Brian Lewis about me/Harry it’s badly written and not funny but I posted it below with Vic/Brian’s website in case you want some boring alcohol fueled evidence of guilt.

    Remember, even though I had the “young Elvis”, I never fell for the “mistaken identity” crap and the State of Texas (Vic) actually dropped it. “Mistaken Identity” didn’t even come up in David Spence’s Bryan trial as Vic realized how fu*king stupid it was.

    Image result for vic feazell truman simons

    Talks to Jan Thompson as Brian Lewis, won’t tell her the truth, wonders why I’m mad

    Related image

    I’m mad because when this shit happened, I/we told you and Truman that Jill and Gayle did NOT look alike. I/we told you that this couldn’tve happened at Koehne Park.

    But nooooooooooo, you had to be right. Noooooooooo. Jill Montgomery with a 42 inch chest looked just like flat chested skinny Gayle Kelley. NO. No then, no now.

    I’m angry because none of us could fucking stop you.

    I’m angry that I didn’t realize that NONE of the three, Jill, Kenneth, Raylene, had blood on them from anyone but themselves.

    I’m also angry that you’re not angry this happened so fuck you.

    I’m angry that Jan Thompson can’t realize Brian Lewis is Vic Feazell and you won’t tell her the truth either.

    So, thank your “faithful few” on December 28th. the Texas Forensics Commission is kind of like the Honey Badger, they’re not going to care about anyone’s widdle historical feelings just evidence.

    I’m angry you put Gregory Feazell in jail when you had “Abel in your pocket” and it didn’t work out for you. You put your own son in jail to shut me up about the Lake Murder. Yes, you did.

    You, like Abel and the others, got sloppy with the overkill.

    Maybe you should have stopped when you had Greg arrested in front of me on purpose.

    You had power over me as long as our son was in the United States, then you fixed it to where he can’t come back. YOU created this with meanness and showing off power.

    I’m mad you don’t believe in DNA in this case. You think I’m embarrassing?

    Bernadette/Harry the first thing I notice from your latest rant is you failed to answer any of the questions I put forth in my previous post, again it shows you are not interested in the truth. I need to set the record straight, since we know you won’t, so people will understand the significance in your statement, ” we know there were four other killers”. You make it sound like you and Vic were always at odds about this case, everyone had a problem with the mistaken identity theory from the beginning other than Truman Simons, so it’s not like you stood alone as an island against the masses, the opposite is true. Back when the first trials took place you and Vic were still together and no one heard anything from you, it wasn’t until after Vic left you you decided to stir up the pot to get back at him. Which is still the case today, Vic left you nobody cares, he’s moved on and for some reason you can’t. But back then you and Vic were still all good, I guess he still loved you back then and trusted you, something I’m sure he totally regrets now. And what I mean by this we know back then when Vic became the D.A. he talked to you about his cases, private conversations that should have stayed between the two of you. We know this because when we look at the records on the case against Vic feazell we see the F.B.I. took statements from you that were from private conversations between you and Vic about cases he was handling. Nothing earth shattering there a husband sharing details of his work with his wife and that’s why your statement about being told about four other killers is important. And I know you won’t tell the truth about this but one has to ask when were you made aware Truman and/or your husband had some idea four others were involved. You said this is something Truman said. I know Truman doesn’t talk to you and hasn’t since you became the gossip queen of Waco, which I think started back in the early 90’s, so when did you hear this? And whom did you hear it from? Again I don’t think you will tell the truth about this, so I will put it like this. It seems it would be more likely you heard this from Truman and/or Vic when things were still all good in your marriage. You can read the Grand Jury testimony, something the juries during the criminal trials didn’t get to hear or see because the Grand Jury testimony was sealed and wasn’t opened until David’s first appeal. In that Grand Jury testimony you can see both Vic and Ned Butler know Clifford Oliver is lying about what he and his three accomplices did that night. Bernadette these are the four people Truman was talking about and you knew this and this is why I couldn’t believe you posted that, I’ve never seen you ever mention this before and I know why. The connection to these four guys doesn’t exonerate Spence and the Melendez brothers, it connects them even more. How could you be calling for the release of Tony and the innocence of David and Gilbert when you knew your ex husband and Truman had knowledge that further proved their guilt and the guilt of others/?

    And this is what I mean when I say you are blinded by anger, you are so bitter and so vindictive the only thing that is important to you is getting back at Vic. Bernadette, Vic had an ethical obligation to report to the court if he made any deals for testimony and honestly that looks like what exactly happened and Vic and Ned need to be held accountable for that. But your drive for revenge has become your primary focus not the truth. I don’t recommend trying to get back at Vic, you need to move on but if you had conversations with Vic or Truman way back in the 80’s that explains why four guys got to walk free and clear you should share it and should have long ago. The problem now is whom is going to believe you now after the decades of dishonesty you have displayed? And that’s the problem with the case, the people that coulda and shoulda didn’t and if they try to now many are going to question it. Bernadette your anger only hurts people, like you think you helped Tony, again knowing what you knew? The best thing for Tony and his family was to show remorse and ask for mercy not rail against the system. He got a great deal, if he and Gilbert held up their part of the deal they would have still had a chance to see their families again a chance the families of the kids they killed would never get. Bernadette you said I was whining about Jan Thompson again showing your concern for the living victims, really nice. I wish Mrs. Thompson would speak so people would truly understand how your lies and the lies and promises of Fred Dannen have truly hurt people, then people would honestly understand the hateful vindictive disgrace of a person you really are.


  22. Brian, THANK YOU, thank you, thank you !
    I am looking forward to joining in the conversation.
    Once i have pulled out all my research materials, i will have time to explain some of the last few years of my working with B. Feazell/H. Storm. I call it, “My trip through Hell.”
    Again, I thank you Brian Lewis/NOT V.FEAZELL😁

    Liked by 5 people

  23. Brian you really have Vic Feazell’s ex worked up, one minute she is saying you are Vic then the next that maybe you’re not. Then she also states Vic doesn’t care or is afraid of the DNA evidence and then she says Vic wanted the DNA run and wanted to help Tony, I’ve never heard that before. I can’t wait to hear what Jan Thompson as to say. As much as Vic’s ex doesn’t like your site she copies a lot of information off of it and I see she was asking about Vyna Oliver, she took it from one of your post. I remember you and some one talking about that some time ago whatever happened with that?

    Liked by 1 person

    • Vero in response to your question on Vyna Oliver, there just isn’t anything concrete on her one way or the other.My interest in her back then was two-fold, well the apartments were. Keep in mind the Ivy Square apartments don’t exist anymore as neither do the Northwood Apartments, so for some one like me that has never been to Waco it’s kind of hard to get a layout of everything. But reading in the reports you see the manger of the Ivy Square apartments report the girls stop by the apartments that day and also three other boys that had run away from the Home were also there at the same time, IO found that a little strange Jill Montgomery had lived at the Home, so on that Tuesdsy afternoon four kids from the Home decided to go to these apartments around the same time, there had to be something to it, maybe they knew somebody there. Now we know a staff member that worked at the Home lived there ; Linda Fuqua, so it’s in all likely hood the kids knew her but would they have wanted to visit her for any reason. I have tried to contact Ms. Fuqua along with a few other people that were living in the apartments at the time but haven’t gotten any responses. But it was the manager’s name that really got my interest,; Mrs. Oliver and you know how I keep looking for connections to Clifford Oliver and remember Clifford was leaving his wife at the time and might have been looking for a place to stay, what better place to look than an apartment complex where a relative is the manager. When I talked to Clifford I asked him about this and I got the usual round about answer from Clifford. I asked him if he was familiar with the Ivy Square Apartments and if it was possible that he had a relative that was managing the apartments at that time. His answer was he was familiar with the apartments but he didn’t think a relative managed the apartments if it was a relative that was managing the apartments it would have been his mother. I asked wouldn’t he know if his mother managed the apartments or not or where she did work, I never got an answer to that and then shortly after that Clifford stopped talking. Some time passes and I think we find Clifford’s mother ‘s name was Virginia, actually at the moment I’m not sure on this, but I think that was the case and then some one found the first name of the manager for me and it was Vyna. A name I had never heard before and I think some people along the line have said Vyna is or can be a nick name for Virginia, again I’ve never heard the name Vyna before so I don’t know but it was interesting. And things just ended there I don’t know if Vyna is short for Virginia, I don’t know even if this is the case is this Vyna or Virginia related to Clifford let alone his mother and we still can’t put Clifford or any of the names connected to him at the apartments on that afternoon. So in the end nothing concrete and that’s what we need at this point something that can lead us to a concrete conclusion.

      Liked by 1 person

  24. I keep getting asked about Bernadette Feazell/Harry Storm and I would like to set the record straight and hopefully bring this to an end even though I know it won’t because this is how it goes with Bernadette and this is why I didn’t want to and shouldn’t have responded to her in the first place. First I do not follow Bernadette Feazell/Harry Storm, I did at one time many years ago and that was one of the reasons I started my own page. Her page is full of inaccuracies, bent facts, delusions and straight out lies, when one tries to question her on these facts and she doesn’t like it she just deletes your post, again she doesn’t care about the truth. So I thought I would start a page where there could be a true open discussion, Bernadette Feazell didn’t like that and has tried to do all she can to discredit me. Now I don’t follow Bernadette Feazell because I really don’t care what she has to say and wouldn’t have anything to do with her at all but she keeps sending me messages, I think about a dozen since the new year, honestly I don’t keep count I just know it’s been a lot over the last couple weeks. I do read these messages, every once in a great while she will say something interesting, it’s very rare like maybe 1% of the time if I’m lucky and sometimes she gives me links to something on her page and I do check it out. But most of her rants are about her ex, her son’s drug problems, who in Waco is sleeping with who and this usual crap that I really don’t care about and has nothing to do with the Lake Waco Murders. I do find it very strange a grown woman has dedicated so much of her life and time worrying about other people’s sex lives, I find it hard to believe so many people take her seriously. But this is what Bernadette Feazell doesn’t she stirs up all this drama so people focus on the drama and over look the facts and truth, people like Bernadette like it that way, that way they don’t have to deal with the truth. We all know Bernadette has a problem facing reality and the truth but she needs a serious dose of it, so I guess I need to relate the truth against some of her recently posted lies.

    First Bernadette stated I should at least talk to people on the phone to prove who I am and she states I haven’t, that isn’t true, I have talked to people on the phone. Her problem is I wouldn’t call her because I have no desire to talk to her, I know she is a lying nut bag and talking to her would get nowhere. And this is her problem, she wanted me to call her and I wouldn’t and this is how she acts, this is exactly what she does, when people don’t go along with her or what she wants she goes on the attack, again this has nothing to do with the murders, it’s all about Bernadette and what she wants. So Bernadette, again is lying about what happened and why some people are not talking to others. This is what happened, to be honest this was a couple years ago so others might have to fill in the exact details. For many years Bernadette has tried to convince people not to talk to me, she only wants them to hear what she has to say. There are those that have learned better. So a couple years ago something was going on, I really can’t remember what, I could be wrong about this because there is always something going on but at the moment I think it had something to do with Tony’s last parole hearing. I see Bernadette just wrote something about a clemency petition that was suppose to be a secret, is she really this crazy, a secret petition, does she understand what a petition is. With a petition you go around and try to get people to sign it, how can that be a secret? I heard about the petition and I’ve never been to Texas. The reason I knew about the petition was because I think members of victim Jill Montgomery signed that petition, if I’m not mistaken this included Jill’s aunt Jan Thompson and I talked to Mrs. Thompson about this. Led on by Bernadette Feazell I believe the feeling was Tony stood a good chance for release he had garnered strong support and one would think if some of that support came from the family of one of the victims this would play a part in the parole boards decision. At the time I was the voice of caution for those hoping the best for Tony, I never talked to Tony but I have been told he really thought he stood a good chance to be released and was in very high spirits. I voiced my doubts about Tony’s chances as much as people like Bernadette Feazell and Fred Dannen keep saying Tony, David and Gilbert are innocent, in the state’s eyes that’s not the case, the official record states they are guilty, like it or not that is fact. And though Bernadette Feazell wants to cry about this issue or that issue, the appellate courts have ruled on these issues over and over, each time siding with the State. Bernadette stated I should read the appeals courts decisions, again showing her ignorance I have read the decisions, read them a number of times and even have posted them in the past so others can read them. If anyone hasn’t read them and would like to I can post them again. Anyway back to Tony’s parole, so I voiced my opinion that I didn’t think Tony was going to get released because he wasn’t showing remorse and that’s what a parole board wants to see, no matter all the outside noise and bluster, that’s not a parole boards concern. Well of coarse people like Bernadette didn’t want to hear that and then it came to pass Tony was denied parole, his spirit sank and then his health. He had put so much hope in people like Bernadette and Fred Dannen like others have done. Now you really don’t want to ruffle too many feathers during this time but unfortunately it’s not the end of the story it’s just another end to another sad chapter in this whole tragic saga. So I reflected on the situation and stated something to the effect the one common factor that has kept this tragedy from truly being resolved is people keep putting their faith in Bernadette Feazell and Fred Dannen and on both sides of the issue, sooner or later people need to realize that is getting them nowhere. Well Bernadette definitely didn’t like that and again tried to get people to stop talking to me and tried to convince them I was Vic. This caused some much unneeded drama, I think more so with Jan Thompson’s family. One of Mrs. Thompson’s daughters came to my defense and this totally set off Bernadette so she blocked Mrs. Thompson daughters, so now people can’t see what they have to say on Bernadette’s page. And just to be clear Mrs. Thompson’s daughter although she defended me she did want me to call Bernadette to get her to calm down. Bernadette had posted her phone number and asked me to call and Mrs. Thompson’s daughter told me I needed to call Bernadette to end all this craziness but I refused I told her given in to craziness just gets you more craziness, I hope she can see that now. So in reality Mrs. Thompson’s daughter was trying to resolve the problem but Bernadette went crazy as usual and blew everything up and then in response Mrs. Thompson didn’t want to deal with anymore of the drama Bernadette was causing and stopped communicating with Bernadette which again has just made Bernadette even more crazy, mad and vindictive and that is where we are still to this day. That is the truth people, others might be able to provide more detail but that is how it went down at least on this end. And I have to point out, see how this has nothing to do with the murders, it doesn’t provide any answers or clarity it just adds to the confusion, that’s why I don’t talk to Bernadette Feazell and don’t like to respond to Bernadette Feazell/Harry Storm’s messages. There are many other issues with this case that deserve our attention, again things Bernadette lies about which I will comment on.

