NOTE: This page has not been updated for Mr. Richard Schmack’s 3/24/2016 court filing. I am not making any updates in order to show the public what was publicly available to EVERYONE prior to the FIRST DAY OF TRIAL.
The entire case is The FBI Timeline, (page linked) I would encourage anyone looking at this website to read that page first.
Please contact me if you have any questions, comments or feel anything posted here is not correct. I have been told Jack (and myself for supporting him) is a monster so many times it really does not bother me any more. That said, I do my best to respond quickly to any questions asked.
First and foremost this case is about a murder of a seven year old girl. The pages on this blog cover all the important aspects of the case. There are many areas of the case I have yet to post on because I am waiting on the supporting document to become public so they can be referenced. Everything here is supported by linked documents. Although there are many interesting aspects, and colorful characters, the entire case get’s down to the timeline. Based on the FBI investigation in 1957 & 1958 Jack could not have been involved based on the time of the abduction and his collect call from Rockford at 6:57 PM, and verified meetings with military officials. It is that simple.
Based on the pages “Jack McCullough and the Maria Ridulph abduction” and the “Defense Motion 10/12/2012” it is clear Clay Campbell was in a very precarious position when he decided to go forward with the case. What is scary is before asking that the FBI files not be allowed in trial, the prosecution and the investigators “read them cover to cover” (See email – Zulawski), quoted from them, but only selectively, then did everything in their power to keep them out of the trial (August 2012 court documents, pages 7-9, etc.). If one looks at just the Charging_Papers and the FBI interviews of Mr. and Mrs. Ridulph (in a text document and original PDF on respective page), it is obvious Jack could not have committed the crime.
It is also clear Brion Hanley’s “Award for Excellence” from the Illinois Homicide Investigators Association (http://www.isp.state.il.us/media/pressdetails.cfm?ID=688) might have been premature based on the October 12, 2012 Defense Motion 10.12.11, point 13:
… primary investigator [Brion Hanley] conducted the identification… he had just interviewed Kathy Sigman Chapman eight days prior to the investigation for nearly an hour and a half. In that prior meeting, officers discussed details of the case with Kathy Sigman Chapman, including using her own prior descriptions in order to try and refresh her memory about the description of “Johnny.” …six pictures that were placed in front of Kathy Sigman Chapman for identification were impressively suggestive for the following reasons:
A. All five filler photos had a white background while the Defendant’s photo had a black background,
B. All five filler photos had gentlemen wearing a suit and tie while the Defendant’s photo had different clothing,
C. All five filler photos had the gentlemen looking off slightly to the right in a yearbook style pose while the Defendant was staring directly into the camera for his picture,
D. All five filler photos had gentlemen with neatly combed hair while the Defendant had unruly hair in his photo,
E. Defendant’s photo had an amateur quality appearance which caused his ear to shine brightly in the picture,
F. All five filler photos were taken directly from a yearbook while the Defendant’s was not.
Just pick out the one that does not look like the others, and the only one with a white face and no dark coat:
There are so many questions in this case, hopefully over time the questions will be answered.
Brion Hanley’s involvement in the Rape Trial also raises questions.
Understand, Brion Hanley “refreshed” Kathy’s memory with Jack’s picture in front of him. It is not know at this time which one of the descriptions Kathy originally gave to the FBI Brion used, or if he just described the picture he was looking at.