Hughes Arrested for 1981 Alavarez Murders (continued)

[barracuda]

I forgot to include a link to one of the small touching details about one of the soldiers and gentlemen prominently mentioned in that article I quoted in my second to last post about the arrest of Jimmy Hughes, and its implications wrt exposing the Octopus.

Oh, come on. You remember: The one with the very moving words of praise and gratitude for his reverend ministrations that were so recently and very publicly spoken by Gen. Miguel Angel Mejia Padgett. Who's not only so criminally dull that he doesn't even post to RI by proxy, but who was also one of the hardcore original members of the junta that forcibly took control of the Honduran government back in June. As well as one of the top lieutenants and lackeys of two-time School-of-the-Americas graduate and power-behind-the-coup, Romeo Vasquez Velasquez.

Anyway. It should have read like this:

"In this emotional meeting Christmas present was commander of the army, Gen. Miguel Angel Mejia Padgett, the defense minister, Adolfo Sevilla Lionel, the commander of the 110th Infantry Brigade, Colonel Alcides Flores Garcia, and the commanders of the structural units of Brigade."

Sorry to be so tiresome and repetitive about this. But it's not like you see nothing but favorable comments from the Honduran military about every American pastor who's set up shop to do good works there in the last twenty or so years. I mean, for heaven's sake, sometimes the Honduran military hasn't even said anything about popular religious leaders working with the poor of their country at all. They've just gone straight to assassinating them.

So it's really quite a distinction that the Reverend James "Jimmy" George Hughes is so highly valued by them. And imo, at least, it only adds to his credentials as a good guy whose reputation is untainted by any really seriously suspect or dubious associations, like having once mistakenly accused of being part of an ARG, or maybe sock-puppetry, or being a citizen who successfully prompted the government to do its job in terms of arresting people that it knows were involved in gang-style executions.

You've got to draw the line somewhere, after all.
____________________

I'd like to give a shout-out to nathan28. Thanks for suggesting randomized bolding of words to prevent text-skimming on whatever thread it was where you said that, dawg. Holla.

Wow, I actually think that technique works nicely for you, compared. Not that I ever felt anything but but the flow of your prose, you know, but a pointedly metered emphasis sort of gets a bit of a bounce going. Speaking of which, could you put some songs in the lounge now? Thank you.</off-topic>

[Percival]

SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT

THE GOVERNOR'S WARRANT FOR JIMMY HUGHES



By Virginia McCullough





Evangelist Jimmy Hughes was arrested on September 26, 2009 as he sat with his wife aboard an American Airlines plane awaiting take off that would have taken him to Honduras where the couple operated The Jimmy Hughes Ministries Children’s Home.



The State of Florida retained James George Hughes on a complaint prepared by California Deputy Attorney General Michael Murphy based on an investigation conducted by Riverside County Sheriff Homicide Unit, Cold Case Division Detective John M. Powers. The charges addressed a triple execution historically known as The Alvarez Executions that occurred in June of 1981. (10/6/09 Attorney General Jerry Brown's felony complaint against Jimmy Hughes )


Deputy AG Murphy’s complaint resulted in Jimmy Hughes fighting extradition from Florida to face the charges in California. This triggered a request by California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger to Florida Governor Charlie Crist that Governor Crist issue a Governor’s warrant requiring the extradition of Jimmy Hughes to California.



Media publicity since Hughes’ arrest has centered on the strange partnership formed between Riverside County Sheriff Cold Case Detective Powers and a woman who identifies herself as the daughter of one of the people killed in the backyard of Fred Alvarez’s home, Fred Boger. The woman is Rachel Begley who uses the internet handle Desertfae (Desertfae.com). On October 2, 2009 Desertfae wrote an article entitled Jimmy Hughes Arrested on Murder Charges: 1981 Triple Homicide and posted it to the web. She discusses her alliance with Detective Powers in the following paragraphs:


Detective John Powers at the Riverside County Sheriff’s Department in California, Central Homicide Unit – Cold Case Division, was assigned to investigate the 28-year-old triple homicide case about 2 years ago when Rachel Begley, the daughter of victim Ralph Boger, convinced the sheriff’s department to re-open the case.

