|
|
Post by jmo on Dec 31, 2017 10:36:16 GMT -6
So, it seems some reasonable people over at 28 firmly believe that Sue was sleeping with Marty. I tried sludging through the site looking to see where that all began but I can't find any proof other than (I think??) Gamberg's wife had a friend who was a bartender who said that she saw Sue with Marty at a bar (??) or something like that?? Did that little tidbit (of truth/nontruth) lead 28 to this point? I can't find anything else that leads us to believe Sue and Marty were EVER together.
WAS SUE SLEEPING WITH MARTY? Thoughts?
|
|
|
|
Post by kmik on Dec 31, 2017 18:07:15 GMT -6
Was Sue really seeing Marty? Who knows for sure - we don't. The bartender is the only one to tell that story. There was an anonymous letter sent to the school counselor (probably from one of the Meeks kids/friends). If that was a motive then Darely J and Joe B would also have to be thrown into the mix.
To understand who said what you have to peel back the layers of post. If you read under Keddie Facts: "Bombshell: MARTY'S AND LOON'S Motives Finally Found", you will read a post of emails sent by Mike Gamberg to 28. Gamberg tells that in going through reports on Karl Spang he came across the account of Karl saying he went back to the Pioneer Bar in Greenville and xxxx bartender could verify his story. But when detective Wright talked to xxxx bartender she dispelled Karl's story of being at the bar but instead told the deputy that she knew Sue and Marty from FRC and they were seeing each other and he had brought her to the bar. Mike verified the bartenders account of attending FRC with Sue and Marty from school records and found his wife Linda was also in one of the 2 typing classes Sue had taken. That is where his wife's name came into this. 28 goes on to explain that in looking over Kathy Beckley's statement Mike discovered who gave the boys a ride to Keddie that night. What prompted Mike to look at Kathy's statement again??
Next bombshell was, "Confirmed: Who gave J/D the ride to Keddie. This would be an extension of the Karl Spang/bartender/Marty and Sue dating story. It seems the bartender that Karl said would be his alibi for the night of 4-11-81 actually ended up being the same person who said that Marty was seeing Sue and just so happens to be the same person who gave the boys a ride to Keddie!! Now Gamberg and 28 seem to think this was kept secret because Kathy was seeing Dana (this bartender was a friend of Kathy Beckley's mom and was asked by her to take the boys home). Yet it is very clear that the police talked to Kathy the week after the murders and she said Donna W. told Pat Dorris that she (Donna) took the boys home - so when did Kathy or the bartender tell the police who took the boys to Keddie? In 1981, 2017, or some year in between??
So what is the bartenders name??? Guess what that is the only thing they will not reveal - I know that's odd considering they've named people who were never even mentioned in the PON list. But one of the biggest questions people have had for 36 years is who took the boys home - and we're still asking. I think it's important to know who this person is since they not only took the boys home but also told the Marty and Sue story, OH and they also dispelled Karl's story of being at the Pioneer Bar (so they obviously knew Karl Spang- who was also in Keddie that night parked by the Keddie Pond).
I'm sorry JMO, I know this was too much information but it all goes together!! And has the same stench as the hammer in the pond. Does it leave you confused? It should. Why not give a name to this person who had such vital information??
J. Lepley is the only person on the PON list that talked to Deputy Wright, worked at the Pioneer Bar, and dispelled Karl's story -yet we're told it was not her (to our knowledge she passed away several years ago). Who was this bartender and why should that be a mystery? |
|
|
|
Post by Admin Horan on Jan 1, 2018 11:11:43 GMT -6
Well, there is a corollary question: How did the killers LEAVE Keddie? Any "suspect" who supposedly can be shown to have driven the victims TO Keddie around 10:00ish pm surely must also be the ones who can be shown to have LEFT Keddie after 1:00ish am.
Who fits BOTH of those criteria? Marty sure doesn't.
|
|
|
|
Post by rosedawson on Feb 9, 2018 17:20:11 GMT -6
This is such a sad story, but what a refreshing thread to read. All of it was written in a professional manner that did not confuse or try to persuade. I'm also so glad that I don't see that dumb melting man gif while I read about the case. Thanks to all of you!!
|
|
|
|
Post by kmik on Feb 9, 2018 19:20:15 GMT -6
Don't be afraid to share your thoughts on the case. None of us were there and do not know what happened. All we can do is look at the reports and information we have. |
|
|
|
Post by Admin Horan on Feb 10, 2018 7:36:17 GMT -6
Rose: By all means, dive in. But like I told kmik, our chances of "solving" this case are zero, maybe less. My only interest is in trying to put a stop to McNarie, Gamberg, People Magazine, and others cashing in by putting a shoddy frame around Marty and Bo. Are they guilty? Who knows? Maybe. But as we will demonstrate on the podcast, it's just easy to put a much "stronger" frame around Chuck and Henry, and by no means am I suggesting that THEY are any more "guilty." Again, maybe they are. But going around framing dead people who can't sue for libel is not justice.
So, why would you or kmik or anyone else try? Like I told them, if you want to play armchair detective, this is a good case to start with, because it builds up your skepticism, and trains you to keep track of all the things you DON'T know about a case that you NEED to know in order to solve it. There are lots and lots of reasons why this case was never solved.
|
|
|
|
Post by jmo on Feb 10, 2018 12:26:10 GMT -6
"But as we will demonstrate on the podcast"
What? What? :-) Who? When??? I would LOVE that! Let us know! That would be amazing!
