www.justiceforchandra.com

[peripeteia]

Hope they give you the job Jane, do you need any references...you should have a few from here.....kate
_________________
A vision sent me on the path of seeking justice for Chandra, nothing I've seen in print to date has diminished the vividness but only served to reaffirm the validity of this vision.

[peripeteia]

Benn:

I know that you are interested as we all are in the KEYS of Chandra's/Condit's. I found a picture of the guy John Woodfolk at the Hardware Store who allegedly made key's for Chandra, the url is
http://www.kovr13.com/07jul01/073101i.htm, I've never seen his picture before.

"The hardware store employee recalls Chandra Levy paying with a credit or debit card. Police have said they researched Levy's financial transactions and never indicated there was any activity after April 30. Hardware store employees have been unable to find the receipt."

/quote

What just occured to me Benn, is that the receipts of Chandra's credit card and bank statements were examined for a debit for the keys but were Condit's records were examined for the same? If not his personal account, his congressional account, he charged everything else under the sun to this account, including his children's salaries, why would he not share the bottomless pit with Chandra? I've wondered also, whether or not Chandra's apt keys were security keys? Edeline would be able to answer that. Permission is need to copy these, and as well they are expensive. Anyway normal keys are very inexpensive to copy, and why would anyone use a debit card or a credit card to pay a few dollars, normally a purchase below $5.00 is rather frowned upon to use a debit or a credit card. To cut a key in Canada it is about $1.00-$2.00.

On another point I read somewhere, that the outside of Condit's apt. had a sweep card, like they use in hotels. I don't know now whether I read this on line on a forum or in the news. If so there would be only one or two keys, as I understand there was a back door to Condit's apt. (perhaps the same key fit the front and the back).

For some strange reason, I have been thinking about the keys over these past few days, and just can't shake the feeling that we have been missing something. One thought that occured to me is that I would have thought that Sven Jones would have known if she had keys or not. Chandra seems to have told him everything else, why would she not tell about the keys? Chandra must have mentioned about going to his apt. Another thing I wonder if Sven Jones was called to the Grand Jury, and if not why NOT. Perhaps we should be writing the DA's office to find out.

I'd love to know what Condit told the police about the keys, as well as the watch, that is if they asked him about them or not.

kate
_________________
A vision sent me on the path of seeking justice for Chandra, nothing I've seen in print to date has diminished the vividness but only served to reaffirm the validity of this vision.

[benn]

Thanks for all of the information kate. I guess we might try to pull a Freedom of Information Act stunt to try to find out about the keys. It might be possible to do that through the mail.

I doubt very much if that would be successful, but it might put the police on guard. If they have too many secrets to guard they might slip and let some be known.

I wrote to Senator Feinstein again a couple of days ago. If she answers, and doesn't just tell me to get lost, I might bring up the question of the keys. Paul Katz mentioned "keys," kate, which is why I have been saying keys.

I asked Feinstein if she had a department on her staff that handled missing persons letters, and I mentioned the Otis Thomas story.

I used this quote from your FBI letters, rd. It is a little less rough than anything I have written.

>>>>>6) The police say Condit is not a suspect, because there is no crime, and the public believes it.

7) A locally loved and respected minister is questioned for three days by the FBI about his story of a relationship between his daughter and a Congressman, and interviewed six times by the Washinton Post about it, and published, and the FBI can't find his daughter to question her because she fled the state, he "backs off", the FBI has no comment, and the national press prints that he lied and made it up, and the public believes it

eight) and both before and after he recanted his story, the national press did not print the circumstantial evidence that would lead any rational person to believe that the white 46 year old Congressman fathered a child with an 18 year old black girl he met at a campus campaign rally, and who dumped him due to his unusual sexual demands...

resulting in a public that doesn't know the facts and a news media that asks themselves whether they have already covered it too much, when they haven't covered it at all...<<<< end of quote

benn

[rd]

I recall Condit's phone and office records were subpoanaed, but I don't recall that his financial records were. I also recall that Condit was still not supplying all the information subpeonaed by November, half a year after Chandra disappeared.

