Neo's Neto Nonsense

Thanks again for everyone's support. I love this crowd!!

NOW, on with the nonsense...

I'll be honest, I've never really paid the Neto and Carr firebomb/dog shooting attacks a whole lot of attention. I did, however, notice that the Neto's suffered more actual damage overall. On both counts, funny enough. Something to think about.

Now lets reacquaint ourselves with some contemporaneous police reports surrounding what's been referred to as a terror campaign in Yonkers. 

As you can see, at approx. 3:30 am on May 13, 1976, the Neto house was firebombed with what's believed to have been a Molotov cocktail. 

Noted in the police report were previous incidents involving black youths bothering neighbors by throwing rocks, trespassing and breaking property (chairs, lawn ornaments, petty shit).

Prior to hearing a bottle crash against her house, Sylvia Neto heard what she believed to be "a young black voice" calling out, "Eddy, Eddy..."

Sylvia, in recounting these incidents on page 104 of Paul Agostino's hot true crime page-turner, Son of Sam the Refried Truth or whatever, placed the rock throwing around the end of '75. She also neglects to mention any troubles with black kids, but states that, "for two years, just about every other month something would happen," including threatening letters and creepy phone calls. 

On page 108, and prior to reading the actual reports himself allegedly, Neo gets a bright idea: John Carr must have been stalking young Sylvia. Phone calls to the house were requesting to speak to the 12 year old. "According to Maury's reports," Paul notes, "John Carr liked young girls."

Let's stop right there. According to John's friend Tom Turkey (and maybe the Breslin letter) John liked young girls:

 


You can also hear Tom Turkey state this for yourself here. Just look for the following:

And then again, he sets it up on page 207:

"...who was stalking Sylvia? Who started harassing the Netos before Berkowitz moved into town?"

Fast-forward to pages 331-332:

"...Mr. Neto states to the detectives, 'approximately one year ago, rocks were thrown through the second-floor window.' This would put the rock-throwing incident somewhere around May 1975, way before Berkowitz moved to 35 Pine Street. Berkowitz had absolutely nothing to do with this, nor did John Carr, as both Mr. Neto and his neighbors claim youths in the neighborhood were throwing rocks at their homes. Close that door..." 

Paul then goes on to hilariously explain:

"I think I can now explain why Yonkers Police were not looking for anyone when these crimes were taking place. The Wicker Street area was being harassed by black youths according to residents making the complaints[...]

The residents, as you can see, were telling the Yonkers Police it was the black youths in the area that were committing these crimes[...]What sense would it have made for the Yonkers Police to look for a suspect when the people reporting the crimes weren't asking them to? The Yonkers Police were not neglecting these crimes in the Wicker Street area."

 


We could go on and on and analyze the various Neto incidents but I'm not going to. Feel free to place your ideas, theories and comments about them below. 

But by my reckoning, and this is strictly my opinion based on how things unfold in the book, Paul injected John Carr into the Neto story to begin with for the sheer sake of exonerating him. This was also another attempt to cast doubt on Maury and his "reports".

Black kids threw rocks and firebombs (pg. 332), Berkowitz made the phone calls, wrote the letters (pg. 334). No way John was involved (pg.332).

Now it makes me wonder if John was involved. Well done!


 

Moving on, Paul says things in his book and then a few pages later he forgets he said them.  

On page 21, he speaks to Mrs. Callahan, who knew John. 

On page 56, he's communicating with Wheat Carr through "Larry". 

On page 84, "I could not find anyone who knew [John Carr] personally."

But really, why is he so fixated on John? Why does his name keep coming up? Why go to ridiculous lengths to clear John Carr's good name? Because it's Wheat's brother, I'm guessing. And near the end of the book, page 342, we discover the following:

"To Wheat Carr, may your days ahead be pain-free and lived with honor. We are Yonkers, so we are family. I will keep my word and make sure your story is told the right way. Keep God in your heart like I know He is to always minimize the pain. I pray your family can now rest in peace. I am here for you now and for the rest of your life, even when you think I'm not. Live the rest of your life like a true hero. Not many can say they saved lives like you can. Live that way, it is what you truly are."

