Roy Truly

[Paul Trejo]

16 hours ago, Cory Santos said:

Lol,

Paul, no offense, but I am reading this with a very neutral point of view.

I do not mind if someone has a different view than I do on this event- the other night one of my good friends and I briefly discussed the subject and he has taught on the the assassination and he is a W.C. supporter and an ex. Secret Service agent. 

So, if I was sitting here as a judge listening to the arguments between you and the other writers, there is one thing I keep noticing.

Respectfully, you present your view-without any citation to proof-and then attack others views by demanding they provide proof.

Reading a book is not proof.

Have you directly interviewed individuals and recorded their thoughts?

Have you obtained documentary evidence that directly shows Walker was in on a plot or is this just your theory based on your speculation?

Do you have direct evidence, not books written by authors, that support your conclusions which trump others?

If not, respectfully, you have a theory not fact.

I have had very well known individuals tell me fascinating things about this event-which I would never repeat out of respect for them and their position.  To me this is first hand proof which I use for my theory formation.

However, for you to attack others on this site and demand they show proof, I must sustain any objection to your argument.

Proof, where is your proof Walker was involved.  Not speculation or books, proof.  Receipts, testimony, checks, documents of any kind, stating he was involved. 

If not, I understand the exhaustion many are expressing about your posts.

Thanks.

Cory,

I have interviewed a few people with regard to the JFK Assassination, namely:

1. Larrie Schmidt
2. Ruth Paine
3. Harry Dean
4. Rev. Duncan Gray
5. Ron Lewis

I have over 5,000 posts on this Forum, sir, going back about six years.   In those posts I've displayed artifacts from General Walker's papers for as long as the Briscoe Center for American History would allow me to do it.

I have solicited NARA for film of General Walker for many years, and have been regularly denied on grounds of FOIA exceptions.

I realize -- and repeat endlessly -- that I have a theory and not fact.   I provide EVIDENCE when asked.  I don't make up stuff.

Yet all those people who have demanded EVIDENCE from me will run away when I demand EVIDENCE from them.

I do not attack anybody, sir.  I behave in a well-mannered and objective manner as far as possible, given the countless insults I have endured for the past six years.   Can you imagine somebody proposing a Walker-did-it CT back in 2011?   Well, that was me.   It wasn't easy, I can assure you.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

[Paul Trejo]

17 hours ago, Ron Bulman said:

Going back to Jim Marrs "Crossfire", the 2013 revised edition, on page 309 this is found.

"A relative of depository superintendent Roy Truly recently told researchers that due to intimidation by federal authorities Truly was fearful until his death.  Truly's wife, Mildred, refused to discuss the assassination-even with family members."   

Ron,

Thanks for getting back to the theme of this thread -- ROY TRULY --

If ANYBODY can show anything in his testimony which proves that Roy Truly was deliberately fabricating, this thread is the place to post it. 

It's  nonsense just to imply, like James Di Eugenio, "We all agree that Roy Truly was lying, and we don't need to explain why to anybody."

By the way -- just because Roy Truly was terrified about the JFK Assassination fallout until he died -- THAT IS NOT EVIDENCE THAT ROY TRULY LIED UNDER OATH.

Just because Roy Truly's wife refused to discuss the JFK Assassination -- even with family members -- THAT IS NOT EVIDENCE THAT ROY TRULY LIED UNDER OATH.

So -- ANYBODY -- what else have you got?

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited December 19, 2017 by Paul Trejo
typos

[Cory Santos]

1 minute ago, Paul Trejo said:

Cory,

I have interviewed a few people with regard to the JFK Assassination, namely:

1. Larrie Schmidt
2. Ruth Paine
3. Harry Dean
4. Rev. Duncan Gray
5. Ron Lewis

I have over 5,000 posts on this Forum, sir, going back about six years.   In those posts I've displayed artifacts from General Walker's papers for as long as the Briscoe Center for American History would allow me to do it.

I have solicited NARA for film of General Walker for many years, and have been regularly denied on grounds of FOIA exceptions.

I realize -- and repeat endlessly -- that I have a theory and not fact.   I provide EVIDENCE when asked.  I don't make up stuff.

