Serving life for Ayer murder, ex-Gree...

Serving life for Ayer murder, ex-Green Beret sues for last Army...

There are 119 comments on the Lowell Sun story from Jan 25, 2009, titled Serving life for Ayer murder, ex-Green Beret sues for last Army.... In it, Lowell Sun reports that:

Thirty years after William Tyree Jr. was convicted of ordering the murder of his wife in their Ayer apartment, the former Green Beret has filed a $5 million federal lawsuit against the Army, claiming he never ...

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Lowell Sun.

First Prev
of 6
Next Last
sistervictim

Goldston, NC

#108 Jul 30, 2014
Angelturner........you really should consider some new material!
sistervictim

Goldston, NC

#109 Jul 30, 2014
A little "food for thought" Angelturner.....the Ayer PD, the MA State Police, and the Army CID knew EXACTLY where the knife would be found. They knew it would be in a plastic bag. And, they knew under whose pillow it would be found before Bill Tyree made his "escape" from Maryland! How, you say? Where would they get such an idea? How could anyone know this that far ahead? You can find that information very easily, by carefully reading the testimony from the Probanle Cause Hearing and/or the Criminal Trial! It is right there. In black and white. Yours for the "picking"! So instead of boring us to death with your incessant posts of the flawed Killiam order, you might want to read something else that is relevant to the matter at hand. Because, you see my dear, all of the aforementioned entities were made aware of EVERY. SINGLE..WORD. Uttered by Tyree while he was in Maryland was shared in nearly "real time"! And, as has been the case from the beginning, Tyree was his own worst enemy! His absolute, narcissistic, adoration of his own voice was exactly what did him in! "What a tangled web we weave, when we practice to deceive." Tyree was given enough rope to hang himself, but he bumped the chair right out from under his own two feet! Priceless! Absolutely, positively hilarious! I do just love a good riddle now and then, don't you Angelturner? Cryptics are fun, no? It was enlighteing to watch someone who was convinced of his own "genius" say, and do every single thing needed to ultimately do himself in! You know what they say, dear. Don't you? "You just can't make this stuff up"!

Since: Apr 11

Belfast, ME

#115 Aug 11, 2014
THE ORDER OF JUDGE JAMES W. KILLAM, III,
AYER DISTRICT COURT JUDGE – MAY 15, 1979

EARL PETERS AND HIS SHOTGUN PART II-k

Reference to the Killam order may be found @#28 (08/12/12) and #33 (10/12/12)

“7.”( POST #114), continued:

After the lengthy complaint of DeMichaelis regarding the admissibility of Menzie’s testimony (now devastating to the Commonwealth), Spadafora has heard DeMichaelis (largely without objection from the defense attorneys) laboriously extract testimony from Menzie, HIS WITNESS, arguably favorable to the Commonwealth. Now, it seems DeMichaelis is unwilling that the defense be provided with an equal opportunity to hear alternate, contrary, testimony.

Spadafora has heard enough.

“MR. SPADAFORA: Your Honor, if I may respond to the District Attorney. On direct examination, the Sergeant here quoted Mr. Tyree as saying that he believed his wife was killed because of a series of incidents that he was involved in. Considering the fact that there were a number of instances involved in a number of different locations, it could result in the possibility that the people involved on the other end of those instances could have a great deal of reason to do away with his wife, specifically, because she knew what they were doing, and she had kept a record thereof. And, Mr. Tyree’s direct conversation is what I am eliciting here from the Sergeant; was that Mr. Peters on the Saturday before the wife was killed, specifically said when confront[ed] by his wife, that she had a book, and she knew what he was doing, people who keep books like that are going to get their throats cut. Now, if that isn’t relevant, then perhaps, the fact that she is dead isn’t relevant.”

