Ed Hoffman's Activities and Observations

[Tim Gratz]

People certainly have the right to be wrong about the facts. People are human and to err is human. People do not have the right to be intentionally or negligently wrong about the facts--at least not people who are socially responsible.

Of course, there can also be a question about what is a fact and what is an opinion.

[Bill Miller]

People certainly have the right to be wrong about the facts. People are human and to err is human. People do not have the right to be intentionally or negligently wrong about the facts--at least not people who are socially responsible.

Of course, there can also be a question about what is a fact and what is an opinion.

I agree in part, Tim. In this instance - Ken has given information that is known to him to be factual and yet Duke says he has not the time to look for those facts. I had a similar situation over the evidence collected by the Commission but chose a different approach - I went and bought two sets of the 26 Volumes and spent the next five years reading over each volume. I guess it all depends on what someone's priorities are concerning how bad they want to know whats factual and what is not.

Bill

[Miles Scull]

I'll try not to let it escape me.

Hey Duke,

Here's a Dillard 3 crop time stamped at between 40 seconds to 55 seconds post Z-313.

It's time to play:

Where D I D He Go ?

Who is missing in this photo ?

(A hint for Duke: fuzz)

Is there a terrible meaning hidden within the secret of the missing man?

Go figure.

Hi Duke,

Looks like added to the apocryphal “Hoffman Tale” we now have an apocryphal “Weitzman Report.”

An interesting approach:

Proving the reality of something that does not exist by referring to something that also does not exist.

Asserting that something exists - the alleged Weitzman Report – because someone remembers it, is as good as saying Santa Clause exists because someone remembered a long lost Christmas present that now no longer exists.

Obviously, the reason the Weitzman Report cannot be found is that there never was one.

The Weitzman testimony, which does exist (!), establishes that somebody thought they saw something such as a firecracker thrown through a bush at the Holland sniper location area. It does not indicate that something was seen thrown near the steam pipe.

The Couch film shows Officer Haygood parking his motorcycle, then other photos show him running up the hill toward the underpass.

Mr. BELIN - Then what did you hear or see?

Mr. MILLER - After the first one, just a few seconds later, there was two more shots fired, or sounded like a sound at the time. I don't know for sure. And it was after that I saw some man in the car fall forward, and a women next to him grab him and hollered, and just what, I don't know exactly what she said.

Mr. BELIN - Then what did you see?

Mr. MILLER - About that time I turned to look toward the - there is a little plaza sitting on the hill. I looked over there to see if anything was there, who through the firecracker or whatever it was, or see if anything was up there, and there wasn't nobody standing there, so I stepped back and looked at the tracks to see if anybody run across the railroad tracks, and there was nobody running across the railroad tracks. So I turned right straight back just in time to see the convertible take off fast.

Mr. BELIN - Where did the shots sound like they came from?

Mr. MILLER - Well, the way it sounded like, it came from the, I would say from right there in the car. Would be to my left, the way I was looking at him toward that incline.

Mr. BELIN - Is there anything else that you can think of that you saw?

Mr. MILLER - About the time I looked over to the side there, there was a police officer. No; a motorcycle running his motor under against the curb, and jumped off and come up to the hill toward the top and right behind him was some more officers and plainclothesmen, too.

Mr. BELIN - Did you see anyone that might be, that gave any suspicious movements of any kind over there?

Mr. MILLER - No, sir; I didn't

Mr. BELIN - Did you see anyone when you looked around on the railroad tracks, that you hadn't seen before

Mr. MILLER - No, sir; I didn't. We was all standing in one group right at the rail looking over, and the police officer, he was standing about 5 or 10 feet behind us.

Mr. BELIN - Now about how many were there in that group altogether, if you can remember?

Mr. MILLER - I would say in the neighborhood of 10 or 12 people. Maybe more, maybe less.

Mr. BELIN - Apart from those people, did you see anyone else in the vicinity at all on the railroad tracks?

