Questions??? I Have Plenty!!!

Advertisements

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

  1. THE TRUE TALE OF THE TAPE or IT WOULD BE A FULL TIME JOB EXPOSING ALL OF BERNADETTE FEAZELL’S LIES AND MOST PEOPLE DON’T HAVE TIME FOR THAT!!!

    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.

    https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.15752-9/53830215_998655717190834_1509482680134139904_n.png?_nc_cat=104&_nc_ht=scontent-lga3-1.xx&oh=43c8426a799e934396828d2cc4a514a0&oe=5D030F50

    https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.15752-9/54277739_349995045611767_6222375002981793792_n.png?_nc_cat=106&_nc_ht=scontent-lga3-1.xx&oh=107bb005a09b00225cf5959a97e397d1&oe=5D49BFD0

    https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.15752-0/p480x480/54432509_821302561548192_4911815343774629888_n.png?_nc_cat=108&_nc_ht=scontent-lga3-1.xx&oh=c3d4d78ee4af4f8983ebd291ef044534&oe=5D4F027D

    Like

  2. 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

  3. 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.

    Like

  4. 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!!!

    Like

    • 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

  5. 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.

    Like

  6. 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!!!

    Like

  7. 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………….

    Like

  8. I almost got ahead of myself! Later that same day, July 19, Salinas receives another call from two brothers that are out fishing at Speegleville Park, they are fishing not too far from where the bodies had been discovered, they have been fishing that area for 20 years and they thought they had noticed some things that were strange or out of place from the countless times they had been fishing in that area. Salinas decided to meet these two brothers out at Speegleville Park and Sargent Robert Fortune went with him. The brothers showed the officers an area that was about a quarter of a mile from where the bodies had been discovered and while they were there they decided to check out where the fence had been cut that was reported earlier, which again wasn’t too far from where they were meeting the brothers. Again, and I know I repeat this over and over, but Salinas’ report on this leaves a lot to be desired. He states there are tress that have been knocked down like as if some one had driven through there, he notes the bark has been knocked off at least one tree, he also states he found blue paint on one of the trees, pieces of a broken parking light and finally some chrome pieces that came off a ford, remind you Gilbert Melendez’ truck was a Ford,. Anyway Salinas does not note if he believes these items he found came off the same or not, that’s left up to speculation but we can see that a vehicle ran through this area and received some damage. Thankfully Salinas calls Special Investigator Dennis Stanley to the scene to take photographs and the information Stanley provides is a little more telling. The first thing that pops out is Stanley states the paint left on the tree is green but maybe more importantly Stanley documents and photographs multiple tire tracks, there was more than one vehicle that went through there, so the items/evidence left behind could have come from more than one vehicle, one would be a Ford, the other is still in question but with the items left one could surmise you would look for a vehicle with front end damage and a head light assembly would have damage, simply put a least one vehicle went through there knocking down trees and doing damage to the front end as it did so. Now would anyone like to guess out of all the vehicles that have been associated or connected to this crime in some way, and remind you many of these vehicles were being sold and/or disappeared before law enforcement got a chance to look at them, which was the only one that we can definitely state and can be proven had front end damage and damage to a head light? If you said Clifford Oliver’s Silver Pontiac you would be correct. Let’s look what the police found in Clifford’s car on the front seat early on the morning of July 14; a towel, two hairbrushes and two screw drivers, very interesting to me. When the police did talk to Clifford and asked him if anything was stolen from his car, he stated his toolbox and tools were stolen out of his trunk. So if this is true the thieves that stole his tools thought hey were stealing his tools but we’ll be nice and let him keep a couple screw drivers and decided to leave a couple on the front seat? I’m having a hard time believing that one. Then we come across Anthony Melendez’ testimony from 1985, I know I’m messing up the whole chronology here but it’s just to difficult sometimes. Anthony states this while he’s on the stand in 198, I grabbed a screw driver off the floorboard and stuck it in my back pocket. The reason he gives is because he didn’t know what David was going to do and they, Tony and David had had a little hassle before and Tony just wanted to protect himself. Again very interesting to say the least. I guess I should add Tony also testifies that he threw this screw driver off the bridge later but then I’m getting too much into the different stories and testimonies that come much later. Let me get back on the proper chronological train of thought. So there we have it Salinas heard about this fence being cut and had checked it out, found some interesting items but hey the ranger had told him the fence had to have been cut sometime the weekend after the murders, the ranger probably seemed to be and honorable guy, I think most of us would hope so. But then that other case came up and maybe everything wasn’t so kosher in Rangerville. To Be Continued………..

    Like

  9. Now on to the case that would bring back the questions about that cut fence and this would have been the aggravated assault of the younger Payne brother, I really don’t want to get too much into this case but there are a couple important factors that shouldn’t be overlooked. First off the reason this case was brought to the attention of Detective Salinas was because the apparent perpetrator(s) of this crime told the Payne brothers they had committed the murders and actually gave them details. The perps were James “Blinky” Lucas, Salinas would put in his report “a known homsexual” and his uncle Ralp Finstad (again sorry about the spelling I probably have it wrong without my records in front of me). And the police were able to track down how these two guys came up with at least some of the information they had about the murders. They obtained the information about the girls being violated by a foreign object from a co-worker of Ralph’s, her mother heard it during a card game from the wife of an ex-police officer. But Blinky had given the boys other details like he had thrown the the girls purses up in a tree. Salinas took the the boys to the park to see if they could find the purses, no luck. So it was decided to bring in Lucas and see what he actually knew. And then the strangest thing happened, Lucas informs the detectives he didn’t have anything to do with the murders but if he did he explained to them how he would have done it a, he explains how he would have cut the fence drove through that area and dropped the bodies in the woods in that secluded areas. Well Salinas knows Lucas is telling him he would cut the fence exactly where the fence had been cut and some one had driven through there and remember that blue paint Salinas stated in his report that he had seen on that tree that was knocked down, well Lucas had a blue Datsun. Could this all be coincidence? I don’t know.What peaks my interest in Lucas is something else he told the police. Lucas had taken the Payne brothers to a residence on Rambler to get drugs, the brothers state it was a powder and Ralph told them it was angel dust. On July 13th before he was killed Kenneth Franks was seen on Rambler, the boy that reported it stated he thought Kenneth was going to see his girlfriend, the girl Kenneth was seeing at the time, Michelle Schillings also lived on Rambler but she did not get to see Kenneth that day. They had made plans to see each other that evening but when Jill called Kenneth he changed his plans and called Michelle and told her that some friends from out of town had come to Waco and he wanted to spend time with them, so Michelle and Kenneth decided they would get together the following day. So why was Kenneth Franks on Rambler that day/ Is it possible that James “Blinky’ Lucas and Kenneth Franks had a common drug connection on Rambler. Now for those of you that keep up with my page you will remember I have tried to track this information down. Lucas gave the police the name and address of the place he took the Payne brothers on Rambler. In the Lake Waco Murders file it states Lucas gave them this information later so this information is not in the Lake Waco Murders files. You would hope to find it in the Aggravated assault case files but guess what this information has been redacted. Hey I’ve talked to the Waco Police Department about this, with all the names and addresses mentioned in connection with both of these cases why is this name and address redacted? Well if anyone in law enforcement in Waco has this information they aren’t coming off of it. Much like the killer of Robert Freuh, good luck getting answers to that, I’ve tried. Anyway it makes you wonder whom this person is, I mean he’s apparently selling drugs to kids and apparently very dangerous drugs like PCP (angel dust) so why would law enforcement be protecting him? More answers I just can’t find the answers to!!! So what does this have to do with James Lucas and the Lake Waco Murders? It made me think or wonder is it possible that through this drug connection on Rambler, one shared by Lucas and Kenneth Franks, James Lucas heard details of the murders and Lucas in trouble of his own with the aggravated assault and possibly further legal trouble, since he had made sexual advances toward an underage boy, thought by helping the police it would help him and he gave them information but in doing so he knew being a homosexual a whole new bleak world of gay bashing would come crashing down on him if he came straight out and gave up those same drug connections? And is it possible the reason we are left with so many questions and law enforcement seems not to care is because for whatever reason they are protecting the party or parties that could provide us with the answers? I’ll leave that alone for now and get back to green and white trucks. So that’s pretty much all on James Lucas but it does bring back the cut fence and with anyone with an open mind you would have to consider the idea more than one vehicle was used at some point during this whole crime and of coarse there are questions. The first one is; did the Waco Police at any time try to match the tire tracks photographed by Special Investigator Stanley to the vehicles owned by any of the likely suspects? I don’t see anywhere that they did this and unfortunately this looks like how the case was handled right from the beginning, the Waco Police Department as a whole just didn’t take things further, didn’t take the next logical step. If they got a piece of information or actually a physical piece of evidence if they liked it they would check it out but a lot of stuff they just ignored or bagged and tagged and threw in a room or on a shelf somewhere, never to been seen again. And does anyone really wonder why there are still so many questions? When I started this little tirade I mentioned that there were a couple things the ladies stated in their video that I should commend them on, the first being they realize the importance of the white truck and now the other thing. At some point in their discussion about this truck one of the ladies points out in at least in one of his many statements Gilbert Melendez admits they left the park but he doesn’t know where they went. I would point out this would exactly match what Josephine Scionti told the police Clifford Oliver had told her back in December 1982.. Yes Gilbert was confused about exactly what happened on many occasions and it could be for any number of reasons. But since this was Gilbert’s position in his later statements and he does say he doesn’t know where they went, I would have to ask if he still didn’t know when he was making these statements in 1984 how would he have known how to get back to the crime scene the night after the murders? We know of coarse he didn’t, he and Tony both testified they returned to Koehne park and this was prearranged. Call me crazy but this doesn’t make any sense at all, you planned for David to walk out in the park probably covered in blood not knowing whom might be there and see you? Really But we know they went back to Koehne and they were seen and by whom? Whom testified to seeing the white truck at Koehne Park late that night? Todd Childers and Clifford Oliver and whom was with Todd and Clifford; John Arnett Jr, the Melendez’ younger brother. And what vehicle were these guys in? They were apparently in Todd Childers green Dodge truck. Are we starting to form a picture in our heads? I hope so but maybe we need to get into the statements and testimony of all these people. To Be Continued…..