This has now become an arena of intense professional rivalry. DeMichaelis must counter the satirical statement which concluded Spadafora’s paragraph (above), else the prosecution’s posture will deteriorate further:

"MR. DEMICHAELIS: May I further state that it isn’t so much the substance that I am objecting to, if it came from a source of a personal knowledge of this witness, such as if he had heard Peters say certain things, or if he had, which are inconsistent with Peters’ testimony, or if he had seen Peters doing this stuff personally, which would be inconsistent with Peters’ testimony, this is commonly called a hearsay self-serving source, to wit: the defendant, which is pure and adulter[at]ed hearsay, which also applies to cross-examination as well as direct examination, as far as I’m concerned I would strongly suggest, if You Honor please, that under those circumstances, this is entirely inadmissible, and I again, renew my motion to strike that whole series of questions and answers that come from a source, from the mouth of the defendant, not even an independent person.”

Readers of this entire transcript (and others) might notice the failure of Bradley (for Tyree) to strenuously enter this ongoing fray on behalf of Tyree. This failure on the part of Bradley reveals an easily identifiable pattern which will be evident through the superior court trial of Tyree.

Not so “THE COURT”. The transcript bristles with evidence that Judge Killam closely followed all:

"THE COURT: I disagree with you that it’s self-serving.
Your motion is denied.”

P. 113; L. 6-P. 115; L. 3

There remains but one query to complete the destruction of what Judge Killam termed

"the credibility of Michael Peters."

[POST #114, P. 113, L. 4-5]

Did Bill Tyree ever tell Michael Menzie that he believed
that Earl Michael Peters murdered his wife, Elaine Tyree?

EARL PETERS AND HIS SHOTGUN – End PART II-k
sistervictim

Goldston, NC

#116 Aug 12, 2014
Angelturner......your life mst be very boring, your horizons quite restricted. Repeating something over and over again, does not make it so.

Since: Apr 11

Lincolnville, ME

#117 Aug 14, 2014
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN (Post 1)

Non-public discussion before a Quorum of the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts for

SJC-11633 -COMMONWEALTH v. WILLIAM M. TYREE, JR.

will commence on September 3, 2014 at the Boston courthouse. Docket activity may be viewed by entering

www.ma-appellatecourts.org/search_number.php

Under docket number, enter

“sjc-11633”

The “Case Docket” page has 4 active sites:

“SJ-2013-350”– Single justice proceedings before Justice Lenk.
Judge Lenk's denial of Tyree’s request for

1. Dismissal of the 1979 indictment-
2. Arrest of Earl Michael Peters-

led to the current appeal to the full Court, "SJC-11533".

The latter motion is pursuant to the terms of SJ-79-279,
“AGREED JUDGMENT”, 11/20/79. Note that “Paper”#12
(10/03/13) seeks to amend the Tyree's current complaint with
“Para (e)”. This submission cites the extensive statements
(some current) of Vias Williams, witness to a man running from
the Tyree apartment at the time of the murder (noon, 01/30/79)
and the failure of the system of justice to bring his testimony
forward. Recently a police report and result of a hypnotic
session with Williams have appeared but could not be cited in
the “Paper”. All statements of Willliams, including his exposure
to 2 or more lineups, confirm that the man he witnessed was not
Erik Aarhus.

“James W. Sahakian, A.D.A.”– Mr. Sahakian (according to our under-
standing) is currently appellate counsel for the Commonwealth of
Massachusetts. Mr. Sahakian’s name also appears as an
an associate District Attorney in the 1979 case of John Droney et al
v. District Court of Ayer (Case No. SJ-79-279). This proceeding
(conducted without notice to either Tyree or Aarhus) resulted in the
withdrawal of an arrest warrant for Earl Michael Peters for the first
degree murder of Elaine Tyree. The conclusion of the case, an
“AGREED JUDGMENT”, Nov. 20, 1979, provided that

“[t]he individual defendants [Ayer District Court and clerk] shall
decline to exercise their jurisdiction to entertain applications for
complaints brought by any party which seek to charge any
individual or individuals with complicity in the murder of Elaine
Tyree, unless so ordered by a justice or justices of the supreme
judicial court.”
Page 2, Para. 4

The current case brought before the Court by Tyree is, in part,
pursuant to the terms of this “AGREED JUDGMENT”.

“Jamie Michael Charles. A.D.A.”– An Assistant District Attorney
assigned to the case by District Attorney for Middlesex County.

