Jump to content


Spartacus

Oswald Leaving TSBD?


  • Please log in to reply
1456 replies to this topic

#1051 Paul Rigby

Paul Rigby

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 1,533 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Southport, England

Posted 12 October 2013 - 09:39 PM

The interesting aspect of the Allman-Oswald encounter is this: Why or how on earth did not Allman recognize Oswald later once it became official that Oswald did the shooting, akin to Odio's reaction when seeing Oswald on the news?

 

Why, indeed?

 

In order not to derail this most excellent thread, I've started a new one on Allman. Sceptics welcome:The assassination reports of Pierce Allman WFAA-radio news



#1052 Sean Murphy

Sean Murphy

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 510 posts

Posted 13 October 2013 - 09:38 AM

Marrion Baker testified before the Warren Commision that Lee Oswald was just behind the door with the glass pane when he first glimpsed him:

 

P2ihJdh.jpg

 

Now, through this window you can't see too much but I just caught a glimpse of him through this window going away from me and as I ran to this door and opened it, and looked on down in the lunchroom he was on down there about 20 feet so he was moving about as fast as I was.

 

Oswald was "moving about as fast" into the lunchroom as Baker was moving from the landing just off the stairway to the door?

It's hard to see how.

Baker's story is that he "ran" to the door in order to go after a man he had glimpsed "walking away".

Yet we are to believe that they covered about the same distance in the same time--i.e. that Baker running did not cover more ground than Oswald walking.

 

QzMdb18.jpg

 

]GYvad3.gif

 

It's a nonsensical scenario, so nonsensical that one wonders why Baker is making such a transparently unrealistic claim.

Why doesn't he just say that Oswald was running?

Or, alternatively, that Oswald was only a few feet into the lunchroom by the time he himself opened the door and looked into the lunchroom?

 

 

**

 

The short answer is, Baker has to merge by force two stories that cannot easily be merged:

#1: I saw a man walking away (as per Baker's 11/22 affidavit)

#2: I saw Oswald standing by the coke machine (as per a later draft of the story, as told by [or to?] Roy Truly)

 

**

 

As we have already seen, Baker in September 64 will go on the record again with a careless reversion to the "standing" version of the story:

 

xMB7iE7.jpg

 

Yet his own WC testimony has both of his sightings of Oswald being of a man who is moving, walking:

 

I just caught a glimpse of him through this window going away from me

==>  I ran on up here and opened this door and when I got this door opened I could see him walking on down.

 

He has a real problem here:

His 11/22 affidavit talked of "a man walking away from the stairway".

For Oswald, just behind the glass pane, to be "walking away" in any commonsense meaning of the words, he would need to be walking into--a wall.

 

xabZMCZ.jpg

 

The lunchroom was sharply off to the left, it was not straight ahead--not even close.

 

So Baker, in his WC testimony, has to split his affidavit's single description of a man "walking away" into two incidences of walking away.

 

The result, as one would expect, is a horrible muddle.

 

**

 

The one thing Baker desperately needs to say--that his first glimpse of Oswald had him "walking away from the stairway"--is the one thing the layout of the landing/door/lunchroom disallows him from saying.

And so we get a hesitation around the words "walking away":

 

Mr. BAKER - As I came out to the second floor there, Mr. Truly was ahead of me, and as I come out I was kind of scanning, you know, the rooms, and I caught a glimpse of this man walking away from this--I happened to see him through this window in this door. I don't know how come I saw him, but I had a glimpse of him coming down there.

Mr. DULLES - Where was he coming from, do you know?
Mr. BAKER - No, sir. All I seen of him was a glimpse of him
go away from me.

 

"I caught a glimpse of this man walking away from this--": if only Baker could finish the thought with the magic word: "stairway"!

 

But he can't, for to do so would be to make a ludicrous claim that would only draw attention to the discrepancies between his current story and the story told in his affidavit.