    Like

  10. I don’t have much time tonight but I wanted to get back into this before this train of thought got off track, well it probably has jumped off track already. Anyway there is a major problem with any vehicle that has been mentioned in connection with this crime whether it’s Spence’s Malibu, Gilbert’s truck, Bishop’s truck or Harper’s van, none of the vehicles revealed any physical evidence that could be connected to the case, not any that were tested like Spence’s Malibu, Deeb’s Triumph, Harper’s van, Gilbert’s truck and then we have some vehicles that were never tested; Clifford Oliver’s Pontiac, the Gutierrez brothers’ car, Todd Childers’ truck and that is never going to change. We will never get any evidence from those vehicles, unfortunately all we can hope for is for some one that was in one of those vehicles and is still alive will one day tell us what they know. So what does that leave us with? With nothing else In the end it comes down to the stories of two men; Anthony and Gilbert Melendez. And as we all know the merits of those stories are the subject of contentious debate. Then we have the multiple statements, seven from Gilbert and two from Anthony like this case needed any more versions and variations. I usually don’t delve into the testimony of the brothers, it’s graphic and gut wrenching and I feel I don’t need to drag the victims’ loved ones through those horrors again, I am immeasurably indebted and greatly appreciate the time, effort and support they have afforded me over the past few years. But unfortunately delving into those horrendous details at times can’t be avoided. When I see videos like the ones I am being critical of now or other new articles that pop up here and there and I see some of the same old lies and rumors, it makes me wonder where are these people getting their information. And all these accounts have one common thread, they question Truman Simons and Vic Feazell or the D.A.’s office in general. Which always leads me to the question, if you were the D.A. and you had the final decision on how to proceed with this case what would you have done? You had three choices. I guess I need to qualify this, what would you have done after you got Gilbert’s first confession or maybe even any of the first three he gave in the spring of 1983 and you knew he was lying? Option one; you take the deal off the table, shelve the statements/confessions for now and wait for more evidence or information knowing that day may never come. We know or we should know his was Vic Feazell’s initial reaction. During his own trial for some of the things he did while he was D.A., Vic Feazell was questioned exactly about this; why after he had gotten the confession/statement from Gilbert Melendez in March 1983 why did it take him so long to charge anyone or even ask for a Grand Jury? Vic’s answer was very simple; he was trying to find more evidence or information and he admits after that spring he didn’t get anymore evidence or information, so he had to proceed with what he had. We can also see in this chain of events this is when Vic starts to change his mind about using jailbird testimony, something he had been opposed to from the beginning but in September 1983 he’s asking all the inmates that said they had heard David talking about the murders to make hand written statements, I would remind everyone that it wasn’t just statements from the seven that would later testify, there were about two dozen, the D.A.’s office went through them and decided what ones they felt were the most believable. So if you were the D.A. that could have been one of your options to just wait it out but we already can see how that worked out.. Option number two you can again quash the deal but proceed to bring charges against Gilbert and use his own confession/statement against him. Now with that you would have a very weak case and no matter how elegant of an orator you are, hell you could get James Earl Jones or Morgan Freeman to read Gilbert’s statement to the jury it still would not have the impact as Gilbert getting on the stand and telling the story in his own way as someone being there. And either way you would still be stuck with the lies and inconsistencies in that statement and Gilbert would not have to take the stand. That’s the worst of both worlds in effect the statement is useless and you lose the option to have the jury hear a first hand account. Which would leave us with the third and final option and the one Vic Feazell finally decided on, go a head and make a deal with Gilbert, try to get as much truth out of him as you can, you just need enough to convince the jury he was there, so let him tell his story with some lies and inconsistencies because you know the details he does give up will have an effect on the jury. So if you were the D.A. what choice would you have made, what would have been your final decision? I think Vic Feazell made the right one and I know that decision leaves us with a lot of questions but what else could he have done? We have to remember what kind of people he was dealing with. I know some people will point to the discrepancies in the testimonies of the brothers as evidence or proof they are making up their stories or were coached or fed information or told what to say, I would say the total opposite is true, yes there are parts where they are clearly lying, I believe it is just a simple case of them trying to minimize their involvement and I think when we actually get to the testimony that will be clear to see. To me the discrepancies show that the D.A. allowed them to just tell their story however they felt they wanted to he didn’t drill them for the answers he wanted. I think there is one fact that clearly shows this and again it’s one of the things that leads to heated debate but I also believe a lot of people don’t understand the facts or the timeline and fail to see the truth. In any of Gilbert’s statement and testimony and Anthony’s statements and testimony there is no mention of Gilbert killing anyone and no one not Truman Simons or anyone from the D.A.’s office told him he ever had to admit to doing so. Then when Anthony decided to make his statements he is told he has to admit he actually did some of the stabbing at least to one of the girls. Anthony tried to make a big deal about this and his supporters followed suit, he argued how Simons or the D.A. forced him to admit something he hadn’t done. The only problem with that is by the time Anthony made his statement Gilbert had already made at least one statement where he says Anthony killed one of the girls. So when this demand was put on Anthony it wasn’t because the prosecution was trying to get him to lie and admit to something he didn’t do, they knew he had done so. Again it simply looks like they, Vic Feazell or the D.A.’s office, were tired of playing games with these clowns if you want to make a deal you have to give us this and Anthony complies. And what that clearly shows is the prosecution didn’t try to feed Anthony any information or tell him he had to say this or that, Anthony and Gilbert disagree on which girl Anthony stabbed but the brothers are both allowed to tell their version of events in front of the jury. That’s not Truman Simons, Vic Feazell or Ned Butler concocting a story that’s at least one of the brothers trying to deny anyway he can his own involvement, by his own hand, of taking a life. The testimony of both brothers will bare this out. So I plan to post some of the brothers testimony, I’m still trying to figure the best way to do it. I was thinking maybe just post their full testimony but that is too long; Gilbert’s testimony in Spence’s trial is over 200 pages long, his testimony in Deeb’s trial is about 150 pages long, Anthony’s testimony in David’s trial is about 175 pages long. I would like to just get into their versions of the actually crimes, without some of the other information and all the objections and hopefully be able to do that in a few paragraphs. I think you will be able to see even with all the discrepancies the brothers are in essence telling the same story, telling a story from a person that was there. I would point out we hear a lot about David Spence’s first trial and the problems with it and what some of the members of the jury thought, they didn’t hear from the Melendez brothers. We don’t hear as much from the jurors that sat through the second trial and got to hear Anthony and Gilbert’s story. I would like to post this testimony sometime this week but it looks like I’m going to be rather busy the next few days, so I will try to get to it as soon as I can.

