I have just returned from Dearborn, Michigan, where the rebuilt JFK Limousine that once was SS-100-X is on display. I was interviewed as part of one of the sections of the program. It was an amazing experience. I have spent time at the Ford Museum before, and many hours with the limo, but this time I was able to see it in the early hours before the public was allowed in. The camera crew started to set up at 5 a.m. and did interviews and some still footage including the interior, prior to 9:30 when the music was turned on and the crowds arrived. I was able to take some good photos also -- when the sun is up it shines on the limo and creates reflections and distortions.

Needless to say, I can't talk much about the contents of the program, but can give a heads-up that it looks to be not only interesting, but perhaps really valuable. I'll post more as I am able prior to the initial air date which is November 4, 2008.

Ironically, as I was being driven back home from the Minneapolis-St. Paul airport I noticed the huge blimp in the sky. It is over the gorgeous Interlachen Country Club in Edina, where the US Womens' Open is taking place. It's not every day that the Twin Cities are the focus of excitement for a sports event such as this.

Pam,

Did you mention that the limo SS-100 X is still considered a crime scene?

BK

Bill, any evidentiary value of the mobile crime scene better known as SS-100-X was lost on Monday, November 25, 1963 when the limo was taken to Hess & Eisenhardt in Cincinnati and was essentially stripped. So while it IS a crime scene, it is one in name only since that date.

Kinda like Elm Street in Dallas after repaving and curb restriping.

Agreed. But wonder if any of the men who worked on refurbishing it are still alive to bear witness to what they saw and had to 'repair'?! I'd almost be willing to bet they had to take secrecy oaths or have been just plain threatened to keep their mouths shut....but one never knows...after all this time....

I would think Pam could answer any question you have about SS100X.

BK

Pamela gave a presentation on the limo at the Lancer NID conference in 1999, and I forgot to ask her a follow-up question then, so I will pose it here: In response to my question, Pamela said that the passengers in the rear seats (JFK & Jackie), could raise or lower their side window according to personal preferences. I forgot to ask

1. whether this was done via an old-fashioned wind-up handle or via a modern electric button and

2, more importantly, whether the driver ALSO had the ability to control the two rear passenger windows, as is typical in modern cars

It appears from this photo that the side window on JFK's side was already rolled completely down when he entered the limo at love Field, and I wonder if that was the norm for JFK on previous trips, e.g. Houston?
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/170/4257164...848f929.jpg?v=0

QUOTE(William Kelly @ Jun 29 2008, 07:58 PM)

Pam,
Did you mention that the limo SS-100 X is still considered a crime scene?

BK

Bill,
When I read a copy of the script of the program (roughed out to date) I said to the producer (with some irony, as I am never without something to say about the limo), "What do you want me to say? You've given all my best lines to other people!"

Yes, the focus of the program is on the limo as the primary crime scene. It will be very interesting, and may end up being valuable as well.

QUOTE(Mark Knight @ Jun 29 2008, 08:14 PM)

Bill, any evidentiary value of the mobile crime scene better known as SS-100-X was lost on Monday, November 25, 1963 when the limo was taken to Hess & Eisenhardt in Cincinnati and was essentially stripped. So while it IS a crime scene, it is one in name only since that date.

Kinda like Elm Street in Dallas after repaving and curb restriping.

The SS did informal searches of the limo during the 12 hours following the assassination. Then the FBI did a rather cursory forensic exam at 1 a.m. 11.23.63. All of this is detailed at my JFK website www.in-broad-daylight.com. It was cleaned out on Saturday, the windshield replaced on Monday by Arlington Glass, and new carpeting installed in early December.

The limo was kept in the White House Garage until December 20, 1963 when Vaughn Ferguson Drove it to Dearborn to be gutted and rebuilt as a bulletproof limo.

Sounds like you may be referencing Mr. Whittaker, who has attempted to appropriate Vaughn Ferguson's statements and rework them into his own experiences. Ferguson was at Dearborn regularly and played golf with a number of FMC employees. Ferguson told the story of his experiences with the limo to numerous people. He was very unhappy with the govt treatment of the car. A few other employees at the FMC have attempted to appropriate Ferguson's statments as well. This is evidence of the significance of the limo as the crime scene.

QUOTE(Peter Lemkin @ Jun 29 2008, 11:16 PM)

Agreed. But wonder if any of the men who worked on refurbishing it are still alive to bear witness to what they saw and had to 'repair'?! I'd almost be willing to bet they had to take secrecy oaths or have been just plain threatened to keep their mouths shut....but one never knows...after all this time....

Vaughn Ferguson shared his experiences and concerns with a number of people at the FMC. Nobody moved it upward. If NARA had not sent me his memo by mistake (it was still being withheld) we would not have known about his experiences at all.

for more info concerning the Limo see: Murder in Dealey Plaza, Part II, The Kennedy Limousine pgs. 120-159, by Douglas Weldon, J.S.

From patspeer.com, chapter 11:

On May 13, 1964, in testimony before the Warren Commission, Robert Frazier described his search of the limousine for bullet fragments late on the night of the shooting. Two bullet fragments had already been retrieved from the front seat by the Secret Service. First, Frazier described the car: "There were blood and particles of flesh scattered all over the hood, the windshield, in the front seat and all over the rear floor rugs, the jump seats, and over the rear seat, and down both sides of the side rails or tops of the doors of the car." Then Frazier described his search: "I examined the car to determine whether or not there were any bullet fragments present in it, embedded in the upholstery of the back of the front seat, or whether there were any impact areas which indicated that bullets or bullet fragments struck the inside of the car." At this point he found three small bullet fragments on the carpet under Nellie Connally's jump seat. By his finding these three fragments, and by his using the word "examine" to describe his search, Frazier gave the clear implication that he was extremely thorough in his search for bullet fragments.