Excruciatingly, the money shot--the shot of Oswald actually walking directly away from Baker's position such that Baker can call to him and have him turn around and come back to where Baker is--has to be held back until Baker has left the stairway and gone over to the door:

 

Mr. BAKER - ... There is a door there with a glass, it seemed to me like about a 2 by 2, something like that, and then there is another door which is 6 foot on over there, and there is a hallway over there and a hallway entering into a lunchroom, and when I got to where I could see him he was walking away from me about 20 feet away from me in the lunchroom.
Mr. BELIN - What did you do?
Mr. BAKER - I hollered at him at that time and said, "Come here." He turned and walked right straight back to me.

 

Baker is now, at last, giving a story that sounds a little more like his 11/22 affidavit story:

 

As we reached the third or fourth floor I saw a man walking away from the stairway. I called to the man and he turned around and came back toward me.

(Baker, 11/22 affidavit)

 

But only a little.

The two stories--11/22 affidavit + WC testimony--are still unreconcilable.

Even after the heavy coaching that Baker has been put through ahead of his WC appearance.

 

**

 

We still are being asked to believe that an indeterminate glimpse of a man moving behind a door located well off the stairway could be described as a sighting of "a man walking away from the stairway".

 

The plain sense of those words in Baker's 11/22 affidavit cannot be ignored:

the man had just left the stairway and was putting distance between it and him.

That's what "walking away from" means, and it's how Baker himself is using those words in his WC testimony.

 

No amount of special pleading (Baker in his affidavit was being economical with language; he used an unfortunate choice of words; etc.) can change the plain sense of those words.

 

Especially as there is nothing--nothing--in the rest of Baker's 11/22 account to particularise the scene of the encounter as the second floor, let alone a room on the second floor, let alone a room on the far side of a closed door on the second floor, let alone a lunchroom on the far side of a closed door on the second floor.

 

**

 

If a witness were to say, "Just after the shooting I saw a car driving away from the Triple Underpass", would anyone dare to suggest that this could mean anything other than that the car had been at or by the Triple Underpass and was now increasing its distance from it?

 

Yet that is the offence against common sense and the English language that those arguing for the veracity of the lunchroom story would have us commit.

 

Just how many impossible things are we expected to believe before breakfast?


Edited by Sean Murphy, 13 October 2013 - 10:06 AM.


#1053 Sean Murphy

Sean Murphy

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 510 posts

Posted 13 October 2013 - 10:13 AM

Still no word back from Gary Mack as to who he currently thinks Prayer Man might be...

 

Anybody But Oswald is not a good enough answer, Gary, especially as your Bill Shelley "by elimination" suggestion committed you to the position that Prayer Man must be a TSBD man.

 

Are you no longer of the view that deducing the identity of Prayer Man "by elimination" is the way to approach this conundrum?



#1054 Bjørn Gjerde

Bjørn Gjerde

    Experienced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 60 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 13 October 2013 - 12:42 PM

The encounter ‘on the third or fourth floor’ as described by Baker in his affidavit is more consistent with the layout of the 4th floor than the 3rd floor:

 

4th floor:  http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=10896&relPageId=37

 

3rd floor:  http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=10896&relPageId=36

 

And the 4th floor is also given as the location of the encounter in this undated report from Marvin Johnson of DPD:

 

http://jfk.ci.dallas.tx.us/01/0173-002.gif

 

‘On about the 4th floor Officer Baker apprehended a man that was walking away from the stairway on that floor. Officer Baker started to search the man, but the building manager stated that the man was an employee of the company and was known to him. Officer Baker released the man and continued his search of the building. Officer Baker later identified Lee Harvey Oswald as the man he had seen on the 4th floor of the Texas Book Depository.’

 

But it was probably not Oswald that Baker had seen on the 4th floor.

 

Bjørn Gjerde

 



#1055 Thomas Graves

Thomas Graves

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,946 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:La Jolla, California
  • Interests:Activities of Sicilian-born brothers Anthony and Paul Mirabile (both deceased) in Detroit, Canada, Los Angeles, San Diego, and Tijuana, Mexico

Posted 13 October 2013 - 10:59 PM

The encounter ‘on the third or fourth floor’ as described by Baker in his affidavit is more consistent with the layout of the 4th floor than the 3rd floor:

 

4th floor:  http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=10896&relPageId=37

 

3rd floor:  http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=10896&relPageId=36

 

And the 4th floor is also given as the location of the encounter in this undated report from Marvin Johnson of DPD:

 

http://jfk.ci.dallas.tx.us/01/0173-002.gif

 

‘On about the 4th floor Officer Baker apprehended a man that was walking away from the stairway on that floor. Officer Baker started to search the man, but the building manager stated that the man was an employee of the company and was known to him. Officer Baker released the man and continued his search of the building. Officer Baker later identified Lee Harvey Oswald as the man he had seen on the 4th floor of the Texas Book Depository.’