Yet all those people who have demanded EVIDENCE from me will run away when I demand EVIDENCE from them.

I do not attack anybody, sir.  I behave in a well-mannered and objective manner as far as possible, given the countless insults I have endured for the past six years.   Can you imagine somebody proposing a Walker-did-it CT back in 2011?   Well, that was me.   It wasn't easy, I can assure you.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

So have you created a website or written a book or documentary which provides people the ability to hear your interviews so they can judge for themselves?

I do not mind that you choose Walker as the center of or a key figure in your theory, investigate, see if you can prove anything.  No problem with that.

I know some people that think U.F.O.s are the real reason behind the assassination.  Fine, give me the proof-witness, documents, etc.

My point was your argument seems to be show me the evidence but your arguments mostly seem to say trust me, it was these people. 

As for the Walker connection, people many many years ago were pointing the finger at him.  This did not start in 2011 if I understand your point.

 

[Paul Trejo]

On ‎12‎/‎19‎/‎2017 at 1:39 PM, Cory Santos said:

So have you created a website or written a book or documentary which provides people the ability to hear your interviews so they can judge for themselves?

I do not mind that you choose Walker as the center of or a key figure in your theory, investigate, see if you can prove anything.  No problem with that.

I know some people that think U.F.O.s are the real reason behind the assassination.  Fine, give me the proof-witness, documents, etc.

My point was your argument seems to be show me the evidence but your arguments mostly seem to say trust me, it was these people. 

As for the Walker connection, people many many years ago were pointing the finger at him.  This did not start in 2011 if I understand your point.

Cory,

I'm a working, family man with an 8-5 job and a commute.  I don't have the time to create a website or a blog.

I have posted on this site for six years.   Regulars here know my work -- though the majority -- CIA-did-it CTers -- are biased against me and show their disdain with impunity -- because, after all, they're the majority.  (As if a majority has never been mistaken.)

Have you heard about the recent book by Dr. Jeff Caufield, General Walker and the Murder of President Kennedy: The Extensive New Evidence of a Radical Right Conspiracy (2015)? 

As early as 2012, sir, I learned that I was not alone in this CT.   Harry Dean (a stellar member of this Forum) was the first to raise this CT, way back in 1965.  He got crickets as the response.  Everybody, even a half-century ago, was wild about the CIA-did-it CT.

Readers should really become suspicious that after a half-century, with hundreds of JFK Researchers, the CIA-did-it CT has massively proven its low value.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited December 20, 2017 by Paul Trejo
clarity

[Cory Santos]

4 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

Cory,

I'm a working, family man with an 8-5 job.  I don't have the time to create a website or a blog.

I have posted on this site for six years.   Regulars here know my work -- though the majority -- CIA-did-it CTers -- are biased against me and show it with impunity.

Have you heard about the recent book by Dr. Jeff Caufield, General Walker and the Murder of President Kennedy: The Extensive New Evidence of a Radical Right Conspiracy (2015)? 

As early as 2012, sir, I learned that I was not alone in this CT.   Harry Dean was the first to raise this CT, way back in 1965.  He got crickets as the response.  Everybody, even a half-century ago, was wild about the CIA-did-it CT.

Readers should really become suspicious that after a full half-century, with hundreds of JFK Researchers, that the CIA-did-it CT has proven its low value.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Paul, there were Walker implications back in the 1990's.  I recall, while researching my law school thesis on Jim Garrison's prosecution of Clay Shaw, I ran across several theorists who mentioned Walker.  The film JFK in 1991 even alludes to Walker.

I have not read that book, perhaps I shall one day.  Now I am busy reading the released documents. 

I recommend that you present your information so others can see what you have obtained in your research.  It might help.

But the central point is you cannot say to another theorist "show me the evidence" and then not provide real evidence to support your points.  Citing a book simply is not proof.

[Paul Trejo]

7 minutes ago, Cory Santos said:

Paul, there were Walker implications back in the 1990's.  I recall, while researching my law school thesis on Jim Garrison's prosecution of Clay Shaw, I ran across several theorists who mentioned Walker.  The film JFK in 1991 even alludes to Walker.

I have not read that book, perhaps I shall one day.  Now I am busy reading the released documents. 