When asked if he felt his search was indeed a "thorough examination of all aspects of the interior of the automobile," however, Frazier's response was not without its qualifications. He replied: "Yes, sir; for our purpose. However, we did not tear out all of the rugs on the floor, for instance. We examined the rugs carefully for holes, for bullet furroughs, for fragments. We examined the nap of the rug, in the actual nap of the rug, for fragments and bullet holes. We pulled the rug back as far as we could turn it back and even tore the glue or adhesive material loose around the cracks at the edges of the rug so we could observe the cracks to see whether they had been enlarged, and we examined all of the upholstery covering, on the back of the front seat, on the doors, and in the rear seat compartment, the jump seats, the actual rear seat, the back of the rear seat, and we examined the front seat in a similar manner, and we found no bullet holes or other bullet impact areas, other than the one on the inside of the windshield and the dent inside the windshield chrome." (5H58-74).

An 11-27-63 Secret Service report on this inspection, included in the Secret Service's report on the limo to the Warren Commission, CD80, confirms "a meticulous examination was made of the back seat of the car and the floor rug." But this wasn't exactly true.

In David Fisher's book Hard Evidence, Frazier was more forthcoming about this examination. He revealed "The President's limousine arrived back in Washington about six o'clock. Around one o'clock the next morning, Cort (Cortland Cunningham) and I started sifting through the blood looking for lead fragments. It was tough; it was very tough...We'd just reach down into the clots of blood and scoop it up in our hands and let it dribble through. Whenever we felt something gritty, we'd clean it up and if it was lead, we'd save it in a pillbox. We didn't really recover a lot of lead." Evidently, they never thought of sponging off the blood and inspecting the carpet with a metal detector and a magnifying glass.

In any event, according to the Secret Service's own report on the limo, CD80, by the afternoon of the 23rd a Secret Service agent was requesting permission to clean the rest of the blood from the back seat and floor of the limo. At this time, he was told to wait for FBI approval. The very next day he made a second request, this time noting "that the odor from the car was becoming offensive." This request, almost certainly made after the announcement of Oswald's death, was granted "after clearance from the FBI." Late that evening, the limousine was cleaned up. No FBI agent was present. According to the Secret Service's own records, "there were still fragments of bone and hair in the debris of the car which had not been removed by the FBI search team." There's no record of what became of this "bone and hair." There's no indication that this clean-up crew looked for small fragments of lead hidden amongst this bone and hair. A Ford Motor Company memo first obtained and reported by researcher Pamela McElwain-Brown, moreover, demonstrates that within 10 days of the shooting, the carpet of the limousine had been removed by "the White House upholstery man" and had been replaced by the writer of the memo, Ford Motor company employee Vaughn Ferguson. There's no record of what this "upholsterer" did with this carpet. There's no reason to believe that a thorough inspection of this carpet was ever undertaken.

Very interesting all. Seems as if there was NOT a complete investigation for bullet fragments and certainly it was NOT preserved as a crime scene should be! I love the term 'White House upholstery man'....wonder what his security rating was?! They have 'plumbers' and they have 'upholsterers'....who knows what else...

It is by far from the only bloody mess that investigators of other crimes had to sift through [and it was (only) the President, after all!]. That car should have been photo'd to death; taken apart while filmed by experts and witnesses; every piece of metal, bone, brain, tissue noted, photo'd, saved and given a proper chain of evidence. Same for any tears, holes, cracks, dents, etc. Shamefull - but no surprise. The windshield should have been preserved and the direction struck and by what determined. Same with the dent and likely lots of other things, denials notwithstanding. Just as the shirt was cleaned, so was the Limo.....talk about a literal whitewash.

Many disturbing tidbits. Every part of the 'crime scene' was tampered with and/or not fully investigated [brain; cranium; body; limo; Plaza; witnesses, photos, seized and ancillary evidence, et al.]

While Pamela relies on "official documents", Doug Weldon interviewed actual persons in Michigan who
worked on the actual limo...far more reliable than self-serving documents by the SS and FBI.

Jack

**************

Doug Weldon : TMWKK The Final Chapter, ep.1.The Smoking Gun, seg 2

Limo information begins with Dr.2 minutes ..Dr.Galanges......54 seconds into the video..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAW-bxxZfcM


The Limo Windshield, Bullet from Front

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vClwuJ0yuWM...feature=related

Limo to Detroit, Part I

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01oaxb00dIE

TMWKK, The Final Chapter, ep.1 The Smoking Gun, seg.3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jmMXfBgjsh0...feature=related

JFK Assassination, Presidential limo SS-100-X, part 5

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_gQpLEzMEoE

B.......

tnx, B.... they're trying to bury Doug's work... never happen!
David

QUOTE(Jack White @ Jun 30 2008, 02:27 PM)

While Pamela relies on "official documents", Doug Weldon interviewed actual persons in Michigan who
worked on the actual limo...far more reliable than self-serving documents by the SS and FBI.
Jack

Vaughn Ferguson is documented by his statements and a newspaper article to have been with the limo for the 4 days after the assassination. He should have been with the limo on the Texas trip, but was conveniently left behind in DC to arrange the cars for the Army-Navy game the following week-end. I brought Ferguson's memo and his statements to the research community. His memo was sent to me by mistake by NARA in a batch of limo docs while it was still being withheld.

Ferguson played golf at Dearborn and told anyone who would listen what happened to the limo. Some other FMC employees have attempted to appropriate his experiences for themselves. Whittaker is not the only one.