Mr. MILLER - There was one young man or boy. He was going to come up on the tracks, but the officer stopped him and asked him where he was going, and he said he was going to come up where he could see, and he asked if he worked for the train station, and he said, "No," so the police officer made him go back down. Where he went to, I don't know.

Mr. BELIN - When was this?

Mr. MILLER - Oh, before the President came along.

Mr. BELIN - About how much before, do you know? Offhand?

Mr. MILLER - I couldn't say.

Mr. BELIN - Do you know anything about this man or boy that you described? About how old he was, or anything?

Mr. MILLER - I can't think. I would say he was in his early twenties.

Mr. BELIN - Tall or short?

Mr. MILLER - I don't remember that much about him. I do recall him coming up and the man talking to him and turning him back.

Mr. BELIN - So he went back down?

Mr. MILLER - Yes.

Mr. BELIN - Where did he come up from?

Mr. MILLER - He came up from the - I am going by where I was standing. He was from our left, from around behind that parking lot.

Mr. BELIN - Did you ever see him again or not?

Mr. MILLER - No, sir; I didn't.

Mr. BELIN - Did you ever see anyone else in that area at all or anything on the railroad tracks at any time?

Mr. MILLER - No, Sir; not until after the shots were fired and the police officers came up the hill and climbed over the fence and started searching.

Mr. BELIN - That was the only other people that you saw?

Mr. MILLER - That is all I recall seeing.

From this testimony Miller was looking along the picket fence & toward the RR tracks & toward the steam pipe area as soon as the shots were fired. Miller continues to look in the same directions as Haygood runs up the hill to the underpass between 50 to 60 seconds post Z-313. Thus, Miller would have seen the alleged rifle toss & the rifle catch & the transport of the rifle to the switch box & the disassembly of the rifle & the sniper’s assistant running up the RR tracks, because all of those alleged actions occurred when Miller & 10 other people on the underpass had a clear view of the area where all of those alleged actions allegedly occurred, and because all of those alleged actions took place during the time frame when Miller & all the others, of course, were looking over toward the locus of all of those alleged actions.

Miller saw none of these alleged actions. Nor did anyone else. (Except, of course, Ed, who was 225 yards away.)

Duke, you don’t know who is not seen in Dillard 3, time stamped 39.7 seconds to 54.8 seconds post Z-313? There is a profound & very telling mystery here!!

Let me know if you are stumped & I'll "spill the beans."

Edited July 24, 2007 by Miles Scull

[Duke Lane]

People certainly have the right to be wrong about the facts. People are human and to err is human. People do not have the right to be intentionally or negligently wrong about the facts--at least not people who are socially responsible.

Of course, there can also be a question about what is a fact and what is an opinion.

I agree in part, Tim. In this instance - Ken has given information that is known to him to be factual and yet Duke says he has not the time to look for those facts. I had a similar situation over the evidence collected by the Commission but chose a different approach - I went and bought two sets of the 26 Volumes and spent the next five years reading over each volume. I guess it all depends on what someone's priorities are concerning how bad they want to know whats factual and what is not.

If Ken has facts at hand, then let him cite them instead of being coy and leaving it up to the people he made a claim to, to go find those facts, which may not even exist.

To paraphrase, I guess it all depends upon what someone's priorities are concerning how badly they want the facts to be known.

This is not a game of hide-and-seek, at least not as far as I'm concerned, and I'm not emotionally or otherwise tied Ed Hoffman's veracity. If you've got something, lay it out on the table. If not, it's not my responsibility to go find it for you, and if it doesn't exist, to keep looking in every hidey-hole possible because you seem to remember seeing it somewhere.

[Bill Miller]

To paraphrase, I guess it all depends upon what someone's priorities are concerning how badly they want the facts to be known.

Hoffman's book was no secret and yet a couple of his critics on this forum had not bothered reading it before deciding what was true and what was not.

Bill

[Duke Lane]

To Duke:

... You said: "Unfortunately, the testimony you cite doesn't contain any of what you said it does." I never said anything about citing testimony.