Wouldn't the store's bank have a record if money was actually credited to the store's account? The police said there was no record of a card transaction for Chandra. In my opinion, that was based on the store's records. There was a source that Chandra had credit card transaction(s) on Monday, April 30th, but they were never identified. That was the evening she paid her gym dues, and I assume that was by credit card. One of the odd facts that slipped by was the reference to her shopping in Alexandria, which is where Dayton lived and where Condit threw the watch box away in a public park. I thought that was very odd for her to be shopping there.

Also, the receipts in her apartment never made much sense either. You would think that the police would release the information they have like that when the case goes cold to give a chance for people to make connections to something they know. To keep it all secret simply protects the murderer, and they wouldn't want to do that, would they?

rd

[fallout]

Just thinking that paying for a dupe set of keys is usually done with cash. Its usually only a few dollars.

And Chandra's name may only have been recorded temporarily on a tag so that when she came back they could find the keys. The tag then might be thrown out. Woolfolk may have remembered the name and the face of a pretty girl. I tend to believe he saw her!

I just saw something on Google that I'll retrieve. A woman who dabbles in remote viewing claims she conjured up a vision of Chandra with a man named "Dave" whom she is blaming for something. I'll try to find it again.
There's only one 'Dave' on my list.


James

[fallout]

This is the dream from someone posting on a psychics board which I happened upon. Some of the entries are interesting in the Chandra sections.

James



http://twinsouls.community.everyone.net/community/scripts/thread.pl

Ladeebugs from AstroStar Astrology and More
Strange dream...never experienced anything like this before.. Posted 4-9-2003 05:15
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Lastnight I had the strangest, most eerie dream of my life. I do not profess to be psychic at all. But, I felt as if I was there...the cold dampness, the eerie way she looked. Chandra Levy came to me in my dream and she was dead..hair was wet...eyes ghastly. She said to me "I trusted you Dave" then she said "Never trust a co-pilot". I cannot shake this dream it has been haunting me all day. I never even followed this story at all but briefly heard about it last year. I have been researching all night to try to find out who "Dave" might be..or why she called him co-pilot. I do know that the feeling she instilled in me was that she told someone a secret...and trusted that person...and he killed her. Does anyone know about this story enough to know who a Dave might be???? Help....

[benn]

I put Christianity Today and otis thomas into Google, and one hit was for my message about Christianity Today right here at www.justiceforchandra.com Rd, you have arrived! If Christianity today doesn't post something, we can read it right here, it if is posted here; and people on the web can find it with Google.

Now a few messages on dna and the Otis Thomas story can be seen by everyone on the web, if they are posted here. One problem about that is, how would it effect the Thomases? There has to be some way to protect the Thomases and also get the information.

kate, you are sort of in that line of work. How can we get the dna information from the Thomases and still keep it somewhat confidential? This looks like it might happen. The idea I guess is to get the right agency to look into this. A cold case agency would probably be good because they would not be looking for media attention anyway. If we post something here now it can be seen all over the web.

benn

[rd]

wow, that is good news, benn! You just posted that very recently. Any thoughts from kate and anybody on the privacy issues that benn points out?

rd

[jane]

Here's another article about L. Lin Wood.

Here's a link to the article, which has a picture of Wood (he wears a blue shirt with yellow tie - did he pick this up from Gar, I wonder?)

http://www.bouldernews.com/bdc/news/article/0,1713,BDC_2397_2240183,00.html
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

quote from dailycamera.com News

Ramsey attorney fights back in civil court, public opinion
Wood's name made with Ramseys, Richard Jewell

By Amy Hebert, Camera Staff Writer

September 7, 2003

ATLANTA — Sitting in his 21st-floor law office overlooking Centennial Olympic Park, Lin Wood is on the edge of his seat, railing against media bias, when his secretary comes in and whispers that Katie Couric is on the line.

Wood relaxes into his chair, picks up the phone and greets the "Today" show anchor by her first name.

They chat about their respective vacations; hers is to London, his is an annual family trip to Florida. Couric asks how his daughter's recent high school graduation went. "I cried," he says.

Wood, who built his reputation as the fiercely protective spokesman for Richard Jewell and John and Patsy Ramsey, swivels in his chair and sorts through stacks of paper for the second-ever issue of Radar magazine. Flipping through it to find the article on himself and his new client, Gary Condit, titled "Devil's Advocate," he tells Couric to pick up a copy.

Wood hangs up without a word of business, but he says he knows what Couric's after.

"She wants an interview with the Ramseys," he says.