Both Powers and Begley were aware of what they were stepping into when they launched their investigations. Today, their respective findings resemble the stuff of spy novels, comprised of all the dynamics of clandestine government agents and organized crime figures involved in murder, money laundering and covert arms deals while exploiting Indian sovereignty (independent of most U.S. laws) at the Cabazon reservation……

Meanwhile, Detective John Powers, with the full support and backing of the Riverside Sheriff, relentlessly followed the cold-case trail from 1981 to the present, examining thousands of old documents across the state, resurrecting police reports from forgotten archives (which were not computerized 28 years ago), and interviewing dozens of hostile witnesses who feared to come forward in 1981.

Ultimately, Powers formed a secret investigative alliance with Begley, a computer whiz, and their work came to fruition last week when Detective Powers was notified by authorities in Miami, Florida that Jimmy Hughes was in the U.S. and preparing to depart for Honduras.

Det. Powers is currently in the process of getting the Governor's Warrant to have Jimmy Hughes brought back to California. He filed a Felony Complaint for Extradition in Indio Court on October 1, case number INF-066719.


This partnership is elaborated on by Detective Powers in an article entitled Daughter’s Work Helps Break Triple Homicide Case by Monica Torline and Kate McGinty in the October 18, 2009 issue of The Desert Sun.



She managed to find documents and people tied to the case that no one else ever uncovered, said Riverside County sheriff's Det. John Powers, lead investigator on the case.

"Rachel uncovered a lot more that we didn't know about,” Powers said, declining to elaborate further on what new evidence surfaced. “She's very tenacious.”….

Begley's independent investigation has been critical to today's case, Powers said.
People across the country have found her blog and personal videos online and reached out to her. Even relatives of Alvarez and Castro have contacted her through her site.

Begley became an information broker of sorts, getting some people to trust her enough to introduce them to Powers. He's met about a dozen of Begley's sources from across the nation who have ties to or a deeper knowledge of the case.

Powers considers her a partner in their ongoing work.

And their partnership isn't over yet, said Begley, who lives with her husband and four children outside Louisville.

“I've got the answers I was looking for, but it's more than that now. It's more of a moral issue,” she said.

“I think it comes down to my dad and friend (Fred) always telling me to do the right thing. I've got all this information, so I want to make sure something comes of it, something meaningful.”

On November 6, 2009 Rachel Begley issued a new press release entitled Florida Governor Charlie Crist's Office Stalls On Extradition of Jimmy Hughes Arrested on Murder Charges: “Octopus Murders.

The following are excerpts from that press release:

Hughes has been held at Miami-Dade Metro West Detention Center since his arrest on 09/26/09. The extradition process involves a Governors Warrant being sent from the State of California to the office of Charlie Crist, Governor of Florida. During the time that the paperwork is being completed, Hughes is required to have a hearing approximately every 30 days. The State of Florida can hold Hughes up to 90 days while the paperwork is being completed, after which time, they reportedly must release him.

Upon learning the news of the second delay, Rachel Begley decided to take action to find the reason for the delay. During the course of the day, she was able to confirm that Governor Charlie Crist's Office has had the completed paperwork in their possession for over two weeks. She made multiple calls, left multiple voice mails, sent emails, and faxes to attempt to speed up the extradition of Jimmy Hughes.

Monica Torline of The Desert Sun wrote today, “Once we issue the warrant we are not involved in the extradition process as it moves through the court system,” Florida press secretary Sterling Ivey told The Desert Sun by e-mail Friday. Officials in the extradition unit of the Miami Dade County State Attorney's Office said in most cases, the governor's warrant is filed with the court during an extradition hearing.”

