Royce Bierma

"I don't think Yates was tied in with the conspirators at all; if he was, why would he volunteer a story at all?" Well, as someone pointed out, Yates didn't come forward with the story until weeks later. By that time he may have ascertained that the police weren't interested in a conspiracy anyway. But if through someone in the police department or the media, he realized they "had their man", and therefore wouldn't look to Yates as an accessory, he may have given the story for the purpose of confirming the Oswald story and pointing away from any conspiracy. In any event, the story was ignored. It didn't appear in the 26 volumes of evidence, although it did appear in the larger collection of Warren Commission Documents. It is a strange phenomenon, though. Roy

Mark, if the Yates statement was part of the frame, and the curtain rods were part of that, then what about the Frazier and Randle's testimony, which tied in with curtain rods? Was this guy just some wacko who wanted to help out the official case, or does this indicate he was tied in with conspirators? Roy Bierma

i'll give you some evidence,if the secret service had done their job that day,11/22/63 would be a footnote in history as the day of a foiled assassination attempt.....Palamara's work speaks for itself,i'm a huge fan.... you discount the uncovered Chicago and Miami plots against JFK, in the previous weeks prior to Dallas, as if they never happened and imply that Dallas was a routine trip in regards to security.... What happened to Rybka? All that I heard is that he in died ( in his thirties) in 1975. At Love Field was he being playful? Simply angry for being left behind to guard Air Force One? Or, was he upset because he was not allowed to do his job and knew it was endangering the president? I was looking for a "Greer Shootist" thread, but couldn't find one. I also found the following comment on a Greer shot JFK video which I think is right on the mark. "The (unintentioned) result of this frame is a stark reminder of the driver's looking back twice (and many-if not most) people claiming to have watched the limo slow to an almost stop, when the first order of business is to flee immediately at the first sign of trouble. Whether the driver shot JFK is secondary to the greater liklihood that he was probably involved in the setup. " Peter, Henry Rybka was born January 28, 1918, and passed away December 1975. He was 57.

Gary E. Marlow, who passed away last year, right? Do we know anything else about him? Regards, Roy Bierma

Well, I just alluded to a distinct possibility, but as I noted before, that's fodder for a different thread! Duke, it seems likely that Oswald could have been working with the ATF in association with Frank Ellsworth. Ellsworth, by the way, lived at 718 N. Zangs, not far from where Oswald lived. In that case, if Oswald were at work in March at J-C-S at the time he was supposed to have picked up the rifle, perhaps Ellsworth picked it up instead. Similarly with the pistol and the C.O.D. that needed to be paid for it. "But if not, who else might've had access to or knowledge of the "original" serial number to duplicate,...." Harry Holmes would have had access to the serial number at the post office and someone may have phoned ahead for him to involve himself in particular with the gun items. As an FBI informant, and possible ATF informant, he may have notified Ellsworth when the rifle and pistol arrived. The keys of course are the Hidell alias and the serial numbers. If they could tie Oswald to the Hidell alias AND the rifle order, and likewise to that alias and the pistol order, they could at least in part incriminate him. And once someone passed on the 2766 numbered rifle(as I believe the 38 short rifle was obtained via Montreal, and added the C, it would have been all set to help frame Oswald. Otherwise, as you suggest, someone buys a 38 short from a local source, either a store, or another gun owner. More likely the latter since the gun showed heavy usage in various areas of the rifle. Roy Bierma

I've read it and consider it outstanding. I'm not sure if people looking for a smoking gun or proof-positive there was a conspiracy will be satisfied, but anyone reading the book should come out amazed at the number of strange characters and weird leads. The book would make a great mini-series, IMO. Although I've never subscribed to the "single-assassin theorists are all cognitively-challenged" argument, I will venture that anyone reading this book and still feeling absolutely sure Oswald acted alone is lacking curiosity, and lacking understanding of their own lack of understanding. As per the bard, speaking through Hamlet "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy." Dick Russell has showed us some of those things. Guys, the two so-called "Luis Castillo" guys are different. The one born in Puerto Rico was Angel Luis Castillo Cabrera. The Bayo-Pawley participant was Luis Angel Castillo Vega. The names are quite different. The B-P Castillo was 39 at the time of the assassination, while the Cuban Castillo was only around 21 or so. Thanks, Bill, for sharing from Dick Russell's new book, in particular, about Castillo Cabrera. Take care, Roy Bierma Sorry, don't think so....see here: {don't know where the 'confusion' came in, but suspect is was purposely inserted by those who wanted to blow smoke - as they did with the two Bishops, and many other figures - standard proceedure to confuse us. Peter, I had what I still consider to be two of them switched around in my post. Angel Luis Castillo Cabrera, is as the document you posted indicates, a member of the B-P mission. It was the much younger Castillo, born in Puerto Rico(the other man was born in Cuba)that is named Luis Angel Castillo Vega. I have seen quite a number of docs in the archive concerning them. One troublesome problem is that some of the Puerto Rican Castillo's claims to be in Cuba during the early 60's are contradicted by arrests of him in Miami at the same time. There is definitely "smoke" here, but I need further convincing that the two are the same person. Thanks, Roy Bierma

