Information for Richard Hooke about Madeleine and Steven Brown


In a June 4, 2016 paper Richard Hooke indicated that Steven Brown was the son of Madeleine Brown and Lyndon Johnson. To quote Mr. Hooke:

“All anyone has to do is look at a picture of Steven Mark Brown and it is immediately apparent he looks exactly like LBJ and Madeleine Brown, His true parents. In 1987, Steven Mark Brown filed a $10.5 million dollar lawsuit against Lady Bird Johnson, claiming he was owed his share of LBJ’s estate.”

Mr. Hooke is a self-proclaimed JFK assassination researcher. Why do I use the term self-proclaimed? Because those engaged in true research provide all the facts surrounding the specific case being investigated. In my opinion Mr. Hooke has reached a conclusion first and then used selective evidence to support his deceptive theory. Let me see if I can prove it.

1] Mr. Hooke claims Steven’s picture looks “exactly like LBJ and Madeleine Brown.”

His claim is an OPINION not a matter of fact.

There have been many studies concerning misidentification errors. To name but a few, there are the studies done by Elizabeth Loftus, Professor of Law and Psychology, University of California, Irvine and University of Washington (q.v.). Studies conducted by Arizona State University’s School of Social and Behavioral Sciences have exposed that identifications are unreliable. The Innocence Project has shown “misidentification is the greatest contributing factor to wrongful convictions proven by DNA testing, playing a role in more than 70% of convictions overturned through DNA testing nationwide.”

Mr. Hooke’s OPINION that Steven looks like Madeleine and LBJ falls apart based upon independent research.

2] Mr. Hooke correctly asserts Mr. Brown filed a lawsuit against Lady Bird Johnson. However, in my view, a ethical researcher would provide full rather than selective disclosure. Mr. Hooke fails to afford a complete picture. Here is what he forgot to include.

“Former District Court Judge Harlan Martin dismissed the case when Mr. Brown, then a naval operations specialist, failed to appear in court.” (emphasis mine)

Source: The Dallas Morning News - October 3, 1990 - pg. 33A

So why didn’t Mr. Brown appear. Maybe it was because the court discovered that 8 years prior Mr. Brown and his mother Madeleine made a failed attempt to claim Jerome T. Ragsdale was Steven’s father.

To make sure Mr. Hooke and the reader understands the importance of this, I have highlighted some notable facts.

“On March 29, 1979, appellant, Steven Mark Brown, filed a "Petition for Determination and Declaration of Heirship" in the Probate Court of Dallas County, where administration of the Estate of Jerome Thorn Ragsdale was pending. Appellant alleged that Jerome Thorn Ragsdale, son of Jesse Thorn Ragsdale and brother of appellee and Paul C. Ragsdale, was his biological father.”

“After receiving notice of the contest filed in the Dallas County Probate Court, appellee filed an "Amended Application to Declare Heirship" in the Estate of Jesse Thorn Ragsdale. The amended application provided, in part, as follows:

"VI. Applicant (Steven Brown) was a party to a suit brought by Madeleine F. Brown claiming a `lost will' which suit was dismissed by the Proponent during trial on the merits in the Probate Court in and for Dallas County, Texas. Applicant believes that Madeleine F. Brown had a son, Steven Mark Brown, who is now asserting that he is the biological child of Jerome T. Ragsdale, Deceased, and Madeleine F. Brown. Attached to the original Application to Declare Heirship was the Application on which Madeleine F. Brown went to trial, reflecting the relationship claimed by Madeleine F. Brown of her son to Jerome T. Ragsdale. Therefore, Applicant moves the Court to determine who are the heirs to JESSE THORN RAGSDALE's Estate."

Source: Brown v. Crockett 601 S.W.2d 188 (1980)

3] As shown above Madeleine Brown (along with Steven) has a history of making false claims. She is also a convicted forger.

F9103481 M. Brown vs. State of Texas (November 6, 1992)

The State asserted "Appellant, acting through her attorney, filed wills purported to be those of Guy and Jessie Duncan on January 3, 1989."

Guy Duncan died on September 21, 1988 and his wife Jessie died November 28, 1988. The probate court subsequently discovered the true will was filed by Gary Dalton. The State then prosecuted Madeleine Brown for the offense of FORGERY.

The jury concluded, "It is therefore found and adjudged by the court, that the said Defendant is guilty of the offense of forgery, a 2nd degree felony as charged in the indictment." The punishment "as has been determined by the Court, (was) confinement in the Texas Department of Corrections for 10 years and a fine of $500.00." Possibly because of her advanced age (She was 67 at the time.) the sentence was modified to "a period of 10 years" probation.

Now there are some who I assume already know about this particular case. They realize that the case was appealed and they will no doubt claim Madeleine was found not guilty. That is not true. The appellate court merely reversed the decision of the lower court on a technicality. Madeleine had an attorney file the will rather than doing it herself. Based solely on that fact, the appellate court reversed her conviction. But none of this discounts the reality that Madeleine Brown had Deborah Abbe prepare a forged instrument and then forged Guy Duncan’s name for presentation to the probate court.

Conclusion: Madeleine Brown and Steven were not innocent victims as Mr. Hooke would have you believe.

I expect, since I have outed Mr. Hooke for his poor research, I will be on the receiving end of more ad hominem attacks and name calling.

One other error Mr. Hooke made in his research paper - it is not Gary Dunkel but Lawrence Dunkel.

Dave Perry November 03, 2016