A month later, although there's no Ramseys interview, Couric has an exclusive — the first airing of the 911 call made in the Ramsey case. And Wood has the nation's attention as he continues his crusade to exonerate John and Patsy Ramsey, identified by Boulder police as suspects in the December 1996 slaying of their 6-year-old daughter, JonBenet.

Wood's aggressive campaign to clear his clients of the unsolved Boulder murder has helped make his name as the telegenic go-to guy for victims of "media smear campaigns." Since the Ramseys hired Wood, he has engineered major shifts in the case, fighting back in both civil court and the court of public opinion and maneuvering to get the investigation out of the hands of the Boulder Police Department.

"The days of 'The Ramseys did it' — that story's over," he said. "The 'umbrella of suspicion' is closed."


Civil court winner

Patsy Ramsey called Wood three years after JonBenet's death, in the fall of 1999. A grand jury was investigating the parents, and tabloids screamed accusations.

"She called me and said, 'We've had some problems related to the death of our daughter,'" Wood recalled. "I was sitting there thinking, 'There's the understatement of the year.'"

He told her the same thing he would tell Condit two years later when the California congressman hired him to fight accusations that he was involved in the disappearance of intern Chandra Levy — "You should have called me earlier."

Statutes of limitations protected earlier stories from libel lawsuits, but the Ramseys still came to Wood's office with a 2-inch-thick file of articles, including several claiming the killer was JonBenet's brother, Burke, who was 9 years old the night of the murder and never a suspect.

The grand jury ended its work without an indictment, and the Ramseys started suing.

Every lawsuit filed by the Ramseys has been settled out of court. Every one against them has been dismissed. And through the civil suits, Wood accessed police evidence and subpoenaed key players in the investigation, using them to threaten a lawsuit against the Boulder police, alleging they ignored evidence that an intruder killed JonBenet.

With that threat in the air, Boulder County District Attorney Mary Keenan took over the investigation from police in December. She has since publicly agreed with a 93-page ruling by federal Judge Julie Carnes dismissing a lawsuit against the Ramseys on the grounds that evidence in the case is more consistent with an intruder theory than theories that the Ramseys killed their daughter.

"I'd like to think that Carnes' ruling and Mary Keenan's statements have driven a stake into the heart of anyone who accuses the Ramseys," Wood said, "unless they just want to make a considerable donation to the Ramseys and me."


'Spin doctor'

He also has released pieces of evidence to the news media, vying for the greatest exposure and most favorable timing.

The release of the 911 tape in June was planned for a slow news time, Wood said, especially because the war in Iraq overshadowed the news of Carnes' ruling in March.

"Candidly, I wanted to make sure as best I could that it would receive maximum exposure," Wood said. "I felt like I would simply wait and pick an opportune time when people might be listening."

Wood is basically the Ramseys' spin doctor, said Lawrence Schiller, author of the 1999 book about the Ramsey case "Perfect Murder, Perfect Town."

He said Wood is building public support for the Ramseys by getting "opinion makers" like Katie Couric on "his team." But Schiller accused him of telling a one-sided story that doesn't admit there were reasons behind police suspicion of the Ramseys.

"Lin Wood is guilty of the same thing that he is laying at the feet of his adversaries, and that is that he's editing the material for the public," Schiller said. "He is in essence a public-relations expert."

With the 911 tape, Schiller said Wood acts as if police lied when they said a lab analysis of the tape revealed Burke's voice on the end, a detail that would be important because the Ramseys said their son was asleep at the time. Detectives got that information from a lab, but Wood acts as if it came out of thin air, Schiller said.

When the "Today" show aired the tape, it also interviewed two experts who dismissed police theories. Wood decided not to give the 911 exclusive to "48 Hours" after journalists at that show said there seemed to be something extra on the end of the recording.

But Trip DeMuth, a former Boulder County prosecutor who investigated the case for former District Attorney Alex Hunter, said Wood's publicity tactics are a fitting response to years of fingerpointing.

"It's been tried in the court of public opinion for years by 'sources close to the investigation,'" DeMuth said. "Lin is now just trying to respond in the same court of public opinion."

DeMuth, who said he was taken off the case because he wanted to pursue evidence of an intruder, said Wood won't fully succeed until the real killer is caught. But he said that's more likely now that Keenan's office is investigating leads that haven't been followed.

