Dick Russell

I have never heard that Edwin Collins was "Angelo." My views on the Odio incident are basically unchanged from what I've written - it was part of the set-up of Oswald, which does not mean it was not a "second Oswald" who was present with Angel and Leopoldo. I just wanted to let you know, Mr Russell, that I have read dozens of books on the assassination of JFK, and that your most recent book in it's own context, surpasses The Man Who Knew Too Much. I came away with several things from the book, but I don't want to insert myself into a Question and Answer format, so I will simply say that the material on Castillo alone was both extremely illuminating, and I thought literally contained leads, if he was really in Dallas that day, instead of being programmed to say he was in Dallas that day. I am sure you realize my point. One last thing I thought I would share with you, is regarding ostensibly a decade later version of Luis Castillo, that is mentioned on the website serendipity and in Weberman and Canfield's book regarding someone circa 1972 named Larry Trackman, who, also was allegedly trying to assassinate Ferdinand Marcos. What I discovered was.... Lawrence Trackman, [next paragraph is spelled as Truckman] identified as "an American adventurer" by the Rome newspaper "Il Messaggero," 1972 no date included.They report Trackman was arrested in Manila, Phillipines because of his alleged involvement in an assassination plot against Ferdinand Marcos. He told interviewers that Kennedy was "The victim of a plot by 15 Cuban and American mercenaries enlisted for the Bay of Pigs invaison." The group could have been Interpen-IAB.......Truckman was allegedly under the influence of sodium pentothat at the time. The text above is what appeared in the 1993 update by Weberman/Canfield page 149 no footnote reference Also See http://www.serendipity.li/wod/nsmith_chron.htm Since there was no footnote in Weberman’s book regarding Lawrence Trackman, I continued to look, and today I did find something in the files at maryferrell.org under the category of Angelo Bruno a document dated Jan 13, 1964 contains a list of persons making telephone calls from the New York City telephone number TN 7-8670, which is listed to System Merchandise Corporation, 19 West 44th Street in New York City. On June 25th 1963 first name not listed last name Yetman, apparently placed a call to Larry Trackman in Buenos Aries, Argentina tel number 414031. * While I would definitely not assume the two names are the same person, conversely, I would not assume they weren’t. Further complicating matters is at the end of the document there is another spelling of said person, this time Larry Tractman. http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...mp;relPageId=74 * http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...amp;relPageId=1 http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...sPageId=1348086 http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...mp;relPageId=85 The Buenos Aries telephone number kind of shocked me...... Have you ever heard the story regarding Trackman? Thank you Mr. Howard for your kind words about my work. I came across the Larry Truckman story back-in-the-day, but was unable to ferret out anything more about it. I think there was an article in 1975 on AP.

In retrospect, it is hard to say how much of what Hemming said was true. Certainly most of it could not be verified, and having subsequently interviewed Hall twice, I tend to doubt that he was directly involved in the assassination. Same for Sturgis, whom I also met. I don't think the people directly involved could have lived all that long afterwards. This is not to say that Sturgis wasn't a contract CIA guy, that seems quite likely. In sum, what I published in 1976 did not necessarily hold water over the ensuing decades, even though I was excited about it at the time.

I have never heard that Edwin Collins was "Angelo." My views on the Odio incident are basically unchanged from what I've written - it was part of the set-up of Oswald, which does not mean it was not a "second Oswald" who was present with Angel and Leopoldo.

I have never heard that Edwin Collins was "Angelo." My views on the Odio incident are basically unchanged from what I've written - it was part of the set-up of Oswald, which does not mean it was not a "second Oswald" who was present with Angel and Leopoldo.

My take on Hemming is mixed. I don't think he was a paid disinformation agent. However, he was someone whose credibility I certainly did not swallow whole-hog, especially the more I got to know him. (In my earlier, more innocent days when I did the Argosy interview, I was more gullible). Gerry just "knew too much" and along too many different avenues, to have stayed alive if it was all factual. So it was always difficult to sort out truth from fiction with Gerry. And he may have had a personal grudge against Hall, whom I doubt very much had direct involvement other than the FBI setting up him & Howard at Sylvia Odio's as scapegoats. I thought what he said about meeting Oswald in 1959 was most likely accurate.

My take on Hemming is mixed. I don't think he was a paid disinformation agent. However, he was someone whose credibility I certainly did not swallow whole-hog, especially the more I got to know him. (In my earlier, more innocent days when I did the Argosy interview, I was more gullible). Gerry just "knew too much" and along too many different avenues, to have stayed alive if it was all factual. So it was always difficult to sort out truth from fiction with Gerry. And he may have had a personal grudge against Hall, whom I doubt very much had direct involvement other than the FBI setting up him & Howard at Sylvia Odio's as scapegoats. I thought what he said about meeting Oswald in 1959 was most likely accurate.

Unfortunately deMohrenschildt was not very forthcoming during our interviews, although his wife Jeanna said "Of course we know it was a vast conspiracy," at which point George told her to shut up. (Or maybe it was the other way around, but I think I told the story in my first book). As I recall, I tried to track down Oltmans at the time but either couldn't do it, or he didn't want to be interviewed. (My memory is a bit reluctant after 30-plus years away from this particular subject).

Unfortunately deMohrenschildt was not very forthcoming during our interviews, although his wife Jeanna said "Of course we know it was a vast conspiracy," at which point George told her to shut up. (Or maybe it was the other way around, but I think I told the story in my first book). As I recall, I tried to track down Oltmans at the time but either couldn't do it, or he didn't want to be interviewed. (My memory is a bit reluctant after 30-plus years away from this particular subject).