QUOTE(J. Raymond Carroll @ Jun 30 2008, 08:47 AM)

QUOTE(William Kelly @ Jun 30 2008, 07:09 AM)

I would think Pam could answer any question you have about SS100X.
BK

Pamela gave a presentation on the limo at the Lancer NID conference in 1999, and I forgot to ask her a follow-up question then, so I will pose it here: In response to my question, Pamela said that the passengers in the rear seats (JFK & Jackie), could raise or lower their side window according to personal preferences. I forgot to ask

1. whether this was done via an old-fashioned wind-up handle or via a modern electric button and

2, more importantly, whether the driver ALSO had the ability to control the two rear passenger windows, as is typical in modern cars

It appears from this photo that the side window on JFK's side was already rolled completely down when he entered the limo at love Field, and I wonder if that was the norm for JFK on previous trips, e.g. Houston?
http://farm1.static.flickr.com/170/4257164...848f929.jpg?v=0

It is my thinking that the controls were electric, and that there was not a control button that the driver could operate. It would seem that when the car was in its open (and unsafe) configuration that it would be consistent with that to have the windows down. I'll check my documentation when I get a chance to make sure.

The Dr.Galanges statements are most compelling and chilling....as is the work of Doug Weldon. So much evidence - so little 'penetration' to the public of it and almost none by the controlled media. Yes, here and there some slips out and the internet is helping mightily, but then you get books like VBs that ignore most of the facts and hand-pick those that indicate the official lie as possible, and many people 'buy' it....sad. Very sad, indeed. Well, before they start to control the internet we had better redouble our efforts - and before all of us who remember and care are too old (or no longer here)......persevere 'group'.

QUOTE(Peter Lemkin @ Jun 30 2008, 11:41 PM)

The Dr.Galanges statements are most compelling and chilling....as is the work of Doug Weldon. So much evidence - so little 'penetration' to the public of it and almost none by the controlled media. Yes, here and there some slips out and the internet is helping mightily, but then you get books like VBs that ignore most of the facts and hand-pick those that indicate the official lie as possible, and many people 'buy' it....sad. Very sad, indeed. Well, before they start to control the internet we had better redouble our efforts - and before all of us who remember and care are too old (or no longer here)......persevere 'group'.

It is interesting that Weldon's info is considered outside of media control when he is, or was, a prosecutor and used some of the same strategies the Bug did in compiling his theories.

One of the issues is that each of the witnesses to seeing a t&t hole in the windshield saw it in different places on the windshield. How can that be? Weldon glossed over that, as it didn't fit his theory.

Another issue is that they all described a hole about the size of a pencil. Why would they say such a thing? Had someone suggested that the windshield was 'special', perhaps 'bulletproof'? The windshield was a stock '61 LCC part. There was nothing special about it. Weldon avoided this fact, as it was inconvenient.

Tie those items into the fact that the windshield that was photographed by Robert Frazier's team at 1 a.m. 11.23.63 during the FBI exam was the same one kicked out by the Arlington Glass men on Monday. That windshield is the one still at NARA. Based on that information, any windshield swapping would have to have taken place prior to the FBI exam and the photographing of it that became CE 350.

A prosecutor can make a case out of anything and make it appear believable. The truth may be something else.

I just read your Hole is a hole site and can't make out exactly what you think the explanation for the crack/hole/defect is and what made it and when. It seems hard for me to believe people would say they saw a hole [as oppossed to a crack] had they not seen one. The fact that people put it in slightly different places is not surprising. Perhaps there was even both a crack and a hole. Given the government's handling of the evidence with just about everything else, anything is possible, and anything they now hold as the 'original' needs to at least be entertained as potentially suspect, IMO. Yet another mystery of that mysterious day. They were using safely glass in 63 weren't they [if, as you say, it was not bullet-proof]? Has anyone taken a similar windshield and tried to see what bullets and fragments of bullets would do to it? Galanges statement seems fairly clear, as did the other statement of a hole clear through. The Greer statement is strange and debated - as are just about all the facts of that day. Perhaps just as someone clearly tampered with the body and autopsy photos, so might they have tampered with the car evidence, and statements made about it - even photos of it. The strange gap in the logbook is curious. Any of these individually can be explained away, but when taken as as whole, alone with the 'whole' of other strange events that day and in the investigation, little the officials say holds water - nor was meant to.

************

Peter :

The last time Doug was an Assistant Prosecutor was in 1985. It also gave him an understanding of how people like the Bug and Specter manipulate evidence...He has not been such in the past 23 years......

There was only One witness who recalled seeing the hole a bit lower in the windshield, than the other witnesses, and that was Stavis Ellis...Doug notes this information in his chapter in "Murder In Dealey Plaza"...and he offers an explanation..He does not gloss anything over.....Doug spoke to Stavis hundreds of times..
Stavis was only certain that there was a bullethole and admitted his recollection as to the exact location could have been flawed...

As for the Arlington glass company, the White House log records show that they were not there Monday, but after that. The F. Vaughn Ferguson memo, may have been a cover-up tool. The Ferguson memo states that the windshield was removed and stored in a closet and not seen again. Yet there are accounts of people seeing the windshield after that date..... The analysis and fallacy of that memo is also in his chapter in MIDP....

Doug also spoke with Willard Hess , the man who was most closely aligned with the limo.....who knew Ferguson and about him....and well, he did not think much about his account.......

As far as what windshield is at the Archives , they will not allow anyone to examine it, sound familiar....Now Livingstone did published a photo, which differed from CE 350.....but I believe he also was not allowed to view it..

Doug Weldon, also has Never stated that the windshield was bulletproof, Nor implied such.......This is discussed also extensively in his chapter in Murder In
Dealey Plaza........

B..............