This extradition hearing has yet to take place. One must wonder how long the delays and stalling will take place. Will Jimmy Hughes be released due to the State of Florida's stalling techniques or a technicality?

This reporter requested information from the Miami-Dade County Police Department, Warrants Division to clarify the timing of the Governor’s warrant requesting the extradition of murder suspect Jimmy Hughes in order to determine whether the process has been affected by the politics alleged in the Begley press release. The following is that request:

From: Virginia McCulloughvmccullough@comcast.net Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2009 11:14 AM
To: l.adams@mdpd.com
Cc:
Subject: FW: Governor's Warrant on Hughes

Thank you for your time this morning. The email below and the attachments were kindly supplied to me by Ed Griffith, Miami SAO. It involves a request for extradition from Calif. Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger to Florida Gov. Charlie Crist for James George Hughes

The first document you pull up on the attachment is a cover letter from Gov. Crist’s Extradition Coordinator

Susan L. Smith. It is addressed to the Warrants Division of your department and it is dated Friday, October 16, 2009. I am told that Gov. Crist received Gov. Schwarzenegger’s request for extradition on October 15, 2009 which then indicates a one-day turn around. However, the Warrants Division stamp indicates it was not received until October 22, 2009. I am assuming that the letter did not get mailed until the evening of the 16th and was in transit on Saturday, the 17th. Therefore it was apparently received on the fourth working day after mailing.

My question is whether on not this time frame for mail between the Governor’s office and the Warrant Division is typical and, if not, could you supply an explanation for anything that might have been unusual about this particular request for extradition.

Rest at link:

http://www.newsmakingnews.com/vm,fred,a ... 16,09.html

[Dr_Doogie]

Funny how Rachel is accused by the NMN crew of tainting the jury pool by trying to see why the delay in Hughes's extradition when VM did exactly the same thing.

[compared2what?]

Percival? You posted over my head. And I don't want inadvertently to end up compounding an unwitting error, or exacerbating the appearance of conflict, or [whatever the case might be] just as a result of having been too proud to admit that I didn't understand what point you were making by posting that article. So it's a good thing I'm not that proud. Forgive me for being so slow-witted. But could you give me an assist wrt your intended meaning? I'm foggy-brained today.

[Percival]

Funny how Rachel is accused by the NMN crew of tainting the jury pool by trying to see why the delay in Hughes's extradition when VM did exactly the same thing.

Yea there is more to this whole Rachel, VM, Hughes thing than meets the eye and I am driving myself batshit crazy trying to find out whose agenda is what.

[Percival]

Funny how Rachel is accused by the NMN crew of tainting the jury pool by trying to see why the delay in Hughes's extradition when VM did exactly the same thing.

Yea there is more to this whole Rachel, VM, Hughes thing than meets the eye and I am driving myself batshit crazy trying to find out whose agenda is what.

My concern has always been this statement by VM that Rachel had nothing to do with getting the case reopened and that:

Direct quotes from VM from this thread:

viewtopic.php?f=8&t=16066&hilit=danny+casolaro+asked+for+help&start=45

I do not believe that desertfae is a "victim" and she has not posted any information that she is who she claims to be. The best evidence of this belief is her removal of her so-called birth certificate from the web. I want to add here that desertfae had absoutely NO influence on the re-opening of the cold case file on the Alvarez slayings. However she is attacking people who are putting their lives in danger trying to solve this triple homicide. What she is doing is particpating as an actress in an Alternate Reality Game. She is a low stage puppet reporting to the puppet master and two or three of his minions.

Here you see desertfae reveal what her motivation is in the videos. She is seeking to act as a sponge - soliciting the net for more documents she can acquire to create more ARGs.

I would like her to clarify that at some point.

