|
Post by Sam on Jun 22, 2017 21:28:51 GMT -5
Please let us know if you post in any of the other insidebaltimore articles. I'd love to see what you say and the replies. I don't understand why those women object to anyone else posting. They act like the site is exclusively for them. If that's the case, why is there a comments section?
After I was attacked by others and called stupid, retarded, crazy, uneducated and ignorant, was banned from "The Keepers" subreddit, and started receiving all the abusive PMs, I deactivated my account. I didn't break any subreddit rules or personally attack anyone else or use abusive language, I was banned simply because I said that I found those women's stories very hard to believe and that a lot of what they said didn't seem logical. In the PM's, I was called a bitch, a whore, a c--t and every other nasty word that can be used to describe a woman. I was accused of being a pedophile, a Catholic priest who sexually abused children pretending to be a woman, either the murderer or someone who was covering up for the murderer, someone who was jealous of the women because I had been sexually abused and didn't come forward, a woman who was having a sexual relationship with a Catholic priest, someone involved in sex trafficking, and a prostitute who serviced Catholic priests. Everyone has been attacked at sometime by someone on the internet, but I can honestly say that I have never been attacked so viciously before this.
A lot of people get attacked on reddit for no reason, but what happened to you is worse than usual. I haven't commented on this case on any other site because I've seen how they gang up on people who doubt anything that those women said. I had a reddit account for a while, but I didn't like the way people would go off topic and call others names and attack them and the moderators never did anything about it. I closed my account after about two weeks.
|
|
|
Post by pat on Jun 25, 2017 1:32:23 GMT -5
A lot of people get attacked on reddit for no reason, but what happened to you is worse than usual. I haven't commented on this case on any other site because I've seen how they gang up on people who doubt anything that those women said. I had a reddit account for a while, but I didn't like the way people would go off topic and call others names and attack them and the moderators never did anything about it. I closed my account after a two weeks. I had been a reddit member for almost 3 years, but I didn't post that often. There was an entire sub-reddit devoted to "The Keepers" and I had some questions about what the women said and how the first two of them remembered after all that time. I wouldn't have been ganged up on attacked so viciously if I'd posted that I was in favor of sacrificing babies at Satanic rituals. The others were allowed to curse, call me names and everything else and all that the moderators did was ban ME! The same thing happens on other sites and I'm beginning to wonder what kind of power these women have over all of these sites. I wouldn't be at all surprised if some of them are lurking here.
|
|
|
Post by catherine on Jun 26, 2017 22:08:08 GMT -5
Pat, your experience (and that of Steve's mother) is an interesting counterpoint to the "survivors" saying they felt so very attacked by the church and the defense lawyers. It seems the reality is quite different; if you read enough of these discussions you can see exactly what they themselves define as an attack (i.e. not fully believing them) and they have zero qualms responding with very real attacks in the form of baseless, defamatory allegations against strangers. They feel completely justified in doing this and are apparently completely blind to their hypocrisy. Seems to be but one of many toxic effects of the "hero" status they indulge in when they identify as a "survivor". I'm really sorry to hear you and Steve's mother were treated like that. beta, I read a recent interview given by Jean Wehner, one of the Sacred Cows, and I believe I detect subtle changes in her story. She now says that when Maskell took her to see Cathy's body that there were maggots in the hole in her head. This is the first I'm hearing of her saying Cathy had a hole in her head. Is this new to you, or has she always talked about the hole in her head? I haven't been able to find the interview, which was posted within the past week, so it may have been deleted.
|
|
beta
New Member
Posts: 36
|
Post by beta on Jun 29, 2017 14:15:44 GMT -5
beta, I read a recent interview given by Jean Wehner, one of the Sacred Cows, and I believe I detect subtle changes in her story. She now says that when Maskell took her to see Cathy's body that there were maggots in the hole in her head. This is the first I'm hearing of her saying Cathy had a hole in her head. Is this new to you, or has she always talked about the hole in her head? I haven't been able to find the interview, which was posted within the past week, so it may have been deleted.
No! I don't think I've heard her talk about that. In fact, in this Huffington Post article from May 2015 she tells how she allegedly saw the maggots on Cesnik's face and in her emotional upset, she reached down and began wiping them off. But it's always been her face, never any mention about maggots coming from the wound. (She did have a head wound, though, and I believe there was a hole in her skull where she was struck.) In the other thread you rightly pointed out that it's incredibly unlikely that up to 100 girls were abused and not a single one said anything. Girls talk, and you're right that something like that would have spread like wildfire (not to mention that someone's parents would have noticed something was going on, especially if they were being drugged.) Along the same lines is the normal response of a teenage girl to seeing a dead body. No matter how much they may have loved the person (and I also think they are very much looking through the rosy lenses of nostalgia in that regard) teenage girls are still going to be horrified at the unexpected sight of a corpse. I don't buy that she instinctively leaned down and brushed away maggots with her bare hands. Another change to her story is that she apparently is no longer accusing Sister Russell as one of the abusers. In 1994 Russell was one of the school Sisters accused, but on the Reddit AMA Ryan White clearly indicated that he is not considering her to be involved in any way, whether in the (alleged) abuse or the murder. So either Ryan and his research team did not know that Jean had originally "remembered" Russell as one of the perpetrators, or he knew and left it out because he's a dishonest little shit. Thanks so much for pointing that out, Catherine. I really hope at some point we'll have compiled such an extensive list of problems that we can email the whole thread to Ryan White and/or the production team and reach out to them for comment.