You said: "You have chosen to corroborate Ed's story, at least in part, based on what a known person didn't say. . . " It appears you're talking about Foster here. If so, then you're mistaken. And you've switched again from testimony back to "what a known person didn't say. . ." No, Duke, I've chosen to corroborate Ed's story based, in part, on what Foster actually did say. Not what he testified to. And what he said is out there, openly available to all researchers.

Okay, we'll play this little cat-and-mouse game one time, but only because I happened to find your citation pretty quickly: Larry Sneed's No More Silence, copyrighted in 1998 and containing interviews with various people spanning 11 years.

The full quote is:

After the shooting, one officer ran up and said the shots came from the overpass, and I told him they didn't. Then I moved around to the end of the viaduct where somebody said some man had run up the railroad tracks from that location. So I proceeded up to the yards to check the empty boxcars to see if anybody had run up that way.

I was in the yards maybe ten to fifteen minutes looking in the cars, but I didn't find anything. Nor did I see anything suspicious behind the picket fence or see anyone with Secret Service or FBI identification, as some have stated. From there I moved on down to the book store ...."

I should note before going further that this was preceded by a description of something that, in 1964, only JC White had testified to, and which opens a question about how JW Foster could have been so certain of the location from which the sound of the shots had come:

... Just prior to the shots, a three engine locomotive went by, so there wasn't a lot that you could see or hear from up there even though the locomotive had already passed and just the boxcars were going by at the time the motorcade passed through.

In the Dillard 3 crop above, one wonders not only where Foster went, but where the train went as well.

It is also interesting to note that Foster dismisses the possibility of "anyone with Secret Service or FBI identification" being in the area "as some have stated" simply because he didn't see them himself. "Folks, I was there and I saw everything!" (One might also wonder why the WC didn't just get JW Foster to do all the testimony and pin down exactly what Oswald did or didn't do!)

Sneed began his interviews in 1987, but does not indicate the approximate date that he interviewed each of his subjects, so we can only say that Foster was interviewed sometime between 1987 and 1998. And we should also ask ourselves how much weight we should give to the adage about witnesses' statements closer to the fact being the more acurate.

In 1964, JW Foster said that he "immediately" went to the TSBD (the "book store?") after the limo had sped away. He also said, under oath, following that statement:

Mr. BALL. When you got over to the School Book Depository Building, what did you do?

Mr. FOSTER. I was standing around in back there to see that no one came out, and the sergeant came and got me and we were going to check the--all the railroad cars down there.

Mr. BALL. Who was that sergeant?

Mr. FOSTER. Sergeant came up there.

Mr. BALL.

Did you search the railroad cars?

Mr. FOSTER.

No; he sent me back down to the inspector

. Told me to report back to Inspector Sawyer.

Mr. BALL. Where?

Mr. FOSTER. At the front of the Book Depository.

So, in 1964, Foster testified under oath that he DID NOT search the railroad cars, but some time after 1987 he told an interviewer that he "was in the yards maybe ten to fifteen minutes looking in the cars." Which was it? Both?

I can appreciate the need to take everything into account to support a notion, but given the faulty recollection - and the incredible hearing, being able to discern without question the location of the shots while railroad cars were click-clacking, click-clacking ten feet behind him - of a man who both didn't spend any time looking in railroad cars and ten to fifteen minutes doing exactly what he swore he didn't do, I'd be kind of skeptical of his recollection, many years after the fact, of someone telling him about "some man had run up the railroad tracks from that location" at the end of the viaduct.

And who was that officer who "ran up" and told him the shots had come from the overpass before he moved to the end of the viaduct? Shouldn't he be in that Dillard 3 crop too?

But you apparently have another witness hidden up your sleeve ("It appears you're talking about Foster here. If so, then you're mistaken"), so it really doesn't matter about any of this, does it. Three-card Monte, anyone?

[Duke Lane]

To paraphrase, I guess it all depends upon what someone's priorities are concerning how badly they want the facts to be known.