[Percival]

Percival? You posted over my head. And I don't want inadvertently to end up compounding an unwitting error, or exacerbating the appearance of conflict, or [whatever the case might be] just as a result of having been too proud to admit that I didn't understand what point you were making by posting that article. So it's a good thing I'm not that proud. Forgive me for being so slow-witted. But could you give me an assist wrt your intended meaning? I'm foggy-brained today.

Oh there is no meaning to it, I have just been doing a lot of reading about the case the last few days and I am posting things for our record here that I find interesting. Carry on.

[Dr_Doogie]

Yea there is more to this whole Rachel, VM, Hughes thing than meets the eye and I am driving myself batshit crazy trying to find out whose agenda is what.

IMHO, there are multiple layers of agendas in play here. The NMN gals seek to be the primary online source of information about this case and are tweaked that Rachel has effectively kept them out of the inner sanctum of direct information. The next level is why do these women seek to dominate the reporting and impunge anyone who does not tote the NMN line. And, of course, why do they seek to always portray Rachel in the worst light possible, even in the face of overwhelming evidence that their claims are BS?

I think that Rachel's motivation for the pissing match is obvious - she feels that NMN is openly working to disrupt the prosecution of Hughes. And based on what we have seen here, her concerns seem more than valid.

I am as confused as anyone as to AD's role in this affair and his/her consistent defense of the NMN regardless of the solidness of the evidence of malfesence.

And my distaste for NMN stems from the fact that they have so polluted the atmosphere with witnesses and principals in the Philip Thompson case with their antics that many refuse to speak with any reporters or researchers anymore. One of the first questions that I must face is "are you affilliated with Virginia McCullough or Kate Dixon?" It is telling that no one asks if I am affilliated with any other reporter who covered the case.

Much of the whizzing matches that you are seeing here are an extension of feuds that have bubbled under the surface for years in emails and personal contact. They have just come out into the open recently in this forum, but to the unaware, it seems like people are coming out of the blue with what appears to be unjustified animosity toward each other. It is not new, just now openly being displayed.

[compared2what?]

Percival? You posted over my head. And I don't want inadvertently to end up compounding an unwitting error, or exacerbating the appearance of conflict, or [whatever the case might be] just as a result of having been too proud to admit that I didn't understand what point you were making by posting that article. So it's a good thing I'm not that proud. Forgive me for being so slow-witted. But could you give me an assist wrt your intended meaning? I'm foggy-brained today.

Oh there is no meaning to it, I have just been doing a lot of reading about the case the last few days and I am posting things for our record here that I find interesting. Carry on.

Okey-doke. That piece was posted on page 4 or so of the locked thread, as well. For the record, I replied by saying I did not understand why anyone would write such an article. It's manifestly absurd to suggest that there's a high enough likelihood that by the time jury selection rolls around (in Riverside County, CA) a small mistake about a procedural detail (that occurred in what will by then have become the distant past in Miami-Dade County, FL) will have the kind of oomph and impact it would take to taint the jury pool. And it's very difficult to believe that anyone who's spent as much time in courtrooms as Ms. McCullough has wouldn't know that. So I just don't understand it. Because inexplicable as it would be if it were a seriously intended but profoundly and anomalously ignorant piece of reportage, it's not like it would be any more explicable if it was a well-informed page of empty words dedicated by an astute reporter to what she knew was a non-existent problem. Because that kind of intentional breach of the trust invested in her by her readership obviously can't help anyone and it can only hurt her.

It was and is baffling to me, therefore.

[compared2what?]

Funny how Rachel is accused by the NMN crew of tainting the jury pool by trying to see why the delay in Hughes's extradition when VM did exactly the same thing.

Yea there is more to this whole Rachel, VM, Hughes thing than meets the eye and I am driving myself batshit crazy trying to find out whose agenda is what.