    Like

  11. Well, I decided I think the best way to go about this is to go through the testimony little by little, in small doses. I wanted to get through it in a few paragraphs but who am I trying to kid, you could write volumes just on the brothers’ testimony. Before I get started I should address a few issues that I know are bound to come up. First off, the brothers lied, hell just about everybody connected to this case lied about something at one time or another but as the old adage goes a good lie needs to be accompanied by a little bit of the truth. Gilbert Melendez was aware of this and testified as much. During cross examination Gilbert tells Spence’s attorney he mixed in a little bit of the truth with the lies to make it sound good, that’s not verbatim but it’s pretty close. If anyone would like to see it verbatim just let me know and I will look it up and post it. So that leaves us with the major problem on how do my decipher the truth or separate the truth from the lies, unfortunately there isn’t any surefire method chiseled in stone. There are behavioral traits and patterns we can trace, especially when we are dealing with the criminal mind but even with that we are left far short of being 100% accurate. Really in the end it just comes down to your gut feelings and obviously each individual’s gut is going to tell them something different. So there are lies and we have to make what we will from those lies.

    Secondly, I doubt most of us have read all of Gilbert Melendez statements, I know I haven’t and I know there is some confusion about the number of statements and/or some of the things that are referred to as statements and if they are are “technically” statements. The most common number thrown out there is seven, and I have to admit I’m still a little confused on the facts here, anyway that number looks to include things, tapes and documents that really aren’t statements per se. Example before Gilbert made his first “statement” on March 26, 1983 he had a conversation with David Spence, he was telling Spence he was going to cooperate and gave David his reasoning for doing so. Unbeknownst to Gilbert and I would guess David this conversation was recorded. After Gilbert lied in his first statements of March and April of 83 the D.A. pulled off the table the immunity deal they had agreed to with Gilbert and with that Gilbert decided he no longer wanted to cooperate and wanted to recant. Fine, the State still could use his statements and not only that they reveal the have the tape of that conversation between Gilbert and David and they make it part of the record and I think that is dated in May of 83, that’s not when the discussion took place, that would have taken place back in the beginning of March, I believe the May date is just when it officially became part of the record or file. Then there was the letter Gilbert wrote to David telling him that He, Gilbert, and David should just take the rap and leave the others out of it, Gilbert wrote it in a way so in case law enforcement got a hold of it they wouldn’t know whom the others were that Gilbert was referring to. Well law enforcement did get a hold of this letter and confronted Gilbert with it and Gilbert spilled the beans and in doing so gave up his brother and Muneer Deeb. I don’t know the exact date all this occurred I know Gilbert always claimed he never gave up his brother until after he was arrested. I assume as I guess most people would that Gilbert is saying he didn’t give up his brother until he was arrested for the Lake Waco Murders which would have been after the Grand Jury handed down the indictments against the four at the end, December 1983. Well Anthony had been arrested before that but that was for the burglary and sexual assault that took place in Corpus Christi, Anthony was picked up or turned himself in for that in August of 1983 and held there until he was charged with the Lake Waco Murders and returned to Waco. So the exact date and details are a little fuzzy and confusing on that. But these to items; the taped conversation and Gilbert’s explanation of the letter are usually bundled together with the other statements. So does that mean these are part of the seven or are there seven other statements, I’m not sure, all I’ve ever seen and actually the only ones that are mentioned during the trials, other than the two things I just alluded to, are four statements; March 26, March 26/27 – apparently the same statement the first just a recording the second a typed and signed transcript of that tape, another confession in early April, I can’t remember the exact date but I can look it up, then we have some document dated May 7 but again that might just be the tape of the conversation from early March between Gilbert and David, I have never seen this document only seen it referenced during the trials and then we have the final 16 page typed up statement of January 10, 1985 and for most part that’s the statement the prosecution is going by during the trials. And then there is the Statement Gilbert gave after David’s trial started in 1984 and Gilbert decided to start coming clean and the State was willing to make another deal with him but not immunity. In that statement he gives a lot more detail and that statement becomes the foundation of the much more in depth statement of January 1985. So to keep things clear in those first few statements in the spring of 83 Gilbert isn’t giving up anything, not his brother or that his truck was used, again as he would testify to he was hedging his bets. Simply put it’s like this, Gilbert returned to Waco in March of 1983 to testify against Spence in the aggravated sexual assault case, while he was there Truman Simons got to him, hey like it or not, right or wrong Truman didn’t go by the book but he got results, no one can deny that. Anyway he goes to Gilbert and tells him hey David Spence is talking about the Lake Waco Murders and he’s brought up your name, who ever talks first is going to get a nice deal the rest of you knuckleheads are getting a one way ticket to Huntsville, wisely Gilbert decides to be the first one to talk, again he states this in his testimony, he wanted to talk before Spence did. And he also explains he didn’t give up the details just in case things didn’t go as Truman said they would and Gilbert could argue he just made everything up. I would point this out that Gilbert stated this in 1985 and that’s exactly what he started doing in 1993 after Deeb got off and things didn’t go as Truman said they would.

    Now the reason I bring all that up even before I get to the actual testimony is for those that have seen or heard those early statements you may notice Anthony Melendez’ testimony at times is very similar to those statements Gilbert would later say weren’t true. I know the they are innocent crew will jump on this that this shows Anthony was fed the information he would later testify to, I would caution against this line of thinking there is a difference between feeding some one information and sharing with them information you already have, I know it’s a fine line but we are splitting hairs here. I could see Truman or anybody working the case at the point when Anthony is finally in custody and telling him his brother has giving him up which entices Anthony to cooperate and then sharing Gilbert’s early statements and it’s that he is shown the early statements that tells me they weren’t trying to feed him information and that it was something it sounds like Truman would have done. Hey Anthony your brother gave you up, I’ll show you his statements but he doesn’t show Anthony the statements where Gilbert gave him up and details Anthony’s involvement, no if Anthony wants a deal he will have to explain his involvement in his own words not just go by what Gilbert said and that’s what we get. There are parts of the testimony that are almost spot on identical and then there are other parts that are so different you can’t help but to question it. So I know that will be an issue, those that believe Spence and the brothers are innocent will point to this as one of their reasons; the testimony doesn’t fit or they were fed this information. People, like myself, whom believe they are guilty will say not so fast grease lighting these are lifelong criminals looking for any wiggle room they can find to allow them to wiggle away from any responsibility if the chance presents it self. Honestly it’s probably not that simple, it’s not totally one way or the other, most likely it’s some where in the middle. Some parts the brothers made up, some parts they just plain forget or just didn’t observe from their point of view and then there are parts when they are actually telling the truth. I would advise try to keep an open mind and as I said before follow your gut, what does your gut tell you, if you were sitting in the jury box how would the brothers’ stories impacted you?

    I promise to get to their testimony a.s.a.p.!!!