    Bernadette keeps stating I don’t care about the DNA evidence, again not true. At times she says I am her ex, Vic, which I’m not so I can’t speak for him but all I’ve ever seen him and Truman Simons for that matter say is they are comfortable about the convictions they got and they don’t have any worries. Now for me, I think all DNA evidence should be tested but here is the problem as it stands right now. When Fred Dannen took possession of the DNA evidence he clearly mishandled it, clear grounds to have that evidence thrown out of court, the State of Texas has already stated they will dispute this evidence on these grounds and people like it or not they will win that argument, there is a statement from one of the people working with Dannen at the time where he clearly states some of the evidence he was carrying in the back seat of his car fell out and he scooped it up and put it back in the envelope, people that is contaminated evidence and the state is not going to take time to listen or decide if it is this envelope or that envelope, the bottom line is Fred Dannen should have never personally handled the evidence there was no need for it, that was his own doing don’t blame the State. That evidence is useless now. Now fortunately before this all happened test had been run on some of this evidence and the DNA profiles should still exist and DNA profiles don’t change, the profiles that were created back then will still be the same today. Then here is the problem with that, again thanks to Fred Dannen and people like Bernadette Feazell, Dannen originally sent the DNA to be tested to a lab in California, one of the very few smart things he did, this lab was the leader in DNA testing and was the home Lab of the leading expert in this field Dr. Edward Blake. The question is what became of the testing this lab did? Dr. Blake only publicly stated he did not find anything, what does that mean? I can’t speak for Dr. Blake and I have tried to contact Dr,.Blake to get a better understanding but to no avail. But knowing he was giving DNA samples from the crime scene and then samples from individuals to compare against those found at the crime scene, his statement he found nothing to me means he did not find any matches, meaning the samples from the individuals did not match those found at the crime scene. Dannen didn’t like these results and sued the lab, ridiculous. People if you create a pool of persons of interest and have them tested and don’t find any matches, the next step is to expand your pool. And this is my stance on what needs to be done with the DNA, collect samples from other individuals and this is what I have called for over the years. We know the DNA evidence that was tested is now contaminated and useless and it wasn’t the fault of the state it was Fred Dannen’s, so why keep carrying on and crying about it, it gets nowhere. Get new samples from some other people of interest. As Bernadette keeps lying about me not caring about the DNA evidence I have repeatedly told her my position and have asked her why doesn’t she call out for this. And Why Doesn’t Bernadette Feazell do this? She only wants to cry about the DNA everyone knows can’t produce results either way, why? Again she just doesn’t want the truth. We know there were others with David Spence that night and we know two testified and couldn’t keep their stories straight, one important issue is their timeline, it’s very important because they state they didn’t get up with David until after the murders, David’s girlfriend at the time Christine Juhl has stated she knew Clifford Oliver was with David much earlier in the evening, I could write much more on what Christine has said, which is much different than she testified to during Deeb’s re-trial but that should be a whole other post. but we do know Clifford Oliver is lying. Then we find one of the other guys that was there was the younger brother of the Melendez’s, some one we never hear anything about or from, wonder why? None of this deserves attention nor to be investigated? And just to explain how things can slip unnoticed in an investigation, I didn’t know John Arnett Jr, actually I didn’t even know he was even a junior, was the Melendez’s younger brother until I was told by Mrs. Thompson a few years ago. I had kept mentioning him in some of my post about Clifford Oliver and she asked me while I kept mentioning him and I told her because he was one of the guys that was with Clifford and David that night and then she informed me he was related to Anthony and Gilbert. I saw in the court transcripts that a Mr. Arnett had picked up Gilbert’s truck from Calvin Nesbitt’s after Gilbert had been arrested in September but I never knew he was related to the John Arnett with David and Clifford, they were father and son. And Think about it; Mrs Thompson was in the courtrooms everyday through all the trials and she took notes for her sister, Jill’s mother, because Jill’s mother was a perspective witness and could not sit in the courtroom during the trial, so Mrs. Thompson kept her informed. And with all that Mrs. Thompson didn’t realize the significance of John Arnett Jr., that’s how little his name came up during the trials, pretty much it just came up in passing, Clifford Oliver and Todd Childers stating he was with them that night and they both did say it was John that was able to get the beer, again something I found a little strange, Clifford and I believe Cal Fraizer were over 21 and could legally purchase beer but it’s the 17 year old that gets the beer for them. This is clearly an area that should be looked into and collecting DNA samples from these individuals would be a good place to start and what harm would it do, if there are no matches it would clear them, it’s that simple. For some one that states she is looking for the truth and justice why doesn’t she ask for this?

    Moving on to the Texas Forensics Commission, again Bernadette Feazell distorts the facts. When Bernadette first started going on about this she stated the TFC decided to review this case unsolicited, again that is a straight out lie. One of David Spence’s sons sent a complaint or request to the commision. I have posted the commission’s response and have a copy somewhere, so I should be able to post it again. Now this isn’t a real biggy it just again shows Bernadette Feazell’s penchant for bending facts or lying however you want to put it. What is important in this response and what Bernadette for some reason fails to realize is in the last paragraph the commission clearly states to Mr. Spence their board has nothing and can do nothing about proving one’s guilt or innocence that is beyond the scope of their purview. All the commission does is determine the reliability of the science used as evidence. So no matter what Bernadette says and wants the Texas Forensics Commission has no say in guilt or innocence or how a trial was conducted in whole. Bernadette further misleads by comparing one case to another, in the end each case has to stand on it’s own merit, just because something happened one way in one caase doesn’t mean the same thing will happen in another case. As many have seen Bernadette has gone on about the commission’s decision on one case and how that effected that case and she has gone on that this is the fate of the Lake Waco Murders. Now I don’t know anything about the case she is going on about but I do know a little something about the Lake Waco Murders and the trials and the appeals and this is very important. Bernadette goes on about the Third Circuit of Appeals and how it will finally get things straight. Bernadette please your stupidity is astounding. Hey let the Third Circuit hear the case but either way it won’t be the final arbitrator. As Crackhead Bernadette stated when the Third Circuit first agreed to hear this case, the judge presiding over this hearing is a political hack, she is against the death penalty, as I am, and as Bernadette gleefully stated hopefully this will influence her decision, thank God our judicial system does not operate like this. Our country has the best legal system in the world and one of the main reasons is because we have protections against judges that would rule based on their personal beliefs and political persuasions rather than the facts, the laws and precedence which is their sworn duty and this is the appeal system we have and a good thing we do so we don’t have people like political hack judges and Bernadette Feazell making decisions because it’s what they want and not tethered to legal grounding. Let the Third Circuit hear the case let the Texas Forensic Commission state their findings, no one should have a problem with that, some might think it is a waste of time and money which it probably is. The best that can happen for those that support Spence and the Melendez brothers is they get a favorable ruling from a judge that shares their sympathies and then the State will appeal this decision and it will go to a higher court, where there is more than one judge sitting one the bench, that is how our system is set up if a verdict is in question one person should not have the power to have the final say, that way a politician hack or a judge that has forgotten their sworn duty can be restrained. And this is what will happen, this case will be back in the courts for years, and going on the earlier appeals which are rooted in precedence it will favor the state and we won’t get any of the answers we have been looking for. And that is all Bernadette has been calling for, she cries about DNA evidence she knows is useless, a white truck the defendant’s family had until after the trials and means nothing and now she is hoping to find a technicality or a political judge, anything but to find the truth. Any reasonable person should ask why. I would like to say I will never post anymore messages I receive from Bernadette Feazell/Harry Storm but I know as soon as I do she will send me something I will feel needs to be addressed and there I will be. One would think the horrible crime itself showed us the worst in human behavior but then we have people like Bernadette Feazell that unfortunately prove that’s not the case.

    Liked by 1 person

  25. I will say one thing concerning B Feazell. She is her own worst enemy. She has played just about everyone that once called her a friend. #1- her filthy mouth is a big “turn off” for me.
    I am not at all interested in the soap opera and sexual habits of Waco, Tx. Perhaps some people find her entertaining. I am interested ONLY in what happened at Waco, Tx on July 12th & 13th in 1982.


  26. Vero, Bernadette isn’t obsessed with me she’s obsessed with her ex-husband Vic, they have been divorced for , well I don’t know how many years exactly but I think it’s close to 30 and she still can’t get over it. So in her crazy mind when she is going after me it let’s her think she is still talking to Vic, she is a total nut case, that’s why I don’t like dealing with her and I should have never responded to her in the first place, it will just keep going on and on and on, it’s all just a waste of time and a smoke screen to deflect from all the lies she has told.

    Abby, no I am not going to Waco to prove to crackhead Bernadette Feazell who I am, if I ever do make it to Waco I have plenty other things I need to do, I don’t need to prove myself to her and that is the issue she has. Plenty people know who I am including family of the victims, people I talked to in the Waco Police Department and the F.B.I. and other people connected to the case but Bernadette doesn’t and it bothers her to no end, how can she effectively spin her lies against some one she doesn’t know, she can’t and that drives her even more crazy than she already is, she is delusional and responding to her just keeps her going, it’s like being cruel to the mentally ill because Bernadette Feazell has some serious issues.


    • Vero I would have to say she is probably lying, this is what she usually does. Just look how she posts as Harry Storm, that is to give the impression that a third party has taken up her cause and it lends credence to her claims or at least that’s how many will read it, that is a common ploy used to mislead people. If people realize it’s Bernadette talking about herself in the third person, then it’s like when anybody talks about themselves in the third person, it’s like what’s up with that weirdo and Vero that is Bernadette Feazell; the biggest lying nut case weirdo to ever hit the state of Texas and that’s saying something!!!

      Now to be fair and honest I know there was one person that I have communicated with that questioned my identity but she thought I was Truman Simons and that was Christine Juhl and I would like to get into that but I don’t have the time right now, I will try tonight. And this will show exactly what I’m saying about Bernadette wanting to keep the conversation on issues that really don’t matter like my identity, the people that know me like you know me those that don’t don’t and that’s that, what should be of interest to everyone is the truth, again clearly something Bernadette Feazell wants to obstruct at any and all cost.


      • Vero it has taken me a couple days to get to you on the subject of Christine Juhl thinking I was Truman Simons, I went back over all the communications I had with Christine, I want to be accurate as possible and purvey things in the proper context. Also I have to be careful with what I say, I know when it comes to Christine Juhl things can be very touchy. I would summit this has more to do with her reluctance to talk to me now more so than she thinks I’m Truman Simons, actually I asked her about this recently, she hasn’t responded. I do know Christine felt I violated some trust we had when I posted some of the details Christine had shared with me about her relationship with David Spence that she felt was private between her and I and with that trust broken it’s all the more difficult to open up and talk about a horribly painful past, understandable, but it is that past that holds the answers to so many questions and unfortunately that’s the point that so many are missing and I guess what I will try to explain again now.

        Going back over my talks with Christine I did find the couple times she told me she thought I was Truman Simons but there really isn’t any proper context per se, I think what people need to understand is when I talked to Christine sometimes we wouldn’t talk for weeks even months at a time, I would still send her questions, dozens of questions if not hundreds and then there would be times where we would a series of conversations over a short period of time and we would go over all kinds subjects, she would answer some of my questions, I would have more, she would have questions. And it was during one of these times where we were talking just about everyday in the middle of July 2016 that she first mention she thought I was Truman and later still during this series of conversations she repeats this again. I will point out Christine and I still talked many times and months after this as you will see. This was the first time Christine said something about thinking I was Truman Simons
        July 12, 2017: I think you feel that way because I asked you a couple of questions verse you asking questions then telling me I am not correct. We all have different memories. we all a just small parts of the puzzle. And so far none of the puzzle is fitting together for you. Must be frustrating! Some of your statements regarding Simmons makes me wonder if you are not Simmons. As you seem to take everything he says as the only truth. Like he is some kind of one man miracle. And that is totally how he feels and betrays himself.