"I do think that public opinion is getting a more open mind about all the different possibilities that are out there," DeMuth said.


'Junkyard dog'

Wood cut his teeth in the court of public opinion representing Richard Jewell, the security guard wrongly accused in the 1996 Olympic bombing in Atlanta.

Jewell's attorney, Watson Bryant, wanted someone to go after news media outlets he thought depicted Jewell unfairly. Bryant had worked with Wood and his then-partner Wayne Grant before and respected them both — Grant for his diplomacy and Wood because "he was the meanest SOB I ever saw," Bryant said.

"Lin is the only lawyer I ever saw that made another lawyer cry in a deposition, and I wanted a junkyard dog," he said.

He said it didn't bother him that Wood and Grant specialized in medical malpractice litigation, because they were good. And he said Wood, whom he described as vain and combative, was perfectly suited for a "street fight" with news media outlets that Bryant had even choicer words for.

"That's a match made in hell," Bryant said. "He took to it like a duck to water."

Wood and Grant were on the case less than two weeks after the fatal explosion, which happened within sight of their office. The early notice gave them the chance to do with Jewell what Wood wishes he could have done with the Ramseys.

"We took to the airwaves," Wood said. "We didn't let the sun set on a false story about Richard Jewell."

The U.S. Department of Justice publicly exonerated Jewell within three months. Since then, Wood has won confidential settlements for Jewell from NBC, CNN and the New York Post.

But he said the case cost him his partnership with Grant, who was not invited on the first "60 Minutes" in which Wood and Jewell pleaded their case. Wood said differences between him and Grant, who did not return calls seeking comment, came to the forefront during that time.

"I have a big ego," Wood admitted. "A lot of lawyers do."


The young Wood

Wood has a softer side too, though, and more personal motivations for his choice of career paths.

At 16, he learned more about sorrow, loss and the criminal justice system than most people experience in a lifetime. And he learned how comforting a good lawyer can be.

On March 29, 1969, Wood returned to his home in Macon, Ga., to find his father standing over the body of his 42-year-old mother, Josephine. Lucian Lincoln Wood was trying to revive his wife, but he had beaten her to death in a drunken rage. He was charged with murder, and his son and 17-year-old daughter were left to fend without parents.

Sleeping at the YMCA and working odd jobs through the end of high school, Wood helped raise money to hire lawyers that secured an involuntary-manslaughter plea bargain for his father. Lucian Wood was sentenced to five years in prison and served about two.

"I didn't try to get him off," Wood said. "I just wanted him to be treated fairly in the system, which is not inconsistent with what I've been doing for the last 26 years for my clients."

He said he would have done the same thing for his mother, who was just as likely to go after his father with a pair of scissors or throw a cup of boiling coffee in his face. The Woods drank and fought, and everybody in the small Southern town knew it, he said.

Wood said he understands what it feels like to be looked down on, and he remembers the "island in a storm feeling" he got from his father's attorneys.

"I was a 16-year-old kid that was involved in a tragedy, and two highly respected professionals reached out and offered to help me," he said, adding that he remembers thinking he'd like to do the same for others some day.

Wood took refuge in books, earning a full academic scholarship to Mercer University. He stayed there for law school, getting married two years in. At 25, he graduated with honors and returned to Macon to work at his father-in-law's law firm.

The feeling that people might think he hadn't earned his position in the firm ate at Wood, and his first marriage ended after four years. Two more unsuccessful marriages followed before he married his "final wife," Debby, 16 years ago. The couple has two children together, and Wood has a son from his second wife and a daughter from his third.

"I've had failures," Wood said. "I didn't get married four times because I was good at it."


Playing the game, and winning

He hasn't had many failures in the Ramsey case.

"So far in a court of law, I've won every case," Wood says. "And I'm not worried about losing in the future."

Darnay Hoffman, the New York lawyer who lost the case that ended with Judge Carnes' 93-page ruling, admits Wood "knocked my block off."

Hoffman represented Boulder journalist Chris Wolf, who sued the Ramseys for libel because their book named him as a suspect in JonBenet's death. The lawsuit hinged on proving Patsy Ramsey knew that wasn't true because she killed her daughter.

It achieved quite a different effect, ending in the ruling that spotlighted evidence of an intruder.