    Like

  12. And finally to the testimony of Anthony and Gilbert Melendez. I’m going to start with a little bit of Anthony’s testimony. He states on the day in question, July 13, 182, he left work in Bryan, Texas with his cousin around noon to return to Waco to score some crank (speed, methamphetamine, dope). He estimates he got back to Waco between 2:00 p.m. and 3:00 p.m. Once back in Waco he heads to the Armadillo Club, which is close to where he is staying with his cousin, to try to score some dope. Anthony states he hung around for about two hours and had a couple beers but didn’t have any luck scoring anything so he decides he is going to check out a couple friends that might be able to hook him up. I have to stop here for a minute, this is exactly why I won’t be able to finish this in a few paragraphs, you can pick apart every sentence of testimony. In this instance, Anthony gives the name of the friend or at least one of the friends he looked up; Tommy Walker. And here’s the thing I see Tommy Walker testified but I have never seen that testimony and this is the only other time I have seen that name associated with this case. But as we will see Anthony states the friends he checked out were not home so he never scored any crack and just gave up looking. Makes me wonder if this was the case what could have Tommy Walker testified to, that he doesn’t know if Anthony or Anthony and David and/or Gilbert stopped by because he wasn’t home, that doesn’t help prove anything for anybody. The only thing I think would be useful and he could testify to is that he did see Anthony that day. And on rather Anthony scored any dope, he testifies he didn’t but Clifford Oliver and Todd Childers both testified when they got up with David later that night he had crank and in a decent enough quantity that he shared it with them and David really wasn’t the sharing kind of guy. Now I guess I could try to look up this Tommy Walker but do you know how many Tommy or Thomas Walkers there are just in Texas alone, I could find a Tommy Walker everyday for the next few years and still not find the one I’m looking for and that’s even if he is still alive. So if anyone can recall what this Tommy Walker testified to, please enlighten me. All I can say is if Tommy testified to seeing Anthony that day that leaves a rain cloud of biblical proportions hanging over the Tony didn’t return to Waco that day parade. But back to the testimony. So Anthony starts walking and is heading down 15th Street when he sees David Spence sitting outside of his mother’s house. David tells Anthony he is going to see Gilbert and asks Anthony if he would like to come along, Anthony states he hadn’t seen his brother in awhile and decides to go with David. They jump in David’s car and stop at the store on the corner to get some beer, Anthony doesn’t give the name of the store but we all know he is talking about the Rainbow Drive-In. And again I need to interrupt the testimony, to me one of the biggest questions that remain is; did any of the victims have any contact with their eventual killers prior to their fateful meeting in the park and did the girls go into the Rainbow Drive-In as Muneer Deeb said they did and if so when? I put forward this, the testimony will bare out a pretty good estimated time when at least Anthony and David went into the Rainbow Drive-In and fortunately we also have a pretty good idea where the girls were approximately at the same time. Jill and Raylene were getting checks cashed at the Piggly Wiggly, the cashier, Joyce Breiten the wife of Ronnie, told the police the girls came in approximately at 5:00 p.m. The address of the Piggly Wiggly was 1711 Herring Avenue, the Address of the Rainbow Drive-In 1423 Herring Avenue, only three blocks away. I would think if the girls were already in the neighborhood this would have been the most logical time for them to have stopped into Deeb’s store, maybe the girls stopped to try and get their checks cashed, if they didn’t stop for some other reason. As the testimony and other statements show at least Jill and Raylene were in the same vicinity and at approximately the same time as their killers, I guess I will leave it at that for now and get back to Anthony’s testimony . So Anthony had just gotten up with David, stopped by “the store on the corner” and gotten beer and according to Anthony this is when they check out a couple of his friends to see if he can get any crank but none of his friends were home so he just blew it off. After this they pick up Gilbert on 18th Street. After they pick up Gilbert they drive around a little bit drinking beer and smoking weed and it’s at this point they start heading to the Lake. Anthony says he believes they are headed to Airport Park because that’s where he usually hangs out when he goes to the lake. At this point the three amigos stop at the hill top store to buy another 12 pack of beer and it is after this they drive into Koehne Park. Again I need to pause the testimony for a little of my own commentary. How David and the Melendez brothers ran into Jill, Raylene and Kenneth is one of the biggest differences in their testimonies, so at least one of them is lying. And I know some will point to this as the brothers having to make up their stories because they are innocent, I would argue the opposite; the brothers were trying to deny any prior knowledge of the events that would unfold later, they had to make up this part to avoid admitting they knew anything had been planned and I believe their further testimony can bring this to light. Some might ask; if Anthony was just going off Gilbert’s early statements why would he have differed so vastly on this crucial point. The only answer I have for that is we can dig only so deep into the criminal mind. So in Anthony’s testimony he states they (David and the brothers) drove through the park , went down around the circle and then they were driving to the other side of the park towards the boat ramp and beach area and this is when the Orange Pinto pulled in and David flagged it down. Wait a minute, you know there are so many questions just with that one statement, ‘David flagged them down”, really? Ok was it just by chance David waved down that one car? You know where I’m leaning on that one. Or did David wave that car down on purpose? If you say yes to the later then the next obvious question is; why, followed by if he recognized that car and the people inside, other than sometime earlier that day when could he have seen Jill Montgomery, Raylene Rice and Kenneth Franks in that Orange Pinto? Anthony continues the blonde hair girl was driving and the boy was in the front passenger seat, they stop and the boy and David talk, the boy leaning over the drivers’s seat to talk to David. And then David pulls the car around and they follow the kids to the circle. That is Anthony’s testimony on how they got up with the kids. Now I think I should switch over to Gilbert’s testimony at this point.

    For most part Gilbert’s testimony is in line with Anthony’s on how, when and where they got together. Gilbert is just a little more precise on somethings. He states he got off work about 4:30 p.m. and had been walking for about 30 minutes and David and Anthony picked him up at the corner of 18th Street and Colcord Avenue. This helps us with the timeline a little more than Anthony does and I believe it also shows us that David and Gilbert had some contact and probably had made some plans because David knew to wait until that time of day, after 4:30 p.m. to go pick up Gilbert. Gilbert states he hadn’t seen David for a couple weeks. In his testimony Anthony states he was under the impression David knew where Gilbert was staying at the time. Anyway they pick Gilbert up, he says David and Anthony are already drinking but they stop right there on the corner where they picked him up and went into that store and bought another 12 pack and then they drove around a bit drinking beer and smoking weed. Gilbert said he thought maybe they stopped again somewhere to buy another 12 pack later but wasn’t sure. This would be different than what Anthony states, he testified that they only two 12 packs were bought, one when he first got up with David and then right before they got to Koehne Park, Gilbert’s testimony is they bought 3 or 4 12 packs before they met up with the kids. But Gilbert has them going into Koehne Park and driving through not seeing anyone he knew and they leave and that’s when they go to the hill top store and buy another 12 pack. And in Gilbert’s version they return to Koehne Park and this is when they see the kids, their car is already parked and Jill, Raylene and Kenneth are already out of the car and are by one of the picnic tables. I have to point out with Gilbert saying he didn’t see anyone he knew and then leaving and then coming back Vic Feazell, I guess being kind of a religious man was hoping for a miracle from God in the way of Gilbert telling the truth asked him was he looking for anyone but of coarse Gilbert says no. So that’s Gilbert’s testimony up to the point where they meet the kids and you can see in essence it’s the same story that Anthony told, there are some slight variations but nothing I would really go crazy over, up until they actually run into the kids. And as we can see with Vic’s question, there are hints, well I’m not sure if they should be called hints but just little things in their testimony that point to them knowing much more than they are willing to admit. Now Vic Feazell wasn’t going to push them hard on these areas, he didn’t want to damage his witnesses, so he might ask a question here and there but for most part he would just let it go. In the end the testimony just leaves us wondering, that’s why we need to consider other facts and testimony to maybe find the truth.