 

But it was probably not Oswald that Baker had seen on the 4th floor.

 

Bjørn Gjerde

 

 

Good point, Bjorn.

 

It's hard to "walk away" from stairways that are as enclosed as those on the third floor.

 

The third and fourth floors are so different that if the encounter did happen on one of them, Baker could have remembered which one it was by simply revisiting both of them before making his affidavit.

 

--Tommy  :sun


Edited by Thomas Graves, 13 October 2013 - 11:07 PM.


#1056 William Kelly

William Kelly

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9,147 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 14 October 2013 - 03:24 AM

They returned to the scene of the crime and Baker verified and Truly accepted that the encounter occurred on the Second Floor, where the situation was re-enacted over and over - and they timed themselves running from the Sixth Floor to that location and from the front door to that location and every time they did that it was approximately 90 seconds.

 

If the encounter with Oswald occurred at any place other than the Second Floor lunchroom then Baker and Truly and Oswald either lied or were somehow wrong about it.

 

Baker's statements and testimony that he first saw Oswald through the window of the door of the Second Floor Lunchroom pretty much eliminates every other floor since there was no lunchroom or lunchroom door on any other floor other than the second floor.

 

While I don't rule out Baker and Truly encountering someone else on the fourth floor - a man in a brown sports coat - for instance, the idea that Baker could mistake the second floor lunchroom encounter with another floor is impossible - unless he was totally lying, in which case we can't believe anything he says.



#1057 Sean Murphy

Sean Murphy

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 510 posts

Posted 14 October 2013 - 09:20 AM

 

While I don't rule out Baker and Truly encountering someone else on the fourth floor - a man in a brown sports coat - for instance, the idea that Baker could mistake the second floor lunchroom encounter with another floor is impossible - unless he was totally lying, in which case we can't believe anything he says.

 

But Baker and Truly's WC testimony rules out their encountering someone else on the fourth floor.

If Baker and Truly are trustworthy witnesses, as you keep insisting, why don't you rule out a fourth floor encounter?

Are you saying they might have lied to the WC?



#1058 William Kelly

William Kelly

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9,147 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 14 October 2013 - 06:45 PM

 

 

While I don't rule out Baker and Truly encountering someone else on the fourth floor - a man in a brown sports coat - for instance, the idea that Baker could mistake the second floor lunchroom encounter with another floor is impossible - unless he was totally lying, in which case we can't believe anything he says.

 

But Baker and Truly's WC testimony rules out their encountering someone else on the fourth floor.

If Baker and Truly are trustworthy witnesses, as you keep insisting, why don't you rule out a fourth floor encounter?

Are you saying they might have lied to the WC?

 

 

I do trust Marion Baker, from what I have gathered about him, he seems like a good cop - the Wrong Copper to try to bribe, he was a hunter, knew rifles, rode a Harley, and took individual initiative by breaking away from the motorcade and searching for the gunman. I read his reports, listened and watched him on tape, and his London trial testimony, and he comes across to me as a very believable witness. 

 

And I don't trust Truly, though since Baker was with him, their stories must match, and also dovetail with what Oswald had to say about meeting them. 

 

Truly is not trustworthy in my view for deciding, after seeing Oswald with Baker less than two minutes after the assassination, and giving Oswald a pass, ten minutes later determining that Oswald was missing from a group of workers and calling the front office to get his address and then, after discussing him with Chief Lumpkin, going up to the sixth floor and interrupting Capt. Fritz from examining the newly discovered rifle to give him Oswald's name and address.  

