Always Returning...

It's been a very long time since I've been here. Life takes over and there just aren't enough hours in a day, or in a month, to attend to all the facets of our lives that should be tended to.
That being said, I now have some time. Unexpected and unfamiliar but here just the same.
Marian Louise Baker is never forgotten. She taps on my shoulder often reminding me that she is still waiting for someone, anyone to let the world know what a gift and blessing she was and that her untimely murder back in the Camelot days of Lancaster County, Pennsylvania should be remembered.
Nothing can change what happened that day. Nothing can erase the horror and brutality of that heinous afternoon by the Harnish cottage. But just as the murder of Jan Roseboro in more recent days clearly screamed that intersection life lines can sometimes lead to an unescapable conclusion, the murder of Marian Louise Baker was in the cards.
Ed Gibbs chose Marian. Or at least his depraved and violently electric mind chose her. But there was to be a victim, don't ever doubt that. The actual identity and circumstances of the killing were variable. A classic case of Marian being in the wrong place at the wrong time. But the bubbling, fermenting and oozing hate that was smothering Ed Gibbs was going to be released somewhere, on someone.
It may be easy now to look at the whole sad story and say "Of course!" It seems fairly clear that the players in Gibb's life set the scene years earlier. Crazy lines intersected and Marian Louise Baker paid the price.
It's occurred to me that Helen Gibbs dodged the bullet, or the lugwrench. I often wonder what kept Ed from snapping and killing the one female in his closest proximity. Perhaps it was the timing. Helen wasn't an arms length away from him that cold, gray January day. Marian was.
I wonder if Helen ever shuddered through the years knowing just how chillingly close she came to a brutal death.
Ed Gibbs killed Marian Louise Baker. But he had co-conspirators.
His parents, his teachers, his past girlfriends. Every human being that reminded him that he has no choices in life, no free will to succeed, to fail or to be human.
What is most astounding is that at the time that the people in Ed Gibb's life were binding him emotionally so tight that was snap was inevitable, they really had no clue.

They Protect Him To This Very Day

The Gibbs family is interred in the Hillcrest Cemetery on Delsea Drive just outside Pitman, New Jersey.

I need to thank a very dear person for helping me with the information from the cemetery itself. I owe you much more than a debt of gratitude and I can only hope that my efforts in this project serve you well in the way that they need to.

For several years, Ed Gibbs' grave was unmarked.

We now know, as of this week, that that isn't the case any longer.

His grave is clearly marked in the family plot.

Ed is buried between his mother and father.

J. Lester Gibbs died in 1964. He wasn't a well man during his son's murder trial and collapsed several times and had a heart attack early on in the proceedings.

Mrs. Florence Gibbs died in 1993.

She placed her son next to his father and then upon her passing, next to her also.

The symbolism there is screaming.

They are flanking him in death as they did in life.

It was told to me that the position of the resting places speaks volumes as to the mindset of the Gibbs parents.

It's only natural that no parent could imagine or believe that their child could have done to Marian Baker what Ed Gibbs did to her.

He confessed and gave the world the details. Not all of them were revealed. The very worst weren't necessary for the success of the trial on the Prosecution's side and they surely weren't going to be revealed by the Defense.

But most parents would somehow, someday, come to grips with the truth and have to admit to themselves that their child was a murderer. They would still love the child, but the truth would become a very dark but tangible part of their reality.

Marian's aunt and uncle, the O'Donels, were faith-filled Christian people. They found peace and forgiveness for the Gibbs family through Christ. They wrote to the Gibbs' several times telling them of their Christian compassion and forgiveness, clearly telling them that they held nothing against the Gibbs parents for what Ed had done.

Not one response ever came back.

The O'Donels were surprised and puzzled.

Now, it seems a bit clearer.

J. Lester died in 1964. Florence lived the rest of her days never truly believing that her Eddie had killed Marian Baker. Her psychological timbre was so fragile that she removed anything to do with the crime, trial and execution from her reality.

Her behavior and demeanor at her son's services is macabre but telling.

Florence Gibbs could finally, for the first time in her life since the birth of her baby boy, Eddie, relax.

She now knew and would know for all time, where he was, if he was safe and what he was doing.

He was "home".

Florence mothered Ed "in a box" for as long as she could while he was alive.

It wasn't easy. And she was a walking nervous wreck.

But now, Eddie was in the big box and he couldn't get hurt, he couldn't fail, he couldn't put a dark mark on the family name and he couldn't challenge the desires and decisions of the family anymore.

Eddie didn't kill Marian. But Eddie passed away.

