BS affidavits

General Discussion About the 1974 DeFeo Murders and related topics
User avatar
msmart112
Amityville_Member
Posts: 1945

BS affidavits

Post by msmart112 » Thu Apr 05, 2007 4:23 pm

In the late-eighties and very early-nineties, a number of Ronnie’s friends signed affidavits. Most of these BS affidavits were introduced at Ronnie’s 440 hearing in 1992 to support Ronnie’s BS claims.

Here is Barry Springer admitting that he was simply "going along with a story"…

Image

Here…Barry Springer talks about Chuck Tewksbury. Notice how Springer describes Tewksbury retracting his affidavit…and how Tewksbury stated that he never even read the statement he signed…

Image

Image

…if Chuck Tewksbury had written his own affidavit…why would he have needed to have read it? Maybe because someone else wrote it for him?

Here’s part of a letter from Frank Davidge to Ronnie DeFeo…

Image

…so now we also have Frank Davidge stating that he received an affidavit that was already prepared.

Here are parts of an affidavit that John Carswell wrote in which he retracted a previous affidavit…as well as part of a court document that references John Carswell...

Image

Image

Image

...wow...yet ANOTHER affidavit that was prepared in advance!

I wonder who wrote all of these affidavits?

And I wonder how John Carwell's original affidavit was notarized when it was served upon the court...when he cleary states that he never appeared before a notary?

It sure makes you wonder if other affidavits had been prepared in advance and illegally notarized, eh?

In fact, here's an affidavit from William Davidge. It's interesting how this affidavit is the first time that his name ever appeared in regard to the DeFeo case. It's also interesting how he lived in Florida...yet his affidavit was notarized in New York...

Image

Here's a great vid that deals with these BS affidavits...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mSCIF7kGWnY
Image

User avatar
Shawn
Been there, Done that
Posts: 2435

Post by Shawn » Sun Apr 08, 2007 6:43 pm

Too funny.
Those affidavits are as worthless as the person they are defending.
First of all, an affidavit is NOT fact in a legal sense of the word. And obviously, those particular ones were denounced by the very people that "signed" them, therefore making them nothing but worthless papers. Here is what I found on the net....


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Affidavit

Affidavit
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
An affidavit is a formal sworn statement of fact, signed by the declarant (who is called the affiant) and witnessed (as to the veracity of the affiant's signature) by a taker of oaths, such as a notary public. The name is Medieval Latin for he has declared upon oath.

One use of affidavits is to allow evidence to be gathered from witnesses or participants that may not be available to testify in person before the court.

Contents [hide]
1 United States Law
2 In England and Wales
3 External links
4 See also



[edit] United States Law
In American jurisprudence, under the rules for hearsay, admission of an unsupported affidavit as evidence is unusual (especially if the affiant is not available for cross-examination) with regard to material facts which may be dispositive of the matter at bar. Affidavits from persons who are dead or otherwise incapacitated, or who cannot be located or made to appear may be accepted by the court, but usually only in the presence of corroborating evidence. An affidavit which reflected a better grasp of the facts close in time to the actual events may be used to refresh a witness' recollection. Materials used to refresh recollection are admissible as evidence. If the affiant is a party in the case, the affiant's opponent may be successful in having the affidavit admitted as evidence, as statements by a party-opponent are not considered hearsay.

Some types of motions will not be accepted by the court unless accompanied by an independent sworn statement or other evidence, in support of the need for the motion. In such a case, a court will accept an affidavit from the filing attorney in support of the motion, as certain assumptions are made, to wit: The affidavit in place of sworn testimony promotes judicial economy. The lawyer is an officer of the court and knows that a false swearing by him, if found out, could be grounds for severe penalty up to and including disbarment. The lawyer if called upon would be able to present independent and more detailed evidence to prove the facts set forth in his affidavit.

User avatar
BellWitch74
Ruined Doll
Posts: 1940
Location: Wonderland

Post by BellWitch74 » Tue Apr 10, 2007 1:46 pm

Is Barry Springer related to Jerry Springer? :lol: :roll:
Madness starts here.
Malice in Wonderland

User avatar
MuyHippie
Amityville Addict
Posts: 203
Location: Corpus Christi, TX
Contact:

Post by MuyHippie » Tue Apr 10, 2007 1:57 pm

BellWitch74 wrote:Is Barry Springer related to Jerry Springer? :lol: :roll:
Now that would make for an interesting Springer Show.
[img]http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v233/Obladioblada/ZombieSupperSig.jpg[/img]

User avatar
BellWitch74
Ruined Doll
Posts: 1940
Location: Wonderland

Post by BellWitch74 » Tue Apr 10, 2007 1:59 pm

MuyHippie wrote:
BellWitch74 wrote:Is Barry Springer related to Jerry Springer? :lol: :roll:
Now that would make for an interesting Springer Show.
That's what I was thinking. It reads like one at times. . . :lol:
Madness starts here.
Malice in Wonderland

User avatar
msmart112
Amityville_Member
Posts: 1945

Post by msmart112 » Tue Apr 10, 2007 6:25 pm

For those of you who don't have a copy of Ric Osuna's "book"...here are some sworn statements that were allegedly made by Augosta Degenaro and Franklyn Boyde.

