Post by kmik on Aug 9, 2019 6:54:00 GMT -6
According to what I've read in 2002 Josh Hancock, who was an English teacher in the Bay area, gave his Senior class an assignment to produce a documentary on the subject of their choosing and to keep them from complaining he would produce one also. A friend, former student (or both) asked if he had ever heard of the Keddie murders (he had not) and the rest is history.
Sheila's cousin (Tammy?) told on the old forum that she was the one who put Josh onto this case (so either she was his friend or her child was his former student). Josh made it very clear in his book, documentary, and on the forum that he would not have been able to do the documentaries without the help of Sheila. In the first documentary they did not have access to the Keddie files but by the second documentary they were able to gain access because of Sheila. Did Sheila's presence and friendship influence what was shared with the public? ALL THE WAY!! By Sheila's own admission Josh okay'd it with her before he included the report of Tina possibly being pregnant. Did she influence who he interviewed? NO DOUBT! Sheila and Richard Meeks got back together either before or during the filming of the first documentary so these were her people and she was listening to them and Josh was listening to her. And the public has been soaking up Josh's theory ever since.
This is what Josh said in a 2010 internet interview:
Josh: Yes. In Part I, I felt that we made a fairly convincing argument as to who committed the murders. But a lot of our conclusions were drawn from the stories and speculations of others, and we couldn't always confirm that the stories we were being told were true. In Part II we set out to remedy that. Part II offers up its fair dose of speculation and rumor, but ultimately the argument we put forth is grounded in fact. In my mind, there is little doubt who committed the murders.
How did he remedy, in Pt. 2, all that speculation told in Pt.1:
He said they made a convincing argument in Pt.1 as to who committed the murders so by Pt.2 I feel sure he dove head first into anything in those files that had Marty Smartt's name attached to it so that he could back up what he told in Pt.1. Just think, they were only allowed access to the Keddie room for a short amount of time (few days, a week?) It took me a full year to sort out the limited info on the forum so no doubt they were overwhelmed with the info they were looking at. The reason he stole files was because he didn't have time to look at everything while they were in the Keddie room. Common sense tells me he didn't see all the files and he didn't steal all the files because he did not have the time and his focus was on anything backing up/strengthening the Marty Smartt theory that he had touched on in Pt.1.
I would think that Dana's family could have seen anything that Sheila saw if they wanted it to.
Didn't mean to write a book but it is very clear to me how Josh came about making these documentaries, who influenced him, who influenced the people that influenced him, and why we only have two statements out of all of those Keddie files- Marty and Bo's - surprise, surprise!! He used a tiny bit of Sheila's cassette taped interview with Crim and Bradley on the documentary but why didn't he transcribe it and give us her entire interview?? Did she ask him not to??? We've got bits and pieces of what they wanted to give us. That's why PCSO told a news reporter in 2011 (after the release of the second documentary) that Josh rushed the film out without having all of the information. Anybody truly influenced and interested in the documentaries and this case should read the 30th anniversary article by Josh Seabold titled : "Thirty years on: Are the Keddie Murders Solved?" All you have to do is google it. I love the documentaries because they sort of help to understand who's who, but this article spoke the truth years before anyone would listen.