I've read it and consider it outstanding. I'm not sure if people looking for a smoking gun or proof-positive there was a conspiracy will be satisfied, but anyone reading the book should come out amazed at the number of strange characters and weird leads. The book would make a great mini-series, IMO. Although I've never subscribed to the "single-assassin theorists are all cognitively-challenged" argument, I will venture that anyone reading this book and still feeling absolutely sure Oswald acted alone is lacking curiosity, and lacking understanding of their own lack of understanding. As per the bard, speaking through Hamlet "There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, Than are dreamt of in your philosophy." Dick Russell has showed us some of those things. Guys, the two so-called "Luis Castillo" guys are different. The one born in Puerto Rico was Angel Luis Castillo Cabrera. The Bayo-Pawley participant was Luis Angel Castillo Vega. The names are quite different. The B-P Castillo was 39 at the time of the assassination, while the Cuban Castillo was only around 21 or so. Thanks, Bill, for sharing from Dick Russell's new book, in particular, about Castillo Cabrera. Take care, Roy Bierma

It's always good to know facts. Got a cite on that one? NBC, unless I'm mistaken (which is possible) was also involved in radio at that time, so it's not necessarily apparent that it was a television announcement.It's probably doubtful that any such tapes or transcripts have survived to give us any indication whether it was a one-time announcement or if it was repeated, or what. It's really a minor point because Brewer for whatever reason decided to see what the guy who ducked into his vestibule was up to. The big news was, of course, the shooting of the President, and I imagine that local news coverage focused largely on that, with the Tippit shooting being a mere sideline. Maybe they had repeated it shortly before Oswald ducked in, which drew the connection for Brewer together with the sirens, which were not the first sirens being heard in that area at the time (police had been in the area for more than 20 minutes by the time Oswald would've appeared). It is merely a question of whether Brewer really thought of the connection between the news of the shooting and someone ducking into his storefront, or whether that's what he thought he sensibly thought after the fact. I might've myself. The most interesting question on this thread yet Steve, I like the way you come straight to the point. But will "THE DUKE" give as straight a reply?It's highly unlikely. To paraphrase someone once at the forefront of the news, "it depends on what the definition of 'played any part' is." Clearly he had a role, even if it was - as he said - merely that of "patsy." It is easily possible to construct completely different scenarios of both shootings that do not have Oswald involved in pulling any triggers, all based on existing and established evidence and testimony. Leaving that aside, it is interesting to note that it would have been much easier to place Oswald at the scene of the Oak Cliff crime had it not been for people who knew him. Even if he had not been seen by anyone at all - as he wasn't, apparently, when travelling between 1026 and 10&P - between the TSBD and the Tippit scene, it would only have been necessary to show that he could've gotten to that area of Oak Cliff in time to kill him: he might've walked from TSBD directly to the Greyhound station and gotten in Whaley's cab for a ride to Neeley & Beckley and then walked to 10&P. There was nobody who could've said that he didn't have his pistol stashed somewhere inside or outside of the building: he supposedly was able to spirit his rifle out of his house and bury it near where General Walker lived, then bury it again and spirit it later back into his house with nobody the wiser. Would it not have been as equally possible for him to have done something similar downtown with his pistol? Since Whaley's logs of pick-up and drop-off times were mere approximations, and Whaley did approximate the time Oswald got in his cab as being 12:30 and out at 12:45 (CE307), it would have been a simple matter to have had Oswald going directly from the TSBD to Greyhound and into Oak Cliff with lots of time to shoot Tippit, even as early as when Tippit was actually shot. But enter Mary Bledsoe's having seen him on the bus, as well as Earlene Roberts' having seen him in the rooming house. Right or wrong, they were insurmountable problems, even if somewhat handy (Bledsoe for her "maniac" description, and Roberts for helping to account how Oswald came to have a pistol on him), resulting in the fudging of Tippit's death to allow Oswald arguably enough time in which to get there. If we begin with the premise that the Tippit murder was a diversion (as I've postulated elsewhere, and which has considerable evidentiary support), then it requires a complete re-evaluation of all that took place in that area, involving Oswald and not, and it's a cinch that Oswald did not kill Tippit simply so the cops could find him faster (he could've stayed on the sixth floor with rifle in hand had he wanted to accomplish that, and wouldn't have disappeared between 10&P and TT only to be walking along the main drag acting suspiciously five blocks and half an hour later). It then boils down to the question of trying to explain the inconsistencies in Oswald's known, unquestioned actions if they are not what they are supposed to have been ... and he ain't talkin'. Duke, what are your thoughts concerning Earlene Roberts' claim that a police cruiser stopped by around the time Oswald was at the Beckley address? Do you think she mistook another vehicle for a police cruiser because of her failing eyesight? Since it's certain that Tippit couldn't have been there at that time, who would have been in the vehicle, if it was a police cruiser? Roy Bierma

