Ed Hoffman's Activities and Observations

[Jack White]

Of course ALL REPORTS ARE NOT TRUE. I have never said that.

Ed REPORTED TO HIS FAMILY WHAT HE SAW. This does not mean

it is TRUE FACT. There are these possiblities:

1. Ed reported what he saw, and it happened just as he said.

2. Ed reported what he saw, but his interpretation was wrong.

3. Ed saw something suspicious and imagined some details.

4. Ed saw nothing at all, and made the whole story up.

I think all but number four are possible. I think number one

is most likely. I believe he saw a man hand something to

a "railroad man". From that point, it is his interpretation.

It is his speculation that it was a gun which was folded up

and put into a bag. That was his interpretation.

My feeling is that a "folding gun" was not used in the assassination.

But my "feeling" does not discredit what Ed saw.

Jack

[Jack White]

Foster is wrong about a passing train. He is the only person to describe it.

The train is seen in NO photos. He is either lying or having a "memory merge"

where events that did happen are confused in time sequence.

Jack

[Bill Miller]

I think that maybe there is some posible resolution to be had over the train moving. I am going from memory here, but didn't Bowers say that he had held up the trains while the President was passing through DP. Well, Bowers also said that he had lost track of the man in the dark clothing behind the fence following the shooting because he had to deal with the trains or words pertaining to his work. So yes, at some point there was a train being allowed to start moving again, but it must have taken several minutes because the assassination films do not seem to reflect a train moving during the first minute or so following the assassination. So is it not possible that Foster just got a little mixed up about the timing of the train starting to move through the area?

Bill

[Duke Lane]

Foster is wrong about a passing train. He is the only person to describe it. The train is seen in NO photos. He is either lying or having a "memory merge" where events that did happen are confused in time sequence.

Unfortunately, no, Foster is NOT the only person to describe the train. I provided a copy of JC White's testimony of April 9, 1964, which likewise described the train. There are others as well, but none specific to a train being on the bridge.

Once again:

Mr. BALL. Did you see the President's car come into sight?

Mr. WHITE. No, sir; first time I saw it it has passed, passed under the triple underpass.

Mr. BALL. You were too far away to see it, were you?

Mr. WHITE.

There was a freight train traveling. There was a train passing between the location I was standing

[i.e., on the west side of the TU]

and the area

from

which the procession was traveling

[i.e., on Elm Street westbound toward the TU from Houston St; that is, between the west side of the bridge and the east side of the bridge],

and--a big long freight train, and I did not see it.

Mr. BALL. You didn't see the procession?

Mr. WHITE. No, sir.

...

Mr. BALL. First time you saw the President's car it was going underneath?

Mr. WHITE. Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL. What did you do after that?

Mr. WHITE.

As soon as the train passed

I went over and on the northwest side of the Depository Building. On the northwest side of the book store up there with the rest of the officers and after about 30 minutes they told me to go out and work traffic at Main and Houston, and I stood out there and worked traffic.

Mr. BALL. All right, now,

you heard no sound of no rifle fire or anything?

Mr. WHITE.

No, sir.

Mr. BALL.

Freight train was going through at the time?

Mr. WHITE.

Yes, sir.

Mr. BALL.

Making noise?

Mr. WHITE.

Yes, sir; noisy train.

Mr. BALL. Mr. White, Mr. Foster was on the east side of the overpass?

Mr. WHITE. Yes, sir.

(

6H255-56

; emphases added]

So we have a cop on the west side of the overpass who says that he saw and heard nothing of the shooting because a noisy freight train was obstructing both his vision and his hearing (why am I thinking of Sergeant Schultz here?). We have another cop on the east side of the bridge who made no mention of such a train - also on April 9, 1964, immediately before JC White testified - and was able to hear the shots well enough to know without a doubt in his mind that they came from the vicinity of Elm & Houston and NOT from anywhere near the overpass.

Two cops, one on each side of the bridge. One sees and hears a train, the other doesn't, and there's no train in any photos.

But yet (!) 35 years later, the cop who DOESN'T see or hear the train suddenly remembers it ... and not only that it was "a train," but a "three-engine locomotive." Pretty detailed "memory merge," isn't it?

As you say, "he is either lying or having a 'memory merge.'"

So how can you be so certain he's NOT "lying or having a 'memory merge'" when he describes in No More Silence that a man approached him and told him about another man running up the tracks from the north end of the overpass?