    One thing that has stuck out to me is, when did the Jill, Raylene and Kenneth get picked up from Koehne Park by whomever? I don’t think it could have been anytime before 7:30 p.m.. We know Mr Franks told Kenneth he had to be home by midnight but this was not the case with the girls. Jill’s mother told the investigators that she was expecting Jill home before or by dark, don’t remember the exact wording, she didn’t give a time but we know it got dark about 9:00 p.m. Raylene’s father didn’t even know Raylene had taken Jill to Waco until the next morning so he wasn’t any help and her mother never talked to any law enforcement officer, so that left Raylene’s younger sister to provide the answer and she states Raylene had told their mother she was planning on being back in Waco about 9:00 p.m. and that she was going to eat dinner with Jill and her mother and should be home about 10:00 p.m., so Mrs. Shaw, Jill’s mother and Renelle, Raylene’s sister are telling us the same thing the girls should have been back in Waxahachie about 9:00 p.m.. It’s more than a hour drive from Waco to Waxahachie, so by the time the kids were being picked up by whomever from Koehne Park shouldn’t the girls have already been on their way? Would they just go along with some one they didn’t know at the last minute? I don’t believe so. So if they had planned on meeting some one why did they wait until it was probably past the time they were planning to leave to do so? I think Mr. Franks provides the answer. I believe Jill and Raylene did have contact with their killers sometime around 5:00 p.m. somewhere in the neighborhood of the store, David’s mother’s house and the Methodist Home, where at least her friend Ginger Yoby had planned on seeing Jill and Jill still had some belongings there she had planned to pick up but no one from the Home saw her there that day and it was at this time the girls made plans to get up with David and whomever later but these plans included bringing Kenneth and Gayle Kelly along. I think “later” would have been sometime after 6:00 p.m. when David either picked up Christine Juhl from work, as Deeb’s partner Karem testified he did or dropped her off to work, Christine testified she worked that night. Meeting sometime after 6:00 would have given the girls plenty of time to do whatever they thought they were going to do and still give them time to get back home in by 9:00. But that’s not what happen, Jill calls Kenneth but he’s not home. Mr. Franks states Jill called between 6:00 and 6:30 and he tells her Kenneth just went to grab some burgers for them for dinner, she can call back a little later. Kenneth not being home when Jill first calls delays the girls. David and the Melendez brothers would not been aware of this and go to the park as planned and when they get there they drive through and don’t see the kids nor Orange Pinto and according to Gilbert decide to leave and get more beer. I have to ask because I’ve never been to Waco, if David and the Melendez brothers were at the hill top store could they have seen the Orange Pinto drive by or even pull into Koehne Park? Either way again going by Gilbert’s testimony they go back to Koehne Park and that’s when they meet up with the kids. So that’s the brothers’ testimony up to the point where they get up with Jill, Raylene and Kenneth. I’m going to stop here for now, there’s a lot to think about in just that small amount of testimony. So we have the weekend to let all this soak in and think about, I hope others will share their thoughts, I’ll be back next week with more.

    Like

    • The question you asked about the store=
      If it was the store on Lakeshore Drive (on the hill), the men could have seen the orange pinto drive by on way to the entrance to Koehne Park. Store was a short distance from the park.

      Liked by 1 person

  13. Trying to get back into the testimony but I need to back track for a moment. Stating anything the brothers said are facts would be a serious stretch and since I’m the one that continues to rant about others bending the facts and truth I need to hold myself to the same standard. The glaring problem with any of the brothers testimony, statements, confessions or whatever is there are so many versions. So it’s kind of like multiple choice when trying to decipher the truth, it becomes more of an interpretation of all the information that’s been put forth and the downfall to that, and I admit I’m as guilty as anyone with this, is if we already have and idea in our head we are going to be drawn to the information and/or statements that fit that idea and make sense to us. Sometimes I need to tell myself slow down Speed Gonzales you’ll miss the real cheese. Also I need to point out that we can’t dissect the brothers’ testimony without getting into their previous statements and picking apart those as well, the defense attorneys at least tried to. And we also have to look at other testimony, statements and information that is out there to even come close to anything resembling the truth or a fact. So having said that I need to backtrack on a few things I posted last week. I will start with where Gilbert was allegedly picked up by David and Anthony and I guess we have to question if they picked him up or if there was another scenario altogether. This is the reason their testimony is so difficult to get into, I feel the headaches coming on already.

    Like

  14. Bkl67: I can remember the two brothers testifying. Their mannerisms and body language screamed that they were both trying to remember what they had been coached to say. You must know that I had been “drinking the koolade” at that time so I was trying very hard to believe them. However, deep inside I was thinking, “These guys are full of IT”. Especially Tony. He came across like the “little boy who was a slow learner in school”.

    Like

    • Mrs. Thompson, again thank you for your insights and I know this is one of the things we disagree on. I would argue and hope I can bring to light to some degree the opposite, yes the brothers were full of it, they were lying but they were lying to minimize their involvement, specifically any prior knowledge or planning on their part. Remember they already had their deals in place, deals where they expected to serve only about 10 years, yeah right 10 years for a triple homicide with aggravating circumstances; sexual assault, torture and most likely post mortem injuries inflicted upon the bodies of the victims. Mrs. Thompson it’s a lot easier going in front of a parole board looking for leniency sticking to your story it was just a chance encounter and that is the story you have to tell on the stand. I know I’ve been slow getting into all this but living in a summer resort area this is the busy time of year. I am going to try to get into tonight at some point.

      Like

  15. Hoping to get somewhere with this tonight, I left off stating I needed to back track so let me get right to that. I stated both brothers agreed that Gilbert was picked up on 18th Street, that is inaccurate, surely not a fact and other information provided would question if Gilbert was picked up or even walking at all. Here is what the brothers stated in their direct testimony on the subject. In Spence’s trial Gilbert testified only that it was at an intersection but then he states we started down 18th Street, so that implies that’s where he was when he was presumably picked up. But in Deeb’s trial he actually says it was close to 15th and Colcord and he gives us the extra detail that there was a store right there at the corner and they stopped and got beer right there and then they headed down 18th. Funny thing is that is the same location Anthony says he and David bought beer but it was before they picked up Gilbert. Now Anthony doesn’t really give the location where he and David picked up Gilbert, what he says, again this is in his direct testimony, that he was walking down 15th Street, saw David on his (David’s) porch and they ran down to the store on the corner and bought beer, not naming the store. Later, when he is asked what store they went to he states it was the store on the corner of 15th and Colcord just as Gilbert said but Anthony states it was before Gilbert was with them. He does agree with Gilbert that they did get another 12 pack after they picked him up but Anthony says it was the Hill Top store right before they went into Koehne Park. Gilbert also states they went to this store to buy beer but says it was in between their trips to Koehne I have to add that another witness that testified would also mention Colcord and 15th but not so much in a direct manner, I will have to get into later. We see the streets 15th, 18th and Colcord mentioned and without much effort we can find the significance of 15th, the brothers knew David had lived there, they had stayed there with him and Colcord, Anthony tells us that is one of the places he went to score some crank, Tommy Walker lived off the corner of 12th and Colcord. So what was the significance of 18th Street, when you find that you get to the much bigger question and when you can answer that I believe you will start to see how some of the other pieces start to come together. And since this was just brought up, I would offer this when law enforcement or attorneys feed a witness information or a story they usually do so with the intent on using that information during the trial, in this case and this instance; being why would the brothers mention 18th Street, the prosecution didn’t make any attempt to bring to light any significance to this location even though they knew what it was as did the defense and that they didn’t argue this point is even more telling, they knew it didn’t help their case. So what is the significance of 18th Street? Don’t you love when people answer a question with another question, well that’s what I’m about to do! Where did Gilbert live at the time of the murders? Maybe asking where he lived is a little misnomer, meaning that he might have slept and/or stayed, put his head down at another location but he had rented an apartment also, where was that apartment located? It was never nailed down during the trials. Actually we have to go back to the earlier statements of the brothers to get this answer. We often hear about the variations and discrepancies in Gilbert’s multiple statements but we rarely hear about the variations and discrepancies in Anthony’s two statements and his early versions of the events can really open the eyes. These would be versions he would later deny or state weren’t true on the stand. I would have to ask were the brothers’ earlier versions closer to the truth than we have been led to believe?