So Florence made potato salad and hosted the mourners and went on with her life.

And when her husband died, he took his place at the side of Eddie, and she would flank him years down the road.

I almost feel  a sense of defiance in Florence Gibbs.
It would have hurt many mothers to ignore a letter from the O'Donel family. They reached out in Christian love and compassion.

I truly wonder if Florence kept the letters. I would love to know if they were part of her personal effects when she died.

Or if they were thrown in the trash as Florence hummed to quiet the voices in her head.

The Ambiguity Of The "Tool" And The "Letter L"

It has occurred to me that all of us that are following the course of events in the Roseboro murder case may be dealing with some misunderstanding or some ambiguity in the little facts that have been publicized to date.
Many of us have wondered about the mention of the "L-shaped wound" that Jan Roseboro suffered prior to winding up in the swimming pool of her back yard.
I know that I was one who tried to determine just what "tool", as the DA's office called it, would have left the impression of an "L" on a person's skull.
After numerous reviews of all that has been publicized so far, I think we "overthought it".
Not until the trial will we know the DA's theory in any concrete sense, but the articles and the quotes that have been published have not been clear and not all have been factual or true to quoting the person in the article.
At this point, it seems more factual to state that Jan Roseboro suffered an "L-shaped wound" to the area of her head behind the left ear. This wound "would have caused significant bleeding."
It wasn't stated clearly, ever, whether the wound was clearly in the shape of an L or if it bore the impression of the letter "L".
It is the former, apparently, not the latter.
It has been made public, however, that the authorities believe the wound to have been caused by a tool.
Many items, when used to whack someone in the head, from behind, can cause an L-shaped wound. A common 2X4 would do that. The edge and side are at a ninety degree angle.
But they have claimed it was a tool. Would a hammer do it? Would a level?
What common tools are found in most every household in America? What tools would be lying nearby, clearly accessible, in the home or by the pool?
If the events of that night were not planned, and Michael Roseboro "snapped", what tool could have possibly been nearby, benignly, just part of the daily life of a typical American family?
If Jan was attacked inside her home and then taken out to the pool, what tools did Michael Roseboro have that would have become an instant weapon of attack?
Jan Roseboro was struck from behind, by a person, wielding a tool, that left a bleeding wound behind her ear. That wound was L-shaped. That tells me it was a flap injury.
Cranial lacerations bleed profusely.
Was she struck with such force by the person wielding the tool that she flew into the pool as a result of the strike?
Were the wounds that appeared all over her body open or closed? Should anyone have expected those wounds to leave a great amount of bleeding? Or was the expected blood flow primarily from the head wound?
Kicking, beating and strangling Jan could have produced some blood, in all probability, just a small amount.
Did the fight take place by the side of the pool, where she was beaten and struck? And when she attempted to get away from her attacker, did he or she then grab the tool and strike Jan in the back of the head with sufficient force to throw her into the pool, unconscious? Or did the force of the strike throw her into the pool, injured but alert, where her attacker then forced her underwater until she was dead?
That would certainly explain the lack of blood evidence in any great amount.
When Jan entered the pool she was alive. But was she conscious? She drowned. That is a fact. But did the autopsy reveal any signs of her being held forcibly under the water?
There wasn't the need for an extensive clean up as many of us have surmised. There just wasn't that much blood outside the watery confines of the family pool.
And what little blood may have been flung by the attacking injuries, that clean up was minor compared to the optional possibilities.
The lack of blood evidence is what the defense is hanging Michael Roseboro's freedom and life on.
The lack of blood evidence is what the prosecution is hanging his conviction on.
There was no great clean up as we thought. Jan Roseboro bled into the pool for the most part.
Any additional blood would have been poolside, where the first responders found her, supposedly receiving CPR from her husband. We do know that she did shed a great deal of blood on the gurney once placed there.
But one question does arise....
Was that "tool" left nearby to be used when she turned her back? Was an argument or fight even necessary or expected? Or was Jan going to be bludgeoned and thrown into the pool by the force no matter the course of events that night?
Michael Roseboro had a phone conversation with Angela Funk that evening.
And Jan Roseboro died.
If not for the sheer brutality and number of attack wounds all over Jan's body, this may have looked like a slip-and-fall drowning.
One gash in her head could have been attriubuted to be the cause of a fall into the pool, with a resultant drowning. There may have been suspicion, but this also may have gone down in the books as a terrible accident.
If Michael Roseboro simply wanted to be free to marry Angela Funk and planned to kill his wife, why would he beat her so savagely?
If this was a premeditated murder, why didn't this case go the way of Laci Peterson, with state-wide searches and pleas for information? Jan could have just "disappeared".
If Mike wished his wife dead and planned for that, how easy would it have been to have staged a "suicide"? Their marriage certainly had enough heartache for some to wonder if she might have not been able to take any more pain.
The beating that Jan Roseboro suffered prior to drowning is a key element of this case and is screaming for attention. The beating that she suffered after her husband had a phone conversation with Angela Funk.
How much louder can that scream?