“Appellant Tyree Brief”– The full (pdf) brief for the Tyree case, written
and entered by Tyree. Cited, again, are the same 2 motions by
Tyree found in the single justice case, SJ-2013-350:

1. Dismissal of his 1979 indictment-(#4)

2. Arrest of Earl Michael Peters for the first degree murder of
Elaine Tyree (#5)

End Post 1 – TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN
sistervictim

Goldston, NC

#118 Aug 14, 2014
Angelturner.........pfffffffft ! Inconsequential finding for an inconsequential man, reposted by an inconsequential minion!

Since: Apr 11

Brunswick, ME

#119 Aug 15, 2014
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN (Post 2)

Non-public discussion before a Quorum of the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts for

SJC-11633 -COMMONWEALTH v. WILLIAM M. TYREE, JR.

will commence on September 3, 2014 at the Boston courthouse. Docket activity may be viewed by entering

www.ma-appellatecourts.org/search_number.php

Under docket number, enter

“sjc-11633”

The live site,@“Appellant Tyree Brief”, fully addresses the purpose of Tyree’s appeal. The motions (not live on the SJC site) to:

Dismiss Tyree’s 1979 indictment (“Paper # 4”)-

Arrest Earl Michael Peters for the first degree
murder of Elaine Tyree (“Paper # 5”)-

are predicated on evidence advanced in the extensive brief.

The factual allegations in support of the foregoing can be found in the brief, in part, on Page 7, Para. 21 and 22.

“(a). the Killam decision”(cf. TOPIX site Posts #23,27,29,33,73,78)
“(b). Gardner statement”(#26,73)
“(c). Aarhus affidavit”(#73)
“(d) Jack Hebb letter”(#23,73)

See also recent posts beginning with #92, 07/11/14.

Note:“Paper”#10 (04/10/14) was provided by Col. Forest S. Rittgers, Jr., former Base Commander of Fort Devens through the Probable Cause hearings in 1979. In the evening of Feb. 13, 1979, acting as a federal magistrate, Col. Rittgers gave oral, telephonic permission to Criminal Investigation Agent Joseph Burzynksi to search the barracks room of Erik Aarhus. This search resulted in the recovery of a knife which was purportedly tied to the murder of Elaine Tyree. Pursuant to information received by Col. Rittgers over the past 2 years, he has found a measure of deception in the information orally relayed to him by Agent Burzynski and has revoked his orally granted permission to search the Aarhus room, effective April 7, 2014.

Note:“Paper”#13 (04/24/14) states that “[t]he Commonwealth will not be submitting a brief in opposition to [Tyree’s] present appeal”. The grounds given for this withdrawal from the Tyree case are that “[Tyree’s] submissions do not raise any new issues not previously addressed by the Commonwealth in its original opposition.” Parties acquainted with this latest development have noted a facial inconsistency in the latter statement since the decision of Col. Rittgers, revoking the search authorization (Rittgers letter to the Court, dated April 7, 2014), is clearly a “new issue[]” within the meaning of that expression.

TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN –(End Post 2)

Since: Apr 11

Monroe, ME

#124 Oct 2, 2014
THE ORDER OF JUDGE JAMES W. KILLAM, III, AYER DISTRICT COURT JUDGE – MAY 15, 1979
EARL PETERS AND HIS SHOTGUN PART II-o

Reference to the Killam order may be found @#28 (08/12/12) and #33 (10/12/12)

It is now clear, as of 04/11/79, that the Court has begun to find Probable Cause against Peters:

“It’s entirely possible that Peters is the knife man.” DAY 6, P. 25; L. 4-5 (See Post # 123, 09/03/14)

An inquiry into the grounds for the Court’s covertly expressed (to counsel) view is now properly before us. And so, it is imperative that we now be informed that, 2 days before, on DAY 4 (04/09/79), the infamous “letters” from Tyree to Menzie and Woodland, exhaustively cited in their prior testimony on that day, had been submitted to the Court as “EXHIBITS #7, 8 & 9”(DAY 4)
at the conclusion of Michael Menzie’s last appearance on the stand. It is clear that neither the Court nor counsel had heretofore read the contents thereof.