Hoffman's book was no secret and yet a couple of his critics on this forum had not bothered reading it before deciding what was true and what was not.

Bill

That's a non-sequitur.

That it "was no secret" does not mean that everyone knows or knew about it. And "bothering" to read something that's difficult at best to find? Damn, isn't that sort of like saying that everyone should have their own personal copies of the volumes just because you do, and if they don't, they're not qualified to speak on this subject?

I've read Hoffman's book. I'm still not convinced. Which is a nice way of saying ...

... But I haven't read "The Weitzman Report," and am eagerly awaiting its publication. Or do I have to go look for that myself, too?

[Miles Scull]

That's a non-sequitur.

That it "was no secret" does not mean that everyone knows or knew about it. And "bothering" to read something that's difficult at best to find? Damn, isn't that sort of like saying that everyone should have their own personal copies of the volumes just because you do, and if they don't, they're not qualified to speak on this subject?

I've read Hoffman's book. I'm still not convinced. Which is a nice way of saying ...

... But I haven't read "The Weitzman Report," and am eagerly awaiting its publication. Or do I have to go look for that myself, too?

I have been aware of Ed's booklet for a couple of years but it's always unavailable. I fellow member reported that in this book Ed said

that there were 3 people on the underpass at the time in question, when I knew there were 15 or more people there.

Also, I became aware that Ed had said that, right after the assassination, he had gone over to old City Hall where the police station

was to report what he had seen, but all the doors were locked. What? So, police officers could not get in & out when activity

exploded after the assassination.

So, I decided that this Hoffman booklet was not worth the $250.00 it sells for on Abebooks.

Looks like Duke has cracked the riddle!

Yes, the man here (right of red line) is Officer Foster:

as seen here standing next to Sam Holland several seconds after Z-313.

But, here 38.75 t0 53.75 seconds after Z-313, there is no Foster to be seen!

Well, of course, this means that Foster in his testimony told the truth, that he RAN to the north end of the underpass

immediately after the shots were fired & he had seen the situation in limo.

Mr. BALL - Now, tell me what you saw happen after the President's car passed - turned onto Elm from Houston.

Mr. FOSTER - After he came onto Elm I watched the men on the track more than I was him. Then I heard this loud noise, sound like a large firecracker. Kind of dumbfounded at first and then heard the second one. I moved to the banister of the overpass to see what was happening. Then the third explosion, and they were beginning to move around. I ran after I saw what was happening.

Mr. BALL - What did you see was happening?

Mr. FOSTER - Saw the president slump over in the car, and his head looked just like it blew up.

Mr. BALL - You saw that did you?

Mr. FOSTER - Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL - And what did you do then?

Mr. FOSTER - Well, at that time I broke and ran around to my right - to the left - around to the bookstore.

So, Foster ran at 10 to 15 seconds after Z=313 to the area of the steam pipe & the switch box! He would have arrived at that locus at

20 to 25 seconds after Z-313! Just in time to notice a most remarkable phenomenom. A flying rifle.

Edited July 24, 2007 by Miles Scull

[Bill Miller]

So, Foster ran at 10 to 15 seconds after Z=313 to the area of the steam pipe & the switch box! He would have arrived at that locus at

20 to 25 seconds after Z-313! Just in time to notice a most remarkable phenomenom. A flying rifle.

[/b]

Miles,

Do any of the assassination photos or films taken within the first minute following the shooting show Foster missing from the underpass?

Bill Miller

[Ken Rheberg]

To Duke:

... You said: "Unfortunately, the testimony you cite doesn't contain any of what you said it does." I never said anything about citing testimony.

You said: "You have chosen to corroborate Ed's story, at least in part, based on what a known person didn't say. . . " It appears you're talking about Foster here. If so, then you're mistaken. And you've switched again from testimony back to "what a known person didn't say. . ." No, Duke, I've chosen to corroborate Ed's story based, in part, on what Foster actually did say. Not what he testified to. And what he said is out there, openly available to all researchers.