 

I became interested in the significance of how Oswald first came to the attention of the official investigators when Robert K. Tanenbaum asked the question at the 2003 Wecht Conference,  "...how is it that the police, the cornerstone of truth in every case, how is it that the police, out of the cosmos, focused on the defendant? What led them to that? What was the trail? That's the credibility of the truth of your case. In our case, the Kennedy assassination, the first question was - how was it that Oswald was stopped by Tippit during the course and flow of the investigation that was happening so rapidly?" 

 

http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot/2013/07/robert-k-tanenbaum-wecht-conference.html. 

 

And in pursuing this question I came up with the Truly-Lumpkin-Fritz connection that is significant in knowing how they zeroed in on Oswald - in RKT's words - "from out of the Cosmos."  

 

http://jfkcountercoup.blogspot/2013/07/oswald-from-out-of-cosmos.html 

 

Mr. Ball: And in order to place the time of it, was it before or after the rifle had been found on the sixth floor? 

Mr. Truly: I wouldn't know. I think it must have been around the (time the) rifle was found, because I was not on the sixth floor at that time, but when he told - let's go back a few minutes - pardon me - I told Chief Lumpkin a good many minutes after we came down from the roof and he went ahead and gave some orders to two or three policemen surrounding him and then said, 'Let's go up and tell Captain Fritz.' 

Mr. Ball; Now, what did you tell Chief Lumpkin when you came down from the roof of the building? 

Mr. Truly: When i first noticed this boy was missing, I told Chief Lumpkin that, "We have a man here that's missing." I said. "It may not mean anything but he isn't here." I first called down to the other warehouse and had Mr. Akin pull the application of the boy so I could get - quickly get his address in Irving and his general description, so I could be more accurate than I would be.... 

 

Mr. Ball: And what was the purpose of going there? [Sixth Floor]

Mr Truly: My purpose in going there was to inform Captain Fritz that this boy was mising and give hm his telephone number, and his Irving address, at the suggestion of Chief Lumpkin, who accompanied me. 

Mr. Ball: Did you give Capt. Fritz this name and address? 

Mr. Truly: Yes, I did. 

Mr. Truly: I told - well, when Chief Lumplin and i went to the sixth floor, Captain Fritz was standing in the are where I later learned they had found the gun, and Chief Lumpkin told Capt. Fritz that Mr. Truly had something to tell him, which I would like to tell him, so he stepped over 4 or 5 feet to where I was, away from the other men - officers and reporters. I would say, that were on the floor, and I repeated the words to Captain Fritz. 

Mr. Ball: What did you tell him? 

Mr. Truly: I told him that we had a man missing - I told him what his name was and his Irving address, and he said, "all right, thank you, Mr. Truly. We will get right on it" or words to that effect.... 

 

And they got right on it. 

 

Now Chief Lumpkin - the man in the middle of all this - was the driver or in the front seat of the Pilot Car, that was about a half mile a head of the motorcade, on security detail - and though it is not usually listed among the vehicles in the motorcade - it included Jack Puterbaugh - who was a key player in the determination of the luncheon site and motorcade route - AND US Army Reserve General who is not on the list of the officially approved passengers for the motorcade. 

 

And whether intentional or not, Lumpkin had the Pilot car pull over to the curb at the corner of Houston and Elm - the only place it is known to have stopped along the entire route - and Lumpkin told one of the three traffic cops standing there that the motorcade was a few minutes away - also informing the sixth floor sniper, just above them in the open window. 

 

Lumpkin was an officer in the 488th Military Intelligence Reserve unit led by Jack Crichton, who also comes into play in this narrative for arranging for a Russian translator for Marina and possibly manning the Emergency Command Center, while the general who Lumpkin invited to come along for the ride was responsible for all US Army Reserve units in that part of Texas. 

 

The bottom line is that Roy Truly led Capt. Fritz directly to Oswald and gave him the Irving address at the urging of Chief Lumpkin, who led the parade, tipped off the Sixth Floor Sniper of the impending arrival of the motorcade and was a member of an elite military intelligence unit that also has a number of other key links to the assassination. 

 

Did Truly lie? 

 

I don't know, but don't think so. He didn't have to, as if he did lie he would have seen Oswald go through the lunchroom door and would have kept Lumpkin's key role out of it.  


Edited by William Kelly, 14 October 2013 - 06:49 PM.