Was it also a case of "lying or having a 'memory merge'" when he first said he DID NOT search the railroad cars, and 35 years later said he did it for "ten or fifteen minutes?"

How do you determine what's "lying or a 'memory merge'" and what's true and correct and absolute unmitigated fact?

(In fairness, Jack, it wasn't YOU who posited that this was all true, but you DO seem to be supporting it ....)

Mr Foster also said to Sneed that there were no plainclothes people with any kind of FBI or USSS credentials around TSBD. So was there or wasn't there? If Foster didn't see any, does that mean that none were there?

I'll post his entire interview here and let you pick out what is fact and what is "lying or a 'memory merge'" if you'd like, and then we can tally them up and decide how much of what he had to say is factual and credible and how much is meaningless and baseless, and how much credence we should therefore lend to anything he said in this interview 35 or more years after the fact. Sound like a deal?

[Duke Lane]

I think that maybe there is some posible resolution to be had over the train moving. ... is it not possible that Foster just got a little mixed up about the timing of the train starting to move through the area?

I agree wholeheartedly, with the possible exception of White's testimony stating otherwise (see above posts).

On the other hand, is it not ALSO possible that Foster just got a little mixed up about the man telling him about someone running up the train tracks away from the TU?

If it's NOT possible, why isn't it? Shoot, if he can mis-remember a whole three-engine locomotive with boxcars, and whether or not he'd searched boxcars in the railroad yard for a spell, I'd guess he can mis-remember a little ol' guy tellin' him somethin', wouldn't ya think?

And if he didn't, how do you know he didn't?

Faith? Conjecture? A simple desire to believe?

Edited July 26, 2007 by Duke Lane

[Don Roberdeau]

[Antti Hynonen]

I think the photogaphic record (of 11/22/1963 at about 12:30 p.m.) from Dealey Plaza including sections of the train tracks in the vicinity, proves quite clearly that at the time the motorcade was approaching the plaza and at the time the first few cars had passed the triple underpass, no train travelled the tracks in the immediate area of the Plaza.

This is further supported by the majority of the eye witness testimony of that day and not least by the testimony of Mr. Bowers, who was in charge of controlling the train access to and from the railway yard in the immediate vicinity of Dealey Plaza. Like Mr. Miller said earlier, Bowers stopped a train prior to it reaching the plaza.

The eye witnesses, whose testimonies have been presented in this thread thus far, describing a train passing the triple underpass bridge at the time of the motorcade, were most likely mistaken with regards to the exact timing of the arrival of the train they describe.

Snippets of the WC testimony of Lee Bowers Jr.

--------------

Mr. BALL - What kind of work were you doing for them?

Mr. BOWERS - I was tower man in the north tower, Union Terminal, operating the switches and signals controlling the movement of trains.

Mr. BALL - Through railroad yards?

Mr. BOWERS - Yes.

--------------

This is Mr. Bowers describing the events minutes after the motorcade had passed:

--------------

Mr. BALL - Afterwards did a good many people come up there on this high ground at the tower?

Mr. BOWERS - A large number of people came, more than one direction. One group converged from the corner of Elm and Houston, and came down the extension of Elm and came into the high ground, and another line another large group went across the triangular area between Houston and Elm and then across Elm and then up the incline. Some of them all the way up. Many of them did, as well as, of course, between 50 and a hundred policemen within a maximum of 5 minutes.

Mr. BALL - In this area around your tower?

Mr. BOWERS - That's right. Sealed off the area, and I held off the trains until they could be examined, and there was some transients taken on at least one train.

Mr. BALL - I believe you have talked this over with me before your deposition was taken, haven't we?

--------------

Edited July 27, 2007 by Antti Hynonen

[Antti Hynonen]

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JAMESaftermath.htm

Above a link to a collection of assassination aftermath photos available on the Spartacus site. Many of them show the railroad bridge immediately after (from a few seconds to a few minutes) the presidents motorcade passed the triple underpass. No train in sight IMO.

Had there been a long and noisy train with 3 locomotives, it would not doubt have been present on several photos and film of that short point in time. I do believe that it is entirely possible that a train went across the bridge a few minutes prior to the arrival of the motorcade or perhaps even several minutes after the motorcade had passed. I am not sure when Bowers allowed the trains to move again. A locomotive and /or boxcars would probably be some 10-13 feet tall, thus roughly twice the height of a man and therefore clearly visible when on the bridge.