Not only is Boyde's statement not signed, but both statements look rather recent...especially when compared to Jacob Siegfried's name and signature.

For a long time I thought that Ric had doctored these statements...but now I think it was the work of Ronnie and Geraldine. These statements sound very much like certain other statements...

Image

Image

Image
Image

User avatar
msmart112
Amityville_Member
Posts: 1945

Post by msmart112 » Wed Apr 11, 2007 7:22 pm

Here's one more BS affidavit...from Ronnie himself...

Image
Image

User avatar
BellWitch74
Ruined Doll
Posts: 1940
Location: Wonderland

Post by BellWitch74 » Thu Apr 12, 2007 11:09 am

Hmmmmmm . . . . . wonder what Tracey thinks of that?
Madness starts here.
Malice in Wonderland

User avatar
astonio
Resident
Posts: 942
Location: Brooklyn, NY

Post by astonio » Thu Apr 12, 2007 11:50 am

BellWitch74 wrote:Hmmmmmm . . . . . wonder what Tracey thinks of that?
GREAT question! Would love to hear her explain away all of his past 'indiscretions'...and Lord, there are many, huh?

User avatar
BellWitch74
Ruined Doll
Posts: 1940
Location: Wonderland

Post by BellWitch74 » Thu Apr 12, 2007 1:01 pm

astonio wrote:
BellWitch74 wrote:Hmmmmmm . . . . . wonder what Tracey thinks of that?
GREAT question! Would love to hear her explain away all of his past 'indiscretions'...and Lord, there are many, huh?
Well, when I had access to TNE she had explanations aplenty for all of his indiscretions and lies. She believes him, I'm sure, but I don't. He's a killer, so why would you assume he's telling the truth? Especially after 30 years? He finally decides to tell the truth about everything? Not likely. People aren't like that.
Madness starts here.
Malice in Wonderland

User avatar
astonio
Resident
Posts: 942
Location: Brooklyn, NY

Post by astonio » Thu Apr 12, 2007 1:09 pm

BellWitch74 wrote:
astonio wrote:
BellWitch74 wrote:Hmmmmmm . . . . . wonder what Tracey thinks of that?
GREAT question! Would love to hear her explain away all of his past 'indiscretions'...and Lord, there are many, huh?
Well, when I had access to TNE she had explanations aplenty for all of his indiscretions and lies. She believes him, I'm sure, but I don't. He's a killer, so why would you assume he's telling the truth? Especially after 30 years? He finally decides to tell the truth about everything? Not likely. People aren't like that.
Couldn't agree more! I do regret I didn't join her forum to offer my own questions...and I have many! I would love to hear some of THOSE answers!!! (Man, I really would, too!) Like, did he ever explain why everyone was found in the same position??? Did he ever discussed this lingering question of many?? Oh snap! I JUST realized, wasted effort....and besides, I'd be more hurt/upset/burnt if he were free...but he isn't!

User avatar
BellWitch74
Ruined Doll
Posts: 1940
Location: Wonderland

Post by BellWitch74 » Thu Apr 12, 2007 1:53 pm

astonio wrote:
BellWitch74 wrote:
astonio wrote: GREAT question! Would love to hear her explain away all of his past 'indiscretions'...and Lord, there are many, huh?
Well, when I had access to TNE she had explanations aplenty for all of his indiscretions and lies. She believes him, I'm sure, but I don't. He's a killer, so why would you assume he's telling the truth? Especially after 30 years? He finally decides to tell the truth about everything? Not likely. People aren't like that.
Couldn't agree more! I do regret I didn't join her forum to offer my own questions...and I have many! I would love to hear some of THOSE answers!!! (Man, I really would, too!) Like, did he ever explain why everyone was found in the same position??? Did he ever discussed this lingering question of many?? Oh snap! I JUST realized, wasted effort....and besides, I'd be more hurt/upset/burnt if he were free...but he isn't!
I think the forum has been made public now, but you have to register to get on them still. I guess the difference is that there won't be people saying yay or nay to you. I haven't had the time to email anyone (if i had there email addresses that is) and have them reactivate my account. But you could join!
Madness starts here.
Malice in Wonderland

User avatar
astonio
Resident
Posts: 942
Location: Brooklyn, NY

Post by astonio » Thu Apr 12, 2007 3:32 pm

BellWitch74 wrote:
astonio wrote:
BellWitch74 wrote: Well, when I had access to TNE she had explanations aplenty for all of his indiscretions and lies. She believes him, I'm sure, but I don't. He's a killer, so why would you assume he's telling the truth? Especially after 30 years? He finally decides to tell the truth about everything? Not likely. People aren't like that.
Couldn't agree more! I do regret I didn't join her forum to offer my own questions...and I have many! I would love to hear some of THOSE answers!!! (Man, I really would, too!) Like, did he ever explain why everyone was found in the same position??? Did he ever discussed this lingering question of many?? Oh snap! I JUST realized, wasted effort....and besides, I'd be more hurt/upset/burnt if he were free...but he isn't!
I think the forum has been made public now, but you have to register to get on them still. I guess the difference is that there won't be people saying yay or nay to you. I haven't had the time to email anyone (if i had there email addresses that is) and have them reactivate my account. But you could join!
Doubtful. You see, I came across her forum some months back and I completed its registeration, but mistakenly included this specific question: If Butch didn't kill his siblings, how was he able to remark that John's leg was twitching involuntarily? Never got a response, nor an accepted memebership....but at this point, I feel the winner.