|
|
beta
New Member
Posts: 36
|
Post by beta on Jun 30, 2017 9:39:40 GMT -5
Other than one reply (I felt compelled to point out to them that I'm not a "defender of the faith") I haven't commented in any other insidebaltimore articles, but I did see one interesting comment in this article from January 2017: Someone commented elsewhere that an anonymous (I think?) girl was briefly referenced in The Keepers as having said that she, too, was taken to see the body. I don't recall this, but it's possible I missed it. In any case, there are now 3 or 4 claimants who say they were taken to see Cesnik's body. I suspect that number will keep rising. If we are to believe these claims, Sister Cathy's body had become some kind of carnival roadshow attraction until she was officially discovered in Jan. 1970. I suppose it goes without saying that schlepping all these people back and forth to see her body is a fatal blow to the notion that she was killed out of fear that she would talk. Who would eliminate a potential whistleblower only to greatly increase their chances of getting caught while taking people for private visits? Perhaps I'm missing something, but the more I learn the more absurd their Sr Cathy/Maskell premise becomes. Also, below is an excerpt taken from the personal blog of Michael Hargadon, one of Jean Hargadon Wehner's brothers. It's from a letter to Paul McHugh, an expert witness in memory who testified for the defense in Doe/Roe v Maskell. Hargadon, The Keepers, Nugent et al -- they are presenting a falsehood in the idea that these accusations happened in a vacuum. As far as I have seen, the only details Jane Doe and all the subsequent accusers have offered are things that were either already a matter of record or things that can't be confirmed or dis-confirmed and we just have to take their word for it, like these detailed conversations and interactions they recall. Jean's father was a policeman, and from what I understand there were other Keough peers with ties to the medical and law enforcement communities. This murder had a huge impact on them and "private" details (not intended for public release) did become known among some of the Keough families as well as the families at Maskell's church. My source for this was a few lone dissenters on the official The Keepers Facebook page who were commenting in late May and early June. Those comments were all deleted within a day or two (of course) and I'm sure they've been banned from commenting, but I'm hoping we hear more from dissenters in their community. Mr. Hargadon's blog: michaelhargadon.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
Post by madeline on Jun 30, 2017 11:38:30 GMT -5
I saw on this site where Jean Wehner said there were maggots IN the side of her head, which seemed to indicate that there was a hole in the side of the head. But from what I've read, the actual hole was in the back of Cathy's head:"And I ran over and I got down on the ground and there were maggots in the side of her head. And I began wiping her head, her face, and saying, 'Please help me, please help me, please help me.' And he came down beside me and he said in my ear, 'You see what happens when you say bad things about people.'"
www.npr.org/2017/06/21/533797877/before-her-teachers-murder-this-keepers-witness-was-already-living-a-nightmare
|
|
beta
New Member
Posts: 36
|
Post by beta on Jun 30, 2017 16:29:41 GMT -5
I saw on this site where Jean Wehner said there were maggots IN the side of her head, which seemed to indicate that there was a hole in the side of the head. But from what I've read, the actual hole was in the back of Cathy's head:"And I ran over and I got down on the ground and there were maggots in the side of her head. And I began wiping her head, her face, and saying, 'Please help me, please help me, please help me.' And he came down beside me and he said in my ear, 'You see what happens when you say bad things about people.'"
www.npr.org/2017/06/21/533797877/before-her-teachers-murder-this-keepers-witness-was-already-living-a-nightmare Thank you Madeline, I hadn't had time to look for her recent interview but it looks like that's the one, and yes, it does seem that Jean is adding a new detail to her narrative. Of course, she did say she's still recovering new memories so she set the stage for an endless stream of new additions, subtractions and creative license. I have to wonder how long people will remain so gullible and short-sighted as to think this is a perfectly reasonable thing; that we should accept, without question, testimony that the accuser can alter, embellish and expand on at will with a built-in excuse of "I only just remembered" for any contradictions or inaccuracies.
|
|
|
Post by jason on Jul 1, 2017 18:59:17 GMT -5
One of the things I found the most unbelievable -- well, actually, I found all of it unbelievable -- so I suppose I should say the most preposterous, is the tale one of them told about a man (was it Skippy?) wearing a nun's habit and chasing her in a car. What was that all about?
|
|
|
Post by madeline on Jul 1, 2017 20:43:36 GMT -5
One of the things I found the most unbelievable -- well, actually, I found all of it unbelievable -- so I suppose I should say the most preposterous, is the tale one of them told about a man (was it Skippy?) wearing a nun's habit and chasing her in a car. What was that all about?