        Then Later on in the same series of conversations Christine says this:
        July 21,2017: I think you’re Simons.

        So that was that, these would be the only two times she would mention to me that she thought I was Truman and we talked many more times over the following months. So I guess the becomes why did she think I was Truman or what did I say that gave her that impression.? As she states in her July 12th message she felt it seemed I took everything Truman Simons said as true or fact and this is where context comes in.There are many things I disagree with Truman Simons on, so I went back to all of our conversations back then to see what might have made her feel that way. And actually there’s not much there, well at least in the way of what Truman believed or thought . Like I said this was a series of conversations that took place over a few weeks and we talked about so much; as usual we talked about Clifford Oliver, Christine and I talked about him a lot; who was with him that night, who did she remember being there the next morning. We talked about her marriage to Mahar, talked about where she lived after she left David, that would be where she stayed in Waco until she left in August and then when she returned in September and later. We talked about her family, her many siblings, mother, father, step father, her mother’s I guess third husband, we just talked about so many things but mostly about things that I don’t even know what Truman felt or thought about. But then there was one exchange and it is one time that I did agree with him and this could give us insight why Christine started to think I was Truman Simons and this exchange started on July 6, 2017 and I wrote:

        “He doesn’t believe you are telling the truth, he has repeatedly told people you are a liar among other things and can’t be trusted. I guess you never read the book but in it he states that he was having a hard time understanding you you just didn’t seem to be believable so he went to your mother and according to Truman your mother confirmed his suspicions and she yes you couldn’t be trusted because you were a liar and a very good one.”

        And Christine’s response later that same day: “Of course I know that Truman and my mother think I am a liar. Truman is an ass and in my opinion a corrupt cop. My mother…. on the other hand was a mean hateful woman that none of the 7 older children would have anything to do with. So you can choose to believe Truman and my mother that I have lied. Or you can choose to believe me when I say I did not know that David killed those kids at the time of the murders. The fact that my mother and I had little to no contact from November the year before until 1987 she was in no position to state or have first hand knowledge of anything. We had a tentative relationship from 1987 on.

        Now my response to this was quite lengthy, to boil it down I told Christine it wasn’t that simple, you just can’t chose to totally believe some one on everything and totally discount all the information out of hand. To clarify at this point we were talking about Christine’s marriage to Mahar and where she stayed when she returned to Waco when Truman called her family around midnight of September 14th/September 15th, the day after Deeb had been arrested the forst time and David Spence had just gotten on their radar on September 11th when Simons and Dennis Baier did a follow up interview, something the original investigators never did, with Lisa Kader the girl that lived at the Methodist Home on the Perkins unit, the same unit as Gayle Kelly and Jill Montgomery lived on and came to the police station on July 19th and told the police Muneer Deeb had killed Kenneth Franks because of Gayle Kelly. When Simons and Baier interviewed her on that September day Muneer Deeb was already their top suspect because of the information they had gathered the first two days after they took over the case but they knew if Deeb had something to do with the murders he couldn’t have acted alone, his physical limitations made it totally impossible, so they asked Lisa Kader and she gave them the name of David Spence, by then she had had her run in with David something that hadn’t happened yet when she talked to the police on July 19th. I know I getting a little off track but that was what our discussion was about, when Christine arrived back in Waco on September 15th after Truman had called her family, Truman went to the bus station to pick her up he was shocked to friend her there with Mahar, Truman was not aware Christine and Mahar had gotten married,; Mahar and Deeb were friends and I guess Christine stayed with Mahar for awhile then at some point moved in with David’s mother. I said to Christine couldn’t she see how that could look suspicious, she had just recently married their top suspects friend and was staying with him and then went to live with the mother of suspect number two. Christine explain that’s not how it exactly went down and that Truman took a part in her moving back in with Juanita White, which I don’t think is how the story has been told in the past. Then a few days later Christine writes about me always agreeing with Truman Simons and then days later being Truman Simons. People I think we can see what happened here and I really don’t want to go too far into this, as I have stated before what’s important here is not whom Christine might have thought I was when she didn’t like the direction the conversation was going or whom Bernadette Feazell thinks I am what’s important is the information Christine hasn’t been clear on to put it nicely and Bernadette Feazell would like never to be clarified

        There are many areas of concern when it comes to the ever changing recollections of Christine Juhl and to be completely honest a few are very troubling. I will try to keep it to a couple of the most important ones and I won’t be able to get to it all at the moment, this will have to be a work in progress over the next week or so. But I.m going to start with a simple one; going back to Christine’s statement of July 12th she wrote:
        “I think my recollections are not clear now. I do believe you are right about getting the nights messed up. Not about Clifford but about the brothers and what night that was when I was in the back of a pickup. I do believe I have it all muddled together. I had forgotten about the gun at the lake with david and the brothers. So much I have forgotten/pushed out of my mind. I need to think”.

        And a few days later, July 20th, she would write, “I cannot get upset at you questioning my memories. You are trying to figure out what and how it happened. So many stories… I do have feelings and you can step on them lightly. Yes you can be harsh… don’t worry I have my big girl panties on. What can you possibly do to me that has not been already done.q”

        Unfortunately I don’t have the time to get into it at the moment but yes Christine’s recollections are not clear about when she rode with David and the Melendez brothers to Speegleville Park and that is so very important.


    • awebb, the short version is; a tape that proves Anthony Melendez or his brother or David Spence are innocent doesn’t exist, again it’s just more of Bernadette Feazell’s lies. There is a tape but saying it proves anything is a far stretch to put it mildly but this is what Bernadette Feazell likes to do; lie, bend and distort the facts, the sad thing is there are people out there that take what she says as factual and the truth which just isn’t the case. And many people that have dealt with Bernadette Feazell have come to realize this and then Bernadette goes after them with more lies and mistruths. And in the end it just becomes an obstacle to the truth and that’s all Bernadette Feazell wants. Awebb I will have a better and more detailed response about the tape or tapes in question later.

      Liked by 1 person

  27. And just so people understand what we are talking about, Bernadette Feazell/Harry Storm posted this on her page:

    Posted on March 10, 2019 by HARRYSTORM Leave a comment

    Jan Thompson, aunt of victim Jill Montgomery, began to write to “Brian Lewis” a few years ago. I told her it was Vic and that I could not stay friends with her and her family if they were going to betray me to Vic. She vehemently said it wasn’t Vic. Then she became angry because the case isn’t just about Jill, there were other victims, and people who were affected by it everywhere. Finally, upon finding out that the Thompson family and Jan, Jill’s aunt had a tape and tried to sell it to TEXAS MONTHLY, the relationship went south. Jan Thompson sat on a tape proving Tony Melendez’s innocence, or at least enough to get the case reopened, OR at least she should have played it for Michael Hall BEFORE HIS ARTICLE, but she didn’t. That was enough for me to sign off. Now it seems Jan thinks Brian Lewis is Vic and they’re having a great time, talk and no evidence.

    The TEXAS FORENSICS COMMISSION will have the final word on this case, not Bernadette Feazell, they will have EVIDENCE.

    Vic Feazell is scared of the truth. Jan Thompson and her daughters? I have no idea, did not know about them trying to sell the tape to Texas Monthly until it was over.


    I can be wrong, if I am I admit it.

    I do NOT say anything unless I can prove it. Unlike the rest of them, I am held to a much higher standard of truth.

    BLK67 Jan Thompson, misunderstood Aunt wanting the truth or just wants a pity party with someone agreeable she doesn’t want to be Vic Feazell?

    Posted on March 10, 2019 by HARRYSTORM Leave a comment
    https://lakewaco82.com/2016/01/21/questions-i-have-plenty/ Vic/Brian’s site

    Vic Feazell IS Brian Lewis

    Here is your proof. Both websites have the same IP address owned by ONE VIC FEAZELL attorney, Waco, Texas.

    They all belong to one person, Vic Feazell, if this research isn’t good enough for you, then, please, keep on believing blindly that Vic isn’t trying to remain the big hero through Brian Lewis. Truly, this whole thing is so laughable I can’t believe it.

    Brian Lewis, Vic Feazell, liar. Addicted his own son to GHB. Scared to death people will find out what a phoney he is and what he did as DA. Scared people will find out what he did with Abel Reyna to stop this writer. Put his own son in jail. Charges dropped later by Abelino because it was all BULLSHIT.

    Such a fine man, he never says anything bad about his ex? Right? No, he just dummies up another person, does it that way, lies to readers about it. Well, he is caught now.

    Calls others “crackheads” when HE himself was a GHB addict, sex addict, went to rehab and now just lies about it, doesn’t want people to know his divorce and estrangement from his son are due to GHB. Scared to death what the Texas Forensics Commission is finally going to do to the case that put him on the map, the Lake Murder. IT’s not over, not because of HIS ex wife but because of the Forensics Commission and because evidence is evidence and talk is just that, nothing. He’s his sister Nancy’s “Hero” too, even though she drank some “water” at his house and wound up at the Emergency Room just like Cecelia and Vic’s maid, “Tina”. Cecelia knows, she just likes the money and lies with him about the GHB. She hates his son and forgets that it was Vic who brought GHB into his son’s life saying GHB was “not addictive.” Then, when his son became a GHB addict, Vic withdrew saying Greg was “weak” because GHB was non addictive.

    Mad, forever mad? You damned right I am. The big MHMR Drug Counsellor and lawyer Vic Feazell hooked his/my son and then just left him and left me to deal with it.

    The “Brian Lewis” website, which is actually Vic Feazell, which he denies vehemently and now, thanks to him being cheap and a lot of digging, here’s your proof in case you were still so damned stupid you think that a Brian Lewis really exists. He made a mistake, or he got Johnathan to make the mistake, his IP guy, he didn’t pay for another IP address where he should have and that’s what caught him.

    Click on the link below that says Vic Brian Lewis and get your truth not just bullshit words from one sneaky man.

    Vic Brian Lewis

    Here are a few late night excerpts to Vic/Brian and back. Why would some guy in another state even care? Ask yourself.

    Liked by 2 people

  28. I will try to address as many of Bernadette’s lies and distortions as I can. I will start with her claim about my IP address; honestly I don’t know what my IP address is and up until a few minutes I didn’t even know how to find it, I had to ask a friend, my computer skills are minimal at best. So apparently you can google this to find this out, so that’s what I did and here is the result I got:
    My IP Address Is:

    VPN Simplifier

    Home » IP Tools » IP Lookup »
    IP Details for
    Share details about this IP address
    This information should not be used for emergency purposes, trying to find someone’s exact physical address, or other purposes that would require 100% accuracy.

    Details for
    Decimal: 852062658
    Hostname: 50-201-113-194-static.hfc.comcastbusiness.net
    ASN: 7922
    ISP: Comcast Business
    Organization: Comcast Business
    Services: None detected
    Type: Broadband
    Assignment: Static IP
    Continent: North America
    Country: United States us flag
    Latitude: 37.751 (37° 45′ 3.60″ N)
    Longitude: -97.822 (97° 49′ 19.20″ W)

    As anyone can see this is not as Bernadette has stated.
    But this search is also showing that I am in Kansas, which I am not I am presently in the state of Maryland about 1 mile east of Cambridge. So one would have to question the accuracy and reliability of finding your IP address using this method, which would bring me to the question how did Bernadette find my IP address? That’s all I can say about this, I pay for and manage my own site.

    Bernadette continues to bring up the TEXAS FORENSICS COMMISSION and again continues to lie and distort the facts, my thoughts and I would take it the thoughts of many people dealing with this case in one fashion or another, on one is scared or afraid. What Bernadette Feazell fails to comprehend for what ever reason is the TEXAS FORENSICS COMMISSION has a rather limited scope in what they do. And she can keep writing and telling people her distorted version as she just did in her earlier post when she said;

    The TEXAS FORENSICS COMMISSION will have the final word on this case, not Bernadette Feazell, they will have EVIDENCE.