An odd legal crossroads (if not a ‘roadblock’ for the Commonwealth) has appeared:

The letters appear to contain material which, IF BELIEVED,, completely destroys
the value of Earl Michael Peters as the chief witness for the Commonwealth.

If Tyree had appeared as a witness in the current proceeding, his statements in the letters would be subject to cross-examination and potential impeachment. But, since Tyree has decided not to testify, there are no direct means of impeaching the crucial statements, cited but yet to be found in his letters. DeMichaelis (for the Commonwealth) could recall both Menzie and Woodland AFTER perusal of the letters’ contents (an option which, oddly, he failed to pursue). He could move to have the letters excluded from formal submission to the Court (an option denied by the Court) BUT COUNSEL WAS NOT ALLOWED TO SEE THE LETTERS UNTIL AFTER THE CONCLUSION OF THE MENZIE/WOODLAND TESTIMONY. Consequently, DeMichaelis will have to deal with ‘the cow AFTER she leaves the barn’. In the interim, the Court saw the letters.

The letters, 3 in number, are postmarked March 14, 23 and 30, 1979, the first being presumably written by Tyree little more than 4 weeks from the day of his arrest on February 13, 1979.

THE FIRST LETTER – EXHIBIT #7

Item 1. The joint Peters/Tyree criminal activity

After the conclusion of the personal body of the letter, Tyree drearily recites some 16 occasions, some of which necessarily involved him in, either participation in or witness to, several varieties of criminal activity. Most of the occasions involved cooperation with Peters, one with Erik Aarhus. Certain materials were stolen by Tyree from military supply but, according to him, given, not sold, to others. None of the 16 occasions involved Tyree in harm, threatened or otherwise, to any person.

Item 2. The letter repeatedly specified the existence and notoriety of the “books” kept by Elaine

Erik Aarhus had approached Elaine, December, 1978, when she and daughter were sitting in Tyree’s truck and demanded that she

“she had better…[get] rid of [the books]...”. P.2

Tyree later confronted Aarhus, fought with him and laughed off Aarhus’ threat to kill him. Aarhus had then stated that Peters was aware that Aarhus’ name was cited therein and that

becuse with those’s books,. I could go to jail.” P. 3, original spelling retained

Item 3. The letter specifically cited the animus of Peters against Elaine

“Mike Peters was at my house the Saturday before she died, me him and Elaine discussed what
we would do with the books so at that point, Mike discovered that his name was in the Books as
often as AARHUS. He got mad and asked me to drive him back to Post. On the way back to
Post, he told me that with Books like those’s floating around,

‘some-one could get their throat cut'.” P. 3. Original spelling retained

EARL PETERS AND HIS SHOTGUN - End PART II-o

Since: Apr 11

Waldoboro, ME

#125 Oct 6, 2014
Posted on TOPIX - "Ex-Green Beret loses appeal in "79 wife killing" - cf. Article in LOWELL SUN, Lisa Redmond, 10/04/14. Dismissal of current Tyree appeal @ www.massreports.com . Search for
SJC-11633-Tyree vs. Commonwealth.

SJC-6 MEMBER QUORUM-TYREE vs. COMMONWEALTH –SJC-11633- ORDER, 10/01/14
LOWELL SUN-“Ex-Green Beret loses appeal in ’79 wife killing”– Lisa Redmond-10/04/14
PART 1
35 years later, both the SJC quorum and the SUN article appear to have overlooked a “res judicata”,“AGREED JUDGMENT”, approved by a single justice of the SJC,“FILED Nov 20 1979”:

“4. The individual defendants [the Ayer District Court and/or Judge Killam, Clerk Birch] shall de-
cline to exercise their jurisdiction to entertain complaints brought by any party which seek to
charge any individual or individuals with COMPLICITY in the murder of Elaine Tyree, unless so ordered by a justice or justices of the supreme judicial court.”

Peter Agnes for Droney et al; Robert S. Potters for the Ayer District Court et al "Nov 20 1979"

Our understanding of ‘hornbook’ law:

1. There is no statute of limitations for the act of murder.

2. Both the Commonwealth (via Agnes) and the Ayer Court (via Potters), as well as the full
bench of the Supreme Judicial Court (acting sua sponte), could well have objected to,
moved to reconsider or appealed the above judgment to the full SJC bench. Such did not
occur.