Thanks for those clarifications. The Limo has not been an area of my focus prior, I admit - only causually. Interesting the Archives won't let anyone examine the 'windshield they have'. Reminds me of the LAPD which had several larger pieces of evidence [door frames, ceiling tiles, etc.] - not letting anyone examine them - until they suddenly, upon reply to a request, said they had been destroyed due to 'lack of space'. I don't have Weldon's book. The youtube interviews looked interesting. Pamela, I'm not taking sides on all this....just trying to figure out what black magic they pulled in this part of the operation. To my way of thinking, only one fact the officials have given can be taken at face value - that JFK was killed by gunshots in Dallas that day. All else is some varient of the [or a partial] truth [or even outright lie] from the authorities, the best I can determine....and they have done their best to see that the truth is not decernible by mortal researchers and the Public. Slowly, we make progress, despite them. The bigger problem is dissemination of this information to the general public to counter the propaganda blitz.

[quote name='Peter Lemkin' date='Jul 2 2008, 12:33 AM' post='148860']
I just read your Hole is a hole site and can't make out exactly what you think the explanation for the crack/hole/defect is and what made it and when.

That's not the point of the article.

> It seems hard for me to believe people would say they saw a hole [as oppossed to a crack] had they not seen one. The fact that people put it in slightly different places is not surprising. Perhaps there was even both a crack and a hole.

There was a lot of confusion at PH at that time. The limo was only there for about 1/2 hour. During some of that time it was cordoned off. The witnessess were communicating what they believed they saw. What they actually did see may be something different.

Given the government's handling of the evidence with just about everything else, anything is possible, and anything they now hold as the 'original' needs to at least be entertained as potentially suspect, IMO. Y

The windshield that is at NARA now has the long spider cracks from having been kicked out by the Arlington Glass men on Monday, 11.25.63. It also has the same defect that is visible in CE 350 which was taken by Frazier's FBI team during the forensic exam at 1 a.m. on 11.23.63. There was no windshield swap during the interim.

et another mystery of that mysterious day. They were using safely glass in 63 weren't they [if, as you say, it was not bullet-proof]? Has anyone taken a similar windshield and tried to see what bullets and fragments of bullets would do to it?

There is a section of the upcoming DC program which may address that.

The strange gap in the logbook is curious.

The WHG logs were kept throughout the weekend. Any 'strange gap' is a strategy to discount that.

Pamela,

Thanks for all the hard work you've put into the Limo over the years. Being a car nut, I've tended to focus on the vehicles involved in the case, and of course, the Limo is at the top of my list.

There is one thing I've always wondered about, and maybe you know the answer. Why did Vaughn Ferguson drive the car to Dearborn rather than having it shipped in a van or at least on a flatbed? Can you imagine the attention he must have drawn driving that thing for 618 miles (according to my map program) on public roads? Did he have an escort or anything? It may not be sinister, but it sure is strange.

Also, are there any maintainance records for the car prior to the assassination?

JWK

[quote name='Bernice Moore' date='Jul 2 2008, 01:52 AM' post='148865']
The last time Doug was an Assistant Prosecutor was in 1985. It also gave him an understanding of how people like the Bug and Specter manipulate evidence...He has not been such in the past 23 years......


Weldon encouraged Stavis Ellis to move the location of the hole he thought he saw upwards, and for Nick Prencipe to 'forget' the location of the hole he saw after he had already provided a location for it.


There was only One witness who recalled seeing the hole a bit lower in the windshield, than the other witnesses, and that was Stavis Ellis...Doug notes this information in his chapter in "Murder In Dealey Plaza"...and he offers an explanation..He does not gloss anything over.....Doug spoke to Stavis hundreds of times..
Stavis was only certain that there was a bullethole and admitted his recollection as to the exact location could have been flawed...

Not so. Nick Prencipe also saw a hole low on the windshield, at least when I interviewed him. Later, Weldon got him to say that he couldn't recall where the hole was. A legal tactic at the least. As you have pointed out, Weldon also got Ellis to be 'uncertain' about where the hole was he thought he saw. Rather convenient.

As for the Arlington glass company, the White House log records show that they were not there Monday, but after that.

Not so. The logs show the Arlington Glass replacement to have been done on Monday. Trying to muddle that is another prosecutor strategy.


The n Ferguson memo, may have been a cover-up tool. T

No. The Ferguson memo was not supposed to be seen. Weldon's pushing a witness without any documentation to have been anywhere near the limo during that weekend may well be an establishment response to that.

he Ferguson memo states that the windshield was removed and stored in a closet and not seen again. Yet there are accounts of people seeing the windshield after that date..... The analysis and fallacy of that memo is also in his chapter in MIDP....

You might want to start doing your own research. The Ferguson memo states no such thing.

Doug also spoke with Willard Hess , the man who was most closely aligned with the limo.....who knew Ferguson and about him....and well, he did not think much about his account.......


Willard Hess also told people he saw the limo at H&E two days after the assassination. That wasn't true either. Weldon encouraged Hess to provide information that would shore up his flimsy theory and ignored a Hess statement that didn't fit in with it.

Doug Weldon, also has Never stated that the windshield was bulletproof, Nor implied such.......This is discussed also extensively in his chapter in Murder In

Weldon sanitized his witness statements. In addition, Whittaker originally claimed that when he saw the rebuilt limo he was sure the windshield in it was the one he had made for it. That windshield was bulletproof.

Seems you can be mesmerized by legal strategy and not even aware of it. It is the Ferguson Memo NARA did not intent to have released. Weldon has tried to use every kind of strategy to attempt to diminish its significance. But the memo is only part of the story. His statements, plus documentation, plus the fact that Ferguson had pieces of the leather from the back seat of the limo corroborate the fact that it was he who was with the limo not only after the assassination but when it was stripped down to metal. We're not supposed to know that.

