The fuck is this bullshit, Jeff Wells and Trident publishing are using us you say?
This is not at all how I read Kate Dixon's statement... I think you are misinterpreting it.
Moderators: Elvis, DrVolin, Jeff
The fuck is this bullshit, Jeff Wells and Trident publishing are using us you say?
Percival wrote:Can you tell us why VM lied to us Ms Dixon, telling us all that Rachel was a fake and an ARG actress and wasnt who she said she was?
Kate Dixon wrote:Percival wrote:Can you tell us why VM lied to us Ms Dixon, telling us all that Rachel was a fake and an ARG actress and wasnt who she said she was?
I don't know that VM lied to you at all. I consider VM to be honest.
Why are you not addressing the CONTENT of John Power's letter and
the issue of why there is a fingerprint booking card dated September 1981 of Jimmy Hughes?
Let's get to the facts of the case, to the Octopus. DESERT FAE, RACHEL BEGLEY, as already, pretty much retired, from posting new facts about it, because she in her own words doesn't want to "screw up" the case for the prosecution. So she is now
irrelvant regarding new information. She is old news as they say in the biz.
It's strange how they let her all hang out, and then put her on the shelf.
Perhaps I should personally investigate her credibility?
Kate Dixon
Kate Dixon wrote: Perhaps I should personally investigate her credibility?
Kate Dixon wrote:...I don't know who the other people are really (they use handles)… though I may have found Dr. Doogie as - a book publisher/investigator regarding a lady whose daughter was kidnapped in the Bay Area peninsula...
American Dream wrote:It's a little tricky because Anita Langley is now a member of this board, but she should not be considered "off-limits" as far as the discussion goes, as long as it stays within Jeff's guidelines.
barracuda wrote:Kate Dixon wrote: Perhaps I should personally investigate her credibility?
I should think anyone doing investigative journalism with regards to the case against Jimmy Hughes would have already done this.
Also, Jeff's publishing house is Trine Day, not Trident. Let's get the plug right.
Kate Dixon wrote:I really don't feel critical of her because if her father was killed then
she can only be expected to be emotional and to be against anyone who
she thinks is not going along with her agenda of bring his killer to
justice or, in this case, to possible lethal injection.
THUS, enter
Anita Langley, who is not a witness as far as I can tell, and she, up
in Canada, is now taking on some of Desert's tasks.
who the other people are really (they use handles)… The anonymous ones on RI
and Anita Langley are trying to keep up Desert's point of view going and that includes attacking the credibility of me and VM. Some of them may be interested in writing books and may be proxies of Cherie Seymour and John Powers, potential book writers and movie makers.
Recently Audioslave, joining in January, started a "Dixon's disbarrment" thread
which flamed out. He admits on this thread that he is doing all he can for
John Powers and the prosecution, thus are they directing him to attempt to
slam my credibility as he tried to do in that thread?
I note no one has talked about the fingerprint card of Hughes in 1981, probably a booking card, or talked about John Power's statement in his
email that he feared he would be killed for investigating the Hughes case, just as deputy MacGowan and his family were killed.
As for me, recently on RI, after NMN's last post on Monday re:
Powers, MacGowan and the Hughes 1981 fingerprint card, they tried to
get into whether I had money or a job -- actually I am poor, and I guess maybe they figured that out, and then they went into El Dorado matters, but I was never arrested or detained there, although a judge up there was unhappy I was seeking public records and publishing them. So I guess they figured that out.Then they probably had a pow wow and got their rather big group
together, and went into the disbarment thing, which Langley and Desert
have taken the time to link or publish on their websites, and then one of them
went into one of my relatives in Emeryville and her colorful past and extensive
property holdings there over the years. No one other than themselves are willing to join that parade, because it is really old news and the state bar document they have is so bizarre they can't really use it as they want to.
They hope that a bunch of their stuff about me on the RI board
and on their websites will be picked up by major search engines such
as Google, and that they can flood the internet with discrediting me
and with the stuff they are doing to VM. That is the anatomy -- trying
to get stuff picked up on the www that they want picked up. Michael
Riconosciuto and Ted Gunderson are behind them in this to a large degree.
Although in their cases, a little knowledge is truly a dangerous thing.
They are frustrated because NMN is now dominating the internent on the
Hughes case, other than of course the AP stories, one LA times story
and Desert Sun stories. You can google or bing Hughe's name and the
word murder or Cabazon and NMN will pop up mightily.
The guys and gals on RI can't dominate the web on Hughes. I know that if
I start posting there with them, I will only help get the stuff picked up by
major search engines. I and my website are a bigger keyword than
they are.
Michael Riconosciuto is a computer type guy and he is a first class intelligence disinformation expert and genius. He wants to dominate the web with the story of how great he is in regarding to this murder case. If you read a recent post on RI by Anita Langley re: Riconosciuto's activities back then, you will see what role MR wants to play in the murder case --- the white knight in armor on the white horse.
He is always walking uphill to be an informant in the various
cases into which he has injected himself -- Hamlin, Thompson, indirectly
Polk -- uphill, because he is a convicted felon and felonies can be used
to impeach a witness.
So far, no one has promoted anything about Hughes, except that
before this ever happened, there was a website for his ministry and
various comments about that, all favorable that I could see -- his helping prisoners, addicts, orphans, his confession and redemption, which are
on the web. And that poses a big problem for Michael and for Desert --
who are joined at the hip. And for John Powers, who also joined
them at their hips. The problem is that Hughes' publicity out there is
far better than Michael's, especially for those who buy that Christian
angle. Do you think Michael will let that stand?
I don't know of Hughes having any felony convictions and he is a
"reverend".
She provided leads. So she is the
first of this group to go after the Octopus a little, since Desert
I would pursue
what Langley said. (Gees, a last name like Langley is quite a hint.)
Her leads are certainly more interesting and relevant than the old lawsuit in Emeryville which I pursued back in the 1990s.
Kate Dixon wrote:Get it?
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 156 guests