The Roseboro Crime Scene

In reviewing numerous news videos of the scene of Jan Roseboro's brutal killing, I began to wonder about the comments and reports that there was "no blood" found at the scene.
If true, that surely will be one of the strongest arguments offered by the defense. But to subscribe to that line of defense, you have to use an alternate "wrap" to your thought process.
They may claim that if Michael Roseboro snapped, and brutally attacked his wife, there would be blood evidence gleaned from his clothing, his body and his surroundings.
Conversely, the lack of blood evidence makes a strong case against Michael Roseboro.

I have been completely unsuccessful in my attempts to find any documentation of random, sudden killers hanging around their crime scene to clean up the mess. Those that attack like a thief in the night usually exit the same way, and in a hurry.
I do think, however, that there was some evidence found on the grounds that we are just unaware of. While viewing one of the videos, I noticed a yellow stack marker placed on the concrete by the Roseboro pool.
That particular marker was labelled with the number "4".
We can only surmise that there are other markers labelled "1", "2" and "3".
It only stands to reason that there has to be some evidence against Michael Roseboro other than a gut feeling, knowing that he was home at the time of the attack.
Even discovering his ongoing affair with Angela Funk isn't enough to bring charges.
No DA worth his salt, or a desire to maintain his gainful employment in the county would rush headlong into charging a suspect without some level of evidence that they feel sure will obtain a conviction.
Many have been very uncomfortable with DA Steadman's comments that even with charges successfully leveled against Roseboro, he claimed that there was still much work to be done.
Most of us agree that the work to obtain a conviction, as far as gathering evidence, should have been, for the most part, done before the charges were levelled.
Steadman gave many the impression that he obtained the charges and detention of Roseboro on the lowest common denominator of evidence that convinced Judge Hamill but then had to bulk it up with substance after the fact.
It very well may be that they do have more evidence than the public is aware of. They can't
play their case out in the public view in totality at the hearing to bind over.
That is just common sense.
The only requirement for acquittal is one juror having reasonable doubt. And that is entirely possible in this case, given what we all know at this point. Perhaps the evidentiary submissions at trial will reduce that doubt completely.
In discovery, I'm sure the defense has turned over every stone to formulate many different possibilities for who killed Jan Roseboro, how they did it and why.
They are only required to create dust and smoke.
Michael Roseboro will be tried by a jury of his peers. I don't know if that brings a level of comfort to him or scares him to death.
All one has to do is sit in the midst of a potential jury pool in any courthouse and listen. What you will hear from those seated around you should scare the hell out of you. Some just want the proceedings over with so they can get back to work. Some will openly admit to already believing the guilt or innocence of the accused, based on something as simple as the defendant entering the courtroom for the voir dire.
Michael Roseboro has already been convicted by many in the court of public opinion. Some are enjoying the horrific situation as if it were a circus or a party to attend.
Others are still so conflicted.
Most are waiting to see the evidence presented.
I do wonder about one thing though......
The DA's office is judged on successful convictions of those it charges with a crime.
In some cases, those charges and the ensuing trial are following a path that they believe is the best chance of winning. Does that always mean that the person charged is truly the one who commited the crime? Or just the one they feel they can get convicted?
There are people walking the streets today simply because the weight of evidence against them is insufficient to garner a conviction. It doesn't mean they are innocent of the crime.
If presented with several scenarios for the death of Jan Roseboro, was her husband charged because the DA believes it to be the truth and has evidence to support that belief?
Or was he charged because of a LACK of evidence in the other scenarios?
Is it easier to charge and work for a conviction against him rather than deal with the lack of evidence against some person yet unknown who could have attacked and killed Jan Roseboro as part of a drug deal gone bad? A payback crime? An impatient and sociopathic girlfriend of Michael Roseboro who saw her plan being thwarted by Jan?
This is far from a cut-and-dried case.
I sincerely hope that as the trial begins and progresses, the evidence will be presented to either convince a jury of guilt or innocence.
For the families involved, there can be no peace or healing until they can find a scenario that they can believe, as horrible as it may be. But being able to know, even the evil, gives them a point from which they can begin to breath again.