Hey! I've been in that place on previous occasions enough times myself to amiably and gently encourage and exhort you not to keep doing it if it really is driving you batshit crazy. Because it really can sometimes, especially when you can see clearly that there's more than meets the eye, but not clearly enough to formulate a testable hypothesis or several as to what. Because then it just turns into an ever-mounting investment of energy in a quest that serves no useful end whatsoever, despite feeling -- in the moment -- like an urgent necessity. I mean, I know that you probably have somehow to maintain a robust and healthy relationship with serial bouts of quasi-obsessional thinking to do your job well, and I respect and trust you to make whatever judgment calls that may require. I just, you know, don't want you to go batshit crazy. Though I guess I'm hoping that kind of goes without saying. So...Well, now I've written myself into The Place With No Transition to Sign-Off In Sight and, um....Rock on, Percival! Bye!

[Percival]

Yea there is more to this whole Rachel, VM, Hughes thing than meets the eye and I am driving myself batshit crazy trying to find out whose agenda is what.

IMHO, there are multiple layers of agendas in play here. The NMN gals seek to be the primary online source of information about this case and are tweaked that Rachel has effectively kept them out of the inner sanctum of direct information. The next level is why do these women seek to dominate the reporting and impunge anyone who does not tote the NMN line. And, of course, why do they seek to always portray Rachel in the worst light possible, even in the face of overwhelming evidence that their claims are BS?

I think that Rachel's motivation for the pissing match is obvious - she feels that NMN is openly working to disrupt the prosecution of Hughes. And based on what we have seen here, her concerns seem more than valid.

I am as confused as anyone as to AD's role in this affair and his/her consistent defense of the NMN regardless of the solidness of the evidence of malfesence.

And my distaste for NMN stems from the fact that they have so polluted the atmosphere with witnesses and principals in the Philip Thompson case with their antics that many refuse to speak with any reporters or researchers anymore. One of the first questions that I must face is "are you affilliated with Virginia McCullough or Kate Dixon?" It is telling that no one asks if I am affilliated with any other reporter who covered the case.

Much of the whizzing matches that you are seeing here are an extension of feuds that have bubbled under the surface for years in emails and personal contact. They have just come out into the open recently in this forum, but to the unaware, it seems like people are coming out of the blue with what appears to be unjustified animosity toward each other. It is not new, just now openly being displayed.

Any guesses why NMN would work to sabotage Hughes prosecution, thats the part I dont understand and youre right it does seem pretty obvious thats whats happening.

[desertfae]

Yea there is more to this whole Rachel, VM, Hughes thing than meets the eye and I am driving myself batshit crazy trying to find out whose agenda is what.

IMHO, there are multiple layers of agendas in play here. The NMN gals seek to be the primary online source of information about this case and are tweaked that Rachel has effectively kept them out of the inner sanctum of direct information. The next level is why do these women seek to dominate the reporting and impunge anyone who does not tote the NMN line. And, of course, why do they seek to always portray Rachel in the worst light possible, even in the face of overwhelming evidence that their claims are BS?

I think that Rachel's motivation for the pissing match is obvious - she feels that NMN is openly working to disrupt the prosecution of Hughes. And based on what we have seen here, her concerns seem more than valid.

I am as confused as anyone as to AD's role in this affair and his/her consistent defense of the NMN regardless of the solidness of the evidence of malfesence.

And my distaste for NMN stems from the fact that they have so polluted the atmosphere with witnesses and principals in the Philip Thompson case with their antics that many refuse to speak with any reporters or researchers anymore. One of the first questions that I must face is "are you affilliated with Virginia McCullough or Kate Dixon?" It is telling that no one asks if I am affilliated with any other reporter who covered the case.

Much of the whizzing matches that you are seeing here are an extension of feuds that have bubbled under the surface for years in emails and personal contact. They have just come out into the open recently in this forum, but to the unaware, it seems like people are coming out of the blue with what appears to be unjustified animosity toward each other. It is not new, just now openly being displayed.

Any guesses why NMN would work to sabotage Hughes prosecution, thats the part I dont understand and youre right it does seem pretty obvious thats whats happening.