Yes, it was Skippy. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that Skippy was a friend of Billy Schmidt and Skippy kept a nun's habit in the attic. I'm not sure if it was at the apartments where Billy lived across the hall from the nuns, or somewhere else, but not very many apartments have attics. Does anyone know where Skippy had the nun's habit in the attic? If was at the apartments, we need to check and see if those apartments had attics.
|
|
|
Post by Joanna on Jul 1, 2017 21:52:02 GMT -5
Yes, it was Skippy. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that Skippy was a friend of Billy Schmidt and Skippy kept a nun's habit in the attic. I'm not sure if it was at the apartments where Billy lived across the hall from the nuns, or somewhere else, but not very many apartments have attics. Does anyone know where Skippy had the nun's habit in the attic? If was at the apartments, we need to check and see if those apartments had attics.
The Carriage House Apartments where she lived are still there and they do not have attics.
|
|
beta
New Member
Posts: 36
|
Post by beta on Jul 2, 2017 10:07:31 GMT -5
One of the things I found the most unbelievable -- well, actually, I found all of it unbelievable -- so I suppose I should say the most preposterous, is the tale one of them told about a man (was it Skippy?) wearing a nun's habit and chasing her in a car. What was that all about?
Ha, yes! "Preposterous" is a great descriptor for much of this series, but this car-driving-pregnant-nun story is particularly odd. The story was told by Barbara** Schmidt, the lady with all the small dogs, and I watched that segment two or three times to try to make sense of it. It was sort of thrown in apropos of nothing. Her conclusion is that the driver might have been Skippy, because he was obsessed with catholicism and was, in her opinion, capable of something nutty like dressing up as a pregnant nun. No idea why he would have tried to frighten her or run her off the road, and I don't recall her ever talking about bad blood between "Skippy" and their family. I mean, Skippy was friends with her brother-in-law Billy (who they implicated in the murder of Cesnik) so why Skippy would want to terrorize his friend's sister-in-law, to whom Billy was apparently close, is anyone's guess. Neither of the nieces seem trustworthy to me anymore. They did at first, but their credibility quickly dissipated as it became clear that they both seem to have some perverse desire for their uncles to be guilty. **I mistakenly named Sharon as the sister-in-law. Barbara was Billy's sister in law (she believed her brother-in-law Billy *and* her husband killed Cesnik) Sharon, her daughter, is the niece who contacted Hoskins/Schaub (the "Nancy Drew detectives") accusing her uncle Billy of being involved.
|
|
|
Post by pat on Jul 3, 2017 11:21:58 GMT -5
Yes, it was Skippy. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but I think that Skippy was a friend of Billy Schmidt and Skippy kept a nun's habit in the attic. I'm not sure if it was at the apartments where Billy lived across the hall from the nuns, or somewhere else, but not very many apartments have attics. Does anyone know where Skippy had the nun's habit in the attic? If was at the apartments, we need to check and see if those apartments had attics. I think that Billy had moved back home when the nun's habit was found in the attic by one of the Schmidt women.
|
|
|
Post by Sam on Jul 4, 2017 23:22:23 GMT -5
I must be missing something. How did those two Schmidt women fit in with the sexual abuse and Maskell? The women that Catherine calls the Sacred Cows first said that Maskell killed Sister Cathy. Then when his DNA didn't match, they said that the other priest, Mangus, probably killed her. I understand that her body was found behind the Schmidt family's car dealership, or car repair, but what reason would Billy Schmidt or any of the Schmidt family have to kill her? I thought that I heard or read somewhere that Billy liked her.
|
|
|
Post by kitty on Jul 5, 2017 16:55:01 GMT -5
I must be missing something. How did those two Schmidt women fit in with the sexual abuse and Maskell? The women that Catherine calls the Sacred Cows first said that Maskell killed Sister Cathy. Then when his DNA didn't match, they said that the other priest, Mangus, probably killed her. I understand that her body was found behind the Schmidt family's car dealership, or car repair, but what reason would Billy Schmidt or any of the Schmidt family have to kill her? I thought that I heard or read somewhere that Billy liked her.
I'm not sure that I'm correct on this, but I got the impression that maybe the priest hired Billy Schmidt to kill Sister Cathy. But Billy wasn't even catholic, so even if Maskell or someone else was going to hire a hit man to kill her, why would they get someone who was mentally off balance like Billy and his gay friend? This part of the story seemed like a red herring to me.
|
|
beta
New Member
Posts: 36
|
Post by beta on Jul 10, 2017 19:15:28 GMT -5
even if Maskell or someone else was going to hire a hit man to kill her, why would they get someone who was mentally off balance like Billy and his gay friend? This part of the story seemed like a red herring to me. For as little sense as any of it made, it seemed like a red herring to me, too.
|
|