3. Whether the term for such appeal was 30 or fewer days in 1979 is immaterial – term has
expired and all parties to this judgment, INCLUDING THE CURRENT 6-MEMBER QUORUM
WHO AUTHORED THE RECENT OPINION, remain, to this day, bound by the ancient expression,
“res judicata” and are no longer in a position to avoid the 35 year-old mandate, their very own
case law.

Parties who peruse the single justice proceeding (SJ-2013-350) will find that Justice Lenk (in her dismissal of Tyree’s current case against the Commonwealth) noted an earlier ruling in the 1979 case, SJ-79-279. This same ruling Is cited as “1” in the November “AGREED JUDGMENT”, viz., that the July 6, 1979 view and judgment given then by Justice Kaplan is confirmed, i.e., that the arrest warrants issued by Judge James Killam were void and issued contrary to law.

Oddly lacking from Justice Lenk’s ruling is any reference to “4”(above) and her court-ordered, legally established duty to consider the evidence, carefully cited by Tyree, for the COMPLICITY of Earl Michael Peters in the murder of Elaine Tyree. Whether or not Tyree has sufficiently advanced such evidence does not appear in her decision nor her duty thereto.

The same absence of “4” is evident in the current 6-member quorum from the SJC, citing only that

“[a] single justice of this court allowed the petition [to void the arrest warrants]
and voided the complaints that had issued against the witness [Peters].

SJC-11633,@2 – 10/01/14

The same opinion faults Tyree for his failure “to rais[e] a third-party culprit defense.”@2

The latter expression indicates a failure (perhaps on the part of a law clerk) to consider the “AGREED JUDGMENT” in its entirety, including the mandate,#”4”, to take into consideration the evidence for the “charge[s]” against Earl Peters for Elaine’s murder embodied in Tyree’s brief. The “rais[ing] of a third party culprit defense” is precisely what Tyree has done and has carefully cited the 1979,“AGREED JUDGMENT” as the grounds for the Court’s obligation to so proceed.

We shall subsequently review Tyree’s past efforts to properly present this evidence and the manner in which the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, although having actual knowledge of the 1979 judgment, deflected those efforts. The transcripts of the 1979 Probable Cause proceedings and the viability of Judge Killam’s 2 page order, finding probable cause against Peters for Elaine’s murder, are also available from court records. End Part 1
Michelle Gooden

Fayetteville, NC

#138 Apr 1, 2015
A grave injustice.....starting with Operation Watch Tower
ANGLETURNER

Lyme, NH

#139 Apr 1, 2015
What happened to #126 to #137?