I did not change a word of that in an effort to embarrass Paul. That's what he wrote.

Again, I love this crowd, see you soon...



 


Comments

  1. In my best Vinny Gambini voice...
    "Yuh honuh, my client Mistuh Ca-uh is ba'ley past bein' a yout himself, but he's innocent, yuh honuh...yuh see, yuh honuh, it wuz doze black youts, they wuh terrorizin' da neighbuhhood, yuh honuh. I feel ashamed, yuh honuh, 'cause we didn't pruhtect da neighbuhhood like we always did back then, we are Yonkuhs, yuh honuh, til duh day we die!"
    TD

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. LOL

      I told you guys this book was spellbinding. And there are moments where I literally have to stop and go, hang on...what do you mean you never met anyone who knew John? You just said you did. And this other shit...

      I know "peacemaker" Paul is pissed off at me. That's his right, whatever. But I keep harping on this: who read this and thought it made perfect sense? And then told him it was a good idea to hit "publish"? Did they reeeeaaaally think this would be the end of Maurymania?

      And I'm hearing all kinds of excuses, one of which is, "well, it's his first book". So what? I'm not looking for spelling errors. Technically it's written well enough, especially for a first time author; adequate paragraph breaks, no run-on sentences, the chapters are self-contained, etc. He knows how to use hyphens. The story flows from point A to point B. All well and good. But the desperation...ugh.

      Delete
    2. Nathan, you’re so well informed and super cool. Do you think Paul is related to or was a member of the 22 disciples of hell? I think he is. I think Maury mentioned a Paul in the letter of confirmed members that David notarized. I bet it’s Paul the author. Keep being super cool. I don’t care where you live or work. You’re so smart obviously.

      Delete
    3. You’re welcome, dummy!

      Delete
    4. Oh, yeah, Nathan...it's spellbinding, all right...and I haven't even read the drivel yet.
      I'm honestly debating whether I should take Amazon up on the Kindle+ offer they just made me so I can read it for nothing and minimize whatever taste Walnuts might get...the idea of putting any amount in his pocket is distasteful to me.

      By the way, he claims in his Amazon bio that he got a criminal justice degree in 1997. Does he mention that in the book itself? Like where he got it? If it's John Jay, that would be so hysterically cliche...

      TD

      Delete
    5. @TD

      What if I told you there were vague references to a movie script behind the scenes?

      Delete
    6. Nathan, that's great. They can trot out Jon Favreau, and give him that idiotic buzzcut he wore in Friends so he can do Walnuts justice, and have him do an acting gig again...God knows his directing hasn't been anything other than mediocre.

      And besides, he's third cousins to Crazy Joe Gallo or something... that's a Sopranos joke, btw...

      But really, that might just spur me on to tell my friend in LA she needs to redouble her efforts to get me that Story Bible from that TV show that Dana was talking about being inspired by Maury's work...it might just contain the last missing piece of confirmation I need to go public with my JC (the other one) and his co-star in that video Maury spoke about...would go a long way to tying a bow on a whole lot of Florida to Denver suspicions, to boot.

      TD

      Delete
    7. @TD

      Also, no, his background in criminal justice never comes up. There’s no real “about the author” or anything. That I’ve seen.

      He does quote a Bible verse at the beginning which is cute. It’s real fire and brimstone. Makes me sorry I made him cuss me out and lose his religion for a moment.

      There’s also no citations. Which is funny because I have one of the articles he quotes and will post what he left. All he has in regard to citations is a short list of “references”.

      Delete
    8. If his claim of obtaining a C.J. degree is true then it’s an associate’s degree. He graduated from Sacred Heart in 1995.

      Delete
    9. Born in ‘76. That checks out.

      Hell, an episode of Law and Order should tell you that you’d need more than one source to clear a suspect!

      Delete
    10. Probably repeated a grade along the way. Like his pals from Lake Avenue, he wasn’t the sharpest spade in the shed.

      Delete
    11. I didn’t want to say it. But I WAS thinking it.

      Delete

Post a Comment