Thanks for your reply. If I'm not mistaken, I posed this same question about Dulles to another JFK forum some years back, and Martin gave me the same answer. Obviously, Dulles's statement, or alleged statement, is one of those that has a lot of potential weight attached to it. And it troubles me that I've never seen a source for it. In a similar vein, I looked a long time for the JFK quote about splintering the CIA into a thousand pieces -- finally found it in a 1966 New York Times article. As I recall, it was unattributed, which likewise makes me uneasy. Both quotes may well be accurate, but without proper sourcing start seeming more like urban myths. John, I agree with you. The fact that there seem to be two attributions, one 7-9-63, and the other one 9-6-64. I wasn't satisfied with the sources for the remarks either, so after I posted I continued my search. The "internal memo" origin didn't seem right, because after Dulles makes his remarks, Albert Jenner responds. This would seem then to come from some sort of executive session. But it must have been a private session, with only a small portion made public. After going through 20 pages of Google results, I still haven't found anything other than many persons quoting each other on 7-9-63, and the Martin Shackelford sourcing, with one person quoting him. Perhaps there is a JFK book which gives a source for it. This is annoying. Take care, Roy Bierma

This website claims it was said by Allen Dulles, Warren Commission meeting , July 9, 1964: http://www.commongroundcommonsense.org/for...php/t42959.html This website says: "But nobody reads. Don't believe people read in this country. There will be a few professors that will read the record... the public will read very little. - Allen Dulles, 7-9-64." http://pages.sbcglobal.net/tom.blackwell/ Thanks for the reply, John. The problem is, this is just a web site containing the quote we're all familiar with. The date helps. But this particular meeting, which I'm guessing was an Executive Session, isn't in the "Document Addendum to the Warren Report" or a Lancer CD that has most of the stuff in the Document Addendum. Has anyone seen a transcript of this July 9 session? I guess I"ll try the NARA web site. John John, as far as I know, there is no July 9 Executive Session. But possibly this is the source of the statement: Allen Dulles, Warren Commission member, fired by JFK as CIA Director: "But nobody reads. Don't believe people read in this country. There will be a few professors that will read the record...The public will read very little." (September 6, 1964, Warren Commission internal memo)-per Martin Shackelford Roy Bierma

As I indicated earlier in this thread, I believe Earlene Roberts fatally undermined the probative value of her clothing identification when she admitted to her poor eyesight and admitted that her attention was elsewhere. The evidence that he left 1026 Beckley wearing a jacket is both implausible (it was too warm for a jacket) and unpersuasive, IMO.But it was good enough to identify Oswald's face, which was smaller than his jacket and apparently made less noise than his zipper? She could make a mistake about a relatively large jacket, but be absolutely positive of Oswald's identity? Well admittedly I was not there when it happened, and admittedly your view is definitely the majority view, but I for one see grounds for real doubt that this was how the deal went down. According to the reports we have from his interrogators, he said he he went to his room and changed his clothes, then went to the movies. It seems you have a problem with that, while I do not.Well, admittedly I was not there when it happened, and admittedly your view is definitely the majority view, but I for one see grounds for real doubt that this was how the deal went down. I guess it comes down to how selective one wants to be with Earlene Roberts' evidence, whether she was completely right, part-wrong and part-right, or completely wrong. Duke, speaking of Earlene Roberts' testimony, earlier you referred to her mention of hearing a car horn peeping, and the matter of two officers which were in the "police" car. I would be interested in your take on this, especially since at the end of one of your posts you wrote, "Think Frank Ellsworth" Could you enlarge on that? Roy Bierma

