Michael
Re: Lt. Joe Kenda
Thu Apr 4, 2019 13:52
2001:558:6027:18:595e:9b4b:ea5d:dc13

I haven't seen any televised specials lately. Most are only an hour long so from my perspective that can't even scratch the surface. So you, me, and everyone else who study the case will all want to see something different but its just not possible in that time-frame.

I do know many include Mark so it would be hard for anyone to dispute what he says unless they've walked a mile in his shoes. I'm not saying that applies to you. But if he's talking about something I can tell you from experience he said a LOT more than what they wind up showing. It's all about show length and they cannot pay the bills without advertisements so in the end its not even close to an hour.

Anyway, my only point of the post was that I disagreed with how you framed what you wrote all the while seeming to want an unbiased account. I know you don't want anyone to consider Lindbergh was involved but unfortunately that's usually the first place a good Investigator would look. Many of the police were originally suspicious of him but were afraid to do anything to upset him because if they did they'd get "bounced." Of course that doesn't mean he was involved, but if it wasn't "him" they'd have been up his ass with a microscope. He wouldn't have been able to protect Betty Gow either.

I guarantee that someone jumping in this from scratch without any agenda or an ulterior motive will look closely at him and the rest of the family without any hesitation. It's a necessary step and doesn't mean they are gullible or being schmoozed in any way.




  • Re: Lt. Joe KendaJoe, Thu Apr 4 13:09
    Michael, of course anyone with the type of credentials both you and I would like to see put forth a proper and thoroughly unbiased investigation of the LKC, would by necessity be required to, and... more
    • Re: Lt. Joe Kenda — Michael, Thu Apr 4 13:52
      • Re: Lt. Joe KendaJoe, Mon Apr 8 09:17
        Michael, you're incorrect when you state I don't want anyone to consider Lindbergh's involvement in the LKC. I did exactly that many years ago, and I've seen absolutely nothing of a conclusive nature ... more
        • Re: Lt. Joe KendaMichael, Mon Apr 8 12:14
          You may have Joe but perhaps others have not. And if not wouldn't it be a good idea for them to study every angle in order to do as you did? You see, they might conclude something different. Or they... more
Click here to receive daily updates