Okay, we'll play this little cat-and-mouse game one time, but only because I happened to find your citation pretty quickly: Larry Sneed's No More Silence, copyrighted in 1998 and containing interviews with various people spanning 11 years.

The full quote is:

After the shooting, one officer ran up and said the shots came from the overpass, and I told him they didn't. Then I moved around to the end of the viaduct where somebody said some man had run up the railroad tracks from that location. So I proceeded up to the yards to check the empty boxcars to see if anybody had run up that way.

I was in the yards maybe ten to fifteen minutes looking in the cars, but I didn't find anything. Nor did I see anything suspicious behind the picket fence or see anyone with Secret Service or FBI identification, as some have stated. From there I moved on down to the book store ...."

I should note before going further that this was preceded by a description of something that, in 1964, only JC White had testified to, and which opens a question about how JW Foster could have been so certain of the location from which the sound of the shots had come:

... Just prior to the shots, a three engine locomotive went by, so there wasn't a lot that you could see or hear from up there even though the locomotive had already passed and just the boxcars were going by at the time the motorcade passed through.

In the Dillard 3 crop above, one wonders not only where Foster went, but where the train went as well.

It is also interesting to note that Foster dismisses the possibility of "anyone with Secret Service or FBI identification" being in the area "as some have stated" simply because he didn't see them himself. "Folks, I was there and I saw everything!" (One might also wonder why the WC didn't just get JW Foster to do all the testimony and pin down exactly what Oswald did or didn't do!)

Sneed began his interviews in 1987, but does not indicate the approximate date that he interviewed each of his subjects, so we can only say that Foster was interviewed sometime between 1987 and 1998. And we should also ask ourselves how much weight we should give to the adage about witnesses' statements closer to the fact being the more acurate.

In 1964, JW Foster said that he "immediately" went to the TSBD (the "book store?") after the limo had sped away. He also said, under oath, following that statement:

Mr. BALL. When you got over to the School Book Depository Building, what did you do?

Mr. FOSTER. I was standing around in back there to see that no one came out, and the sergeant came and got me and we were going to check the--all the railroad cars down there.

Mr. BALL. Who was that sergeant?

Mr. FOSTER. Sergeant came up there.

Mr. BALL.

Did you search the railroad cars?

Mr. FOSTER.

No; he sent me back down to the inspector

. Told me to report back to Inspector Sawyer.

Mr. BALL. Where?

Mr. FOSTER. At the front of the Book Depository.

So, in 1964, Foster testified under oath that he DID NOT search the railroad cars, but some time after 1987 he told an interviewer that he "was in the yards maybe ten to fifteen minutes looking in the cars." Which was it? Both?

I can appreciate the need to take everything into account to support a notion, but given the faulty recollection - and the incredible hearing, being able to discern without question the location of the shots while railroad cars were click-clacking, click-clacking ten feet behind him - of a man who both didn't spend any time looking in railroad cars and ten to fifteen minutes doing exactly what he swore he didn't do, I'd be kind of skeptical of his recollection, many years after the fact, of someone telling him about "some man had run up the railroad tracks from that location" at the end of the viaduct.

And who was that officer who "ran up" and told him the shots had come from the overpass before he moved to the end of the viaduct? Shouldn't he be in that Dillard 3 crop too?

But you apparently have another witness hidden up your sleeve ("It appears you're talking about Foster here. If so, then you're mistaken"), so it really doesn't matter about any of this, does it. Three-card Monte, anyone?

Duke,

I’m glad to hear that you found the J.W. Foster story “pretty quickly.”

Foster really did say, “Then I moved around to the end of the viaduct where somebody said some man had run up the railroad tracks from that location.”

This one sentence is loaded with relevant information.