Bill, the apartments were owned by Isabella Gregory. See CE 2349. Her husband at that time was Blaine Gregory. At some stage, she was also known as Isabella Dawson (probably either maiden name or name of second husband after Blaine died in '81). Hi Greg, Thanks, for that. Didn't Dawson cash an Oswald check? Also, it's possible McLaney owned the property before Gregory. There's an old neighborhood bar called Gregory's near the Quarter. Wonder if they're same family? BK Bill, we researched the ownership of that apartment about 7 years ago through our old friend Lamar Chauvin of New Orleans. Don't you remember? Isabella Dawson indeed signed a rent check from Oswald. Take care, Roy Bierma Hi Roy, I remember, but I am trying to substantiate and confirm what Adele and Ed say, that the apartment house was owned at some time by William McLaney, which would put it into the hands of a major player. Also got your note on the Joan Mellen talk at Pittsburgh so I put it up as a separate thread for people to react to it. I also hope Joan will rejoin us and talk some more about it. BK Bill, the receipt for the rental check is dated Aug. 9, 1963, the same day Oswald was arrested. The William McLaney ownership would be nice to confirm. I'm also aware of the presence of an "Isabel"(lnu)with Jack Ruby in Islamadora, Florida, in 1958 when he was running guns by boat with James Woodard. In one of the documents on that subject it says that "Isabel" was from Chicago, where Ruby also originated. Roy Bierma

Bill, the Julio Cesar Fernandez of Martinsburg is of course in the 26 volumes. The "Julio Fernandez" a pseudonym given by Clare Luce to interviewers, was a DRE operative. Fonzi pursued the leads given re the latter 'Fernandez' Fonzi found out from Luce that one of the three men whom she sponsored along with a boat for anti-Castro use was Jose Antonio Lanusa. Did Fonzi also interview Dr. Julio Cesar Fernandez? I'm not sure there isn't some confusion here. Best, Roy Bierma

I've never heard of such a thing, but that's hardly to say that it hasn't happened or that these folks haven't got their stubs in a frame on their mantlepiece either. Think of the hundreds of people who were at the Trade Mart for the luncheon that never took place: occasionally, someone will trot out their invitation to it, but it's been a relative few in terms of the number of people who were there. Proportionately speaking, we might never expect anyone to come up with such an item of memorabilia, especially since it seems unlikely that it would have been dated. Another interesting aspect of that, for the sake of saying so, is that it seems equally unlikely that anyone would believe the person who came forward with such an item (and especially if it wasn't dated!). I've spoken to a couple of people - one of them was in a lineup with Oswald, another says he was outside the theater when Oswald was brought out (and who disputes the "angry mob" several people claim to have seen or encountered) - whose own families don't believe them. In the case of the former, it's easy enough to prove just getting a copy of the Report (at least, I think the names of the other "suspects" are there; certainly in testimony); in the latter, I'm still supposed to find the guy a photo of people outside the theater since he thinks he might've been in it. He was also a school chum of Butch Burroughs. It's an interesting concept that, first of all, "this is not a court of law" and we therefore should not be constrained by such things as "reasonable doubt" or technical issues of admissibility (or stoop to using such "unethical" tactics), but merely be able to "see the reality" based on the "obvious." Too and conversely, this not being a court of law, the "obvious" invariably points to Oswald as being the sole perpetrator; to suggest otherwise, however, does require "proof beyond a reasonable doubt." Nicholas Katzenbach hit the nail on the head in his famous memo to Bill Moyers, albeit in a slightly different context: Speculation about Oswald's motivation ought to be cut off, and we should have some basis for rebutting thought that this was a Communist conspiracy or ... a right-wing conspiracy to blame the Communists. Unfortunately, the facts on Oswald seem about too pat – too obvious (Marxist, Cuba, Russian wife, etc.) .... Those words could as easily be applied to the case in chief rather than the single aspect of Oswald's "motivation," which naturally presumes his guilt since the innocent don't have motives! Nevertheless, the "facts" are "too pat - too obvious," and the fact that a quasi-legal body of politicians - as all were, in one form or another - would endorse them without any form of devil's advocacy, and moreover, that thinking Americans - who are trained from Day One that we are all "innocent until proven guilty" - can swallow such explanations without question is disturbing. It is all as with the rifle: there is little if anything to factually and fully support the conclusion, but since it was there and we don't know who else might've gotten it there or how, Oswald "must" have done it even though it objectively seems like he didn't. (Unless you've got a better explanation? If so, prove it: I don't have to.) I've often wished that I would one day witness something of great import and be called to testify, and that in the course of so doing was asked a question by one of the attorneys who, as I began to elaborate, demanded "yes or no, Mr. Lane. Did it happen that way?" whereupon I would have the opportunity to turn to the judge and say, "Your Honor, I took an oath to tell 'the whole truth,' and a simple 'yes' or 'no' would not do 'the whole truth' justice." Unfortunately - or perhaps fortunately! - I don't foresee that ever happening (but there's still time in this life!!). While by no means intending to disparage Mr. Brewer, it might've been nice - and might well have happened if there was cross-examination - to know exactly how it was that Brewer thought he'd recognized Oswald as a former customer; as it stands, his speculation on that point tends to be "proof" of his recognition of Oswald ... as if that is any sort of indication that Brewer knew him to be the "suspicious" type, or that his customers were more likely to be sneaking around and darting off the streets when cops were around than anyone else. Duke, hello. Perhaps, although he told the FBI he did not know Lee Oswald(apparently untrue) he recognized him when Oswald bought a pair of shoes from him at Hardy's Shoes. Among Oswald's possessions found the weekend of the 22nd were two new pairs of shoes, one of which was a pair of black oxfords with crepe soles, John Hardy brand. http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...bsPageId=752247 If they were new, perhaps the encounter between Brewer and Oswald was recent. Roy Bierma