User avatar
BellWitch74
Ruined Doll
Posts: 1940
Location: Wonderland

Post by BellWitch74 » Fri Apr 13, 2007 8:13 am

I think the forum became public about 2 months ago or so. I could be wrong. No, you'll never get an answer to that question.
Madness starts here.
Malice in Wonderland

User avatar
astonio
Resident
Posts: 942
Location: Brooklyn, NY

Post by astonio » Fri Apr 13, 2007 8:58 am

BellWitch74 wrote:I think the forum became public about 2 months ago or so. I could be wrong. No, you'll never get an answer to that question.
To be honest, really, what CAN be said to excuse this away??? It was before the autopsy was completed, no way a cop could have 'forced' him to the admission. This alone establishes his role. I mean, for real, how can you comment on what you have seen, if your objective is to convey your innocence?? He's stupid.

User avatar
Brendan72
Forest Giant
Posts: 3065
Location: Australia
Contact:

Post by Brendan72 » Fri Apr 13, 2007 3:51 pm

When affidavits are made and signed does the notary co-sign them?

My impression is that affidavits are sworn testimonies and if found to be said in dishonesty then the person who made the original statement is in hot water.

Little help?
- Brendan72

"May the forces of evil become confused on the way to your house."
- George Carlin. Comedian. (1937-2008)

User avatar
msmart112
Amityville_Member
Posts: 1945

Post by msmart112 » Fri Apr 13, 2007 9:32 pm

Here's an interesting 1990 statement from Geraldine...

Image
Image

User avatar
msmart112
Amityville_Member
Posts: 1945

Post by msmart112 » Fri Apr 13, 2007 9:45 pm

Brendan72 wrote:When affidavits are made and signed does the notary co-sign them?
That's how it is "supposed" to work...unless someone is able to find a notary willing to sign and stamp an affidavit without witnessing a signature...

Image

Forgery is of course also an option. :wink:
Brendan72 wrote:My impression is that affidavits are sworn testimonies and if found to be said in dishonesty then the person who made the original statement is in hot water.
Absolutely. But...only if the court has the time and inclination to hunt down and seek charges against the perpetrator.
Image

User avatar
Brendan72
Forest Giant
Posts: 3065
Location: Australia
Contact:

Post by Brendan72 » Fri Apr 13, 2007 10:54 pm

I suspected this to be the case but wasn't sure how the affidavit process worked over there.

But like here I suspect the justice system is so under-resourced and staff overstretched that they wouldn't have time to investigate the validity of every affidavit.
- Brendan72

"May the forces of evil become confused on the way to your house."
- George Carlin. Comedian. (1937-2008)

scipio-USMC
Amityville Maniac
Posts: 1693

Re:

Post by scipio-USMC » Sat Mar 10, 2012 7:02 pm

msmart112 wrote:For those of you who don't have a copy of Ric Osuna's "book"...here are some sworn statements that were allegedly made by Augosta Degenaro and Franklyn Boyde.

Not only is Boyde's statement not signed, but both statements look rather recent...especially when compared to Jacob Siegfried's name and signature.

For a long time I thought that Ric had doctored these statements...but now I think it was the work of Ronnie and Geraldine. These statements sound very much like certain other statements...

Image

Image

Image

Unlike a NJ lawyer who is automatically a notory by virtue of passing the bar, a NY lawyer is not authorized to take oaths. Lawyers in NY will have their secretaries be notories and notarize documents not the lawyer.

At any rate even if someone did come in and say these things the lawyer would have no idea whether these people were who they claim (I can go five a statement not under oath and claim to be anyone I want) and because I refuse to say it under oath and claim I am not willing to repeat it again it actually serves no value at all.

Rhiannon99
Amityville Member
Posts: 6

Re: BS affidavits

Post by Rhiannon99 » Sat Mar 10, 2012 7:31 pm

msmart112 wrote: In fact, here's an affidavit from William Davidge. It's interesting how this affidavit is the first time that his name ever appeared in regard to the DeFeo case. It's also interesting how he lived in Florida...yet his affidavit was notarized in New York...

Image
There's something else odd about the Davidge affidavit.

The top of the document lists the county as "Volousia."

The county is misspelled. Edgewater is in Volusia county.

One would hope a notary (even a legal secretary) would check something like that, particularly with two states and two jurisdictions involved.

Post Reply