[Miles Scull]

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JAMESaftermath.htm

Above a link to a collection of assassination aftermath photos available on the Spartacus site. Many of them show the railroad bridge immediately after (from a few seconds to a few minutes) the presidents motorcade passed the triple underpass. No train in sight IMO.

Had there been a long and noisy train with 3 locomotives, it would not doubt have been present on several photos and film of that short point in time. I do believe that it is entirely possible that a train went across the bridge a few minutes prior to the arrival of the motorcade or perhaps even several minutes after the motorcade had passed. I am not sure when Bowers allowed the trains to move again. A locomotive and /or boxcars would probably be some 10-13 feet tall, thus roughly twice the height of a man and therefore clearly visible when on the bridge.

Hi Antti,

You seem to want to know where the train is. (The train that just went by. )

Here you are:

[Duke Lane]

Had there been a long and noisy train with 3 locomotives, it would not doubt have been present on several photos and film of that short point in time. I do believe that it is entirely possible that a train went across the bridge a few minutes prior to the arrival of the motorcade or perhaps even several minutes after the motorcade had passed. I am not sure when Bowers allowed the trains to move again. A locomotive and /or boxcars would probably be some 10-13 feet tall, thus roughly twice the height of a man and therefore clearly visible when on the bridge.

I agree ... and I'd think others would have remarked on it, too.

But that begs the question of why J.C. White would say, under oath, that there was a train when there clearly was not (and at the crucial moments of the shooting, which he thus failed to hear!), and why - despite both not having testified to a train being there and one not being there - why J.W. Foster would "remember" one in such graphic detail 35 years later?

There were other officers who could see White and Foster plainly, and they did not mention a train either. In fact, one even said that when the motorcade was coming down Elm Street, both officers were looking eastward toward the motorcade ... but doesn't mention a train being in White's way.

This is probably a great subject for a different thread, but for the purposes of this one, while I'll happily fall short of saying it was a lie, it certainly shows that Foster's later recollections were, at least if not at best, unreliable ... and certainly not reliable enough to hang one's hat on for the supposed "rifle toss."

[Bill Miller]

Is this a train in the background as the Limo has just passed through the underpass?. Did a track run in this direction in the youtube video which I am linking to here? The "train" appears to be followed by other traffic.

Duncan

I think if anyone pays attention to the fact that what has been suggested to be a possible train is no taller than the railings of the underpass .... the notion of that being a train soon dissipates.

Bill

[Bill Miller]

Bill:

You have personally met Ed Hoffman, could you tell me approximately how tall

he is..

Thanks B..

From memory - about 6' tall Ed was - give an inch or two possibly. I am 6'1" tall and I do not recall Ed being taller than I am.

[Duke Lane]

Is this a train in the background as the Limo has just passed through the underpass?. Did a track run in this direction in the youtube video which I am linking to here? The "train" appears to be followed by other traffic.

Same part of the clip lightened (from a screen capture of the YouTube video playing):

It looks to me as if you can see the balustrade on the west side of the TU, at least up to the point above the Elm St walkway under the bridge. To the right of it ...?

Since White said that the train not only blocked his view, but likewise drowned out the sound of the shots, it would therefore have had to clear White's position - which was over the Commerce Street section of the underpass, close to Elm - by the time this frame was recorded, that is, within just a few seconds of the shooting.

I don't know how fast that means it would have had to have been going, but it would seem faster than trains would typically be going into, out of, or through a trainyard.

Edited July 27, 2007 by Duke Lane

[Duke Lane]

I think if anyone pays attention to the fact that what has been suggested to be a possible train is no taller than the railings of the underpass .... the notion of that being a train soon dissipates.

What, no three-engine locomotive with boxcars following?

The question is then: if we are almost certain that there was no train on the overpass at the time, but J.W. Foster described it nevertheless, can we rely on any of what he said in No More Silence?

We can't rely on his description of the train; we can't rely on his claim to having searched the cars in the railroad yard; why should we rely on the statement about a man approaching him and telling him about someone running away down the tracks?

Let's not say that it's not true ... but is it reliable? If so, why?

[Duke Lane]

You seem to want to know where the train is. (The train that just went by. )

Here you are:

That's definitely the tail end of a train, i.e., a boxcar ... but is it moving or stationary?

If it's moving, how long after the shooting was this frame taken, and how fast would a train have to have been moving to get to where it is in this image by then?

Edited July 27, 2007 by Duke Lane