Well, with the ban hammer hanging over some of our heads, I don't think that can be answered here.

[Percival]

Yea there is more to this whole Rachel, VM, Hughes thing than meets the eye and I am driving myself batshit crazy trying to find out whose agenda is what.

IMHO, there are multiple layers of agendas in play here. The NMN gals seek to be the primary online source of information about this case and are tweaked that Rachel has effectively kept them out of the inner sanctum of direct information. The next level is why do these women seek to dominate the reporting and impunge anyone who does not tote the NMN line. And, of course, why do they seek to always portray Rachel in the worst light possible, even in the face of overwhelming evidence that their claims are BS?

I think that Rachel's motivation for the pissing match is obvious - she feels that NMN is openly working to disrupt the prosecution of Hughes. And based on what we have seen here, her concerns seem more than valid.

I am as confused as anyone as to AD's role in this affair and his/her consistent defense of the NMN regardless of the solidness of the evidence of malfesence.

And my distaste for NMN stems from the fact that they have so polluted the atmosphere with witnesses and principals in the Philip Thompson case with their antics that many refuse to speak with any reporters or researchers anymore. One of the first questions that I must face is "are you affilliated with Virginia McCullough or Kate Dixon?" It is telling that no one asks if I am affilliated with any other reporter who covered the case.

Much of the whizzing matches that you are seeing here are an extension of feuds that have bubbled under the surface for years in emails and personal contact. They have just come out into the open recently in this forum, but to the unaware, it seems like people are coming out of the blue with what appears to be unjustified animosity toward each other. It is not new, just now openly being displayed.

Any guesses why NMN would work to sabotage Hughes prosecution, thats the part I dont understand and youre right it does seem pretty obvious thats whats happening.

Well, with the ban hammer hanging over some of our heads, I don't think that can be answered here.

Can you PM me because I really dont understand why anyone would NOT want that bastard in prison. Does he deserve a fair trial? ABSOLUTELY. Does he deserve the death penalty? NO in my opinion I am against that. But if he is guilty he should pay the price for that so why in the world would NMN want to help the defense if they too, like us, understand what the Octopus is really all about?

What am I missing here?

[Cordelia]

.

Well, with the ban hammer hanging over some of our heads, I don't think that can be answered here.

Can you PM me because I really dont understand why anyone would NOT want that bastard in prison. Does he deserve a fair trial? ABSOLUTELY. Does he deserve the death penalty? NO in my opinion I am against that. But if he is guilty he should pay the price for that so why in the world would NMN want to help the defense if they too, like us, understand what the Octopus is really all about? What am I missing here?[/quote]


I think Percival is expressing what many readers wonder, at least I do. Would it be possible to answer in a hypothetical, theoretical manner without addressing specific people?

Percival, on the thread that was just locked, you wrote:

"I am a journalist by the way paid, known and published, its what I do for a living and we abide by certain ethics, at least most of us in the professional journalistic world do, I cant attest for you people who call yourself journalists because you have a website."

Can you write more about your thoughts on current ethical standards of journalism, and also what defines a journalist, as opposed to a reporter or a website blogger? I ask because I wonder your take on how ethics may have changed from an 'old school' of journalism, and what readers view now, via websites and internet reporting; how this 'new school' might impact a decades old, high profile and far-reaching case like this.

(As a little girl in the 1950's, I spent a lot of time in a newspaper office--my father was our city's bureau chief for the state's main newspaper--surrounded by reporters & journalists, and at lunch and after hours at the local watering hole. I wasn't old enough--or interested--to understand their reporting standards; they worked hard at the grindstone in the office, while I entertained myself with the grease pencils and newsprint, but what I remember most was trying to protect my head amidst the after hours political arguments, the boozing and brawling......)

[annie aronburg]

what I remember most was trying to protect my head amidst the after hours political arguments, the boozing and brawling......)

Sounds like this place.