#1059 Ian Kingsbury

Ian Kingsbury

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 558 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:just far enough north of London
  • Interests:Coaching football ,reading ,watching West Ham when pos. trying not to comment on West Ham when pos. unhealthy thirst for knowledge any knowledge.

Posted 14 October 2013 - 11:27 PM

Bill
If we eliminate all but "strangers" in the TSBD at the time and places
We have put them it leaves Jack Edwin Dougherty.
And we know very,very little about him!

Where do you start?

Ian

#1060 Thomas Graves

Thomas Graves

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,946 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:La Jolla, California
  • Interests:Activities of Sicilian-born brothers Anthony and Paul Mirabile (both deceased) in Detroit, Canada, Los Angeles, San Diego, and Tijuana, Mexico

Posted 14 October 2013 - 11:56 PM

 

 

 

While I don't rule out Baker and Truly encountering someone else on the fourth floor - a man in a brown sports coat - for instance, the idea that Baker could mistake the second floor lunchroom encounter with another floor is impossible - unless he was totally lying, in which case we can't believe anything he says.

 

But Baker and Truly's WC testimony rules out their encountering someone else on the fourth floor.

If Baker and Truly are trustworthy witnesses, as you keep insisting, why don't you rule out a fourth floor encounter?

Are you saying they might have lied to the WC?

 

 

[...]

 

Did Truly lie? 

 

I don't know, but don't think so. He didn't have to, as if he did lie he would have seen Oswald go through the lunchroom door and would have kept Lumpkin's key role out of it.  

 

 

Bill,

 

Although I suspect that Truly was one of the bad guys, I find his reasons for reporting Oswald missing plausible.  As he alluded in his WC testimony, it was the combination of the fact that Oswald must have been (at least subconsciously) "on his mind" (having vouched for him just ten minutes earlier) with the fact that Oswald was was apparently the only one "missing."

 

If Truly had lied and said he'd seen Oswald go through what you call "the lunchroom door," how would that have kept Lumpkin "out of it?" 

 

As I understand it, Truly claimed that he witnessed Baker talking to Oswald (and vouched for Oswald) in the second floor lunchroom and then, about ten minutes later, noticed that Oswald was missing. Then Truly called the warehouse and got Oswald's address, phone number, and physical description.  Then he told Lumpkin that Oswald was missing, and Lumpkin suggested that he tell Fritz, which Truly did. 

 

So how does Truly's telling the truth (not seeing) or lying (seeing) Oswald walk through "the lunchroom door" have anything to do with the chain of events I've just outlined, given the fact that Truly claimed that he not only witnessed Oswald in the lunchroom but vouched for him there, as well? 

 

What do you think Lumpkin would have done regarding Oswald if Truly hadn't mentioned to him that Oswald was missing?  Do you think Lumpkin would have said to Truly, "Say, Roy, is your temporary employee who used to live in Russia, that Lee Harvey Oswald guy, missing by any chance?"

 

Thank you,

--Tommy  :sun

 

PS  Every time I click on your two links, I get the error message "Server Not Found -- Firefox can't find the server at  www.jfkcountercoup.blogspot.


Edited by Thomas Graves, 15 October 2013 - 12:30 AM.


#1061 William Kelly

William Kelly

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9,147 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 15 October 2013 - 12:20 AM

Bill
If we eliminate all but "strangers" in the TSBD at the time and places
We have put them it leaves Jack Edwin Dougherty.
And we know very,very little about him!

Where do you start?

Ian

 

I don't know Ian. i guess if you eliminate Oswald as the Sixth Floor sniper, if he wasn't a "stranger," you'd have to look at all of the other employees, not just the floor laying crew or other book order boys like Oswald and JED, but those who worked for the sub-contractors and book publishers, as well as those who delivered books to the TSBD and were there on occasion. 

 

Dougherty was described as a former vet, but one who was slow and with a low IQ. I think he lived with his parents and was assisted in his testimony, though we don't know much more about him. At least I don't 

 

There is also the possibility the Sixth Floor sniper was a cop, as that would explain why he was in no hurry to leave and that the plan was to just blend in with those searching the building after it was sealed. 