    Like

  16. I just stated that it was never nailed down where this apartment was that Gilbert had rented, actually it is only referred to once during the trials. Where did Gilbert say he was staying at the time of the murders? Of coarse he gave different answers in each trial, in one trial he stated he stayed with his grandmother and in the other trial he said he just bounced around staying with different friends, none which he named. I need to point out another thing about the brothers’ testimony, they don’t give direct responses to many of the questions they are asked, there is an ambiguity to many of their replies, it’s by design it’s intentional on their part, it leaves them some wiggle room, it can leave confusion. That style of delivery is referred to as con talk or jive talk, a con will tell you something and you might think he is really telling you something but then when you think about it you realize he did a lot of talking but he really didn’t tell you anything, I’m pretty sure we all know people like this, the brothers being criminals and liars were well versed in this, give a little but don’t give too much detail, again we see this through out the brothers testimony. I have been reading the brothers testimony over and over again over the last couple weeks and there is one reply Gilbert gives that I’ve read at least 20 times and I still don’t know exactly what he is saying happened, I mentioned this one time but again it is through out their testimony. With that I would question what might look like the brothers not remembering as being that and not the uncertainty of their answers they are doing for their own benefit and they are well aware of this. Luckily as with most lifetime criminals they aren’t the brightest people in the world and they let slip details because they don’t realize the significance that detail can provide. So what did Anthony say about where Gilbert lived at the time. Remember in his direct testimony Anthony states he and David picked up Gilbert and Vic Feazell asked him how did David know where to pick up Gilbert if Gilbert was just walking down the street. Anthony answers he thought David knew where he lived. In typical Vic fashion he allows it to go at that and doesn’t press the matter, he doesn’t want to damage his witnesses, if the defense wants to open that can of worms let them, Vic knows it won’t help their case. And we have one of those little strange quirks in this case the defense didn’t try to drill Gilbert on where this apartment was, again they knew the answer but they did go after Anthony on this issue. They straight out ask him if he knew where Gilbert was staying at the time and of coarse Anthony denies knowing and this is when the defense pull out Anthony’s confessions/statements and the picture starts to become so much clearer.

    Like

  17. Before I get into Anthony’s eye opening statements I want to get back to Gilbert’s alleged walk because facts are so hard to come by in this case I like to share them whenever I do find them. Back in 1984 and 1985 when the trials were taking place there wasn’t a thing called the internet, also known as the “information highway”, it had yet to be launched, that would happen in 1993 the same year Muneer “Lucky” Deeb became a free man and I seriously doubt if anyone in those courtrooms could have foreseen the impact the internet would have on our society. Or that a crime buff in far off Maryland that has never been to Waco could get on this information highway and let’s say look up Hillcrest Hospital, Waco Texas, this is where Gilbert stated he was painting that day and started his walk although he couldn’t recall whom he worked for, couldn’t even name any names or names of companies on his paychecks nor whom signed those paychecks. I will do this right now as I post this so I can be as accurate as possible, I chose google maps, I get a nice map of Waco, I see where the hospital is and then I look for 18th and Colcord, wow it looks like it would be a long walk especially after a long day of work, google maps provides me the distance between these two locales, since not everyone is going to drive the exact same route. Google is nice enough to provide me with what they consider are the 3 best options. The distances of those 3 options 8.6 miles, 6.9 miles and 6.6 miles. The average person can walk approximately 4 miles in an hour, I don’t know how that diminishes the longer you walk, so even with taking the shortest route Gilbert would have been walking about a hour and a half in the hot Texas summer after working all day. Really? I didn’t even check out the distance between the hospital and 15th Street and Colcord just by looking at the map I could see if Gilbert walked in that direction he would have just been adding more unneeded distance to his already strenuous workout walk from work. now I know the Melendez brothers weren’t the brightest people in the world but Gilbert couldn’t have been this stupid. He was from Waco he knew his way around he wouldn’t have added all that distance to his walk. So did Gilbert take this hour and a half journey from work? I don’t think so and we can look at Anthony’s statements to provide the answers. This would be one of those times when the stupid criminal gave away a detail he didn’t realize would reveal so much more later and the simple reason for this is Anthony didn’t know what Gilbert was going to say and vice versa, see both brothers would have done this,, give away what they thought were small insignificant details, which standing alone probably would have been but put together- BINGO!!! I want to point out one more thing in to regards where the brothers testified they bought beer; Anthony’s version He and David bought beer at the corner of 15th and Colcord but before Gilbert was with them and then bought beer at the Hill Top store after they picked up Gilbert. Gilbert sates they bought beer after he was picked up once, a little vague, at an intersection and then at the corner of !5th and Colcord, the same place Anthony mentioned. And finally Gilbert states they might have also bought another 12 pack on North 18th Street and then another 12 pack at the Hill Top store. We see the mention of 18th Street again, are we getting the picture? If not let’s go to Anthony’s statements to clear it up.

    Like

  18. I’m rambling so much I’m even losing myself!!! If I remember correctly when I left off on the testimony the defense had asked Anthony if he knew where Gilbert lived and Anthony denied knowing this and now the defense attorneys go for the statements. Before I even get into what Anthony said about where Gilbert lived at the time and how they ended up getting together, there are so many other interesting points Anthony would change during his direct testimony. One that they indeed did score some crank that day, two that he (Anthony) bought a six pack of beer before he got up with his brother and three, just for now, that Anthony didn’t pick up his brother, David and Gilbert picked him up. And where? In Anthony’s two statements we get that little ambiguity we are so use to getting with the brothers answers and of coarse different versions. In his first statement, which would have been the statement he made on June 12, 1984 when he agreed to cooperate and made the deal, Anthony states he bought a six pack of beer at the 7-11 on the corner of 18th Street and Lyle Avenue. Why was Anthony in that area, that’s where Gilbert had rented an apartment. Of coarse Anthony didn’t know the exact address but here is how he described it’s location; on the corner of 17th and Lyle close to the Piggly Wiggly. And yes that would be the same Piggly Wiggly where Jill and Raylene cashed their checks , 1711 Herring Avenue, Gilbert’s apartment was less than a block away. I know, so many possibilities so many questions. I know many of you are thinking you know exactly where I am going with this and honestly I wish I could but unfortunately we just don’t have enough to go on at the present to qualify that as the truth. The one little detail we have about a possible drug deal, which I believe the kids thought that’s what they were getting involved in was what Gayle Kelly told Mike Nicoletti when he first interviewed her on July 20,1982. The person Kenneth was planning on making the drug deal with was some one the kids would have been leery about. I can see the kids meeting up with whomever this person was in public and out in the open like the park or in a store but to go to a recently rented apartment, I don’t know. And then there is the possibility they could have drove to the apartment but never got out of the car, just so many possibilities. And think by the time anyone in law enforcement became aware of this apartment and tried to connect it to the case it was probably rented to another tenant, cleaned and maybe even painted, so much for physical evidence. Anyway Anthony tells us in this first statement it wasn’t he and David picking up Gilbert, it was David and Gilbert picking up Anthony and where was this and again we get the usual Melendez ambiguous a little confusing answer, either he was walking on Lyle toward Gilbert’s apartment or he was at Gilbert’s waiting for Gilbert to come home, Anthony is a little shaky on this detail.

    Like

  19. There is still a lack of facts with all this and I’m afraid at this point with the passage of time getting undisputed facts is a monumental challenge, this is what the Melendez brothers’ testimony leaves us that’s why I stated earlier that we have to look to others to help us find the truth. In doing so I believe we can start to see the brothers’ lies and the purpose behind those lies, again this occurs through out their testimony. I am going to skip ahead a moment to give an example. When Anthony testifies about what went on when they first met up with the kids it sounds like it was just one great party. We know that wasn’t the case, the way Anthony puts it David and the brothers were partying with Jill, Raylene and Kenneth for hours, the way he puts it Mr. Franks must have just missed them when he went riding through the park looking for them, of coarse this didn’t happen it’s almost absurd. Now someone wants to say the prosecution fed them this story, why would they do so it would weaken their already shaky timeline and they knew the autopsy could prove this was false, the kids weren’t drinking beers and smoking weed but the State didn’t try to attack this story they knew it wasn’t true, so did the defense but they didn’t try to attack it either, both sides let the lie stand because it doesn’t benefit either party, the only person who thought they would benefit from this version of events was Anthony Melendez and again it is clearly a case of him trying to deny any prior knowledge. His version is hey when we first got up with the kids everything was cool we were just partying with them we drank a few beers, smoked a few doobies, drank some more beer, then the boy asked if we wanted to smoke more weed and went in the Pinto a rolled a few more joints, we smoked those and drank a few more beers then we were started to run low on beer so David suggested we go to the store and get more, that’s Anthony’s story and it’s a load of crap, again his motivations are crystal clear and we will see this again and again.