Anybody know what site where all can be found?
ANGLETURNER

Lyme, NH

#142 Apr 4, 2015
THE ORDER OF JUDGE JAMES W. KILLAM, III, AYER DISTRICT COURT JUDGE – MAY 15, 1979
EARL PETERS AND HIS SHOTGUN PART II-q
Reference to the Killam order may be found @#28 (08/12/12) and #33 (10/12/12)
We are aware that Judge Killam, well before April 11, 1979, had full judicial notice regarding the frailty of Earl Peters’ testimony:
“It’s entirely possible that Peters is the knife man.”
DAY 6, P.25; L.4-5 (See POST #123,#124)
On DAY 9 or 10, the “Armorer” or serviceman in charge of the barracks armory testfied, in this case for the armory within the barracks of Earl Peters. The testimony of the revlevant armorer, Wayne Maxon, is not available to us and we now must rely on inferences thereto, in other Probable Cause testimony (Peters), Maxon’s (and others’) Superior Court testimony and the order of Judge Killam, 05/15/79.
Peters explicitly acknowledged prior storage of a “Remington 1100 shotgun”(DAY 4, 04/04/79; P.75-76; L.23-P.L.2)
at the Washington Street Tyree residence:
“Q.[Bradley] At some point, it was under the couch at Tyree’s apartment, was it not?”
“A.[Peters] That’s right.
“Q. Was it not under the couch in Tyree’s apartment on Sunday[*] night, the night before his wife was killed?
“A. No, I removed it Saturday night.”
*Later corrected to Monday, the night before the murder.
DAY 4, 04/04/79;P. 76; L.5-10
Bradley’s curiosity apparently results from earlier interviews with Tyree. Otherwise the existence of the shotgun in the apartment would be extraneous to the current status of the case. Bradley may know that Tyree had written to Menzie but there is no evidence that he had access to the letters before their presentation by Menzie later on that day. Now we are given Peters’ relation of the shotgun’s journey from Tyree apartment to Fort Devens armory.
“Q. Okay. Now, when you removed the Remington, you took it to the Arms Room, did you not, and checked it in?
“A. That’s right.
“Q. Would that be that night?
“A. No.
“Q. When?
“A………….Monday morning at seven o’clock.
“Q.…………. It was Monday morning then, on the 29th of January right, that you turned
that weapon into Sergeant Matthews?
“A. It wasn’t Sergeant Matthews, it was Spec Four [Wayne] Maxon.
P. 76; L. 17- P.78; L. 19
Although Peters was ambivalent whether the weapon was removed from the Tyree apartment on Saturday or Sunday night, he clearly relates its entrance into the armory:
1. Early, ca. 7 o’clock, Monday, January 29.
2. The armorer in receipt of the weapon was one Wayne Maxon.
The Commonwealth (DeMichaelis) likely did not know what provoked Bradley’s inquiry re this particular shotgun (but would have had access to the apartment inventory, in which there was no mention of a shotgun) and also chimed in.
“Q. Now, tell us about this gun that was under the couch in the Tyree apartment,
how it got there and under what circumstances?
A. I bought it early in January at the Burlington Shopping Center in Burlington and I
brought it back and I kept I at Bill’s house, I don’t know, three or four weeks, possibly.
Q. Was there any conversation with Bill Tyree before you brought it to Bill’s house?
A. No.
Q. Was he aware of the fact that it was there?
A. Yes.”
P. 116-117; L.19-L.8
DeMichaelis now unwittingly extracts crucial information from his own witness
Q. What was the reason for your removing [on Sunday, 01/28/79]?
A. One, I was going home on a leave, or on pass, rather, on Wednesday, and I was going
to leave Tuesday night, or Wednesday, and the reason was, Bill and Elaine were packing
to go to Utah and that’s why the shotgun was removed and put in the Arms Room.”
P. 118; L. 6-15
EARL PETERS AND HIS SHOTGUN – End PART II-q
QBob

Killeen, TX

#151 Dec 9, 2015
Witness wrote:
Well, some people shouldn't comment unless they know what they're talking about. I know that Tyree didn't do the murder and neither did the other person in prison for it.
Ok Mr Witness - if you know so much tell me the kind of work did at Devens? What was his Job?
ANGLETURNER

Franconia, NH

#152 Dec 11, 2015
Dec. 11, 2015

To all who follow the Tyree matter:

Note whether TOPIX has now included PART II, s through v.

