This new piece written by Criminal Justice Chris and Carl Denaro features a letter from J. P. Ranieri to David Berkowitz:
"The Sons of Sam: Was John Paul Ranieri a Human Trafficking Victim?"
This new piece written by Criminal Justice Chris and Carl Denaro features a letter from J. P. Ranieri to David Berkowitz:
"The Sons of Sam: Was John Paul Ranieri a Human Trafficking Victim?"
Thanks for posting. I supplied Carl with a letter David provided me, edited, and he'll be posting to groups. Hopefully this puts to bed that Carl is acting with poor intentions and is a puppeteer.
ReplyDeleteObviously, the contents of this letter places David at even higher scrutiny due to implications of earlier involvement. So, I think it will be hard to refute that the letter is a lie.
Regardless, at least it progresses research and ties up some loose ends.
If anyone from the Carr family has an issue with the content if the letter, it really isn't my problem or David's problem. Carl deserves to be treated with respect, is a victim, and whoever was responsible for his shooting should have been held accountable through the criminal justice system far earlier. Otherwise this discussion would not even be happening.
I am going to answer a few questions that I read today related to this letter that were forwarded to me by Carl Denaro. We were both utterly perplexed by the comments.
ReplyDelete1) John Paul Ranieri contends that he saw David Berkowitz when he was "young and impressionable". It does not clearly state he saw him in 71 or 72. It clearly could have been earlier.
2) If John Paul Ranieri did see him in 1971, David Berkowitz left for basic training in June of 1971 and came back in the fall/winter 1971 before he was deployed to Korea. So, clearly he could have seen him in 1971. It clearly says in the John Comparetto DA interview that David Berkowitz came home before being deployed to Korea.
3) John Paul Ranieri is obviously confused whether he saw him in 1971 or 1972 and is seeking clarification from David Berkowitz. I'm unclear what the readers were confused about in this part of the letter.
4) If John Paul Ranieri had moved to Wisconsin at the time, which I am unclear if he was located there or not, clearly we had transportation in the 1970s in the United States: cars, trains, planes. He could have traveled back to NY like many of the others did. Unclear how this is so hard to wrap your head around.
5) One person commented about him interacting with Jeffrey Dahmer in Wisconsin like he made it up or something. The interaction is confirmed with Dahmer in an interview. If I remember correctly, Dahmer claims Ranieri drugged him and sexually assaulted him. George Klees would need to point the group to the correct source.
6) David Berkowitz never met with John Paul Ranieri. I did not publish this in the article because I do not feel it is relevant. I would assume he didn't meet with him because he was demonstrating, through dating the letter and the weird, cryptic writing in the corner of the left-hand side, that he might have still been involved with the group. You would need to see my version, apply a magnifying glass to it, to see the cryptic writing. There is a Thai "baht" monetary symbol. Thailand is previously known as "Siam" which is phonetically close to "Sam". I don't speak on behalf of David Berkowitz, so I'm not going to discuss why or why he didn't meet with him. This is only my conjecture based on how I would have reacted if I were him.
7) One person said, to be fair, maybe it would be embarrassing to post the letter. Not embarrassing remotely.
Maybe if you don't understand the complexities of the case, you shouldn't chime in on commenting in groups. All you do is stress Carl Denaro out in the process, btw. . .
Well, we’re dealing with the kind of people who can turn “wore a tan coat” into “wore a tan!!!”
DeleteðŸ¤
@Nathan
DeleteGood point. Thanks.
I guess nobody is supposed to notice that Manny begged Carl to just admit he was shot by David Berkowitz last night and then this morning there was a fake Carl Denaro Facebook account making friend requests.
ReplyDeleteThey’re getting weird and desperate. Statute of limitations and all…
DeleteIn case you are interested here is my new blog: https://medium.com/@criminaljusticechris/near-the-water-the-queens-district-attorney-s-and-the-nypd-s-cold-case-on-leslie-sue-zaret-579a9a21d7a7
ReplyDeleteI know Manny has been asserting David Berkowitz was responsible for her death. Wrong. The prime suspect does have the same profile: adopted, Jewish, owned a gun, on LSD.
Moreover, FBI determined more than one person laid her body out.
This is likely JJ from TUE. So exactly how did David Berkowitz know about this one as well as the women who went to Leuken? Dod they gain internal NYPD info? Did he really witness it? And why on earth did the NYPD lose evidence twice?
,
DeleteWhat do you mean by "This is likely JJ from TUE"?
Are you saying you think Leuken's story about JJ was really a reference to Leslie Zaret's murder?
TD
Yes I do.
DeleteA comb was used on Zaret. I think information about her was jumbled by the women who gave Leuken information or information was relayed to make it complicated.
Refer to the Santucci Leifer document. It says David claimed the cult killed a girl in 75. She was Jewish and her body was left near Oakland Lake. Zaret was left near Oakland.
I did not include any if this in the article but the FBI and the NYPD have the information.
@TD
DeleteIf you want a copy of the FBI report, I gave a copy to Ward. Maybe he'll share it with you. I forked over almost 8 pages of analysis and interviews to get what I got.
First off, nice job on that blog article on the Zaret case and obtaining the police reports. I believe that Santucci/Leifer document on the Queens DA site is Leifer writing a cover letter to Santucci and then attaching documentation and notes directly sent by Maury (notes dated November 6th, 1980 under "The Jerabek connection"). The question is did Berkowitz really reveal the hairbrush incident and when did he? Or is it Maury knowing of the 1974 Zaret case (it was main reported NY story in 74) and eventually getting the comb/brush info later on (from Queens DA or other sources?). You may be right on the confusion of someone mixing up the Zaret case with "Jacklin"/Jerabek and giving Lueken a confusing story.