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin Horan on Feb 11, 2018 17:12:59 GMT -6
Oh, geez. I thought everyone on here (especially the Keddie boards) knew. Iiiiiii will send a mass PM to all members, and and also figure out how to "publicize" it on the main page.
|
|
|
|
Post by EKH on Feb 11, 2018 20:39:09 GMT -6
Though I mostly follow Professor Horan with regard to the Zodiac case, I really enjoyed (for lack of a better word) the podcast on the Keddie murders. I admit I had never even heard of Keddie or Martin Smartt or John Boubede prior to coming to these forums so I come into the case "clean." I was very interested in the notion that one of the young victims might have had an episode of diabetic aggression and attacked someone or WAS attacked by someone in the cabin and it escalated from there somehow. I just wish there were a few more pieces for us.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin Horan on Feb 12, 2018 12:22:07 GMT -6
EKH: Funny you should mention more pieces--kmik has been digging some up. Stay tuned!
|
|
|
|
Post by dt2016 on Feb 14, 2018 17:17:33 GMT -6
Hi, very intriguing mystery. Tom, your theory sounds very logical and covers most of the bases. I noticed on one of the videos of the doc where Sheila and Ricky are walking through the cabin Ricky mentions Marty there that night. Is he just going by all the rumors or his actual memory?
As far as I know he's never talked about that night before.
|
|
|
|
Post by Admin Horan on Feb 15, 2018 19:06:48 GMT -6
dt2016: Welcome! As for Ricky's comments on that video, who knows? But what I always tell people who want to dive into "cold cases," my experience (just over 30 years) is, "memories" more than a year old are almost always worthless. Even once a person falls asleep, their memories of anything start to degrade. And if someone, like Sheila Sharp for example, starts to TALK about ANY memory with someone else, then all bets are off.
Hypnosis? Meh. Acid flashbacks? Meh. Dreams? Meh. Without corroborating evidence, you just never know about ANY "memory."
|
|
|
|
Post by snoho17 on Apr 4, 2018 17:45:33 GMT -6
dt2016: Welcome! As for Ricky's comments on that video, who knows? But what I always tell people who want to dive into "cold cases," my experience (just over 30 years) is, "memories" more than a year old are almost always worthless. Even once a person falls asleep, their memories of anything start to degrade. And if someone, like Sheila Sharp for example, starts to TALK about ANY memory with someone else, then all bets are off. Hypnosis? Meh. Acid flashbacks? Meh. Dreams? Meh. Without corroborating evidence, you just never know about ANY "memory." Agreed! Eye witness statements can be the bane or savior of any investigation. I've seen 20 onsite witnesses all give slightly varying statements with a few others giving incompatible accounts. Are they ALL lying? No, each individual is processing info through diffrent life perspectives. Time creates holes in memories and these keddie witnesses in particular, are pressured to fill these holes. |
|
|
|
Post by Admin Horan on Apr 5, 2018 7:47:39 GMT -6
All of this falls under "victim profile." In the gossipiest town in America, suddenly, nobody knew anything about the Sharps. And that includes their best "friends," the Meeks clan. In all the years of shooting their mouths off about Martin Smartt, they've said what about the Sharps, really? Was Sue incontact with Jim Sharp, or not? What about the kids? Did SHEILA get along with Sue?
Now, I don't put any stock in the story about Johnny (and Dana) "helping" Sue clean up the yard. but you're right--SUE kept it cleaned it up. Is that why Sheila might lie about the boys helping? Instead of admitting that there was friction between Sue and some of the kids?
The points you make about her keeping the cabin clean and kids in decent clothes fits her profile as an officer's wife. What doesn't fit that profile is Sue moving to Deadendsville, USA and taking up with lumberjacks and gandy dancers (no offense. I'm just saying, an officer's wife...) I mean, if she considered herself and her kids to be on the same social level as the Meekses and Smartts, theeeennn why be so snobby about letting Sue and the Meekses raise their baby in Deadendsville?
The Sharp kids go from having a military officer in the house to having no authority figure at all, with results that are totally unsurprising. They go from living among nothing but officer's families to--Keddie. Who, exactly, were the CLASSIEST people in Keddie? The Albins? And in those days, all the "decent" people still shunned ANY single mother and her kids, no matter what social class they USED to belong to. I'm, exactly Johnny's age, and I grew up in a county in Illinois pretty much identical to Plumas County, in and among "families" pretty much identical to people like the Meekses and Smartts and Walkes and Seabolts. Even among THOSE people, a fatherless family like the Sharps would have been considered "trash." And I'm talking about some people who still didn't even have indoor toilets yet. Being a single mom was simply not accepted. Period. No outsiders like the Sharps EVER moved to our town unless they HAD to (like, if the dad got transferred to the local oil refinery.)
So--Why, exactly, did SUE move to Plumas County, and stay there? She had a lot more family and inlaws around Portland. But she moved to Plumas County, where her brother Don lived. Why there? Was she "blacklisted" among the officer class? What for? She was still attractive. She didn't even date among the "society" of Plumas County. And Jim didn't even want the kids back after Sue died. Why do I keep asking? Because no one (like the Meekses) will answer. Murder happens for a reason. There are two big blank spots in this whole "case:" the Motive, and the Victims' Background. That's no coincidence. If we ever fully understood the victims, we'd find the motive. We know Dana's background pretty thoroughly. What's the Big Secret about Sue Sharp? Why is it a secret?
Birds of a feather flock together. We've seen the kind of birds who flock to Keddie. How does Sue Sharp fit in?
|
|
|
|
Post by cancersucks on Apr 29, 2018 11:57:18 GMT -6
Because she was interested in a man there? Maybe someone she met through her brother? That's why I moved to Deadendsville.... Just a thought.
|
|