    I have addressed this many times in the past and in those response I have stated the best thing to do is read what the The TEXAS FORENSICS COMMISSION has said about this issue. I have posted their response before but I think the last time I got into this subject I stated I have a copy but didn’t post it at that time, sometimes it hard to find things even though you know you have them. Well I have taken the time to find the The TEXAS FORENSICS COMMISSION response when they first decided to get involved in the case which I will post again for those that have missed it in the past. I would point to two things, first when Bernadette Feazell started going on about how the The TEXAS FORENSICS COMMISSION was going to prove David Wayne Spence and the Melendez brothers’ were innocent a few years ago, she stated that the The TEXAS FORENSICS COMMISSION decided to look at this case unsolicited, you probably can find her remarks about this on her page, you have to look a few years back and that’s if she hasn’t deleted it, she likes to do that when she gets caught in her lies she just deletes post. Anyway just reading the first line you will see the The TEXAS FORENSICS COMMISSION is responding to a request to review this case, it wasn’t unsolicited, they were asked by one of David Wayne Spence’s sons and they agreed to look into it. But probably even more important, well at least when you are determining the depth and scope of Bernadette Feazell’s lies and falsehoods; in the last paragraph, like the last line the The TEXAS FORENSICS COMMISSION clearly states they have nothing to go with proving someone’s guilt or innocent, so as Bernadette Feazell continues again to falsely state it’s all up to the The TEXAS FORENSICS COMMISSION and they have the final say and will prove innocence, it is just not true, no one is afraid of the commission, they don’t and can’t comment one way or the other on guilt or innocence it’s beyond their purview. Let’s hear what they have to say, what Bernadette Feazell and those that hang on her every word like it’s gospel fail to realize is the exception is that The TEXAS FORENSICS COMMISSION will find the bite mark evidence faulty and unreliable but guess what they are not the first to come to this conclusion, the appellate courts have already stated this and unlike the The TEXAS FORENSICS COMMISSION the courts do have a say in proving guilt and innocence and what have they said on this matter multiple times, the bite mark evidence is worthless but it doesn’t show the court committed an agrievous error which is needed to overturn the convictions. I could get into all the appeals but most of them are on line if you would like to read them. So you will see you don’t have to take my word for it and you will clearly see Bernadette Feazell is lying as she always does, here is the response from the TEXAS FORENSICS COMMISSION:

    Liked by 2 people

  29. Now onto the subject of the tape or tapes in question and I have to admit this is a touchy subject and I’m not sure if I can accurately describe the whole truth on this matter, I feel I do know enough that can bring into question Bernadette Feazell’s account. Here is the problem with this, the whole business with the tape has to do with the victim’s families, well in the case victim Jill Montgomery’s family and I do not nor should I try to speak for them, yes I was fortunate enough they were willing to give me their time, knowledge and insights into this case and I shouldn’t and don’t want to abuse that in any way, something Bernadette Feazell should think about doing but she doesn’t care she just wants everything to be about her and her vendetta against her ex husband, sad to say the least. But it’s this attitude she continues to have that just keeps hurting people in the end, the victims’ families, the families of those convicted, Bernadette doesn’t care and it’s ashamed because it’s been her actions, well mostly lies, that have help keep the truth obscured and the rumors and lies alive. And there is no better example than the tape she mentions.

    We need to keep in mind we are talking about things that developed over many years, it’s not like one day things were one way and then the next everything changed, we need to keep things in proper context. To do so we need to understand how things developed over time. I think for those that have followed the case Brian Pardo is a familiar name and I think we should start with him. Mr. Pardo became the first person to champion David Wayne Spence’s cause back in the mid 90’s, Bernadette Feazell joined him very early on. By the time Mr. Pardo got involved Spence’s origin date of execution had been set, so Mr. Pardo didn’t have much time, this would have been 1996 but they needed to do something if they were going to save David Spence. They first tried to get help from Barry Scheck and his innocence project. Mr. Scheck declined, his innocence project has a policy they don’t get involved in cases where the defendants originally pled guilty, although Spence had never pled guilty his co-defendants the Melendez brothers had, so Mr. Scheck puts them in touch with another attorney from New York. Mr. Pardo did and this attorney was very helpful and was actually able to get Spence’s date pushed back a couple times. Another thing this attorney knew what needed to be done was keep this case in the public eye, they needed the publicity, enter Fred Dannon and in time the articles about the case in the New York Times by Bob Herbert. By the time Dannon decided to get involved in the case and write a book Spence had already been executed. Dannon would go to Waco and even though in time things would change Fred Dannon and Vic Feazell got along, well enough that Feazell opened up everything he had to Dannen. I should mention this apparently was the same approach Dannen took with the record executives when he wrote his most popular and best selling novel “Hitmen” and anyone interested in seeing what CBS and Columbia Records had to say about Fred Dannen and his methods their interviews were on youtube. It seems Fred Dannen likes to gain trust by misrepresenting his true intentions and it looks this is what he did with Vic Feazell. And this is where we get to the tapes, this would have been 1997/98. It was with these tapes that Fred Dannen told many people he could prove Spence and the Melendez brothers were innocent, Feazell and others working at the D.A.’s office fired back that Dannen had edited the tapes and taken things out of context. So which side to believe? Fred Dannen did take hundreds of hours tape and cut them down to a few hours at most, that is the very definition of editing and with that much editing I think it would be safe to say Dannen did take many things out of context and we do have to take into account whom we are talking about and his history. I know things I have heard from the tapes don’t match the story Dannen and Bernadette try to push these days.

    All along while this is going on, we have the victims’ famil;ies that still have questions about the case and what happened to their loved ones that got raped and murdered. Bernadette Feazell puts Fred Dannen and at some point Anthony Melendez and his family in contact with Jan Thompson the aunt of victim Jill Montgomery. Over the course of the next few years Dannen stated he had the evidence he needed to prove his case and a meeting was arranged by Mrs. Thompson for Dannen to present his case to Jill’s family. This took place in 2001 and Dannen’s presentation took a few hours, I think most of his so called evidence were the tapes he had taken from Vic Feazell and edited, far from proof, he also told the family he would have his book finished in the near future. There was one other thing Dannen told the family but honestly I can’t say if this occurred during this meeting but it was another thing that he said he could provide as proof that turned out not to be true. He told the family that he was on the verge of getting Tab Harper’s sister to give him up. When I first heard this I didn’t believe it was true, everything I’ve ever seen the sister say she is defending her brother but this gives us a glimpse into how Fred Dannen and Bernadette Feazell operate, they will bend the truth and facts because that’s what they want and when they tell people these things they want it to come off as factual and the truth and want people to take it as such and in most cases with these two it just isn’t that way. All any of the victims’ families wanted and still want is the truth whatever it is but it has to be the truth. By the time this meeting took place Jill’s family had been dealing with Dannen for a few years and Bernadette even longer and there had to be questions about the validity of some of the things Bernadette and Dannen were stating as facts, so by the time of the meeting the family decided to tape the meeting, that way they would have their own record of what occurred. People this is the tape Bernadette Feazell is so hell bent to get her hands on, there isn’t any evidence on the tape that proves anything and although I haven’t heard the tape, I have talked to Mrs. Thompson about it, I think the only thing one would find on the tape is all the promises Dannen made and couldn’t keep and his lies about what were facts, again far from proof and evidence. Then we have the issue Bernadette raises about selling the tape or trying to make money from the tape, I know the family as categorically and in no uncertain terms denied this, people I have to believe them and knowing the source and that would be the only source claiming they tried to sell the tape is Bernadette Feazell her history of lying speaks for itself. I have heard it was she Bernadette Feazell that was trying to arrange some kind of business transaction for the tape and again knowing how she lies and that she has tried to make money and money for others like Fred Dannen on this case this looks like the most likely scenario. Either way there isn’t any evidence on the tape and remember this was before Fred Dannen got possession of the DNA evidence and then said he found the carpet that was in the van Harper had and it matched the samples Dannen had that somehow were opened and became contaminated, people seriously are we really expecting to get the truth from Bernadette Feazell Feazell and Fred Dannen.

    Liked by 2 people


    First I must thank the wonderful and classy Mrs. Jan Thompson, See, the lies Bernadette Feazell decided to spew last week were ignorant, rude, offensive and total mischaracterizations of some one that has done nothing but looked for the truth for all the victims, her niece being one of those victims she knows and feels the pain the rest of us will never fully understand. Then she has to put up with crackheads like Bernadette Feazell that just make things more difficult. But Mrs. Thompson is calm and cool, reserved and measured and really doesn’t want to get involved in all this craziness she has better and more important things to do with her life and in her wisdom she knows it’s better to just let things go. I on the other hand want to confront everything head on, don’t let lies and misinformation stand unchallenged, expose them for what they are because if we don’t we allow the lies and rumors to become facts and no one will ever find the truth there. Mrs. Thompson, from her experience over the years knows it’s better not to deal with Bernadette Feazell in any way, don’t talk to her, don’t respond to her even when Bernadette gets on line and spews awful and ugly lies, that had to hurt. Mrs. Thompson was going to deal with it in her own dignified and quiet way and then she was nice enough to share with me a conversation she had a few days ago and I was like please we have to make this public we have to expose Bernadette Feazell for the lying despicable crackhead she is. Mrs. Thompson was cautious, rightfully so, again remember she doesn’t want to get involved or caught up in all this craziness, so I tried to lay out the best case I could for my reasoning why I feel it is so important to fight these lies and try to put them to an end, I will get more into later. Mrs. Thompson was very patient with me and has allowed me to share her recent conversation with Michael Hall. Mrs, Thompson again I want to thank you with all my heart and I honestly hope by exposing the lies the benefits reaped will manifest swiftly.





  31. Thank you Brian for what you have said about my mom. I am a lot like you as far as not just sitting back and allowing B to talk shit about my mom. Jan Thompson is my mom and I promised my Daddy on his death bed in 2006 that I would take care and protect my mom for him and I take great pride in doing so! I can’t begin to tell you how hard it was for me to not immediately respond to B said about my mom. You see, I am the total opposite of my mom…..I usually have knee jerk reactions and spew my feeling and thoughts without thinking. Sometimes that is good and sometimes not so good lol! I can tell all of you that my mom NEVER tried to sell those tapes to ANYONE and she did let Michael Hall hear them. We mailed them to him and he mailed them back. Also as far as my mom thinking all of the attention needs to be on only Jill, that’s a crock of shit too! Any time we refer to the murders we always say “the kids” never just Jill. All of this started with B because my mom and I do not believe Brian is Vic. That is it. She is mad that we do not agree with her. We know Brian is Brian. My mom has talked with him on the phone. In a way I am glad we have broken ties with B because now we can see just how truly insane she is. Everyone has told us this but we didn’t realize it to be true until this happened. Thank you Brian for everything you have done. I personally will say I still don’t believe that David, Tony and Gilbert did the murders. My gut tell me different. I am clueless as to who the real murders are. I do believe someone knows the truth. Will we ever know?

    Liked by 1 person

  32. I’m sorry I haven’t posted anything in so long but things have been extremely quiet over the last few months, no one wants to talk. But as it is always this time of year around the anniversary of the murders an influx of interest develops. I have to say, this is one of my biggest fears in relationship to this case; as time goes by and we lose the people directly connected to the case and all their information, all we will be left with are the lies and rumors and the version of events from the people that have been trying to spread those same rumors and lies until it gets to the point that that will be all we ever hear and the masses will take that as the absolute and undisputed truth. Unfortunately it looks like we are on the verge of that terrible fate becoming a reality. Case in point as many of you have probably seen Bernadette Feazell/Harry Storm has posted a couple videos from YouTube that discuss the case. Of coarse she praises the efforts of the young ladies and their view on things, well we know Bernadette Feazell is some one that has zero interest in the facts or truth and will praise anything that helps keep the facts and truth obscured as the videos she shared clearly do. I will share the videos also and just point out a very few of the most obvious problems.


  33. With the first video there are just so many things that are not accurate but I will just stick to one, one of my favorite that I have been arguing against for years. In this video the host repeats the often stated but untrue fact that at least 6 witnesses saw Terry “Tab” Harper at Koehne Park the night of the murders. Again I will ask, as I have done an umpteenth time over the last couple decades,; Can anyone name those supposed six witnesses??? I never get an answer because those six witnesses don’t exist. I will try to make this as simple as possible because it seems there are still so many people out there that just can’t grasp this; there is a huge difference between saying you were told some one saw Harper at the park and actually being at the park and seeing him there!!! Yes there were many calls to the police from people that stated they were told or had heard Tab Harper was at the park but they had not been at the park or had not seen Harper there. And most of these so called witnesses had all received this information from the same source, one Author “Rusty” Escott. If we eliminate all the people that called the police that had gotten this information from Escott we are left with only two people they actually state they saw Harper at the park and both are extremely questionable, more questionable than the bite mark evidence!!! One of coarse was Rusty Escott himself, the same Rusty Escott that ended up admitting lying to the cops about some of the information he had told people that the police had received and let’s not forget he changed his story on many things. He said he had seen the kids get into Harper’s van, then he stated he never saw the kids at all. He stated he saw the Pinto and Tab’s van parked beside each other but they weren’t parked in the circle where all the other witnesses stated seeing the Pinto parked and where it was found the next morning but it saw the two vehicles parked to the right of the boat ramp on the other side of the park. Ok if you wish to believe Rusty Escott I really don’t know what to tell you other than it isn’t wise to put a lot of faith in some one that has admitted he repeatedly lied and other witnesses have also pointed this out about him and what he is stating doesn’t match what other witnesses have stated they saw. That leaves us with one other witness that stated he actually saw Harper in the park the day of the murders, that would be the biker “Angel” and that we only have his nickname and no other information to go on about this person it tells us how much faith Detective Ramon Salinas had in this information and remember Harper was Salinas’ hot lead. And the reason Salinas didn’t put any faith in Angel’s statement and why it is so questionable is because Angel is clearly telling Salinas something he thinks Salinas already knows and we see this in the report when Salinas writes in response to his first question Angel replies I agree with whatever the girls told you. The girls in question were Carren Ritchie and Kathy Prochnow, problem is neither girl stated they saw Harper in the park, Hell Ms. Ritchie didn’t even mention they had been at the park that day, all Ms. Prochnow had said was they were at the park that day riding with the bikers, in a court of law that is called leading a witness, inadmissible and very questionable!!! Anyway here is the video. Bernadette Feazell/Harry Storm posted enjoy, I have to say we shouldn’t enjoy the lies and rumors continually getting spread and stated as facts but again obviously people like her do!!!