Everyone, please understand what I’m NOT trying to do here. I’m NOT trying to prove anything to Duke (or Miles), just stand up for Ed Hoffman’s story in this forum so that everyone will know that there is support for what Ed claims to have seen that day. Nothing will prove Ed Hoffman’s story to Duke, witness his crass “Mary wasn’t a virgin” comment. I find that unnecessary in this discussion or any JFK assassination discussion, and as a Christian, I find it offensive.

Anyway, let’s move forward with what Foster said in that one loaded sentence:

1. “. . .end of the viaduct. . .”:

This would be the north end of the triple underpass, where the switch box is located.

2. “Then I moved”: Foster was on the bridge and headed in the direction of what would ultimately be the area of the switch box. The timing of this move was associated with. . .

3. “. . .where somebody said. . .”

He left after talking to “somebody” on the bridge.

That “somebody” would seem, most reasonably, to be a railroad worker. The story. . .

4. “some man had run up the railroad tracks. . .”

A man was seen running up the tracks. Sounds like what Ed Hoffman saw.

5. “. . .from that location.”

The location = the end of the viaduct, the area of the switch box. Someone was running up the tracks from the north end of the underpass, the area of the switchbox. Exactly what Ed’s “railroad man” was doing (running), where he was running (along the tracks), and where his running had started from (the area of the switch box).

Finally, Miles has now said in a post following Duke’s, referring to the Dillard 3 photo showing the railroad workers on top of the bridge:

“But, here 38.75 to 53.75 seconds after Z-313, there is no Foster to be seen! Well, of course, this means that Foster in his testimony told the truth, that he RAN to the north end of the underpass immediately after the shots were fired & he had seen the situation in limo.”

Miles, it’s good to see you using the more accurate 53.75 seconds as the far end of the range since Dillard 3 really did come in around 55 – 60 seconds after Z313.

I’m not sure if Foster is behind that vertical bridge extension next to Holland or not, but if he’s not, then he truly is on his way to follow up on the story that one of the railroad workers had just told him. That story: that the railroad worker had witnessed someone running off along the railroad tracks, a run which started from the end of the bridge (which is the area of the switch box).

But, Miles, you’re wrong on the time that Foster began running. It couldn’t have been 10-15 seconds after Z313. We see the limo about to enter the underpass in the Altgens photo. And we see Foster, too. He still needs time to have a conversation with another police officer who claimed that the shots came from the overpass (also found in Sneed’s book), time to refute that claim, then time to hear the story from the railroad worker about the running man before running off himself. Foster needs more time for those two conversations to take place. And regardless of when Foster left, a man running along the railroad tracks from the area of the switch box had already been witnessed by that time.

Ken

[Jack White]

Standing ovation for Ken!

Jack

[Duke Lane]

Anyway, let's move forward with what Foster said in that one loaded sentence:

1. ". . .end of the viaduct. . .":

This would be the north end of the triple underpass, where the switch box is located.

2. "Then I moved": Foster was on the bridge and headed in the direction of what would ultimately be the area of the switch box. The timing of this move was associated with. . .

3. ". . .where somebody said. . ."

He left after talking to "somebody" on the bridge.

That "somebody" would seem, most reasonably, to be a railroad worker. The story. . .

4. "some man had run up the railroad tracks. . ."

A man was seen running up the tracks. Sounds like what Ed Hoffman saw.

5. ". . .from that location."

The location = the end of the viaduct, the area of the switch box. Someone was running up the tracks from the north end of the underpass, the area of the switchbox. Exactly what Ed's "railroad man" was doing (running), where he was running (along the tracks), and where his running had started from (the area of the switch box).

Well, you have chosen to ignore the fact that JW Foster "made a major mis-statement" about his searching the railroad cars within a paragraph of the first, and thus have decided that his statement that suits your purposes - despite its differences from his WC testimony - is 100% accurate.

Fair enough. There is no arguing with or convincing the faithful ... or those whose hats hang on others' stories.

[Miles Scull]

Well, you have chosen to ignore the fact that JW Foster "made a major mis-statement" about his searching the railroad cars within a paragraph of the first, and thus have decided that his statement that suits your purposes - despite its differences from his WC testimony - is 100% accurate.