    But getting back to Anthony’s statements versus Anthony’s testimony the defense did try to attack him on a few points, for example let’s take his polar opposite versions on rather they were able to score any crank; statement yes, testimony no. Again Anthony’s wishy washy recollection on this gives us a glimpse of his little criminal mind at work. He probably knew others that had tried to use being wasted out of your mind on drugs as a defense and thought he would give it a try, again trying to diminish his culpability, I was so wasted I didn’t know what I was doing or what I did, so at first he admits he got the crank but when some one much more intelligent explained to him that defense rarely works and usually works against the defendant, he changed his story to he didn’t get any crank. Unfortunately most of us have probably had the misfortune of getting caught drinking under the influence of alcohol, it happens, alcohol and partying are a prevalent part of our society, you do it once it’s a mistake learn your lesson and move on, continually repeat that mistake and it becomes a regret and courts start to see the repeated behavior as being callous. It’s the same thing with drug abuse and even more so because it’s a controlled substance, it’s illegal, jurors and juries in whole have a tendency to look down on such behavior, especially when a junkie gets on the stand and tries to use that as a defense, again it shows a certain callous behavior to get on the stand and say you do these drugs and in Anthony;s case he admits right on the stand he was willing to go hours out of his way to get them and then when you use them you can lose control of your actions. Anthony wisely changed his story and again the Prosecution doesn’t care one way or the other all they need from him is to admit he took part in the murders, he can say he was on drugs or not it doesn’t matter to them and again this wasn’t something the State fed Anthony, this was his own story and he was allowed to tell it anyway he wanted. But that still leaves us with the question did Anthony score any speed that day? As I said before I would love to see Tommy Walker’s testimony but even without that others might be able to shed some light on the hidden truth. Remember earlier I mentioned there was a third person that mentioned something about 15th Street and Colcord, well it was one of my favorite knuckleheads my good ole buddy Clifford Oliver. It’s time to delve back into his testimony to see how even with all his lies he can still enlighten us..

    Liked by 1 person

  20. I know I am bouncing all over the place, there’s so much I want to get to and I’m having a hard time finding the time to write and I want to get to everything. I wanted to get to Clifford Oliver for a moment, another one of Waco’s shady characters very skilled in avoiding the truth. But trying to find facts in any of Clifford’s testimony is an exercise in futility. One of the things I think is important with Clifford’s testimony is you get to see the difference in how the prosecutors handled the witnesses over time. Clifford is clearly not telling the truth, now you might not sense that during his testimony during David Spence’s first trial, the prosecution pretty much just let’s things slide, doesn’t press the witnesses too hard, you also see that with the Melendez brothers, again the D.A. doesn’t want to damage his witnesses, that’s the defenses’ job if they desire to go there. This wasn’t the case during the Grand Jury and remember during the trials that took place in 1984 and 1985 the Grand Jury testimony was still sealed, the defense didn’t have access to it and the juries in those trials never got to hear anything about it. I think anyone that is familiar with the testimony of both Clifford Oliver and Todd Childers in Spence’s first trial gets a sense these two guys are having a hard time detailing the chains of events as they are trying to state what happened, it looks as if they are just trying to account for their time and where abouts. And their stories end up being pretty close in detail to each other, neither one really could establish a concrete timeline, Todd mentioned a couple more stores they apparently stopped at to purchase beer before they were able to buy it at Zippy’s on 25th Street. Todd mentions going to a grocery store first and adds a third 7-11, Clifford just recalls stops at two 7-11’s before making it to Zippy’s. Then we get to where they went after Zippy’s, apparently they went to the girlfriend’s home of one of the other guys that was with them, Cal Frazier. Again during the trial not much detail is given and the D.A. doesn’t drill either guy for details. Both Clifford and Todd say that’s where they went and they are asked where that was, Todd answered it was only 7 or 8 blocks down the road from Zippy’s and Clifford just says it was right down the road from Zippy’s and it was left at that. I guess I should point out at this time when law enforcement, in this case the Sheriff’s office because the Waco P.D. just wasn’t interested in this information at the time, first set up an interview with Clifford Oliver in December 1982 after his girlfriend had called the Crime Stoppers Hotline and told them Clifford had shown her where the murders had occurred and that he said David Spence had told him this, Clifford missed this interview. He decided to go see Cal Frazier instead, no mention of this during the trials but Clifford is surely questioned about it during the Grand Jury. He was asked did he go to Cal’s so they could get their stories straight, Clifford replies, no he just wanted to check with Cal to make sure he didn’t forget anything that happened that night. Despite whatever terminology Clifford chose to use yes he was getting his story straight and yes the prosecutors know he’s lying. At one point Ned Butler tells Clifford he knows someone is lying and Clifford better get it straight. Also during the Grand Jury Vic Feazell tries to get Clifford to nail down exactly where they went to see Cal’s girlfriend and Vic actually gives the girls name, so he obviously knows where she lives. The girls name was Julie Jenkins and Clifford never does come up with where she lived. After many questions from Vic the closest he comes is it was between 25th and 18th Street. One of the things that sticks out about this exchange is Clifford claims he isn’t good at naming the side streets or cross streets, for instance he knew Zippy’s was on the corner of 25th street but he couldn’t name the other street, ok that’s not a big deal, Vic tells him it’s Gorman Avenue. But it’s what Clifford says about where they went next that should raise some red flags. Clifford states they headed to David’s, more precisely David’s mother’s house, a place he has been a number of times and knew where it was, it was on the corner of 15th and Cumberland, but he said it was off Colcord and he thought 15th Street, if you missed it Clifford just contradicted himself just a few sentences earlier he said he knew the numbered streets but wasn’t good with the side streets. Why? The answer I think is quite simple, Clifford was trying to keep his story straight, Clifford is confusing himself, things he should be able to answer without any problem he is having difficulty with because he is so focused on avoiding the answers he doesn’t want to give. To be fair, if we try to trace Clifford’s route, sometime he seems incapable of doing, we could say he went down Gorman Avenue, which ends at 18th Street, taken a left went the few blocks and turned on to Colcord , Cumberland was just a few more blocks down on 18th and was just a few blocks from Colcord. The question is why couldn’t Clifford just say this. I would say because it didn’t happen. I don’t know where Julie Jenkins lived, it would be interesting to find out but I wouldn’t be surprised if she lived somewhere close to Lyle Avenue. Clifford and Todd were making up a reason they were in that neighborhood. They were trying to hide where they actually went, in their testimonies they both state they ended up at David’s, which is true to some degree but when did they actually get to David’s? I know one person that questions that and that would be Christine Juhl, the girlfriend that lived with David, that she questions when Clifford and he friends came to the apartment should raise some eyebrows. I know Christine is not the most reliable person but there are a couple things she has been consistent about over the decades, first that she remembers seeing David and Clifford together at some point that night, she is still not absolutely clear on this. She has also maintained over the years Clifford , his friends and David woke her up the next morning to take her to work to get more beer. Do you honestly think David cared if Christine made it to work that morning? No, he just wanted more beer. And the other thing Christine has been consistent with is she’s not sure if David or David and Clifford and his friends stayed at the apartment that night. So if the party crew didn’t spend the night partying at David and Christine’s apartment where did they go? Let’s take a look back at Gilbert’s early statements, the ones where he didn’t mention that Anthony was involved nor his white truck. In these statements Gilbert says he and David went back to Gilbert’s place drank beer and talked. In Gilbert’s testimony he states he dropped Anthony off somewhere on North 18th Street, so Anthony could walk back to his cousins’ on McFerrin, remind you Gilbert’s place was only one block off 18th. And remember that detail Anthony made in his first statement that I said held some importance; he bought beer at the 7-11 at 18th and Lyle and walked down to his brothers, well here is the significance with that. Remind you Gilbert was never clear where he exactly lived, for most part he was very vague. But when asked where he disposed of the tarps he had used to cover the bodies and the bloody clothes, which bloody clothes we will have to get into later, Gilbert gave his usual ambiguous response; I was driving towards work, I went a little ways and went to the 7-11 and put the bucket that contained the bloody clothes and tarp in the dumpster. Gilbert’s “little ways” was like a block, the 7-11 he stopped at was the one Anthony mentioned at the corner of 18th and Lyle and that would tell us where Gilbert’s place was and probably where those involved got together afterwards. Remember in his first statement Anthony claims he did score some crank, in their testimony both Clifford and Todd claim when they got up with David he had crank and at least Clifford and Cal partook. As I said before so much comes together if you know where Gilbert’s apartment is and connect it to other pieces of the puzzle, like where did Gilbert have to drive to get his truck, Bosqueville or just to 17th and Lyle, think about the difference in the amount in time that would have taken. If Gilbert had dropped off his truck at Calvin Nesbitt’s before the crimes wouldn’t he have taken out the supplies he needed to work before doing so but we see by his own admission his work supplies were still in the truck on the morning of the 14th. And what about that roughly 7 mile distance to and from the job site, do we really believe Gilbert was walking that? I doubt it, he was using his truck. His Lyle Avenue apartment and white truck are the keys and Gilbert knew this and that’s why he was so hesitant to mention either.