    • I cannot say I enjoyed this “tale of the triple murder”. Your showboat acting and liberal adlibs were at the least distracting. Worse video I have seen to date (concerning the Waco triple murder case.)
      After 37 years I still do not see anything comical concerning the torture and murder of three young people.
      Rating: 0

      Liked by 1 person

      • Mrs. Thompson, always glad to hear from you and I totally agree with your thoughts on this video and unfortunately I think we will see more stuff like this in the future as the voices of those connected to the case disappear it leaves the door wide open for theatrics of this nature. And the most shocking thing about these videos is how much they simply just got wrong or don’t understand, these young ladies should have spent more time collecting and reviewing the facts and less time posing for the camera. And Mrs. Thompson I know from our last correspondence where things stand, rightfully and understandably so and I know I shouldn’t try to drag you back into this, I’m sorry but I can’t stop myself. But when these ladies went on about how Jill and Gayle looked so much alike, I couldn’t believe they were still drinking that Kool-Aid and thought they really should talk to some one that knows much better and of coarse I first thought of you. Please, to help keep the record straight could you remind people that Jill and Gayle did not look alike, outside Truman Simons no one thought that, not even Gayle Kelly even though she would testify to the contrary. And not only that but both Christine Juhl and Kareem Quasem, two people that knew David Spence pretty well have stated repeatedly and Kareem would testify to this, that Spence had an uncanny ability to remember names and faces. Kareem testified David would meet a girl one time then she would come into the store months later and David would remember her just like that. So no David Spence did not confuse Jill Montgomery for Gayle Kelly, it is totally impossible. He at least knew Gayle from both of them hanging out at the store and we know there was more interaction between the two outside the store than was revealed during the trials. I would say the same for Jill, David probably knew Jill at least from her coming to the store as the other girls from the Methodist Home did and Mrs. Thompson you know my thoughts on more of a connection between the two so I won’t waste your time getting into all that again. Bottom line the mistaken identity theory is a fluke but that does not mean David Spence and the Melendez brothers did not kill Jill, Raylene and Kenneth, it’s just there’s another whole part of the story we haven’t heard, YET!!! And unfortunately we will never hear it if we sit by and allow the rumors and lies to persist and Mrs. Thompson without your gracious guidance whom out there is really looking for the truth? Not Bernadette Feazell/Harry Storm she is just interested in revenge against her ex Vic Feazell. Not Fred Dannen he just wanted to make money selling a book. Apparently not these two new clowns, I really don’t know what they are doing and obviously they don’t either but I hope they stop. As I stated in my earlier post there were just so many facts they had completely wrong, it was painful to listen to, I wasn’t going to get into all of that but when I have the time, which probably won’t be tonight I will get into some of those facts, that way people can see them and will also see how by bending or misrepresenting the facts the truth becomes obscured and not that the facts give us all the answers, unfortunately the opposite is true, the facts leave us with even more questions but we need those facts to find the answers and truth. Again Mrs. Thompson I always greatly appreciate your input and insights and hope we will get to be blessed by your presence again here @ lakewaco82.com.

        Liked by 1 person

      • Mr. Moore, there are many that feel the same way as you and all opinions and views are welcomed and appreicated, that’s why this page was started in the first place. Obviously I disagree with your conclusion, I admit I probably am wrong about some things but I would like to response to your points in some detail.
        I will start with the physical evidence or the lack thereof. The physical evidence doesn’t point to anyone because unfortunely there isn’t any, well any that has been brought to light up to now and that’s part of the problem, not saying there wasn’t or isn’t any; the multiple knives the Waco Police Department displaced, Spence’s bloody vest Christine Juhl threw away in a dumpster behind the Rainbow Drive-In and I would question the drops of blood found in David’s car. I know it was decided it was Christine Juhl’s blood and the blood had gotten there after she tried to commit suicide but there’s something there that doesn’t add up, but again multiple inconsistent stories. I will leave it with this question. If Spence took his car to the garage the morning after the murders as everyone states, Christine says the car wasn’t running the day of the murders and David never got that car back, he would get the station wagon and Christine Juhl tried to kill herself after the murders, her story keeps changing on that, how did her blood attributed too her suicide attempt end up in a car they no longer had? I tried to get answers to this but I upset some people with that one. And I would have to remind you the only test run on the blood found in David’s car was to determine blood type and the blood type did match Christine’s but did any of the victims share that same blood type? A simple question to answer but up to the present it seems I would do better trying to pull teeth from a rattlesnake with my bare hands. Which is a perfect segue to the bite mark evidence. The bite mark evidence, presented as physical evidence is questionable at best, there are some that would use stronger language in discrediting this unreliable science but unfortunately it was allowed at the time. The truth is it was inconclusive and should be seen as such. What the biting does is give us a glimpse into the personality of David Spence, and again another little reminder; it’s something neither of the juries in Spence’s two trials heard during the guilt phase of his trials. Lisa Kader testified during the penalty phase and Christine Juhl didn’t testify during David’s trials and wouldn’t testify until Deeb’s re-trial. I just point that out because there are many like yourself that believe David Spence is innocent but the best anyone that supports him can hope for is a court somewhere decides for a re-trial and in a re-trial how brutally violent David Spence was towards females at this time will be brought up, the prosecution won’t make the same mistakes it made the first time around. Hey if two juries were able to find him guilt without hearing aboit this how do you think they are going to react when these girls can get on the stand and describe what David did to them and how he treated them and I know Christine Juhl and Lisa Kader are still effected by it today, With witnesses like that who cares about what the so-called experts that can’t agree have to say. It is/was the personality of David Spence that made him carry on this way and we’re not talking about like playing around with your girlfriend and you bite too hard and she slaps you upside the head and you won’t be doing that again anytime soon, we’re talking about bites that left marks weeks later. So as physical evidence the bite marks are useless, it’s the act of violently biting itself that is the tell.
        Moving on to your point about David Spence not being seen at the park, that is one of the weakest arguments and honestly I am trying to convey that respectfully. There are a few problems with this argument. No one saw David at the park that evening, everyone would have to agree on that, so what? As the prosecution was able to point out during the trials with their questioning of Kenny Young and Rick Guthrie, people that were at the park didn’t see everything that was going on, yes it would have been nice to have had some one see something and you would think with the couple dozen people that the police talked to some one would have seen something but it just didn’t happen. And I don’t want to make light of this but it’s not like the people that went to the park that night were told before hand that something crazy was going to happen and keep a look out for it, as Young ang Guthrie clearly pointed out they were too busy doing their own thing, as probably everyone that was at the park was doing that night Another way to show how weak this argument is is to point out no one saw the girls leave the park that night either and that’s one thing I am 100% sure happened sometime that night Jill and Raylene left that park but no one saw it, so are you going to argue that because no one saw it it didn’t happen? Again it’s just a weak argument. And this is what makes it worse in this case, David’s defense could not provide one alibili, of coarse David didn’t say one way or the other during his trials but later after he was asked about things, mainly in response to questions about the testimony of Clifford Oliver and Todd Childers in regards to them saying he told them he was at the lake that night, Spence has said he was at Airport Park that night, guess what there hasn’t been one person that has said they saw him at Airport park that night. For all I know he could have been at both parks at some point that night and no one saw him at either but it doesn’t prove guilt or innocence. Even when David filed his appeals he did not try to provide alibi witnesses because they didn’t exsist. He did file for attorney indiffernce for somethings his attornies failed to bring up during the trials but no mention of witnesses that could place him elsewhere, that an attorney failed to call a witness on behave of this client that would have clearly put into question his guilt would definitely be indifference. I guess we can’t say for sure exactly where David went and did that day and all we are left with is the accounts of the Melendez brothers which you have pointed out are filled with inconsistencies.
        Everybody has a problem with the inconsistencies, we have discussed them on this page on many occassions and of coarse I have a lot to say about it. I just don’t have the time to get into it right now, I will try to get back into it tomorrow night , if not it will have to be next week. But I ask you this; whom has tried to gain more from these inconsistencies?


      • Mr Moore, I finally have a little time to return to your post. No one is denying there are many inconsistencies, discrepancies and straight out lies in all the statements, confessions and testimonies from all the sources. But what do we make of it? You are probably primarily focused on what were the ever changing stories of the Melendez brothers and I will get into that in a minute, but there were plenty of conflicting and changing stories going around, told by any number of people. I usually point to Clifford Oliver, I know that brother is hiding something. But take a look at Gayle Kelly, she supposedly was a close friend to both Jill Montgomery and Kenneth Franks and she admits she lied when she testified. I know I’ve talked to her, as did Fred Dannen and I know she has had some contact with Jill’s family, so Gayle Kelly is clearly aware what hardships these lies or inconsistencies or discreancies have caused and one would think she would understand the pain not of knowing the truth but she just doesn’t care. She believes she knows the truth and that David, GHilbert, Tony and Lucky are guilty and that’s it. So trying to get a straight story or clear up any inconsistencies with people like this is nearly impossible. It’s a little different with the Melendez brothers.

        There could be any number of reasons the brothers changed their stories so much, I guess the first possibility that those whom support the brothers will point to is they had to make up their stories because they were innocent and were never there and they were fed some details and they just couldn’t keep the stories straight, of coarse those of us that believe they are guilty don’t buy that. On the other hand it could be because of something simple and I guess innocent like they don’t remember because they were highly intoxicated the night of the crime and just can’t remember or maybe the passage of time blurred their memories, Gilbert didn’t agree to talk until March 1983, eight months after the murders, Tony didn’t talk until 1984 almost two years after the events he was describing. And then there is the possibility and it’s the one that those whom believe in their guilt will point to and that is the Melendez brothers were just trying to minimize their guilt as much as possible and I can clearly point to this on numerous occasions in both the brothers multiple statements/confessions and their testimonies. But before I get into that I have to ask what does any of this prove, how can one person’s interpretation of the brothers’ statements prove anything over another’s interpretation, it doesn’t it can’t! A while back I started posting the brothers’ testimonty so people could see what the brothers actually said and of coarse I gave my take on it in the process but it donged on me at some point sharing that testimony and telling people what I think doesn’t prove anything, I doubt if I’m going to change many minds with my interpretation, my time would be better spent trying to track down facts, they are hard enough to come by in this case, so I should use my time wisely. But Mr. Moore in response to your comment about the inconsistencies I would like to point out a couple, one for each brother, that clearly show in these statements the brother making the statement was trying to minimize their involvement in the crime. And I would point out these were big inconsistencies, not little things the jury or court would or could have missed. And this is part of the problem these inconsistencies were allowed to stand, David’s attorney, Russ Hunt, tried to attack the brothers’ testimony on some points but not on these two glaring differences. Grant you it wouldn’t have helped the defense to agrue these points because though the details were off it still placed the brothers at the scene of the crime and that’s what you get from the Melendez brothers’ stories, the details might be all mixed up but it leaves you with enough to believe, without a reasonable doubt, they were there. And that’s a problem for the defense back then and is still a problem for their supports today.

        Now getting to the two parts of the brothers’ testimony that differ greatly and again I repeat there are many instances of this occurring in their stories, these are just two of the biggest, in my opinion. The first one deals with how the girls became undressed, according to Gilbert; David told the girls to undress and they complied. Then David takes Jill and tells Gilbert to take Raylene and he takes her into the car. Tony is left watching Kenneth, this is one point both brothers agree on. But Tony tells us a different story, he never says David commanded the girls to get undressed, he never says how Raylene ended up undressed but he does tel us that David was in the car with Jill fighting with her trying to get her clothes off. We can debate which story is closer to the truth if either but we can clearly see this is an instance when Gilbert is minimizing his own involvement. Gilbert is telling us that David was in control of the situation and he was just doing what David told him and Raylene was already undressed when he got in the car with her because David had made the girls strip. If this didn’t happen as Tony’s story would suggest, how did Raylene lose her clothes? And if she was with Gilbert did he have something to do with it? You can clearly see the picture. If David didn’t tell the girls to undress as Tony states, Gilbert was probably the responsible party for whatever happened to Raylene from the beginning and he wasn’t just doing what David told him to do, he acted on is own. Something he definitely would most likely want to forget or not mention.