James, yes, Harry Holmes was Dallas informant T-2. Roy Bierma

Bill, the apartments were owned by Isabella Gregory. See CE 2349. Her husband at that time was Blaine Gregory. At some stage, she was also known as Isabella Dawson (probably either maiden name or name of second husband after Blaine died in '81). Hi Greg, Thanks, for that. Didn't Dawson cash an Oswald check? Also, it's possible McLaney owned the property before Gregory. There's an old neighborhood bar called Gregory's near the Quarter. Wonder if they're same family? BK Bill, we researched the ownership of that apartment about 7 years ago through our old friend Lamar Chauvin of New Orleans. Don't you remember? Isabella Dawson indeed signed a rent check from Oswald. Take care, Roy Bierma

Hey Bill, thanks for posting this Mellen presentation. This is worthwhile reading, especially for those unable to attend the conference. Roy Bierma

Okay, I'll give a hint... it has to do with the red stars. Pat, in the left photo the star appears to be directly above the ear, whereas in the upright photo of President Lincoln, the star appears to be above and back of the ear. Were the wounds in Lincoln's case placed inconsistently? (Not a student of the Lincoln case) Best, Royce Bierma

Tim, I've met and talked to Brownlow on two separate occasions. I include him as a witness on my witness list at patspeer.com. He told me the same story each time. He was with his grandma in front of the Dal Tex. He heard four shots. He had NO IDEA where they came from, but, seeing people run towards the knoll, ASSUMED the shots came from the knoll. He stands on the knoll with Groden, selling his videos. Brownlow has interviewed many of the Dallas citizens on the periphery of the assassination, and sells videos of his interviews.. In my opinion he is very knowledgeable. I am totally surprised by the allegation he claims to have seen a shooter, and doubt he said anything so wild. Both times I spoke to him, a year apart, he mentioned that he personally liked Jean Hill and Beverly Oliver, but had extreme doubts they'd seen any shooters on the knoll. I, like others have met and talked to Mr. Brownlow at the pergolas end, where the steps start. He and Robert Groden set up several times a week selling Grodens books, and such, and swapping assassination stories. I talked to him several times, and he never mentioned seeing anything. All he had to ad was that he was there with his family. I dont know how old he is, but he cant be much older than me, so he couldnt have been that old. I was in the 3rd grade when the assassination took place. I dont think anyone that age would be that alert to notice these things and recall these events so clearly after all these years. Im not saying he didnt, but I find it hard to believe, as I cant recall much about anything about 3rd grade, let alone yesterday. I can believe that he heard what his family talked about for years, and has elaborated it to the point it has become today. [if he is saying what you say hes saying] No offense to Mike intended, as he seemed like a very nice guy. He is just working alongside of Bob Groden trying to inform people who come to the plaza. I have his # and mailing address. If you want it, contact me through the message board. thanks-smitty Hi, yes, I also met Mike, back in 2005. Mike had to have been eight years old at the time of the assassination. Roy Bierma