Yes, I was in touch with John Armstrong on a regular basis as he was working on research for what became his book "Harvey and Lee." I thought his material was quite remarkable, and I independently verified for example his interview with the Stripling Jr. High principal. It just gets curiouser and curiouser, as Lewis Carroll might say. I really can't comment which Oswald was victim of MK/ULTRA. It would make sense that it's the one who was taken into custody and shot by Ruby. That would have been "Harvey." Makes sense too that "Lee" was involved in setting him up as the patsy. I did come across the name of Donald Norton, and am aware of the visit paid him by John Judge some years ago, but don't know anything beyond that. I would tend to doubt that a "second Oswald" who was directly involved is still running around somewhere. Glad you enjoyed my book.

I interviewed Eugene Dinkin in 1976 at Grand Central Station, where he showed me some of his "evidence" - mostly news clips with lots of circles on them, as I recall. I had the feeling he was pretty "out there," that someone had done a number on his head - a likeable fellow though, and one whose initial story out of France I believed then, and still believe. I've no idea if he might still be around somewhere.

I don't know anymore where that list of documents is, I would imagine quite a few were declassified by the ARRB but there may be some still salted away.

You just told me a whole lot more about Billings than I had any idea. I have never spoken to him, though I did peruse the interesting notes he did for the Garrison investigation, at Jim Lesar's archive in DC. Other than that, I really don't have anything further to base an opinion on.

But do you agree that the killers wanted LBJ to be President? I'm sure LBJ was more "palatable" than JFK. Look at how he reversed policy course on Vietnam almost immediately. Same with Cuba, where a rapprochement had been in the works. There would be no elimination of the oil depletion allowance under LBJ either. And no vigorous pursuit of the Mob.

I doubt very much that LBJ had any direct involvement in the assassination (the cover-up is another matter). After all these years, I can't recall specifics about which of Richard Sprague's "cast of characters" didn't hold up for me - only that I felt it was a bit too sweeping, and not based on firsthand information, which I then set out to find via interviews with whoever I could locate. So I have the late Mr. Sprague to thank for his inspiring me onto the trail.

I knew no more about Le Cavelier than I came across in Bud Fensterwald's files. He seemed credible at the time.

I don't know any more about Felipe Vidal than Cuban intelligence officials said in Nassau or than Bishop told me when I interviewed him (as well as the government files linking the two of them). But based on what I learned from and about these two individuals, I would say it is "conceivable" that they were involved at some level in JFK's assassination.

I don't know any more about Felipe Vidal than Cuban intelligence officials said in Nassau or than Bishop told me when I interviewed him (as well as the government files linking the two of them). But based on what I learned from and about these two individuals, I would say it is "conceivable" that they were involved at some level in JFK's assassination.

Richard E. Sprague was a very decent man, without whose initial inspiration I would never have gotten into my own research on the assassination. Having never done in-the-field interviews, much of his information was based on other researchers and the "cast of characters" in his Taking of America turned out to be somewhat of a stretch. Be that as it may, his work on the photo evidence was landmark at the time.

Richard E. Sprague was a very decent man, without whose initial inspiration I would never have gotten into my own research on the assassination. Having never done in-the-field interviews, much of his information was based on other researchers and the "cast of characters" in his Taking of America turned out to be somewhat of a stretch. Be that as it may, his work on the photo evidence was landmark at the time.

I'm pretty certain we would have gotten a LOT closer to the truth had Sprague remained HSCA counsel, because he was tough and uncompromising and ready to travel roads that his successor, Blakey, was not. (I'm specifically talking about the CIA's role in the Oswald saga). I'm not out to impugn Blakey's integrity, but let's face it - the Mob-fellas-did-it scenario is a bit too pat and in keeping with America's good guys-bad guys mentality that avoids the harsher realities. I am not aware of any recent comments Sprague may have made about the HSCA or the assassination.

I'm pretty certain we would have gotten a LOT closer to the truth had Sprague remained HSCA counsel, because he was tough and uncompromising and ready to travel roads that his successor, Blakey, was not. (I'm specifically talking about the CIA's role in the Oswald saga). I'm not out to impugn Blakey's integrity, but let's face it - the Mob-fellas-did-it scenario is a bit too pat and in keeping with America's good guys-bad guys mentality that avoids the harsher realities. I am not aware of any recent comments Sprague may have made about the HSCA or the assassination.

Peter - I did file a FOIA some years ago with CIA and FBI for whatever files they might possess about me, and received nothing whatsoever concerning my JFK investigations (except for CIA having collected most of my published articles, which were sent to me with comments excised). I also tried on Nagell, and received a rather large file from Army Intelligence related to his years in Japan, relevant parts of which I included in the 2003 edition of MWKTM. The other agencies sent a few things but little of substance, not surprisingly.

Peter, thank you for your enthusiastic response to my new book, especially the last chapter. Once a book is published, it's too late to sell excerpts to a magazine. But please spread the word however you can!

I am directly aware only of what Richard Case Nagell told me once over the phone (1979 I believe), indicating that two CIA men had sat at an adjacent table to us in a bar in LA and tried to convince him afterwards that I was secretly tape-recording him. I wasn't, and told Nagell so. He said he didn't think so, because they were so adamant and clearly trying to sever our relationship. But I'm sure I was followed that night, when he dropped me off at my house.

Wish I could shed further light on Carl Bernstein's sources for his article on CIA and Media. It is, of course, noteworthy that he did not delve into anyone (e.g., Bradlee) from his own newspaper. All I know is what Bernstein set down at the time in Rolling Stone. What I try to do in my new book is make a few links between that, and the ways some of the same "players" covered up in the Kennedy assassination - a leap Bernstein didn't make, if he was even aware of it.