Not passing the sniff test, Pamela... What I'm seeing here is simply; D. Weldon is an attorney therefore he knows how to manipulate witnesses....? Ya want to discredit someone else's work, get eyewitness testimony stating the attorney manipulated their testimony, or PROOF (like a tape recording) from a uninterested 3rd party stating same...

" Weldon pushing.... Weldon sanatized witness statement[s].... Weldon encouraged... x2 Weldon used every kind of strategy....etc." Pamela, whats all this about --sounds like envy, eh? Ya missed the boat, lady....

J. William King' Pamela,
Thanks for all the hard work you've put into the Limo over the years. Being a car nut, I've tended to focus on the vehicles involved in the case, and of course, the Limo is at the top of my list.

You're welcome. When I became a dedicated researcher in 1988 I tried to find a niche that nobody else cared about. That was the limo. Now it is almost common knowledge that the limo was the crime scene of the assassination, and not the TSBD. That is so validating.

There is one thing I've always wondered about, and maybe you know the answer. Why did Vaughn Ferguson drive the car to Dearborn rather than having it shipped in a van or at least on a flatbed? Can you imagine the attention he must have drawn driving that thing for 618 miles (according to my map program) on public roads? Did he have an escort or anything? It may not be sinister, but it sure is strange.

The limo was always the property of the FMC, leased to the WHG at a mere $500 a year. The car was meant to be product placement on the world stage. It ended up being a symbol of the powerlessness of JFK's protection.

Nonetheless, by December, 1963, when the new carpeting arrived for the rear of the limo, and was installed, the limo was ready to travel. In its covered configuration, without the flags flying, it looked like any other limousine. It was being taken to Dearborn to be stripped down to metal, in other words, junked, except for the frame. Driving it doesn't seem to have been an issue. There was no need for an escort. There was nothing special about the car anymore, other than the fact that it was the crime scene of the assassination and that was being destroyed.


Also, are there any maintainance records for the car prior to the assassination?
JWK

I haven't found any yet.

I beg to differ about it looking like any other limousine, especially with the roof texture and general configuration. There were very few Lincoln limos on the roads back then, especially ones with fabric covering the roof. Add to that the exposure it got after the assassination and I think it would be very recognizable. I'm actually surprised they didn't fly it up there. Of course, nothing about this case surprises me anymore.



Since the car was used mainly in low-speed driving...very low in some cases, I'm thinking that the ride to Parkland was probably the first time it was really opened up. I've driven enough cars of that vintage (I currently own a 1961 Oldsmobile Super 88) to know that when driven slowly over a long period, they sometimes carbon up, or the 2 extra barrels on the carburetors get gunked up. I know that sometimes my Olds will almost stall if I suddenly hit the gas. I'm wondering if when Greer hit the gas pedal, it might have hesitated, and slowed down almost to a stop before finally catching and accelerating away. It could explain the sudden slowdown at the moment of the head shot.

JWK

I don't doubt your knowledge of cars, but now we have the 'gunk in the carburetor did it' varient. Enough coincidences for one day to add yet another, methinks. I assume the USG had enough money for good servicing of the engine - better than their 'servicing' of the Chief of State I'll wager. The brakelight issue is also not addressed by the gunk theory.

David G. Healy'Jul 4 2008, 01:28 PM'
Not passing the sniff test, Pamela... What I'm seeing here is simply; D. Weldon is an attorney therefore he knows how to manipulate witnesses....? Ya want to discredit someone else's work, get eyewitness testimony stating the attorney manipulated their testimony, or PROOF (like a tape recording) from a uninterested 3rd party stating same...


Perhaps you will share with us whatever fragrant aroma you were sniffing when you were lured away from information the govt doesn't want you to know?

Weldon pushing.... Weldon sanatized witness statement[s].... Weldon encouraged... x2 Weldon used every kind of strategy....etc." Pamela, whats all this about --sounds like envy, eh? Ya missed the boat, lady....


If you choose to remain blissfully naive to the legal strategies prosecutors use, you will not be of much help in deprogramming those 'persuaded' by the Bug's WCR redux, will you?

I am curious about this alleging that the Zapruder film made it to the movie theater within the a month of the shooting. There were press films that were shown in theaters, but they only had the Nix and Muchmore films on them. I hope I didn't miss it, but could you post what town or theater this played in again? And could it be that you are misremembering the time frame?

Bill

I'm not suggesting for a minute that "gunk in the carburetor" killed JFK. Like any big event, it's always a bunch of small things that come together to create the larger event. This might be one of those small things that contributed.

The traditional cure of a carboned up engine is to take it out on the highway once in a while to "blow the carbon out". Since this was mainly a parade car driven very slowly much of the time, I'm wondering what maintainance procedures were done to insure that it didn't get "gunked up" like grandma's car that she only drove to church once a week. Maybe they ran it down the runways at Andrews once a week to blow it out. I don't know. Thats why I was asking Pamela about the records.

JWK

From post # 25........

Quote B: "The Ferguson memo states that the windshield was removed and stored in a closet and not seen again. Yet there are accounts of people seeing the windshield after that date..... The analysis and fallacy of that memo is also in his chapter in MIDP...."


"Quote :Pamela: You might want to start doing your own research. The Ferguson memo states no such thing. "

...B.........Here is the exact quote from Ferguson's Dec. 18 memo after describing that the windshield had been removed on Nov. 25:

"A Mr. Davis of the Secret Service then took the windshield and put it in the stockroom under lock and key and I have not seen it since."

Also noted later is that Kelllerman examined the damaged windshield on November 27, allegedly a short time before the windshield was replaced
(and two days after Ferguson said it was locked away.)

Discussed on page 137.of "Murder In Dealey Plaza".......

Ferguson un-numbered statement posted below.......