ANGLETURNER

Since: Dec 15

Ocala, FL

#156 Dec 15, 2015
TEST2

Since: Dec 15

Ocala, FL

#157 Dec 15, 2015
THE ORDER OF JUDGE JAMES W. KILLAM, III, AYER DISTRICT COURT JUDGE – MAY 15, 1979
EARL PETERS AND HIS SHOTGUN PART II-p
Reference to the Killam order may be found @#28 (08/12/12) and #33 (10/12/12)
THE FIRST LETTER-EXHIBIT #7 (Tyree-Menzie, ca. March 14, 1979)
Item 4. The exoneration of Aarhus:
“If you see Aarhus again, tell him I know he didn’t do it, and that by him saying he did it ain’t going to
help at all…I’m no fool, she was a big girl and its going take more th[a]n just him to do it…” P. 18
The same disparity in physical size was noted by the Court:
“Speaker 3:“…there was question as to whether or not Aarhus actually held the weapon.…
Did you feel like it actually was consistent with what took place?”
“SPEAKER 2-Killam:
“No. For several reasons.The victim Elaine Tyree was a large woman.
Eric Aarhus was a small man.”
Transcript of Judge Killam interview,“MURDER AT FORT DEVENS”, 11/4/97
THE SECOND LETTER-EXHIBIT #8 (Tyree-Menzie, ca. March **, 1979)
Item 5. The Peters/Tyree rift:
“…so we split, we told Elaine that we had been 4 wheeling and had hit a tree branch, after
[Peters] left that night I told Elaine the truth, that was the straw that broke the camels back,
she threatened to divorce me and tell everything, at that point I told her that just so I wouldn’t
do it any more to keep a record of all the things me and Peters had done, she then showed me
the books, after that we never fought over that subject…” P. 1
Item 6. The Peters shotgun:
”…Peters had a shotgun,(a Remington 1100, 12 gauge) under our couch, you know our couch
folded into a bed. Well the cops didn’t find that shotgun at our house, and it was there the
morning of the day she died. Which means that gun was taken out of there later that day…” P. 1-2
NOTE: Tyree could not have known, in March, of the testimony of Wayne Maxon, Armorer, in late April.
Item 6. The guilt of Peters:
“”[A]nd who els[e] would have a key (Elaine told her Parents she
seen [Peters] take my keys, and she thinks he had duplicates made)…” P.4
“[N]ow I truly believe, I’m on the level that Peters cut my wifes throat,
Bec[a]use she had the goods on him…” P. 9
THE SECOND LETTER-EXHIBIT #8 (Tyree-Menzie, ca. March **, 1979)
Item 7. Elaine:
“…[T]he only thing that ever ment anything to me was Elaine, and I tried to prevent it and I didn’t.
mike Elaine stuck thru me with thick and thin and when we were having promblelms and I was acting
like a jackass and was w[a]ndering around lose last year (feb 78 TO June 78) did she leave me hell no,
when this court-martial thing came up did she leave me, hell, no, and when she gave birth to my daughter
I thought I had the world by the [***], I had my new truck, new daughter, and one hell of a lady for a
wife…mike you never will know what you have, until you don’t have it.” EX.#7; P. 9-10–original spelling
retained
Item 8. Dawn:
“…so I named her, and my daughter is the one thing in this life that means more
then anything elsa, cuse she’ Elaine a little Elaine, that’s what I see when I see Dawn.
Yep that’s my kid, me and elaine thought often about her first day of school, when she
told them her middle name, yep that was something me and Elaine knew, that nobody
could take from us, we had Dawn and each other. And that was all we needed…” EX.#8; P. 3-4-original
spelling retained
EARL PETERS AND HIS SHOTGUN – End PART II-p