        We get the same thing from Anthony and if it is possible it’s even more disturbing than Gilbert’s omission because it deals with taking part in actually killing one of the girls. Again both brothers agree that Taony took part in killing one of the girls, the unbelievable and astounding thing is they disagree on which girl he took part in killing, that’s a huge inconsisteny or discrepancy, I think anyone would have to question that. There is another point on which both brothers agree on that happened right after Tony took part in the stabbing of one of the girls and that is Tony became I guess despondent or maybe in shock over what he had just done and in doing so he pretty much no longer took an active part in what was going on. This is important for a couple reasons, one which would be this could be one of the reasons Tony’s memory is so faulty, he can’t remember things accurately that night because he went into shock. The other thing I think it points to is Gilbert’s versions of what happen at least in regards into whom Tony stabbed is probably more believable. I would add Tony’s version really doesn’t make sense, there are huge holes in his story as to when and where people are, victims and killers, during the chain of events. It just doesn’t add up. In Gilbert’s version Tony stabs Raylene near the end of things, after Jill and Kenneth have been killed. David tells Tony they can’t leave antyone behind and Tony has to take part because they are all in this together. Raylene is begging for her life, crying she won’t say anything if they let her go. There seems to be some arging among David and the brothers if they should kill Raylene or just let her go. As they are arguing Raylene makes a break for it and tries to run off and this is when Tony stabs her. He stabs her a couple times and either drops rthe knife or hands the knife back to David and walks off and David takes the knife and stabs Raylene a few more times. This is the version Gilbert gives us and as sad and heart wrenching as it is there is just a ring of truth in it. Unlike what we get from Tony, who states he doesn’t know how Raylene was killed, he just remembers seeing her laying beside the car when he and Gilbert were about to leave to go get Gilbert’s truck and David stopped them to get his “lovestick” from under the passenger seat, I would add this is where they found the blood in David’s car, and then David went over to Raylene. In tony’s version he doesn’t stab Raylene he stabs Jill and this happens earlier in the chain of events. Again we get the same story about David telling Tony he has to take part and that they were all in this together and Tony stabs a couple times and gives David the knife. There is one important detail that Tony gives us that could explain his whole thought process. He tells us that David has already started stabbing Jill before he takes part. There is a term for this, I think both legal and psychosocial, most of us would know it as the Van Houten defense. For those that are unfamiliar with this it is the defense Leslie Van Houten tried to use in her retrial for her part in the Tate-Labianca murders. The defense tried to say Leslie really didn’t kill anyone because the only person she stabbed, Rosemary LaBianca, had already been stabbed so many times she was already dead when Van Houten did any stabbing. Of coarse this defense doesn’t work but it does give us a glimpse into the mind of the person that is trying to use it, it shows some level of guilt. The party trying to use this defense is tring to justify in their own mind their actions. In both cases, Van Houten and Anthony Melendez, they are probably correct in telling us that they knew or realized the victims in either case weren’t going to live through their violent ordeal so their actions probably didn’t have much to do with the final outcome and their participation or lack thereof wasn’t going to change anything but they did take part. And that Tony can’t admit to stabbing Raylene, a girl that hadn’t been stabbed up to that point is one of the strongest signs of guilt in all his and Gilbert’s statements and testimonies. With all their inconsistencies we are still left with Anthony not being able to come to terms with his actions in his own mind, To me it probably points to his guilt more than anything else but Mr. Moore it is only how each one of us interprets these inconsistencies, it is not rock solid proof either way, it doesn’t prove anything but that’s what we are left with.

        Liked by 1 person

  34. Now with the second video, again full of inconsistencies and inaccuracies, too many to get into. What I would like to bring attention to are at least two areas the young ladies are clearly unsure about and state as much. At one point they state they don’t understand why Truman Simons connected David Spence with biting in the first place. They say that don’t know why and then suggest maybe it was just because of David’s reputation, this was of coarse not the case. But I do see this has ben a theme that is often repeated that Truman Simons went after David without just cause, again that would not be the truth and this is a major point of the case that continually gets missed and the record is very clear on this. The young ladies do mention Lisa Kader but apparently miss some of the information she provided. Lisa Kader was the first person to implicate Muneer Deeb in the murders when she went to the police station on July 19th and told them that Muneer Deeb had killed Kenneth Franks because of Gayle Kelly. When Truman Simons and Dennis Baier took over the case on September 10 after the original detectives suspended their investigation, the first thing Simons and Baier did was go over all the police files on the case and see if the original detectives had missed anything, which makes sense, and of coarse the original detectives had missed plenty including not checking out or following up the information or tip they had received from Lisa Kader on July 19. Simons and Baier re-interviewed Kader on September 11, they had taken over the case only the day before but by then Deeb was already looking like a very good suspect. Ms. Kader really couldn’t provide any more information on Deeb or why she thought he had killed Kenneth but with Deeb’s physical limitations it was obvious to the officers if he committed the murders he couldn’t have killed the three teenagers alone, some one would have had to help him and that’s when Lisa Kader gives them the name of David Spence, well she didn’t know his last name she only new him as David and Chili. She was asked why she believed this David or Chili would have had anything to do with these murders, she answered because he hung out at Lucky’s store and he was a very violent person. Simons and Baier ask her why did she think David was a violent person and she replies she went out with him one time and he raped her. She gives them the details of this alleged rape and the officers ask her if she ever reported this, which she hadn’t but she had told a friend. A little skeptical, this girl had failed to report this to the police and now she has this story how this David or Chili had held a knife on her and raped her, how could they believe her and that’s when the whole case turned around. Lisa Kader told them that Chili had violently bit her and most importantly she could show the officers that because the bite mark was still visible on her body. I guess there is some question of when this event occurred it looks like the best date has to be August 10, that was the only date Kader and the girl she was with signed out together, if that’s the case it means it was a month later, September 11, when Simons and Baier interviewed her but when Simons saw the mark it reminded him of the marks he had seen on Jill Montgomery’s body at the crime scene. And with that Simons and Baier decided to check to see if there was anything on file about a David or Chili that hung out at the Rainbow Drive-In and to their surprise a David Wayne Spence had just been arrested two days earlier for a sexual assault and they went to pay him a visit that day in the county jail. So that is how Simons connected Spence with bite marks and these murders, he just didn’t pick him out of the blue because Spence was a bad guy.

    Now on the second issue the ladies in this video seem to not understand, and the scary thing here is one of the ladies claims to be an attorney, if she is an attorney I would advise anyone in Texas that gets into a legal bind please do not retain this ladies services for your own good!!! Anyway they mention Ronnie Breiten and question or state they do not understand why the information on him wasn’t allowed in court or the judge would not allow it. Ok first we have to understand Ronnie Breiten’s connection to the case and there was none other than it was his wife that cashed Jill’s check at the Piggly Wiggly. The ladies in the video correctly state there was an eye witness that claimed they saw Ronnie Breiten in bloody clothes the morning after the murders, to get to why the jury did not hear about this we have to get to the eye witness. And to state that the court did not hear this is one of those little inaccuracies that people try to point out as the court and/or State doing something wrong and in this case the court acted properly, the court heard the information the jury did not, a big difference, you would hope an attorney would understand this. The eye witness was Ronnie’s own mother and the defense was planning to put her on the stand, the State objected and rightfully so. It seems most people don’t understand that discovery works both ways in legal terms, the State has to give whatever relevant information they have to the defense and the defense has to inform the State what witnesses they are planning to use so the State can properly prepare for that witness. In this case the State had talked to Catherine Breiten, the defense’s witness and Ronnie’s mother, and she told them she had made up the story about Ronnie being involved in the murders and the defense was aware of this but were planning to put her on the stand anyway. The State objected and asked the judge to allow them to question her outside the presence of the jury which the judge allowed and the D.A. also reminded her lying on the stand was a chargeable offense and the whole truth came out. Ronnie had returned home the morning after the murders after he had been fishing with dirty clothes that had some blood on them, he proceeded to put these clothes in the washer where his mother apparently had some finer whites in the same washer and had told him not to mix his clothes in with those but he did anyway, this angered his mother so much she called the police and reported that she thought her son had something to do with the murders. When she finally calmed down she told the whole story, again the defense was aware of this and the State opposed this and didn’t want this circus played out in front of the jury. After hearing Mrs. Breiten’s story the judge agreed with the State and rightfully so and warned the defense from trying further stunts like this. So what I can’t understand is why an attorney is putting out a video 37 years later and can’t understand this and is still questioning it, I understand the world seems to be getting stupider with each passing generation but this is totally ridiculous and again we see people like Bernadette Feazell praising it!!! Anyway here it is.


      • Ms. Breiten, during Spence’s first trial Catherine Breiten testifies she is Ronnie’s mother. The only sexual relationship I”m aware Ronnie had was with his wife Joyce and she was the person that cashed Jill Montgomery’s and Raylene Rice’s checks at the Piggly Wiggly.


      • Ms. Breiten, I went back over the testimony over the weekend, Catherine was Ronnie’s step mom. I do have a question for you, in the testimony I see it mentioned that Ronnie had been sent to TDC; do you know what he went to prison for and when it was?


      • Hello Mary, very glad to hear from you. I actually tried to contact your mother a few years ago and then when I was talking to Gayle Kelly she informed me she and Lisa were still friends and remained in touch, I asked Gayle if she could pass on my request to Lisa. Gayle informed me Lisa didn’t want to talk about David Spence, apparently she still suffers some trauma caused by her incident with him, totally understandable. I would still like to talk to your mother, to be honest I know it would be impossible to separate the two; the murders and the incident with Spence that happened a few weeks after the murders, especially for your mother My focus of inquiry would be her interview with the Waco Police on July 19, 1982. I could not totally avoid the later incident, I think it is a part of the story most people just don’t understand because how little has been put out there about it and when there is a lot of the time the facts are distorted or not correct at all and then people don’t see the importance. We hear so much talk about physical evidence sometimes it gets lost that it was the marks David left on Lisa’s body, a month after the incident, that led Simons and Baier to him in the first place, physical evidence it doesn’t get more physical than that. For me it is one of the most aggravating misconceptions that continually get repeated that Truman Simons just went after David Spence out of the blue because he knew Spence to be a bad guy that’s far from the truth and actually when Simons and Baier first went to meet David after talking to Lisa they both report they found him to be very polite, affable, jovial just not what they were expecting at all. It wasn’t until after they talked to David’s parole officer, Gene Deal, that they started to get an idea of the other side of David Wayne Spence’s personality. I guess Truman Simons has brought some of this on his own with his own personality, it seems there are a lot of people out there that don’t like him or don’t trust him but if you take the names out of this case and just say two officers were investigating a triple homicide and in the course of their investigation they came across a girl that had provided information shortly after the murders, believing as all law enforcement did at the time that more than one individual committed these brutal rapes and murders but the girl had only given one name and the person she named had some serious physical limitations during their follow up interview they asked the girl if she knew of anybody that would have helped the person she named in the first interview, the girl gives a second name and tells her story, further questioning the girl she shows the officers marks on her body left by the person she just named and those marks reminded one of the officers of the marks he had seen on the body of one of the victims the day their bodies were discovered, I think any law enforcement officer would have pursed that or they should have but with this case things get messed up all kinds of ways. But again this would not be the focal point, Lisa’s second interview and the ensuing course of action is pretty cut and dry as far as I am concerned, that course being David Spence becoming a strong suspect of coarse. It is that first interview and questions surrounding it where I find myself, still after all these years, not totally understanding. Mary it’s a little difficult to explain or pinpoint what I am actually trying to get to that is why it would be invaluable to talk to your mother. The best I can put it would be like this; your mother was the only one in what seemed to be a very close knit circle of friends, that would be the kids that lived at the Methodist Home and a few of Kenneth’s friends from Waco, that really came forward and talked to police, she pretty much gave them the case on a silver platter if they would have done anything but they didn’t. But in that interview Lisa also informs the police of the strange relationship between the Rainbow Drive-In or more precisely Muneer Deeb and the girls from the Home and this information put a damper on those activities, the Rainbow was put off limits to the kids by the staff at the Home and maybe this had something to do with why no else spoke up they didn’t want to ruin what they saw as a good thing even at the expense of the lives’ of their friends, which would be very disturbing but reminds me of the Marcy Conrad murder from the year before. When I talked to Rhonda Evans, another girl I think your mother would know, and remind you Rhonda still believes David is innocent, she told me the murders were over something silly, she would never elaborate. And we look at people like Gayle Kelly that would later say that Deeb gave her very descriptive details about the murders only a couple weeks after the murders, such as Kenneth was stabbed around the heart multiple times not to be killed but made to suffer and die slowly, didn’t Gayle think the police would have been interested in this when they talked to her many times after the murders but she said nothing, well nothing until after she was told by Simons and Baier that Deeb was a suspect months later. And then we have Christine Juhl later testifying that on the morning on July 14th well before the bodies had been discovered that Muneer Deeb came to work and told her that Gayle’s boyfriend had been killed and he was happy they finally got him but she didn’t say anything to any law enforcement officer until at least months afterwards. So that’s the thing with Lisa Kader she was really the only one to come forward and put it all out there for the police and I guess I have to ask why? Was there something she knew or heard that maybe others hadn’t, From talking to Gayle I take it she and Lisa were close and still are, maybe Gayle shared something with her that she didn’t share with others, I wouldn’t say this is impossible but from what I have read and understand about the case it would have more likely been Patti Deis that Gayle would have shared more with considering how it was Patti’s apartment and the Northwood apartments in general where a lot of the drama surrounding the murders played out. And the police report that contains Lisa’s interview does clearly point out that Lisa states she really didn’t have much information to go on, she said Gayle wouldn’t talk about the murders and that she(Lisa) thought the police should go talk to her. So that tells me there was talk about the murders among the girls at the Home, at least on the Perkins Unit that Lisa and Gayle both lived on as had Jill when she was there, so was it everybody just talking in general or did Lisa try to talk to just Gayle as the report might suggest? Hearing Lisa Kader’s side of the story or how things were around the time of the murders, both before and after would be very enlightening. What made her decide to break the silence? I would love to understand all that and I think it would give us a better understanding of the whole atmosphere of the time. One other thing I would like to talk to your mother about but again this might be too close to the other incident but what did/does she know about Robert Coleman. I know she would know him from Faye Pearson and the incident but he was also with David Spence during the Pack incident, And thinking about the Pack incident, well other incidents David Spence was involved in, again when I was talking to Gayle Kelly she asked me if I was aware what David had done to her friends Lisa Kader and Bobby Brem. I told her I was aware of the Kader incident but have never heard anything about there being an incident between David and Bobby, I asked Gayle if maybe she had just misspoke when she said Bobby Brem she meant Darvin Pack which I was aware of, Gayle never responded to clear that up. I tried to ask Bobby Brem about this also again no response. Would Lisa Kader know anything about this. Well that’s it Mary, good to hear from you, I know it is a bit selfish on my part it is part of a dark past your mother would probably prefer not to dig up but it could help provide answers for so many other people. Again I would love the opportunity to talk to your mother directly but maybe she would feel better sharing with her daughter. Either way I hope to hear from you in the future.