Fair enough. There is no arguing with or convincing the faithful ... or those whose hats hang on others' stories.

Duke,

If I'm understanding this correctly, then Foster's testimony (The Testimony of J.W. Foster was taken at 1:30 a.m., on April 9, 1964, in the office of the U.S. attorney, 301 Post Office Building, Bryan and Ervay Streets, Dallas, Tex., by Mr. Joseph A. Ball, assistant counsel of the President's Commission.) is in direct contradiction to Foster's recollection of his movements recorded 25 or 30 year's later in Sneed's book.

25 years is a long time. Memory degradation is probable. The Sneed account, in comparison with the 1964 testimony, has the earmarks of someone (an older person in their late 60s or early 70s) looking back down a 25 to 30 year corridor of time. The Sneed account has the appearance of a summation of not clearly remembered details of a time long ago & half forgotten. The 1964 testimony is clear, crisp & exact as to detail.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Mr. BALL - Now, tell me what you saw happen after the President's car passed - turned onto Elm from Houston.

Mr. FOSTER - After he came onto Elm I watched the men on the track more than I was him. Then I heard this loud noise, sound like a large firecracker. Kind of dumbfounded at first and then heard the second one. I moved to the banister of the overpass to see what was happening. Then the third explosion, and they were beginning to move around. I ran after I saw what was happening.

Mr. BALL - What did you see was happening?

Mr. FOSTER - Saw the president slump over in the car, and his head looked just like it blew up.

Mr. BALL - You saw that did you?

Mr. FOSTER - Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL - And what did you do then?

Mr. FOSTER - Well, at that time I broke and ran around to my right - to the left - around to the bookstore.

Mr. BALL - Now, did you have any opinion at that time as to the source of the sounds, the direction of the sounds?

Mr. FOSTER - Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL - What?

Mr. FOSTER - It came from back in toward the corner of Elm and Houston Streets.

Mr. BALL - That was you impression at that time?

Mr. FOSTER - Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL - Was any shot fired from the overpass?

Mr. FOSTER - No, sir.

Mr. BALL - Did you see anyone with a weapon there?

Mr. FOSTER - No, sir.

Mr. BALL - Or did you here any sound that appeared to come from the overpass?

Mr. FOSTER - No, sir.

Mr. BALL - Where did you go from there?

Mr. FOSTER - Went on around the back side of the bookstore.

Mr. BALL - Immediately?

Mr. FOSTER - Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL - Did you see anybody coming out that side of the bookstore?

Mr. FOSTER - No, Sir.

Mr. BALL - Back side? What do you mean by that?

Mr. FOSTER - Well I guess you would say the northwest side of it.

Mr. BALL - Were there any people in the railroad yards around the bookstore at that time?

Mr. FOSTER - Yes, sir. There was a pretty good crowd beginning to gather back in that area.

Mr. BALL - At that time?

Mr. FOSTER - Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL - Had you seen anybody over at the railroad yard north and west of the bookstore before you heard the shots fired?

Mr. FOSTER - No; other than people that had come up there and I sent them back down the roadway.

Mr. BALL - I see. People had attempted to get on the overpass there?

Mr. FOSTER - Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL - And you had sent them away?

Mr. FOSTER - yes, sir.

Mr. BALL - When you got over to the School Book Depository Building, what did you do?

Mr. FOSTER - I was standing around in back there to see that no one came out, and the sergeant came and got me and we were going to check the - all the railroad cars down there.

Mr. BALL - Who was that sergeant?

Mr. FOSTER - Sergeant came up there.

Mr. BALL - Did you search the railroad cars?

Mr. FOSTER - No; he sent me back down to the inspector. Told me to report back to Inspector Sawyer.

Mr. BALL - Where?

Mr. FOSTER - At the front of the book Depository.

Mr. BALL - Did you talk to Sawyer there?

Mr. FOSTER - Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL - Did you tell sergeant or Sawyer, either one where you thought the shots came from?