B.........

From post # 25........Re Nick Prencipe.....

Quote Pamela: "Weldon encouraged Stavis Ellis to move the location of the hole he thought he saw upwards, and for Nick Prencipe to 'forget' the location of the hole he saw after he had already provided a location for it. "

Quote B:......"There was only One witness who recalled seeing the hole a bit lower in the windshield, than the other witnesses, and that was Stavis Ellis...Doug notes this information in his chapter in "Murder In Dealey Plaza"...and he offers an explanation..He does not gloss anything over.....Doug spoke to Stavis hundreds of times..
Stavis was only certain that there was a bullethole and admitted his recollection as to the exact location could have been flawed...

Quote : Pamela "Not so. Nick Prencipe also saw a hole low on the windshield, at least when I interviewed him. Later, Weldon got him to say that he couldn't recall where the hole was. A legal tactic at the least. As you have pointed out, Weldon also got Ellis to be 'uncertain' about where the hole was he thought he saw. Rather convenient."

--------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: NPRINCE9@juno.com
> To: pamelamXXXXXXX
> Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2000 08:18:36 -0400
> Subject: Re: Re: reply again
> Message-ID: <20000710.082154.-3779853.1.NPRINCE9XXXXXX
>
> Pam
> Over the years--many--I have met people from all walks of life and I
> am a pretty good listener and observer.
> When some have a particular interest or goal in mind--many things that
> are pertinent--but present an opposite version or opinion--there is
> always an inclination to avoid what is evident, or to attempt todiscredit
> it.
> I have always spoken exactly what I feel and to whomever I am addressing
> and I will never change. I have ralked with Presidents and in one case,
> gave one a scorching he did not expect--and apologized for it--this is
> the truth.
> >From day one, I have talked with fellow officers and other people, about
> talking with Greer the night of the event.
> I have not changed anything I ever stated, and nver will, even under
> oath. That is my position.
> As far as remembering who was where and what time it was and other
> confirmations, its been a long time and I never put too much emphasis on
> them, but the facts stated remain AS IS AND WERE.
>
> Thanks, good luck Nick



B.........

*************************

Quote: Pamela : "Sounds like you may be referencing Mr. Whittaker, who has attempted to appropriate Vaughn Ferguson's statements and rework them into his own experiences. Ferguson was at Dearborn regularly and played golf with a number of FMC employees. Ferguson told the story of his experiences with the limo to numerous people. He was very unhappy with the govt treatment of the car. A few other employees at the FMC have attempted to appropriate Ferguson's statments as well. "

There is no congruity between Whitaker's account and Ferguson so how could he rework anything into his account and for what purpose? He never mentioned anything to anyone but his family and he insisted on anonymity so what purpose would there be to do this? Who are these other employees that have attempted to appropriate Ferguson's statements? Can you name one and give an account?.

Quote Pamela,"Ferguson was at Dearborn regularly and played golf with a number of FMC employees.."

From what is known, it is not thought that Whitaker played golf and certainly no thought that he would have ever met Ferguson. What is truly amazing is that you without any knowledge, have suggestsed that Whitaker played golf with Ferguson and along with others....possibly weaved themselves into his fictictious account. Are you referencing here one of your own made up statements....?? Name the others and give an account....

........ In addition, Mr. Whitaker started telling his family about what happeneed right away (November 25). Ferguson was allegedly in D.C. for a long time after the asassination ( Pamela are you suggesting that Ferguson was golfing in Michigan in December?) Check the weather. His account was not allegedly written until December 18th and many of the events were post November 25, so how could Whitaker weave anything into his account (though there is not one similarity.)

B..........

Pamela would you publish the part of the White House Garage log showing that Arlington glass replaced the glass on November 25, as you stated in your posting and that the Ferguson memo claims.

Below is the Ferguson statement where he does relate that date......

But within the SS W/H Garge log, the closest that comes to such, but with No Date, mentioned is on page 2...

See below......also...

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/....do?docId=10482

B.....

Edited, for spelling.

***********************

Well will you have a look....I did find it, and the FBI states that the Arlington Glass replaced the windshield on page 4, on........

Nov.26th.........not the 25th as Pamela re the Ferguson statement states.

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...amp;relPageId=4

B..........

Another oddity,

Interesting that Rowley's memo on page 4 of CD 80, refers to the Ferguson memo that is dated December 1st, 1963.

The memo we have is dated December 18 th, 1963.

Was there a December 1st memo that had to be corrected (if so, sloppily) on December 18 th. ?

Also, in a chronology of the limo prepared by the HSCA, it refers to testimony by Mr. Ferguson.

I cannot find any testimony by him.

Where is that testimony.....??

B.......

QUOTE(Bernice Moore @ Jun 30 2008, 09:35 PM)

QUOTE(David G. Healy @ Jun 30 2008, 01:56 PM)

QUOTE(Peter Lemkin @ Jun 29 2008, 09:16 PM)

QUOTE(Mark Knight @ Jun 30 2008, 03:14 AM)

Bill, any evidentiary value of the mobile crime scene better known as SS-100-X was lost on Monday, November 25, 1963 when the limo was taken to Hess & Eisenhardt in Cincinnati and was essentially stripped. So while it IS a crime scene, it is one in name only since that date.

Kinda like Elm Street in Dallas after repaving and curb restriping.

Agreed. But wonder if any of the men who worked on refurbishing it are still alive to bear witness to what they saw and had to 'repair'?! I'd almost be willing to bet they had to take secrecy oaths or have been just plain threatened to keep their mouths shut....but one never knows...after all this time....

for more info concerning the Limo see: Murder in Dealey Plaza, Part II, The Kennedy Limousine pgs. 120-159, by Douglas Weldon, J.S.