"It's the best thing that ever happened to them," Hoffman said.

He said Wood is a hard-nosed, old-school lawyer who's difficult to deal with and will "fight tooth and nail for everything," but Hoffman added that he respects his opponent's abilities.

"If I had a person that had the problem the Ramseys had, I'd want Lin Wood," he said.

But Hoffman said he still believes the Ramseys are guilty, and he said Wood's vigilance has made the news media skittish about looking into evidence that implicates the couple.

"I think the media is definitely much more cowardly with this case now," Hoffman said.

Few members of the news media are willing to comment on their relationship with Wood.

Publicists at "Today" and "Larry King Live" — which take the top spots on Wood's Web-site list of news media appearances — declined interview requests. Fox News, which Wood is threatening to sue over a report that said there has never been any evidence an intruder killed JonBenet, declined comment.

Andrew Cohen, a legal analyst for CBS News, said the news media and the public have simply moved on — to Laci Peterson and Kobe Bryant — although Wood does what he can to keep the story alive.

"He knows how to play the game, and the media allows him to play the game," Cohen said.

Wood is an aggressive and zealous attorney, but his efforts are all "window dressing," "spin" and "pizzazz," Cohen said before stopping abruptly.

"I better be careful what I say," he said. "I don't want him to sue me for libel."

Represented by Lin Wood, the Ramseys have prevailed in every lawsuit they've been involved in over the 1996 death of their daughter, JonBenet. Here are key cases:

Ramseys as plaintiffs

Suits naming them as defendants, which have typically hinged on proving one of the parents killed their 6-year-old child, have all been dismissed. Suits brought by the Ramseys, over libelous statements in books, newspapers and television broadcasts, have all been settled out of court.

Here's a brief history:

Burke Ramsey vs. Star magazine: Filed December 1999, seeking $25 million for a story claiming JonBenet's brother Burke was the killer. Burke was never a suspect. Settled May 2000.

Burke Ramsey vs. Time Warner: Filed May 2000, seeking $4 million for a story reprinting the Star allegations settled June 2001.

Burke Ramsey vs. New York Post: Filed May 2000, seeking $4 million for a story reprinting the Star allegations settled January 2003.

Burke Ramsey vs. the Globe: Filed May 2000, seeking $35 million for a story portraying Burke as a suspect. Settled January 2001.


Burke Ramsey vs. Court TV: Filed June 2001, seeking $70 million over a show identifying Burke as a suspect in the murder. Settled October 2002.

John and Patsy Ramsey vs. Steve Thomas and St. Martin's Press: Filed August 2001, seeking $80 million over former Boulder police officer's 2000 book, "JonBenet: Inside the Ramsey Murder Investigation." Settled March 2002


Darnay Hoffman vs. John and Patsy Ramsey: Filed March 2000, seeking $50 million for libel on grounds that Patsy Ramsey killed JonBenet and so knew that statements in the Ramseys' book were false dismissed April 2000 so Hoffman could file Wolf vs. Ramseys.

As defendants:

Linda Hoffman-Pugh vs. John and Patsy Ramsey: Filed April 2000, seeking $50 million for libel on grounds that Patsy Ramsey killed JonBenet, then named the Ramseys' former housekeeper as a suspect. Dismissed April 2002.

Robert Christian Wolf vs. John and Patsy Ramsey: Filed April 2000, seeking $50 million for libel on grounds that Patsy Ramsey killed JonBenet, then falsely named the Boulder journalist as a suspect. Dismissed March 2003.

Clarence Otworth vs. John and Patsy Ramsey: Filed August 2000, seeking $100,000 for breach of contract. The Ramseys had offered a $100,000 reward to anyone with information on who killed their daughter, and the Georgia man said he was owed the money because he had the answer: They did. Dismissed November 2000.

What's next?

Wood says he will sue FoxNews this month over correspondent Carol McKinley's statement that "there has never been any evidence to link an intruder" to the murder.Attorneys for Fox refused to comment, but they defended McKinley's reporting as "fair, balanced and accurate" in a letter to Wood responding to an ultimatum that he would sue if Fox didn't run a retraction. Wood said he's also heard rumblings of book deals by an "Internet junkie" and former Ramsey housekeeper Linda Hoffman-Pugh. If published, he said he would peruse the books carefully.