  35. And another point of interest: it seems Vic Feazell started a podcast on the anniversary of the murders. I wonder will he be answering questions about the Lake Waco Murders??? Because I have plenty!!!


    • My mother Lisa…hasn’t spoke to Gayle since the time of the crimes. Ive never met gayle…at first she was ok with speaking with you but then it did give her alot of anxiety.. and she has blocked alot out. I know she says she used to go hang out with them and was assulted by the one guy. Im glad she came forward but she must have been scared. She was very young and living in the methodist home in Waco. My grandma passed when she was 3 and her and he family was scattered. .so she has chosen to forget I assume since she lost her friends. Its very sad hearing her talk about it. I never even knew about it until I was over 20…. i can try to ask her questions.. but i don’t know what she will remember or not. Thank you.

      Liked by 1 person

      • Mary, thank you for the response, I know my questions can put the children of those that were connected to the case in some way in a uncomfortable situation. For the past year or so it seems I get more feed back from the children or they have more questions. I can see how this could have effected them if their parents still struggled with these events through out their lives which I can see has been the case with the people I have talked to. And for some of the children they have never heard about all this before and it can be difficult. I can only imagine how this story was told to you, it looks like your mother waited until she thought you were old enough to even start to understand. And to be honest that will probably be the key that opens up the truth. Hey I’m an outsider, always will be, in the end it doesn’t matter what I think , say, believe or understand. I want to understand I want the truth to come out and it’s more than just some morbid curiosity. Yes this case is interesting, complex, intriguing and aggravating there have been just so many loose ends left dangling, the breeding ground for craziness, There was enough craziness connected to this crazy before outside parties like myself and others I won’t name at the moment got involved. I think back to when I first read about David Spence tying up this girlfriend, Christine Juhl, to his pick up truck and dragging her down the road, I thought it some some of the craziest stuff I had ever read, it’s up there with Charles Manson. Years later I got the chance to talk to Christine Juhl and of course I had to bring this up and she was very open about this and not only about this incident and many others but also the fact as to why she went back or how she got back, I think that was my question to her why did she stay with David so long after that, it was like 8 or 9 months, she had only been with David a few months when he did this. And she told me her parents made her go back, after this had happened to her she went to her parents, she spent the night there but in the morning they drove her back to David’s and told Christine she made her bed now she had to sleep in it, well at least that’s the version Christine told me and I have no reason to doubt her. But it made me think what was crazier the act David committed or the way Christine’s parent reacted? I know with my rambling way the point can get lost but the point is, i believe anyone would see this as a crazy, unhealthy and questionable situation including the children of the people involved, when I ask questions about it I’m doing so as a stranger grateful for any information that will appease my inquiries. It would be different with those much closer and living in the aftermath, they need answers to understand their own lives and how it has effected them, their family dynamic, maybe some family issues. And it’s in these moments that outsiders like myself will never witness when the real and full truth reveals itself. So Mary, if I may be so bold, I will have to take you up on going through you to question your mother, she gave the Waco PD the case on a silver platter on July 19th, 1982, six days after the murders and they did nothing with that information. And Mary I want to share with you what Gayle Kelly told me, to put things in proper context Gayle sent me these messages after Anthony Melendez passed away in January 2017, Gayle hadn’t talked to me in months prior to that, she was upset with me about something I had said and I was surprised to hear from her again.

        1/16/17, 12:23 PM
        Did you see that the last defendant Gilbert Melendez died Friday,final chapter in this long saga
        I can finally close this crap in my life.

        1/17/17, 11:06 AM
        Mr,Lewis.I am not interested in satisfying your couriosty over a murder three decades ago.Gilbert testified for the state against David and filled in all the holes in the theory’s. Also I could care less that some trailer trash kid from Waco wishes his daddy wasn’t the bogey man.It will come to nothing.Lisa like me wishes for nothing more than to move on.Her memories as are mine are painful,hard to live thru that others can’t seem to let go.As far as this writer.His book will be nothing more than fiction.Deeb admitedd to many thanks that he set this horrid thing in motion.Gilbert even told us the perverse pleasure that David had with the murders.I see no reason to prolong the agony this would bring to so many people. I’m sorry that the consperity theorists have nothing better to do.The right people were caught and tried.Justice was served.For me and many others it did not end at the sentencing..I pray that you find some closure and stop this nonsence.IT IS OVER.

        1/17/17, 11:44 PM
        What I’m disappointed Mr.Lewis no witty comeback about my moral duty,just kidding.I take no pleasure in Melendez s death,but it brings closure oddly enough.Lisa Kader says she’s not interested in discussing David Spence with you or anyone.I asked her out of loyalty to my friends.She was once a good friend,but like m e ,she has had a few bouts with a physh.hospital. So I did relay your message Mr.Lewis…sincerely, Gayle

        So Mary see the dishonesty that still persist with this case and that’s why I believe your mother could be very important she was the only one back then that was willing to be honest in this group of friends or kids at the Methodist Home, especially the girls from the Perkins unit where your mother, Gayle Kelly and Jill Montgomery resided and they all had to be aware to some degree what was going on, so why the silence, then and now, your mother was the only one to come forward. If I could alleviate any of your mother’s anxiety over talking about this, which I understand is much easier said than done, I would want her to know I’m not interested in getting into her incident with David Spence, we don’t need to rehash that, no one can dispute she was violently bitten by him, she still had the bite marks on her body when she was interviewed my Truman Simons and Dennis Baier, so there’s no need to get into that. My interest is in how things were between the different parties before the murders, I believe your statement,” I know she says she used to go hang out with them’, is referring to David and the Melendez brothers and she is saying that she knew them before the store opened and partied with them at the lake as both Gayle Kelly and Rhonda Evans have told me. And that’s what I am trying to get, the proper timeline, remember in court the state with the help of Gayle Kelly tried to paint the picture that the two groups didn’t know each other and there wasn’t any contact between the two prior to the murders. We now know that is a lie and your mother could help provide the details, Rhonda Evans does want to provide any details because she had a close relationship with David and wants to believe he is innocent and realizes connecting him to the victims in anyway doesn’t help his case. And Gayle Kelly well I guess she just likes to lie, as I was trying to show you in her messages, I don’t understand why but it is very troubling, the only answer I can fathom is she is trying to hide something, something I hope someone like your mother that was around back then can shed some light on. Mary I understand this will be hard on your mother I know there are things she just want to forget and has blocked out and also I see it in her nature not wanting to be the focus, that comes out in both the police reports and her testimony, she would rather go along to get instead of causing a rift. During the trials when she was asked if she didn’t have a good opinion of David Spence why did she go out with him, she replied because her friend Faye Pearson wanted to go out with Robert Coleman and she didn’t want to mess that up so she went along. Even when she went to the police on July 19th she didn’t go along, she went with a staff member from the Home, she was the only kid from the Home that wanted a staff member present when they talked to the police. And it’s this characterization of her personality that sticks out when she came forward to talk to police, whatever caused her to decide to come forward was strong enough for her to break away from her normal behavior of just going along with the crowd, she definitely broke with the crowd when she came forward and I think the date she finally decided to come forward also shows that. July 19th was the day Gayle Kelly got off restriction from the Home, she got off restriction that morning and decided to run away again and then a few hours later your mother shows up at the police station. Mary I could be wrong about all this and that’s why we should hear from the person that was there. I hope to hear from you again soon.


      • Mary, I have a couple questions just to get a better understanding of how things were. First, your mother knew Robert Coleman to some degree, that was the guy Faye Pearson was with. His name comes up a couple times in the reports, apparently he was a friend of David’s although he was a few years younger, David being 24/25 and Robert being 19. Robert was also with David and Gilbert the day they attacked Darvin Pack. So Robert seemed to be around but no one I have talked to remembers him, maybe your mother remembers him and how he fit into things, how Faye had met him or how he and David knew each other?

        In your earlier response you shared the circumstances which brought your mother to the Methodist Home. Your grandmother passed away when your mother was 3, a couple questions, did your mother go to the Home at that point when she was 3 years old and did your mother have any siblings and did any of them also go to the Home as well/ The reason I’m asking about that is because I have wondered what was the youngest age of children the Home cared for, I thought I read it was the age of 5 but I’m not absolutely positive on that, if your mother was sent there when she was 3 that would clear that up. And if she was sent there that young did she spend all that time at the home? I know she turned 17 at the end of March 1982. And how long did she stay at the Home after the murders? Also I have seen where the kids that stayed at the Home for an extended, multiple years, time as they got older they would move to another unit to be with kids in their age group, I take it this would have been the case with your mother, if so does she remember how long before the murders she was on the Perkins Unit? I know Jill Montgomery’s last roommate, Angela “Nikki” Rhodes had moved to the Perkins unit in this fashions at the beginning of the year, 1982.

        And this might be the hardest of these questions to answer, the Methodist Home cared for approximately 200 kids at one time and they were housed in units of 12. The home had a waiting list so the Home was always full, I guess 16 units of 12 would be 192 kids and that would be the number of kids living there at one time and I guess if your mother was there for many years she would have known most of them although there seems to be frequent turn over. I would like to focus on the Perkins Unit at the time of the murders. In the police reports we see names of a lt of girls that lived at the Home around that time, most of them from the Perkins unit but it isn’t clear on others. We know your Mother, Gayle Kelly, Nikki Rhodes, Ginger Yoby, Tamra Samples, I am probably spelling that name wrong and I would guess Faye Pearson and Michelle Lewis, although the police didn’t talk to her, were also housed in the Perkins Unit. I’m not sure about some of the others whose names came up; Laura Madderax, Christine Hart, Dolores Perez, Penny McNutt and maybe Katherine Prochnow, she told the police she knew Jill Montgomery from the Home but it really doesn’t say if she stayed at the Home. When I tried to talk to her she replied she didn’t want to talk to me, so I don’t know. Mary could your mother verify if these were the girls on the Perkins unit at the time or if I have missed anyone. I know Patti Deis and Star Compton, Jill’s first roommate lived on that unit as well but they had left by the time of the murders. I’m just wondering if there is someone we haven’t heard about or from? There seems to be a split in opinion as to what the truth is. Most people are familiar with Gayle Kelly’s version, that being the one that she gave on the stand, although now she admits she lied. Dolores Perez and Penny McNutt both testified for the defense, essentially their view was Gayle Kelly was a liar and couldn’t be trusted and that Deeb and company were friends and wouldn’t have done this. Rhonda Evans never testified but with talking to her I know she feels this way as well. Mary you wrote your mother told you she hung out with them, again I take that to mean Spence and the Melendez brothers, just as Rhonda Evans and now Gayle Kelly both say. Just to be clear, your mother never mentioned that to anyone back then, well at least it’s not in the police reports or her testimony, she stated that she just knew David from him hanging out at the store. It’s totally understandable her thoughts on David would have changed after what happened to her, so I am not trying to be critical in anyway, again just trying to clarify now that the narrative has changed so drastically.


