luf12
Trooper II
Posts: 70
|
Post by luf12 on Mar 5, 2019 20:05:16 GMT -5
I am wondering if Cemetery John was a former student of John Condon because Night Guard Riehl described Cemetery John as an man in his 20s. Since Cemetery John was said to be in his 20s, he looked like he could be one of Condon's students.
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Mar 6, 2019 11:12:25 GMT -5
I am wondering if Cemetery John was a former student of John Condon because Night Guard Riehl described Cemetery John as an man in his 20s. Since Cemetery John was said to be in his 20s, he looked like he could be one of Condon's students. The police were thinking along those lines as well. They pulled the records for his students and there's actually a couple of files at the NJSP Archives dedicated to just that. Once the J.J.Faulkner slip turned up they discovered one of his former students (J. Faulkner) lived near St. Raymond's at one time so that re-ignited the whole idea at that time as well.
|
|
luf12
Trooper II
Posts: 70
|
Post by luf12 on Mar 7, 2019 0:35:18 GMT -5
I am wondering if Cemetery John was a former student of John Condon because Night Guard Riehl described Cemetery John as an man in his 20s. Since Cemetery John was said to be in his 20s, he looked like he could be one of Condon's students. The police were thinking along those lines as well. They pulled the records for his students and there's actually a couple of files at the NJSP Archives dedicated to just that. Once the J.J.Faulkner slip turned up they discovered one of his former students (J. Faulkner) lived near St. Raymond's at one time so that re-ignited the whole idea at that time as well. Did the police interrogate Condon's former student, J. Faulkner?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Mar 7, 2019 11:02:59 GMT -5
Did the police interrogate Condon's former student, J. Faulkner? Twice. He was a New York Cop. Once by NYPD and then by NJSP. I go into it a little in V3.
|
|
luf12
Trooper II
Posts: 70
|
Post by luf12 on Mar 7, 2019 11:55:37 GMT -5
Did the police interrogate Condon's former student, J. Faulkner? Twice. He was a New York Cop. Once by NYPD and then by NJSP. I go into it a little in V3. Will V3 cover Cemetery John's true identity?
|
|
|
Post by Michael on Mar 8, 2019 10:48:39 GMT -5
Will V3 cover Cemetery John's true identity? No. I offer some supplemental information in Chapter One about certain things but nothing that addresses your question. Everything "new" I had on the subject is in V2. Funny that I say "new" when 98% of it has been sitting in the Archives since the very beginning. It's why I laugh at these Pseudo-Experts who claim I'm "wrong." Why haven't they been down there to see for themselves? I realize more and more that if someone disagrees with what I find they'll say its "no good" or that "I" don't know what I am talking about. For me its not about what one "likes" or "dislikes" its about what's actually IN "all" of the source documentation. It's why I footnote the hell out of both of my books to eliminate those kinds of criticisms. And yet it still occurs defying all common sense and logic. We also have these same "Experts" evaluating the documentation without ever laying eyes on it. That's a neat trick isn't it? And if you ask they might just wonder over here, after the fact, to see if its uploaded so they could answer it honestly. What's crazy is that some of these people are Professionals in other fields so its hard to believe they are so obtuse. And yet they are. It's more baffling to me than the crime itself. Others think I should give my opinion more than I do. I think I offer it to a lesser degree in certain places but the whole point of anything I publish is to get the "unknown" material into the daylight so everyone can see it for themselves then draw their own conclusions. For me to say I think CJ was " X" that would be a disservice and would put people into an " either-or" type situation that should never exist. I say that because everyone sees things differently. And we can agree in one place but disagree in others. However, people tend to put themselves in a box where if they disagree in one place that supposedly means I am an invalid source and completely incorrect everywhere. That's not how real life works. So to make a long story short... (too late for that I guess) .... but it's my hope that everyone armed with the new information would be offering up their ideas about that. That's what makes the discussion boards so great because we will see a variety of ideas to further consider then apply to our personal knowledge. Just as an example we see that Joe and I disagree often but its in that disagreement where even more valuable ideas can spring forth.
|
|