— Camera staff

Contact Amy Hebert at heberta@dailycamera.com or (303) 473-1329.
_________________
"There is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; and hid, that shall not be known."
Christ

[jane]

quote from the Modesto Bee (Opinion, Letters)

Condit children earned money

Published: September 6, 2003, 06:55:11 AM PDT

The Bee wrote an editorial (Aug. 9) concerning PAC money that was allegedly given to former Congressman Gary Condit's children. That PAC money was no longer controlled by Condit and had been set aside to promote the Central Valley. If Chad and Cadee Condit received anything from the fund, they earned it. They also have worked hard to promote the Central Valley.
We lost the best congressman this area ever had because of innuendos and mistruths by the media and those who wanted him out of office because he voted for what was best for his constituents instead of party lines. I understand why he refused to talk to the media. You distort the truth or just ignore it.

It would be great if we could get the truth from our local paper, along with Rush Limbaugh and Rob Johnson.

LARRY JEFFERS

Oakdale
_________________
"There is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed; and hid, that shall not be known."
Christ

[rd]

What's the odds that a Congressman would be in his office all afternoon in Congress and no one except his aide who is also his driver sees or talks to him?

What's the odds that during that afternoon a young intern who is the Congressman's mistress disappears, only a few days after unexpectedly losing her internship?

What's the odds of a young intern unexpectedly losing her internship and disappearing after asking her Congressman boyfriend about a secret child with an 18 year old black minister's daughter back home?

What's the odds that people who give the police statements and take lie detector tests are lying while a Congressman who won't give statements and take lie detector tests would be telling the truth, assuming he ever talked?

rd

[benn]

rd, what are the odds that we can find a cold case police unit tht will listen to us?

I wrote a long email to Mike Doyle today, sort of hinting that a cold case police unit is needed.

I also tried to explain the Thomas story as best I could. I mentioned the threats to the Thomases. I am wondering when Thomas received those threats. Could they possibly have been made before Chandra disappeared? Probably not, but I mentioned it. Of course Mike Doyle knows all of the details, but he can only print what they want him to print.

Christianity Today still has my message posted.

What are the odds of something beginning to happen in the cold case?

benn

[rd]

well the odds get better when a fire is lit under it. My thoughts on the threats as far as the ModBee goes is that with OC Thomas claiming to have "let things get out of hand" or however he described it, presumably the threats are part of what he made up when it "got out of hand".

Personally, I think that's a whole lot of very detailed lying over weeks requiring an incredible imagination. In fact, it was so detailed and so incredible, I don't think he was lying. His daughter took the child and left town and the FBI couldn't find her and she was never seen again the rest of the year while the case was being covered. That's pretty shy, isn't it?

The ModBee printed an article on a cold case being worked by the Modesto Police right now. RR sent me an email on it. Maybe they're just getting warmed up for Chandra's case now that they have SP behind bars.

rd

[benn]

I don't know exactly where Jennifer Thomas was. She said she had a twin sister, and I never believed that. I think she was her own twin sister, but I don't blame them for telling the media anything to get rid of them.

Her neighbor though, I forget her name, said that Jennifer was working in a fast food restaurant. That sounds logical. I don't think that someone would make up a story about their daughter having a child out of wedlock and lie about who the father was.

They weren't doing good policework, but I guess they have a lot of cases. The old tv Dragnet police used to check everything out. I thought I saw Dragnet on the tv schedule, but I did not check to see when it was playing.

The Levys and the Katzs told about Otis being afraid. Seems like a lot of women poped up out of the woodwork who were afraid also. The reason they popped up is they were afraid.

Even Jennifer Baker told Chandra's family that she had been intimidated and did not tell all.

benn

[peripeteia]

Benn:

There is no way to get the DNA of a person without expressed permission or a release of secrecy. This is not going to happen in the case of the Thomases. A court in a paternity case, or the grand jury in the case of Chandra per se, could request a DNA sample for comparison purposes. In other words, the court could order DNA testing on Baby Thomas and compare that to the sample that Condit offered. I feel this should be done as it could lead to motive. But there is no way to bring this about except by court order or a release of the person or guardian to obtain this DNA.

kate
_________________
A vision sent me on the path of seeking justice for Chandra, nothing I've seen in print to date has diminished the vividness but only served to reaffirm the validity of this vision.