      • Continuing, since my mind is on this train of thought. So when your mother told you she hung out with “them”, she is referring to the parties out at the lake prior to the store opening in February 1982, that Gayle and Rhonda are talking about? What I’m trying to get to but it just seems no one wants to cooperate is this; unlike what we were told during the trials, when we were told that the parties involved didn’t know each other, we now hear they did know each other pretty well, hung out and partied together on multiple occasions and were at least on friendly terms prior to the events of July 13th. Obviously this obliterates the whole mistaken Identity scenario, as if anything more needed to be added. But it also leads to more possibilities and questions. OK so these teenagers. for most part 16 and 17, are partying at the lake, they are too young to purchase alcohol and they needed to get their weed and maybe other drugs from somewhere. Along comes David Spence and the Melendez brothers, a number of the local kids knew the Melendez brothers sold weed and David was always looking for a party, Gayle Kelly told me they ( Spence & Melendez brothers) were always trying to befriend them (the girls from the Home), so the most obvious scenario is David would get at least the alcohol for the kids, if he could party with them and the Melendez brothers probably provided at least the weed and this would have been prior to Muneer Deed entering the scene and the store opening. As I just stated when I asked Gayle about this all she would say is “they were always trying to befriend us” and when I asked Rhonda she says she doesn’t remember where they got the alcohol and/or weed, honestly I find this hard to believe, I’m in my 50’s now and I still can remember the people I could go to when I was a teenager and wanted to party. I think in Rhonda’s, she believing David id innocent doesn’t want to connect him to anything and with Gayle after what happened she doesn’t want to remember how things were between everybody prior to the murders. Mary I know we probably can expect the same thing in your mother’s recollections after her run in with David on August 10th but if she can, and I know it will be difficult, I would like her to go back to before then, before the murders, even before the store opened, when the girls from the Home were partying at the lake. Can she recall some of the other girls that were there, again Gayle and Rhonda were both vague on this, both giving me the exact answer, “we all”. I know that is a very broad question, let me put it like this. I find it very unlikely that one of the kids from the Home just walked into the Rainbow Drive-In when it first opened and walked up to the counter and asked do you guys hand out beer, weed and pills. The more likely scenario is some of the girls knew David from partying at the lake with him and when he started hanging out at the store they knew he would be some one that would get alcohol for them and that was the genesis of the problems that would develop. Muneer Deeb was trying to find a wife and wasn’t having much luck, your mother was aware of this he had made the same proposition to her as he did a number of the girls from the Home. Deeb didn’t hold David in high regard, he would say David was kind of rough in appearance, he could be loud and didn’t like the way he talked, by how Deeb’s partner, Karem, tried to explain it when he testified in his best English he said David talked bad, we can take it David was loose with the language he used. But on the other hand David was friends with all these girls, they would come in the store and talk with him and do whatever and Deeb took notice and talking with David we found out about the partying and this lead Deeb to decide to become Dr. Feelgood, if it worked for some one as rough as David, Deeb thought he would give it a try maybe if could girl a girl that would be willing to marry him if he enticed them with alcohol and drugs. We know most of the girls at least accepted the goodies from Deeb, hey if he was willing to give things away why not and we know Gayle Kelly really took advantage of this situation. How far did it go? Mary, again, I know this is kind of going all over the place, to simplify, your mother was the only one to come forward with this, the only one that told the police about what going on at the store and since she went to the station with her unit house parent, Debbie Sapp, I believe it’s safe to conclude she had at least told her what was going on prior to going to the station, maybe it was Ms. Sapp that advised your mother she needed to go to the police. We know once the Home became aware of the situation, again your mother being the source, they made the store off limits to the kids, closing down that party pipeline, I would think some of your. mother’s friends weren’t too happy about that. Your mother really didn’t have much information directly about the murders just more like the situation that existed, she told the police that Kenneth and Deeb got into an argument over Gayle Kelly and it was at this time that Deeb threatened Kenneth, did your mother witness this herself or did she hear it from some one else? Can she remember when this occurred and or what it was about? As far as the story has been told Kenneth, Gayle and Deeb had very limited contact with each other for about three weeks prior to the murders, Gayle avoided Deeb and didn’t go to the store, when Deeb tried to go to Patti’s apartment and see Gayle, Patti and/or Kenneth would just send him on his way, does your mother know something different? And finally your mother told the police on July 19th they should talk to Gayle Kelly because she might know something. The police talked to Gayle the next day and never said anything or questioned her about this, actually they talked to her multiple times over the next couple weeks and never mentioned any of this. It wasn’t until Truman Simons and Dennis Baier interviewed your mother on September 11th and by that time your mother had had her incident with David Spence and Simons and Baier decide to go ask Gayle about this and then the flood gates opened. Had Gayle said anything to your mother about the murders before your mother went to the police on July 19th? Mary I know it’s a lot, your mother was the only one to come forward back then and maybe she could fill in some of the blanks for me, I hope she can find the strength and courage again to help answer some of the questions that remain, Thank you.


      • Hello Mary, earlier this summer I listened to some taped interviews from Sgt, Dennis Baier that were recordered a few years ago about the case, there are more I am waiting to be released. On one of these tapes he comments that he thought the original investigators on the case didn’t look into the Methodist Home connection enogh. I couldn’t agree with him more, even before the bodies were found or even a missing report on the kids had been filed, law enforcement knew the connection between two of the victims, Jill and Kenneth, was they had met at the Methodist Home. Waco PD did send a detective to the Home on Thursday July 15, two days after the murders, but when the detective was asked if he wanted the files he declined, stating if he needed them he would come back, that never happened. That got me thinking about your mother and her interview of Monday July 19th, which Waco PD did nothing with, totally mind boggling. I understand it is difficult for your mother to rehash these memories but she was the only person that came forward back then with the truth. And that’s the focus of my inquiries. I would to avoid the incident with David but it might be hard to totally skip it seeing it was that interview she had with Truman Simons and Dennis Baier on Saturday September 11, 1982 that put David Wayne Spence on their radar. I’m more interested that first interview she had with Waco PD on July 19th where she told them that Muneer Deeb had Killed Kenneth Franks because of Gayle Kelly. Unfortunately a tip Waco PD decided not to follow up on for whatever reason. They didn’t even ask Gayle Kelly about it when she showed up at the police station the next day, how much things would be different today if Waco PD had just done their job properly and followed up the leads they got.

        Having said that because Waco Pd failed to follow up in anyway, there are a couple things that stand out. I don’t think we should expect the detectives to quote verbatim what a witness says in their reports but with that sometimes we are left wondering about the statements in a report And this is how it is with something your mother said and again the detectives really didn’t try to dig deep into it but it has stood out to me. When your mother was asked why she thought Deeb had killed Kenneth she explains the threats Deeb had made but says she doesn’t know all the details they should talk to Gayle Kelly and they ask why should they talk to Gayle Kelly and your mother’s response was because Gayle Kelly is not talking and the interview pretty much ends there. Interesting, the point being your mother’s comment implies people were talking about it and probably tried to talk to Gayle Kelly about it but weren’t getting anywhere, so the question becomes who was talking about it and what were they saying? It’s obvious your mother was aware of this because she went to the police station. But there seems to be a disconnection and what i mean by that is this; after the murders the Rainbow Drive-In, Deeb’s store became off limits to the kids living at the Methodist Home upuntil the time of the murders the kids were allowed to go over to the store, again it would seem during whatever talking was being done the staff at the Home became aware the owner of the store was giving the girls beer, pills and weed, kind of hard to believe that didn’t have a clue about this before the murders. I know when your mother went to the police station that day a staff member or house parent with her, so I would have to believe that parent had an idea what your mother was going to report. And another thing that stands out is no where in any of the reports does it show that anyone from the staff of the Methodist Home ever told law enforcement about the situation between the girls that have been placed in their care and the store across the street, I find that strange to say the least.

        So Mary that is what I would like to find out from your mother, she was the one person that came forward, so maybe she could help explain so outsiders like myself can better understand. It makes sense people or the kids from the Home were talking about their friends getting killed but was it that or was it more of a thing like I would guess living in the Home there would be group meetings where issues like this were discussed and probaably some of these truths came out. Most likely a mix of both; group meetings and then friends talking amongst theirselves. Whatever it was it was enough to make your mother come forward and go to the police station. I am hoping she could help us understand how things were in those few days between the murders or when they first heard about the murders either late July 14 or early July 15 and when she went to the station on July 19.


  36. Last week I stated I would delve into some of the errors in the information these two ladies presenting in their videos, there were so many. A few stick out in my mind and I really don’t want to waste the time listening to those videos again. So I have picked one glaring mistake, I can go all over the place with and probably will. It is like a microcosm of the whole case in general, well I guess that could be said about any little piece of information or misinformation that’s out there about this case, there is so much linked or connected to each piece of information even the smallest detail. So many questions with all information gathered; does it have any significance or is it a red herring? Did the investigators give proper consideration or do they just let it slip through the cracks? Did they spend too much time on some information and not enough on other information? What were the investigations thoughts on all the information that was gathered, can they properly explain their actions or lack there of with each piece of information. Again so many questions, questions we will probably never get the answers to, unless we want to put a lot of unwarranted faith in Vic Feazell’s future podcast. So were left with the questions and unfortunately a lot of lies, rumors and misinformation that continually get repeated to the point the masses believe it is the truth, well I’m here to help dispel the people from the fictitious world created by the likes of people like Bernadette Feazell and Fred Dannen and unfortunately looks to be picked up by a new generation. I will call this exhibit one.

    In one of the aforementioned the young ladies mention person of interest and sometime suspect James Russell Bishop. And one little piece of information they tell us about Mr. Bishop was that he owned a white truck, WRONG!!! James Russell Bishop owned a 1972 green Ford Ranger, he purchased this truck in 1981 after he was discharged from the army and still had it when he went to California and was the vehicle he used during the commission of the crime(s) he committed there and was actually how he got caught, this truck got stuck in the sand at the beach where he had taken the two girls and raped and then shot them and he left it there. So the vehicle James Russel had is well documented, how these two ladies missed this is astounding. Now the reason I pick this little faux pas is not so much the snafu itself but some of the comments the ladies made about this afterwards and actually I have to commend them on this at least. Following making the statement that Bishop had a white truck one of the ladies says something to the effect; there’s that white truck again. This shows they understand the significance of the white truck, which I think most people miss and mainly because they just keep hearing Bernadette Feazell going on about it how Truman Simons purchased this truck from the Melendez brother’s mother after the trials, found zero evidence in the truck just as the Waco Police had done and then took the truck to a junkyard where it was destroyed, which as the appeals court has pointed out more than once doesn’t amount to a hill of beans about anything but the ignorant massed blindly follow the pied piper But if he ever did get the truth about the white truck it would clear up so much and there are people out there that could do it but they are not talking, not only that The Melendez brothers’ family now tries to deny Gilbert even owned a truck at the time of the murders, which we know is a lie. And with this sideshow Bernadette Feazell continues to perform people miss the importance of the truck and whom saw it when and where. And then we have to get into Gilbert’s 7 different statements and how his story changed over time and that just adds to the confusion and I plan to get into all that but first I want to get in the or a green truck or green vehicle and look at it’s possible significance. The reason I want to get into the green vehicle is to try to keep things in some sort of chronological order, remind you the authorities were not made aware the white truck Gilbert owned had played a part in the crimes until Gilbert finally gave it up sometime in 1984 after the Grand Jury indictments had come down and this was after the first three statements he made in the spring of 1983 where he didn’t mention the truck nor the involvement of his brother Anthony. Much more on all this later but now let’s get back to the color green.

    On Monday July 19th, only six days after the murders, shortly after 8:00 a.m. Detective Ramon Salinas receives a call from ranger Charlie Burger,, he works at Speegleville Park, he informs Salinas he remembers hearing something about a fence being cut and he thinks there was a work order somewhere but he would have to find it and get back with Salinas on this. In typical Salinas fashion his reports leave us with so many questions and leaves us to kind of figure things out ourselves, right or wrong. Now my take on it, Ranger Burger is talking about something he saw and heard prior to making the call, like not that day probably days before, he states he think he saw a work order but obvious he doesn’t have that work order with him, if he did we probably could at least get the date when this work order was submitted and would tell us the fence was cut by then. So to me it sounds like this Burger had heard about this fence being cut saw a work order probably sometime the week before, was off on the weekend, came back on Monday morning remembering he wanted to call the police about this but hadn’t done so and finally did so that morning but by that time he didn’t have the work order in his possession so couldn’t remember the dates or any other helpful information. Burger would call back a few minutes later, forgive me because I know I will probably get the spelling wrong on this and I don’t have my records in front of me, Burger has talked to the ranger whose responsibility it is to take care of things, be sure everything is in proper order, and one have been the person that would have gotten the work order, that was ranger Gustafason but Gustafason tells Burger the fence had to be cut after Friday afternoon because he checks those fences everyday and had done so Wednesday, Thursday and Friday. Burger makes his call back to Salinas and reports what Gustafason has told him and things on that pretty much go no further. I will be the person that throws this out there, is it possible, is it within the realm of possibilities that Ranger Gustafason is mistaken or even lying? I say it is. Maybe Ranger Gustafason wasn’t doing his job, maybe on those hot summer Texas days Ranger Gustafason was just riding around the expansive park, maybe finding a cool place in the shade to take a nap or maybe he got some fishing in, maybe he didn’t want to admit he wasn’t doing his job., it sounded like he had a nice easy job and he probably didn’t want to lose it. Either way he was taken for his word, that’s nice but it doesn’t help answer many questions. Like di the police ever track down that work order that should have provided an all important date? Now this seems like a little thing and might not have meant anything until a couple weeks later when more information came in from another case. To be continued………….


Leave a Reply to bkl67 Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s