**************

Doug Weldon : TMWKK The Final Chapter, ep.1.The Smoking Gun, seg 2

Limo information begins with Dr.2 minutes ..Dr.Galanges......54 seconds into the video..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAW-bxxZfcM


The Limo Windshield, Bullet from Front

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vClwuJ0yuWM...feature=related

Limo to Detroit, Part I

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=01oaxb00dIE

TMWKK, The Final Chapter, ep.1 The Smoking Gun, seg.3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jmMXfBgjsh0...feature=related

JFK Assassination, Presidential limo SS-100-X, part 5

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_gQpLEzMEoE

B.......

Thanks Bernice for posting TMWKK segments. I recall that someone posted all these utube showings of the three censored hours. Could someone please repost them. I am recently in contact with the son of an old friend who is very interested in all things conspiracy and I would like to email them to him.

Many thanks,
Dawn

Chapter 16 in CAR CRASH CULTURE, Palgrave-Macmillan 2001, "SS-100-X", which I wrote, gives additional information on the limousine as well as information from and about Nick Prencipe and Vaughn Ferguson.

Section four of the SPEED channel documentary on SS-100-X at Youtube contains an interview with Catherine Ferguson, Vaughn's widow, and me:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HwZBI6VMRyQ

'Bill Miller' date='Jul 7 2008, 01:47 PM'
I am curious about this alleging that the Zapruder film made it to the movie theater within the a month of the shooting. There were press films that were shown in theaters, but they only had the Nix and Muchmore films on them. I hope I didn't miss it, but could you post what town or theater this played in again? And could it be that you are misremembering the time frame?


I watched the Zapruder film in a theater in the Lower East Side of Manhattan in December, 1964, not '63.

[quote name='J. William King' date='Jul 7 2008, 12:40 AM' post='149200']
I beg to differ about it looking like any other limousine, especially with the roof texture and general configuration. There were very few Lincoln limos on the roads back then, especially ones with fabric covering the roof. Add to that the exposure it got after the assassination and I think it would be very recognizable. I'm actually surprised they didn't fly it up there. Of course, nothing about this case surprises me anymore.


The script seemed to be to minimize everything about the limo. We're not supposed to think of it as the scene of the crime, but just as any old car. Even the damage was minimized.

Since the car was used mainly in low-speed driving...very low in some cases, I'm thinking that the ride to Parkland was probably the first time it was really opened up. I've driven enough cars of that vintage (I currently own a 1961 Oldsmobile Super 88) to know that when driven slowly over a long period, they sometimes carbon up, or the 2 extra barrels on the carburetors get gunked up. I know that sometimes my Olds will almost stall if I suddenly hit the gas. I'm wondering if when Greer hit the gas pedal, it might have hesitated, and slowed down almost to a stop before finally catching and accelerating away. It could explain the sudden slowdown at the moment of the head shot.


The limo was equipped with a special fuel pump to prevent it from vapor locking during slow moving parades on hot days. I would hope that if Greer felt it did bog, that he would have said something to that effect.

[size="1"][quote name='Bernice Moore' date='Jul 7 2008, 08:26 PM' post='149258']
There is no congruity between Whitaker's account and Ferguson so how could he rework anything into his account and for what purpose? He never mentioned anything to anyone but his family and he insisted on anonymity so what purpose would there be to do this? Who are these other employees that have attempted to appropriate Ferguson's statements? Can you name one and give an account?.

Yes, the points of incongruity are significant, as they indicate that Mr. Whittaker seemed to have bits and pieces of information that don't really make sense and don't agree with Vaughn Ferguson's statements.

Mr. Whittaker has no documentation connecting him to the limo. He had never seen it before. He had not worked on it, nor accompanied it anywhere. Without anything connecting him to the limo in the first place, those pushing his statements ought to have vetted them before rushing to bring them to the research community.

The subject of who Whittaker spoke to and when is something that is difficult to prove. Hindsight is perfect. Rumours about the limo started on 11.22.63. The limo is documented to have arrived in Dearborn a few weeks later.

One of the FMC employees who tells a similar story is a man named Charlie who says he saw the limo at the Experimental Garage in Dearborn two days after the assassination. It is here that the limo would have gone, and in fact, did go in December, 1963, not the Rouge, as Mr. Whittaker says.

The limo was in Dearborn at the Experimental Garage a few weeks after the assassination, in December, 1963, to be gutted down to metal and rebuilt by Hess & Eisenhardt. Any information regarding this event would have spread like wildfire, in that the FMC employees knew, if the govt did not, that the limo was the scene of the crime. The significant number of limo sightings is an indication to me of people's sincere desire to get to the root of the crime.

Bernice Moore' Jul 7 2008, 07:00 PM'
From post # 25........
Quote B: "The Ferguson memo states that the windshield was removed and stored in a closet and not seen again. Yet there are accounts of people seeing the windshield after that date..... The analysis and fallacy of that memo is also in his chapter in MIDP...."

How could Ferguson account for the whereabouts of the windshield in his memo for any time subsequent to the writing of the memo?Ferguson is simply reporting what he witnessed.


"Quote :Pamela: You might want to start doing your own research. The Ferguson memo states no such thing. ".....Here is the exact quote from Ferguson's Dec. 18 memo after describing that the windshield had been removed on Nov. 25:"A Mr. Davis of the Secret Service then took the windshield and put it in the stockroom under lock and key and I have not seen it since."


Apologies. I misread your statement to think that you were claiming Ferguson had stated something about the whereabouts of the windshield after the date of his memo.

[i]Also noted later is that Kelllerman examined the damaged windshield on November 27, allegedly a short time before the windshield was replaced
(and two days after Ferguson said it was locked away.) [/i]

Ferguson was not in charge of the windshield. He reported what he had witnessed.