    Like

  21. Still bouncing around, that’s why it’s so hard to go over the testimony in the proper chronological order, something comes up that you have to delve further into and in a lot of cases that’s not how it happened in court if he happened in court at all. In just this little bit of testimony from the brothers first getting together until they ran into Jill, Raylene and Kenneth we see huge discrepancies in their stories but essentially they are telling the same story. To me it these discrepancies or variations that prove they are telling their own stories and were not fed information nor told what to say, I know many would argue otherwise. I would point out one other thing that clearly shows this probably more than anything else. Much has been made about Gilbert not being able to correctly state what car he and David were in or used the night of the murders in his first statements. I don’t think it should come as a surprise he didn’t mention his own vehicle. Originally he said they were in David’s station wagon, when it was found this was impossible he switched his story and then finally he had to give up his truck when he mistakenly stated David’s car had four doors. What we rarely see mentioned is what Gilbert testified to during the trials. Again he said David’s car but when asked what type of car it was he says it was a Pontiac looking car. When asked what he meant by that he replied it looked like a Pontiac. And Gilbert said this in both the trials he testified in. To say it once OK a little slip but to repeat it when he went to the stand in the second trial, come on the D.A. definitely didn’t tell him to say that. What car they were in is kind of important and seeing that was Gilbert’s response the first time around one would have to think the D.A. would have prepped him better for the second trial, especially if it was information they were feeding Gilbert. And it would have just been one word to remember, Malibu. If Gilbert couldn’t remember that one would have to believe, again if it was information that the prosecution had fed him and wanted him to testify to, they would have tried to make it easy for him, like simply just showing him a picture of David’s Malibu and asking him if that looked like the car he was in that night. That they allow his statement to go unopposed or to be clarified is very telling. I would add Gilbert wasn’t even sure of the color but he did say he thought it was gold, goldish or tan. It just looks like for whatever reason another car is stuck in Gilbert’s mind about that night. A Pontiac and we all know whom had a Pontiac that night; Clifford Oliver. The same Pontiac that was vandalized the same night as the murders and damage to the front end and head light assembly as you would expect to see on the vehicle that ran through the heavy under brush at Speegleville Park. Yes the same Pontiac that had a towel, two hairbrushes and two screw drivers sitting on the front seat. Clifford Oliver the guy that failed to inform law enforcement, only a couple days after the murders, that he had gone to Koehne Park the night of the murders or that he had returned there the next morning with David Spence. it looks like he didn’t even mention he got up with David Spence that night until either David’s girlfriend Christine Juhl or Clifford’s girlfriend Josie Scionti informed law enforcement that was the case. And the same Clifford Oliver that finally admitted to getting jacked up on crank with Spence that night. The coincidences start to add up to much much more.

    For the supporters of David Spence, Anthony and Gilbert Melendez I know there are things you can point to in their confessions, statements and testimony that would lead to doubts about their guilt and the lack of any physical evidence further deepens those doubts. In the case of Gilbert Melendez anyone would have to admit it looked as if he was getting his life straight after some mistakes in his past. He had just bought a vehicle and rented an apartment. His claim that he didn’t want to get involved in the on going conflict between Gayle Kelly, Kenneth Franks and Muneer Deeb might be true. But there is one thing that firmly attests to his guilt and that would be the letter he wrote David Spence telling him they should take that rap and keep the others out of it and I remind you Gilbert tried to hide this from the authorities and wrote it in a way they wouldn’t know whom Gilbert was referring to when he said “others”, so the authorities definitely had nothing to do with it’s composition. And that would be my question, whom were the others Gilbert was referring to? When he was confronted by the authorities about this letter he claimed he was referring to Anthony Melendez and Muneer Deeb. Both of them had already been indicted so keeping them out of it would have been impossible at that time. I also believe when Gilbert decided to cooperate again with the state, realizing or being told by his attorneys that the letter alone was enough to bury him, it’s an unsolicited admission of guilt, good luck fighting that in court, Gilbert saw the light.

    For Anthony Melendez we can say the case was even weaker against him, the only thing connecting him to the case prior to his decision to plead guilty and cooperate was the previously proven pristine account of Clifford Oliver. When Clifford finally got around to admitting to law enforcement that he had gotten up with David Spence the night of the murders Clifford claimed Spence told him he had been out at the lake with Tony Melendez. Clifford would repeat this to the Grand Jury and it would be enough to indict Anthony Melendez for the Lake Waco Murders. Now at the time of the murders Anthony was a fugitive trying to elude law enforcement for his part in that robbery in Corpus Christi, so it’s not like Anthony was living right. And of all days to return to Waco to score some crank. Some of the more cosmically conscious among us might want to remind us that karma comes back ten fold, I’d rather stick to my previous statement that the coincidences start to add up. Either way Anthony Melendez spent about two decades longer in prison than anyone else convicted of the Lake Waco Murders and pretty much on his own words and the word of two proven liars; his brother Gilbert and Clifford Oliver.

    And what about David Spence, can anyone honestly say or honestly believe that he was not involved in this crime in some way? I don’t know if he ever did admit to killing the kids but people inside jail and outside jail said he admitted to raping two girls out at the lake. Some might want to say he was just kidding or joking around like many others said Muneer Deeb liked to do and some might say it was this inappropriate and warped sense of humor that David and Deeb, so dissimilar in all other aspects of their personality, shared in common. I would counter the personality trait David and Deeb had in common was a domineering attitude towards females. And it was this domineering attitude that unraveled a simple, yet no less tragic, plan to take a couple kids out to a secluded park, shoot them and hope to make some money into the blood lust orgy of torture and violence it became. Anthony and Gilbert Melendez knew this about David that’s what caused the brothers to move away from David in November 1981 when he tried to display his domination over Christine Juhl.

    In the next small portion of testimony I will get into, and hopefully soon, we come to the part of the brothers’ testimony that is most strikingly similar, it covers the time they spent with the kids before things took a turn for the worse, probably not like anyone had planned.In this sliver of their story, yes the brothers still avoid even hinting of any prior knowledge and try to diminish their roles but their testimony is nearly identical. How could Gilbert recall this almost word for word as Anthony did? No they were not coached, Gilbert couldn’t even come up with Malibu!!! In this part of their testimony the echo of familiarity in details rings of the truth. Anthony and Gilbert are able to paint in vivid color the true nature of David Wayne Spence, a heart of darkness. Both brothers tell us; in his speech, attitude and behavior David Spence acted offensive towards Jill Montgomery. David made lewd comments about Jill’s body and started grabbing her. Jill told David to stop, tried to push him away and told him he couldn’t do that. In response David slapped Jill across the face and proclaimed,”Ain’t no bitch tells me what I can do”, then David pulls off the road and into the woods.

    Like

    • If David pulled off into the woods at the supposed spot shown to me by Truman Simons, he would have to be a magician. The area was very dense with large trees. I always wondered how he could have gotten that Malibu into that space. This area is also where Truman found the bracelet TWO years later he wanted me to say belonged to Jill.????

      Liked by 1 person

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 )

Google photo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s