Since: Dec 15

Ocala, FL

#158 Dec 16, 2015
THE ORDER OF JUDGE JAMES W. KILLAM, III, AYER DISTRICT COURT JUDGE – MAY 15, 1979
EARL PETERS AND HIS SHOTGUN PART II-q
Reference to the Killam order may be found @#28 (08/12/12) and #33 (10/12/12)
We are aware that Judge Killam, well before April 11, 1979, had full judicial notice regarding the frailty of Earl Peters’ testimony:
“It’s entirely possible that Peters is the knife man.”
DAY 6, P.25; L.4-5 (See POST #123,#124)
On DAY 9 or 10, the “Armorer” or serviceman in charge of the barracks armory testfied, in this case for the armory within the barracks of Earl Peters. The testimony of the revlevant armorer, Wayne Maxon, is not available to us and we now must rely on inferences thereto, in other Probable Cause testimony (Peters), Maxon’s (and others’) Superior Court testimony and the order of Judge Killam, 05/15/79.
Peters explicitly acknowledged prior storage of a “Remington 1100 shotgun”(DAY 4, 04/04/79; P.75-76; L.23-P.L.2)
at the Washington Street Tyree residence:
“Q.[Bradley] At some point, it was under the couch at Tyree’s apartment, was it not?”
“A.[Peters] That’s right.
“Q. Was it not under the couch in Tyree’s apartment on Sunday[*] night, the night before his wife was killed?
“A. No, I removed it Saturday night.”
*Later corrected to Monday, the night before the murder.
DAY 4, 04/04/79;P. 76; L.5-10
Bradley’s curiosity apparently results from earlier interviews with Tyree. Otherwise the existence of the shotgun in the apartment would be extraneous to the current status of the case. Bradley may know that Tyree had written to Menzie but there is no evidence that he had access to the letters before their presentation by Menzie later on that day. Now we are given Peters’ relation of the shotgun’s journey from Tyree apartment to Fort Devens armory.
“Q. Okay. Now, when you removed the Remington, you took it to the Arms Room, did you not, and checked it in?
“A. That’s right.
“Q. Would that be that night?
“A. No.
“Q. When?
“A………….Monday morning at seven o’clock.
“Q.…………. It was Monday morning then, on the 29th of January right, that you turned
that weapon into Sergeant Matthews?
“A. It wasn’t Sergeant Matthews, it was Spec Four [Wayne] Maxon.
P. 76; L. 17- P.78; L. 19
Although Peters was ambivalent whether the weapon was removed from the Tyree apartment on Saturday or Sunday night, he clearly relates its entrance into the armory:
1. Early, ca. 7 o’clock, Monday, January 29.
2. The armorer in receipt of the weapon was one Wayne Maxon.
The Commonwealth (DeMichaelis) likely did not know what provoked Bradley’s inquiry re this particular shotgun (but would have had access to the apartment inventory, in which there was no mention of a shotgun) and also chimed in.
“Q. Now, tell us about this gun that was under the couch in the Tyree apartment,
how it got there and under what circumstances?
A. I bought it early in January at the Burlington Shopping Center in Burlington and I
brought it back and I kept I at Bill’s house, I don’t know, three or four weeks, possibly.
Q. Was there any conversation with Bill Tyree before you brought it to Bill’s house?
A. No.
Q. Was he aware of the fact that it was there?
A. Yes.”
P. 116-117; L.19-L.8
DeMichaelis now unwittingly extracts crucial information from his own witness
Q. What was the reason for your removing [on Sunday, 01/28/79]?
A. One, I was going home on a leave, or on pass, rather, on Wednesday, and I was going
to leave Tuesday night, or Wednesday, and the reason was, Bill and Elaine were packing
to go to Utah and that’s why the shotgun was removed and put in the Arms Room.”
P. 118; L. 6-15
EARL PETERS AND HIS SHOTGUN – End PART II-q
ANGLETURNER

Franconia, NH

#164 Dec 26, 2015
Does anyone out there know what happened to
"EARL PETERS AND HIS SHOTGUN-Part II,
"r" to "v"?
These last few posts contain the punchline
and conclusion to the entire series.
I posted them but they don't appear.
Without those 5 posts, the story has yet to be told.
ANGLETURNER, on the day after Christmas
ANGLETURNER

Franconia, NH

#166 Dec 30, 2015
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: Have been unable to post

"EARL PETERS AND HIS SHOTGUN PART II, r through v.

Interested parties may have a WORD document, entitled

"THE KILLAM ANALYSIS"

which encompasses "r" through "v" by reaching

ANGLETURNER through the blind e-mail service
available via TOPIX.

Recently, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court
opined that

"Tyree could pursue a third party culprit defense"

(paraphrase)

under specified conditions. The above document
("THE KILLAM ANALYSIS") indicates the extent to
which such was not pursued in the Superior Court
trial of Tyree (1980).

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 6
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Leominster Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Fitchburg motorcycle cops 47 min Lynch for Soggy D... 28
We offer all types of loans at 2% (May '13) 2 hr Kevin Lynch 3
KEVIN LYNCH vs. TURTLE BOY 14 hr Jimminy Crickets 21
Another Monday Has Come And Gone May 24 The Midnight Crapper 25
News Lunenburg woman charged in $161 grocery theft (Oct '16) May 22 Jimminy Crickets 8
News Ex-Realtor charged with allegedly bilking clien... (Jun '09) May 22 Green16 19
Scott Bonnevie (Sep '14) May 18 Madman 7

Leominster Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Leominster Mortgages