[quote name='Bernice Moore' date='Jul 7 2008, 07:18 PM' post='149254']
From post # 25........Re Nick Prencipe.....
Quote Pamela: "Weldon encouraged Stavis Ellis to move the location of the hole he thought he saw upwards, and for Nick Prencipe to 'forget' the location of the hole he saw after he had already provided a location for it. "

Quote B:......"There was only One witness who recalled seeing the hole a bit lower in the windshield, than the other witnesses, and that was Stavis Ellis...Doug notes this information in his chapter in "Murder In Dealey Plaza"...and he offers an explanation..He does not gloss anything over.....Doug spoke to Stavis hundreds of times..
Stavis was only certain that there was a bullethole and admitted his recollection as to the exact location could have been flawed...

QUOTE ON
Some of the jockeys around the car were saying, "Looky here!" What they were looking at was the windshield. To the right of where the drive was, just bove the metal near the bottom of the glass there appeared to be a bullet hole.
QUOTE OFF
No More Silence, Stavis Ellis, p147

Ellis' forgetfulness was a byproduct of his interactions with Weldon. How convenient.

In Nick's interview with me he gave a position for the hole he thought he saw. In his subsequent interview with Weldon he could not recall a location.

Nick "thought" he saw? This the same Nick Prencipe that belonged to JFKResearch up to the time he died? Washington D.C. cop? Who also knew SA Greer, this the same guy your talking about? And so we get this right, did you interview Nick or did he interview you? When and where did this interview take place?
Thanks

David G. Healy' date='Jul 15 2008, 03:08 AM'
Pamela said:
In Nick's interview with me he gave a position for the hole he thought he saw. In his subsequent interview with Weldon he could not recall a location.[/quote]

Nick "thought" he saw? This the same Nick Prencipe that belonged to JFKResearch up to the time he died? Washington D.C. cop? Who also knew SA Greer, this the same guy your talking about? And so we get this right, did you interview Nick or did he interview you? When and where did this interview take place?
Thanks


I interviewed Nick Prencipe by phone in March of 2000.

David G. Healy' date='Jul 15 2008, 03:08 AM'

Quote :Pamela said:
In Nick's interview with me he gave a position for the hole he thought he saw. In his subsequent interview with Weldon he could not recall a location.[/quote]

Nick "thought" he saw? This the same Nick Prencipe that belonged to JFKResearch up to the time he died? Washington D.C. cop? Who also knew SA Greer, this the same guy your talking about? And so we get this right, did you interview Nick or did he interview you? When and where did this interview take place?
Thanks


Pamela Quote : I interviewed Nick Prencipe by phone in March of 2000.

*************************



From: NPRINCE9@juno.com
To: pamelam@xxxxxxxxx
Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 08:06:01 -0400
Subject: Re: reply
Message-ID: <20000707.080612.-3697521.1.NPRINCE9@juno.com>

Pam
I try to be as helpful as I can, but I am a bit upset at some of the
choice of words I note from time to time. When you state that you will
follow up and see what makes sense, I dont follow this line of thinking.
I knew the limo when I saw it, I sure saw it many times and even sat in
it. There was someone else in the process of lifing the tarp from its
partially lifted position, as I recall. And I did see a bullet hole, so
if there was a bullet hole, or damage to another one of the cars, there
is a new track to follow.
I do not remember what time I got home that night, or the next morning, I
have no idea what time it was.
My interest in ALL available facts in this are similar to others, I weigh
whatever I see, hear or read for my own judgements, something I have been
doing for the most part of my 84 years.
I was not aware that you were writing a book on this. so I can wait for
some the queries I made.

Regards


NICK


B......

Thanks for the Nick message, Bernice. Do you have any more? I have
no doubt that he told it like it was...not like someone else's "interpretation."

Jack

[quote name='Bernice Moore' date='Jul 20 2008, 11:48 PM' post='150208']
Pamela Quote : I interviewed Nick Prencipe by phone in March of 2000.
From: NPRINCE9@juno.com
To: pamelam@xxxxxxxxx
Date: Fri, 7 Jul 2000 08:06:01 -0400
Subject: Re: reply
Message-ID: <20000707.080612.-3697521.1.NPRINCE9@juno.com>

Pam
I try to be as helpful as I can, but I am a bit upset at some of the
choice of words I note from time to time. When you state that you will
follow up and see what makes sense, I dont follow this line of thinking.
I knew the limo when I saw it, I sure saw it many times and even sat in
it. There was someone else in the process of lifing the tarp from its
partially lifted position, as I recall. And I did see a bullet hole, so
if there was a bullet hole, or damage to another one of the cars, there
is a new track to follow.
I do not remember what time I got home that night, or the next morning, I
have no idea what time it was.
My interest in ALL available facts in this are similar to others, I weigh
whatever I see, hear or read for my own judgements, something I have been
doing for the most part of my 84 years.
I was not aware that you were writing a book on this. so I can wait for
some the queries I made.

Regards

NICK


Thank you for posting a copy of this email from Nick. Mine were lost in a pc crash. As you can see, I was asking for details that might give an idea as to what time he went to the WHG, who was there, and facts that might be corroborated by other information.

He recalled seeing Greer that evening, yet according to existing information at this point, nobody saw Greer leave Bethesda during the evening. He also recalled walking in and pulling up the tarp on the limo without anyone questioning him, whereas the SS claimed that there were people around the car all evening. He also provided me with a location of low on the left side. He later said he couldn't recall the location. When one does not have all the answers it makes more sense to provide the information available and allow others to weigh and evaluate it. Eventually, the missing pieces may appear.

I was not asked to write a chapter on SS-100-X for CAR CRA