I recommend that you present your information so others can see what you have obtained in your research.  It might help.

But the central point is you cannot say to another theorist "show me the evidence" and then not provide real evidence to support your points.  Citing a book simply is not proof.

Cory,

Thank you for the invitation to repeat my CT in great detail on this thread.   I agree with you that simply citing a book cannot be proof.  I try to make my posts short, but I'm more comfortable spreading out.

Here is one bit of evidence that you might have never seen.   Please tell me what you think of it:

http://www.pet880.com/images/19750623_EAW_to_Frank_Church.pdf

The content of this artifact from the Walker papers (courtesy Briscoe Center for the Study of American History, Austin, Texas) is that General Walker is contradicting his own sworn testimony to the Warren Commission, in which he stated he never heard of Lee Harvey Oswald until after the JFK Assassination.

Here, in this letter, signed by Walker, he tells Senator Frank Church that he knew that Lee Harvey Oswald was his shooter only days after the April 10, 1963 shooting.

Have you ever seen this before, Cory?   What do you think of it?

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited December 19, 2017 by Paul Trejo

[Chris Davidson]

41 minutes ago, Paul Trejo said:

Ron,

Thanks for getting back to the theme of this thread -- ROY TRULY --

If ANYBODY can show anything in his testimony which proves that Roy Truly was deliberately fabricating, this thread is the place to post it. 

It's  nonsense just to imply, like James Di Eugenio, "We all agree that Roy Truly was lying, and we don't need to explain why to anybody."

By the way -- just because Roy Truly was terrified about the JFK Assassination fallout until he died -- THAT IS NOT EVIDENCE THAT ROY TRULY LIED UNDER OATH.

Just because Roy Truly's wife refused to discuss the JFK Assassination -- even with family members -- THAT IS NOT EVIDENCE THAT ROY TRULY LIED UNDER OATH.

So -- ANYBODY -- what else have you got?

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Paul,

Do you believe the films or his testimony?

Mr. TRULY. That is right.
And the President's car following close behind came along at an average speed of 10 or 15 miles an hour. It wasn't that much, because they were getting ready to turn. And the driver of the Presidential car swung out too far to the right, and he came almost within an inch of running into this little abutment here, between Elm and the Parkway. And he slowed down perceptibly and pulled back to the left to get over into the middle lane of the parkway. Not being familiar with the street, he came too far out this way when he made his turn. 
Mr. BELIN. He came too far to the north before he made his curve, and as he curved--as he made his left turn from Houston onto the street leading to the expressway, he almost hit this north curb? 
Mr. TRULY. That is right. Just before he got to it, he had to almost stop, to pull over to the left.
If he had maintained his speed, he would probably have hit this little section here. 

[Cory Santos]

3 hours ago, Chris Davidson said:

Paul,

Do you believe the films or his testimony?

Mr. TRULY. That is right.
And the President's car following close behind came along at an average speed of 10 or 15 miles an hour. It wasn't that much, because they were getting ready to turn. And the driver of the Presidential car swung out too far to the right, and he came almost within an inch of running into this little abutment here, between Elm and the Parkway. And he slowed down perceptibly and pulled back to the left to get over into the middle lane of the parkway. Not being familiar with the street, he came too far out this way when he made his turn. 
Mr. BELIN. He came too far to the north before he made his curve, and as he curved--as he made his left turn from Houston onto the street leading to the expressway, he almost hit this north curb? 
Mr. TRULY. That is right. Just before he got to it, he had to almost stop, to pull over to the left.
If he had maintained his speed, he would probably have hit this little section here. 

Chris,

There have been videos on youtube about this-not naming the theorists that presented it. . . you know who it is...- that the car did go to far and almost stopped or did stop.  Not saying this is my opinion, but, there are theories about this.

Interestingly, it just occurred to me, if it did stop or almost stop, why not shoot him when he is almost stopped right in front of you?

Moreover, if they new the route in advance, why was a practice run not done so that they would have noticed the danger of the hard turn and warned Greer in advance?  Probably just a mistake and coincidence.

Regardless, lets assume they stopped or almost stopped right in front of the depository taking the turn to avoid the side street (I have been there many times and can understand how someone could get confused with this) was that part of a plan or was it a coincidental mistake by the driver Greer?