 

Most everybody though, wants to chase Ozzie the Rabbit, and gets distracted from even attempting to identify the real gunman, who we know wore a white shirt, was between 25-30 years old, and had a bald spot on the top of his head, and was armed with a rifle.

 

The cop who "discovered" the Sniper's Nest, also passed two men descending the steps when he was going up. Who were they? 

 

BK 


Edited by William Kelly, 15 October 2013 - 12:21 AM.


#1062 William Kelly

William Kelly

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9,147 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 15 October 2013 - 12:32 AM

 

 

 

 

While I don't rule out Baker and Truly encountering someone else on the fourth floor - a man in a brown sports coat - for instance, the idea that Baker could mistake the second floor lunchroom encounter with another floor is impossible - unless he was totally lying, in which case we can't believe anything he says.

 

But Baker and Truly's WC testimony rules out their encountering someone else on the fourth floor.

If Baker and Truly are trustworthy witnesses, as you keep insisting, why don't you rule out a fourth floor encounter?

Are you saying they might have lied to the WC?

 

 

[...]

 

Did Truly lie? 

 

I don't know, but don't think so. He didn't have to, as if he did lie he would have seen Oswald go through the lunchroom door and would have kept Lumpkin's key role out of it.  

 

 

Bill,

 

If Truly had lied and said he'd seen Oswald go through what you call "the lunchroom door," how would that have kept Lumpkin "out of it?" 

 

BK: TOMMY, THEY AREN'T NECESSARILY RELATED, JUST TWO ITEMS THAT IF TRULY'S BEHAVIOR WAS SCRIPTED, HE SHOULD HAVE SEEN OSWALD GO THROUGH THE DOOR, AND LUMPKIN'S ROLE WOULD HAVE BEEN INVESTIGATED - AND I BELIEVE SUPPRESSED. 

 

As I understand it, Truly claimed that he witnessed Baker talking to Oswald (and vouched for Oswald) in the second floor lunchroom and then, about ten minutes later, noticed that Oswald was missing. Then Truly called the warehouse and got Oswald's address, phone number, and physical description.  Then he told Lumpkin that Oswald was missing, and Lumpkin suggested that he tell Fritz, which Truly did. 

 

So how does Truly's telling the truth (not seeing) or lying (seeing) Oswald walk through "the lunchroom door" have anything to do with the chain of events I've just outlined, given the fact that Truly claimed that he not only witnessed Oswald in the lunchroom but vouched for him there, as well? 

 

What do you think Lumpkin would have done regarding Oswald if Truly hadn't mentioned to him that Oswald was missing?  Do you think Lumpkin would have said to Truly, "Say, Roy, is your temporary employee who used to live in Russia, that Lee Harvey Oswald guy, missing by any chance?"

 

Thank you,

--Tommy  :sun

 

PS  Every time I click on your two links, I get the error message "Server Not Found -- Firefox can't find the server at  www.jfkcountercoup.blogspot.

 

 

I don't know what Truly would have done if Lumpkin didn't get him to go see Fritz, and I don't know what Lumpkin would have done if Truly didn't tell him about the suddenly and mysteriously missing employee who he had seen on the second floor ten minutes earlier. I don't think that Oswald was the only employee missing, as some of them, if you read their statements - reported they were not permitted back in the building after going out to see the motorcade. So Oswald couldn't have been the only missing employee. 

 

I don't know the answers, I'm just asking questions myself. 

 

And I don't know how to fix the link problem, but blogspot is run by Google and if you go through Google first you should be able to get there. 

 

But I will be leaving this subject soon, and devoting my time to the Air Force One tapes, though I hope you all keep trying to figure it out. 

 

BK 

 

And isn't my blog link posted by Ed Forum just below my biography? 


Edited by William Kelly, 15 October 2013 - 12:35 AM.


#1063 Thomas Graves

Thomas Graves

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,946 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:La Jolla, California
  • Interests:Activities of Sicilian-born brothers Anthony and Paul Mirabile (both deceased) in Detroit, Canada, Los Angeles, San Diego, and Tijuana, Mexico

Posted 15 October 2013 - 12:38 AM

 

Bill
If we eliminate all but "strangers" in the TSBD at the time and places
We have put them it leaves Jack Edwin Dougherty.
And we know very,very little about him!