Mr. FOSTER - Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL - What did you then tell them?

Mr. FOSTER - Told them it came from the vicinity up around Elm and Houston.

Mr. BALL - Did you tell the sergeant that first, or did you tell that to Sawyer?

Mr. FOSTER - Told that to inspector Sawyer.

Mr. BALL - You told that to Sawyer?

Mr. FOSTER - Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL - Did you tell that to the sergeant?

Mr. FOSTER - I don't know whether I told the sergeant or not.

Mr. BALL - What did you do after that?

Mr. FOSTER - I moved to -down the roadway there, down to see if I could find where any of he shots hit.

Mr. BALL - Find anything?

Mr. FOSTER - Yes, sir. Found where one shot had hit the turf there at the location.

Mr. BALL - Hit the turf?

Mr. FOSTER - Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL - Did you see any marks on the street in anyplace?

Mr. FOSTER - No, a manhole cover. It was hit. they caught the manhole cover right on the corner and -

Mr. BALL - You saw a mark on the manhole cover did you?

Mr. FOSTER - Yes sir.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Sneed with Foster remembering:

"After the shooting, one officer ran up and said that the shots came from the overpass, and I told him they didn't. Then I moved around to the end of the viaduct where somebody said some man had run up the railroad track from that location. So I proceeded up to the yards to check the empty boxcars to see if anybody had run up that way.

I was in the yards maybe ten to fifteen minutes looking in the cars, but I didn't find anything. Nor did I see anything suspicious behind the picket fence or see anyone with Secret Service or FBI identification, as some have stated. From there I moved on down to the book store and walked on down to the south side of Elm..."

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

In 1964 Foster states that he never went to the RR cars. Foster explains why he did not. In 1964 Foster explains each of his movements & also indicates why he made them.

The Sneed account has the earmarks of a confusion of memory. Foster's 25 to 30 year recall has probably faltered & invented an interpolation which did not occur.

Otherwise Foster lied to the Warren Commission. Now, to suggest the Foster was deliberately lying to the WC in order to hide evidence of an assassin other than Oswald does not make sense, because the WC already had Holland's testimony of the smoke, etc. A tortured stretch.

One thing to consider, however, is that Foster in 1964 said that he ran to the north end of the underpass BEFORE the limo entered the underpass. This would place Foster, along with the other spectators who were already there at that time, at the switch box area at 20 to 30 seconds after Z-313. In other words, Foster was joining other spectators nearby the switch box & steam pipe BEFORE Hoffman's scene could possibly have been played out. In other words, Foster would have arrested Ed's sniper's assistant with rifle in hand or Foster would have been shot dead as he encountered Ed's assistant in the act.

Thus, if ''someone'' had really seen somebody running up the tracks & if that running somebody really had been Ed's Sniper's assistant, then that "someone" would also have seen Ed's sniper's assistant catch the tossed rifle, disassemble it, bag it & run up the tracks with the bag. Is one to assume that the "someone" who saw somebody running up the tracks ALSO missed seeing everything else Ed's story tells, just as every one of the other spectators nearby the steam pipe & the switch box ALSO missed everything Ed's story tells? Somebody seen running up the tracks at the time in question actually disproves Hoffman's story! Why? Just because only the running man was seen & nothing else.

It is possible that someone did see somebody running up the tracks, but on the logic that person must have been seen running up the tracks BEFORE Z-313.

Edited July 26, 2007 by Miles Scull

[Jack White]

Logical conclusion...

Hoffman SAW what he saw and reported the same day it happened.

Other witnesses DID NOT SEE what Hoffman saw; we do not know why.

Foster, Holland and others may have seen nothing THEY THOUGHT

SUSPICIOUS about Hoffman's "railroad man" by the switch boxes.

He was just "tending to business".

Conjecture is not proof.

Jack

Edited July 26, 2007 by Jack White

[Bill Miller]

Conjecture is not proof.

Jack

But its the best that Miles has got going for him.