Greg, this is mostly for you. It turns out that there is no such thing as an "Alpawna box", as Leon Hubert suggested. Later in the evening of November 22, 1963, John McCullough, reporter from the Philadelphia Bulletin, bumped into Jack Ruby. McCullough said Ruby was wearing a gray porkpie hat, very wooly, and a blue topcoat. He was holding a box that had a blue background and white lettering on it that spelled, "Alpacuna" Alpacuna was a brand of men's outerwear manufactured by the Jacob Siegel Co., then of Philadelphia. Earlier, in 1946, Siegel sued the FTC in order to retain the use of his brand name, Alpacuna, since lower courts had threatened to make him abandon it on the grounds that it was misleading, bordering on false advertising. Although the coat was partially made of alpaca, there was no vicuna in it. Further, Siegel had advertised products as including material that was not actually in them. Eventually, Siegel had to stop false advertising as regards non-included materials, but was allowed to keep the Alpacuna label. Now just what Ruby was doing holding such a box, measuring 8 inches by 5 inches by 3 and one-half inches, is beyond me. Questioned by Burt Griffin, McCullough was informed by Griffin that people had seen Ruby with neither topcoat nor hat that evening. Yet McCullough was certain that it was indeed Ruby he had encountered. Roy

Thanks Roy. I assume you are refering to the man leaning on the car with a cigar in his hand. ? Robin. Yes, Robin, everything seems about right about this being Lovelady, except the shirt. According to TKOAP, p. 187, Lovelady was wearing a window pane shirt. This looks more like the pattern of Oswald's shirt. But Lovelady had a bald spot in the area shown in the photo, and the facial profile looks like his. Hmm. What do you think? Roy Roy. To be honest i'm not sure, however the bald spot does look right, and he has a similar profile to Lovelady. ? Did Lovelady smoke cigars? And another thing, and I don't want to come off as a contrarian, but isn't that a suit jacket? Robert, it looks like a shirt to me, but it could be a suit jacket. I have no idea whether Lovelady smoked cigars. It's probably someone else. Incidentally, do you or anyone else have a photograph of William Shelley? He was supposed to be next to Lovelady in the Altgens 5 photograph, but his figure is obscured. It seems that his arms are up, but you can't see the face. I've seen Truly in a photo, but never a good one of Shelley. Roy

Roy, I was told by one of the Kloepfer daughters who visited Oswald in Sept that he told them he was heading east "on important business" and to buy a gun. That seems to support what the article says as far as time of the purchase. However, what I really think was going on here was something entirely different. The information seems to be coming from the DPD. You'll note that the article also points out that the Dallas trip was announced on Sept 28 -- about 2 months prior to the story. In other words, someone was trying to tie the purchase of the handgun to the announcement of the Dallas trip. Greg, greetings. Yes, that may very well be. Also, according to the hand-written Fritz notes, Oswald told him that he had bought the S-W a few months before in Fort Worth. In the end, though the announcement of the trip would tie him to this purchase, someone higher up than the Dallas police determined that the "evidence" used for the purchase of the handgun would be the mail-order placed with Seaport Traders, and the serial number, and tying Oswald to the Hidell alias. Interestingly, Richard Case Nagell also used the Alex Hidell alias. Cheers, Roy

Although the Smith-Wesson handgun Oswald allegedly used in the Tippit murder is thought to originate with a mail order filled out by Oswald in January, this New York Times article states that the gun was purchased "two months ago."(Nov. 29, 1963 article in New York Times) That would place the purchase some time in the latter part of September, 1963. The article goes on to say that the police traced the gun "to its point of origin" Was this another mail order placed by Oswald as part of his work for either the Dodd Committee or for the ATTU(Alcohol, Tobacco, and Tax union)? Or was this an order placed by someone else trying to tie Oswald to it? http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...bsPageId=141591 " target="_blank"> http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...bsPageId=141591 Roy Bierma