Where do you start?

Ian

 

I don't know Ian. i guess if you eliminate Oswald as the Sixth Floor sniper, if he wasn't a "stranger," you'd have to look at all of the other employees, not just the floor laying crew or other book order boys like Oswald and JED, but those who worked for the sub-contractors and book publishers, as well as those who delivered books to the TSBD and were there on occasion. 

 

Dougherty was described as a former vet, but one who was slow and with a low IQ. I think he lived with his parents and was assisted in his testimony, though we don't know much more about him. At least I don't 

 

There is also the possibility the Sixth Floor sniper was a cop, as that would explain why he was in no hurry to leave and that the plan was to just blend in with those searching the building after it was sealed. 

 

Most everybody though, wants to chase Ozzie the Rabbit, and gets distracted from even attempting to identify the real gunman, who we know wore a white shirt, was between 25-30 years old, and had a bald spot on the top of his head, and was armed with a rifle.

 

The cop who "discovered" the Sniper's Nest, also passed two men descending the steps when he was going up. Who were they? 

 

BK 

 

 

Bill,

 

I think I read that Dougherty's handicap was emotional in nature, not low intelligence per se.

 

Didn't Truly say that he was a good worker (i.e., not slow)? 

 

Does the Army take people who are "slow and with a low IQ?"

 

 

--Tommy  :sun


Edited by Thomas Graves, 15 October 2013 - 12:39 AM.


#1064 Chris Newton

Chris Newton

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 336 posts
  • Location:Florida, USA
  • Interests:JFK Assassination - Theory &amp; Research<br>Military History<br>Computer Science<br>Photography

Posted 15 October 2013 - 12:50 AM

There is also the possibility the Sixth Floor sniper was a cop, as that would explain why he was in no hurry to leave and that the plan was to just blend in with those searching the building after it was sealed. 

 

 

Hey Bill, just a theory but considering witness testimony of there being two men seen in the windows, and the reports of the "fake" SS agents in and around the building and the two unidentified "plain clothes" coming down the stairs. I'm thinking it was a classic sniper team. Shooter and Spotter. The Shooter hides the weapon and the spotter rearranges the boxes to resemble a fighting position and frame "the patsy". This gives them time to complete both actions and then head down the stairs. They split up, one goes out the back and one goes out the front. If they encounter anyone they can show their ID and blend in and walk away. Would you be suspicious if a you encountered a stranger and they flashed a badge and asked for a phone? Brilliant.



#1065 Thomas Graves

Thomas Graves

    Super Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,946 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:La Jolla, California
  • Interests:Activities of Sicilian-born brothers Anthony and Paul Mirabile (both deceased) in Detroit, Canada, Los Angeles, San Diego, and Tijuana, Mexico

Posted 15 October 2013 - 12:51 AM

 

 

 

 

 

While I don't rule out Baker and Truly encountering someone else on the fourth floor - a man in a brown sports coat - for instance, the idea that Baker could mistake the second floor lunchroom encounter with another floor is impossible - unless he was totally lying, in which case we can't believe anything he says.

 

But Baker and Truly's WC testimony rules out their encountering someone else on the fourth floor.

If Baker and Truly are trustworthy witnesses, as you keep insisting, why don't you rule out a fourth floor encounter?

Are you saying they might have lied to the WC?

 

 

[...]

 

Did Truly lie? 

 

I don't know, but don't think so. He didn't have to, as if he did lie he would have seen Oswald go through the lunchroom door and would have kept Lumpkin's key role out of it.  

 

 

Bill,

 

If Truly had lied and said he'd seen Oswald go through what you call "the lunchroom door," how would that have kept Lumpkin "out of it?" 

 

BK: TOMMY, THEY AREN'T NECESSARILY RELATED, JUST TWO ITEMS THAT IF TRULY'S BEHAVIOR WAS SCRIPTED, HE SHOULD HAVE SEEN OSWALD GO THROUGH THE DOOR, AND LUMPKIN'S ROLE WOULD HAVE BEEN INVESTIGATED - AND I BELIEVE SUPPRESSED. 