 

Edited December 19, 2017 by Cory Santos

[Ron Bulman]

I've made it to page 50 tonight.  This is by far the best compilation of statements and testimony and comparison of them on the subject of the Texas School Book Depository I've ever seen. 

E.G.  Lovelady told the HSCA it was 20-25 minutes before he got back into the TSBD.  That would mean he was Not There for the rollcall/lineup of building employee's where Truly singled out Oswald as the Only One missing.  I. E., HE would be at least the second one missing.

Then there's "Victoria Adams saw the elevator cables moving".   Who was riding the elevator as she descended the stairs or entered them?  A shooter, spotter and rear lookout?  The power was off, then it was on, then it was off?  Elevator(s) stuck on the fifth floor per Truly, about the time Adams saw the cable moving.  Or while he and Baker were maybe running up the stairs?

http://dealeyplazauk.org.uk/pdfArticles/Anatomy of the second floor lunch room encounter Aug 27 2017-by_Bart Kamp.pdf 

Edited December 20, 2017 by Ron Bulman

[Rick McTague]

18 hours ago, Cory Santos said:

Chris,

There have been videos on youtube about this-not naming the theorists that presented it. . . you know who it is...- that the car did go to far and almost stopped or did stop.  Not saying this is my opinion, but, there are theories about this.

Interestingly, it just occurred to me, if it did stop or almost stop, why not shoot him when he is almost stopped right in front of you?

Moreover, if they new the route in advance, why was a practice run not done so that they would have noticed the danger of the hard turn and warned Greer in advance?  Probably just a mistake and coincidence.

Regardless, lets assume they stopped or almost stopped right in front of the depository taking the turn to avoid the side street (I have been there many times and can understand how someone could get confused with this) was that part of a plan or was it a coincidental mistake by the driver Greer?

 

And isn't it convenient that the Zapruder film was edited to remove this precise sequence?

[Paul Trejo]

On ‎12‎/‎19‎/‎2017 at 2:23 PM, Chris Davidson said:

Paul,

Do you believe the films or his testimony?

Mr. TRULY. That is right.  And the President's car following close behind came along at an average speed of 10 or 15 miles an hour. It wasn't that much, because they were getting ready to turn. And the driver of the Presidential car swung out too far to the right, and he came almost within an inch of running into this little abutment here, between Elm and the Parkway. And he slowed down perceptibly and pulled back to the left to get over into the middle lane of the parkway.  Not being familiar with the street, he came too far out this way when he made his turn. 

Mr. BELIN. He came too far to the north before he made his curve, and as he curved--as he made his left turn from Houston onto the street leading to the expressway, he almost hit this north curb? 

Mr. TRULY. That is right. Just before he got to it, he had to almost stop, to pull over to the left.  If he had maintained his speed, he would probably have hit this little section here. 

Chris,

Thanks for the polite conversation.

I think you may be making some key assumptions when reading this snippet of Roy Truly's testimony to the Warren Commission.  Please let me ask you some questions:

1.  When Roy Truly says "this little abutment here, between Elm and the Parkway," exactly what spot on Elm Street do you imagine that to be?

2.  When Roy Truly says, referring to the JFK limo driver, "he would probably have hit this little section here," exactly what spot on Elm Street do you imagine that to be?

Once you answer my questions, I'll provide you an answer with greater accuracy to the spirit of your question.

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

Edited December 20, 2017 by Paul Trejo

[Chris Davidson]

Paul,

Here's a pano with Truly included.

 

[Paul Trejo]

1 minute ago, Chris Davidson said:

Paul,

Here's a pano with Truly included.

 

Chris,

OK, thanks for the photo.  Very clear.   Now, what is it about Roy Truly's testimony that motivates you to suggest that he was deliberately LYING?

Regards,
--Paul Trejo

[Chris Davidson]

Paul,

Truly is much too precise in his description of the limo location while turning.

If he would have generalized and only said it made a wide turn (subjective) then I could cut him some slack.

If you believe the Towner film is unaltered, the limo never touches the far right lane.

The back end of the Impala ? is parallel with Elm St within the center lane.

 

[Guest]