DeleteFirst, Zaret would have made an attractive victim to the group because her birthday fell on 22 Sept, Mabon. Second, her name essentially anagrams out to a phonetic chameleon for water: retaz or retawz (plural).
DeleteThis means her birthday would have bern known, meaning someone close to her or her information was run and obtained. I believe she knew something and was profiled out as a serial killings, killings two birds with one stone since the group liked symbolism.
Wish I could say more, but the source saying someone wanted to go to the mother and say what happened is telling, but feared "thry" would hurt her family.
Thanks for the compliment. I worked hard on this one for two years.
Also, the comb was not disclosed to thr media until years later. Many many years.
DeleteLots of presumptions being made which are predicated on either the girls giving Leuken bad Intel, whether intentionally or not, or Leuken getting the stories jumbled in her letters to Dunleavy.
DeleteC and M gave Leuken information about 2 distinct murders they alleged had occurred...one that is proven (albeit with certain details that don't seem to match exactly) and one that was seemingly disproven, with the alleged victim (or an impostor) turning up alive to discount the story.
And Maury's own words attest to this...here's a direct quote from the Jerabek-Leuken Connection file:
"Leuken had been told by this C & M that T was the cult leader, was involved in SoS, and that Jane's car had been at the Mosko murder, and that Jane had been murdered."
And...
"When you step back and look at this whole episode, beginning with Leuken's initial meeting with C, M and "Jane" in June of 1977, you see that it is logical, and it makes sense. We've allowed prejudice to get the better of us. I think it's time that stopped, especially since we've got substantiation.
Here is what else the girls told Leuken:
---There was a murder in Queens in the summer of 1975 (August?) that this group was responsible for. A Jewish girl named Janice was killed in a schoolyard near Oakland Lake."
Now, is THIS reference likely pertaining to Leslie Zaret's murder? Presumably, although where they got the name Janice from is anybody's guess, as is why the year is off.
To summarize:
C and M tell Leuken about 2 murders they allegedly know about, one being Jane (or an impostor) who was allegedly chopped up and thrown in Little Neck Bay in August 1977, shortly after the Moskowitz murder...and a "1975" murder of a girl in a schoolyard...the details of which do not match Jane's alleged demise.
Leuken then relays the details of these alleged murders to Steve Dunleavy in several calls and letters...several.
If there is any confusion about this, it appears it is due to 1 small paragraph in TUE, which references Leuken's "latest" letter...wherein Maury's associate George Austin is quoted as saying (in 1978), "What are you going to do about all this? She talks about a mutilation murder three years ago and says they used a hairbrush on the girl...and Berkowitz witnessed it!"
Was Leslie Zaret mutilated?
TD
@TD
DeleteI would argue not unless you want to use mutilated loosely. Some people bastardize the English language, Grossman is one example.
The month is right, ethnicity right, near Oakland us right. Year off.
Little Neck Bay is close.
I argue is is a complicated riddle. The FBI and the NYPD have my analysis. I'll give them a year to look into it. If the do nada, like they did with my Zodiac tip related to the anagram, then I'll be forced to publish.
things, a question and a point...
DeleteIn your presentation to the FBI regarding your anagram solution...did you state that was a translation of the last 18 letters of the Z340, as your article implies?
As for those 18 characters, anagrams are incredibly subjective. One can rearrange letters in various ways to achieve results that could be correct, or could be totally off-base.
For example, did you know those last 18 have been anagrammed in the past and yielded the name of one of Arthur Leigh Allen's high school and college classmates, whom ALA had had a falling out with?
TD
That is interesting. Did not know that.
DeleteBut, considering "tip" is written in reverse trail, it needs to be eliminated first. Then the rest needs to be solved. Considered "x" is his signature and he implies his name is coded into letters, I'd lean towards my solution. Especially since it has been said Zodiac ties in.
Yes. I gave it to the FBI an explained it.
If you told the FBI those 18 characters are the last 18 of the Z340, they're likely to think you have no clue what you're talking about...those 18 are the last 18 of the Z408, the cipher decoded by the Hardens in 1969. If you go back and reference the article you were talking about in your piece, the one about Dave Oranchak and his team solving the Z340, you'll notice the author of the article was referencing the Z408 at that point in the article.
DeleteDetails matter.
TD
I referred to them as being the unsolved letters. I find the FBI does not follow up on tips unless it is placed in a FOIL request follow up to their email address. It was not done in this case.
DeleteAlso, behemoth is in line with water theory. It is a water animal in the book of Job and there is water symbolism in the Zodiac crimes. I don't believe he'd give his real name right way, either. But, I suppose there could be multiple meanings, including a high school mates name.
ReplyDeleteI've never bought it was Arthur, though.
I don't think ALA was Zodiac, either. Before I discounted the anagram idea, I briefly entertained the notion that one of the informants pointing the finger at ALA, Don Cheney, was Zodiac, and had written the cipher. I've long moved off that idea, as anagrams are very imperfect tools...
DeleteTD
Agree on imperfect. But if they are in line with other variables and if you can calculate the statistical probably in relation to other potential anagrams, there can be a fairly good argument for it being correct.
Delete