 

As I understand it, Truly claimed that he witnessed Baker talking to Oswald (and vouched for Oswald) in the second floor lunchroom and then, about ten minutes later, noticed that Oswald was missing. Then Truly called the warehouse and got Oswald's address, phone number, and physical description.  Then he told Lumpkin that Oswald was missing, and Lumpkin suggested that he tell Fritz, which Truly did. 

 

So how does Truly's telling the truth (not seeing) or lying (seeing) Oswald walk through "the lunchroom door" have anything to do with the chain of events I've just outlined, given the fact that Truly claimed that he not only witnessed Oswald in the lunchroom but vouched for him there, as well? 

 

What do you think Lumpkin would have done regarding Oswald if Truly hadn't mentioned to him that Oswald was missing?  Do you think Lumpkin would have said to Truly, "Say, Roy, is your temporary employee who used to live in Russia, that Lee Harvey Oswald guy, missing by any chance?"

 

Thank you,

--Tommy  :sun

 

PS  Every time I click on your two links, I get the error message "Server Not Found -- Firefox can't find the server at  www.jfkcountercoup.blogspot.

 

 

I don't know what Truly would have done if Lumpkin didn't get him to go see Fritz, and I don't know what Lumpkin would have done if Truly didn't tell him about the suddenly and mysteriously missing employee who he had seen on the second floor ten minutes earlier. I don't think that Oswald was the only employee missing, as some of them, if you read their statements - reported they were not permitted back in the building after going out to see the motorcade. So Oswald couldn't have been the only missing employee. 

 

I don't know the answers, I'm just asking questions myself. 

 

And I don't know how to fix the link problem, but blogspot is run by Google and if you go through Google first you should be able to get there. 

 

But I will be leaving this subject soon, and devoting my time to the Air Force One tapes, though I hope you all keep trying to figure it out. 

 

BK 

 

And isn't my blog link posted by Ed Forum just below my biography? 

 

 

[emphasis added by T. Graves]

 

Bill,

 

When, during his WC testimony, Truly was asked if Oswald was the only person missing, Truly said that Oswald was the only one that he knew of at the time

 

Do you think that Truly, 11 to 13 minutes after the assassination, was aware of other TSBD employees who were also missing?

 

It does, however, cast Truly in a bad light when he says that no complete roll call was taken that afternoon.

 

Mr. TRULY. When I noticed this boy was missing, I told Chief Lumpkin that "We have a man here that's missing." I said, "It my not mean anything, but he isn't here." I first called down to the other warehouse and had Mr. Akin pull the application of the boy so I could get--quickly get his address in Irving and his general description, so I could be more accurate than I would be.
Mr. BALL. Was he the only man missing?
Mr. TRULY. The only one I noticed at that time. Now, I think there was one or two more, possibly Charles Givens, but I had seen him out in front walking up the street just before the firing of the gun.

Mr. BALL. But walking which way?
Mr. TRULY. The last time I saw him, he was walking across Houston Street, east on Elm.
Mr. BALL. Did you make a check of your employees afterwards?
Mr. TRULY. No, no; not complete.
No, I just saw the group of the employees over there on the floor and I noticed this boy wasn't with them. With no thought in my mind except that I had seen him a short time before in the building, I noticed he wasn't there.
Mr. BALL. What do you mean "a short time before"?
Mr. TRULY. I would say 10 or 12 minutes.
Mr. BALL. You mean that's when you saw him in the lunchroom?
Mr. TRULY. In the lunchroom.
Mr. BALL. And you noticed he wasn't over there?
Mr. TRULY. Well, I asked Bill Shelley if he had seen him around and he said "No."

 

--Tommy  :sun

 

PS   Hmmmm.  Come to think of it, It is interesting that Truly didn't claim to have noticed by himself that Oswald was missing, but that he asked the mysterious Bill Shelly about Oswald's whereabouts.   So, why did he ask Shelly if he'd recently seen Oswald?  Because Oswald was kinda on his mind after having (allegedly) seen him a few minutes earlier in the second floor lunchroom?


Edited by Thomas Graves, 15 October 2013 - 02:36 AM.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users