Jump to content
The Education Forum
Robert Prudhomme

One Last Thing Before Xmas Eve: 2nd Floor Lunch Room Encounter

Recommended Posts

[...]

Ed,

That's wonderful. So Baker wasn't such an idiot, after all.

By the way, what did you mean when you said that Belin's asking Holmes about whether or not Oswald had mentioned Coca-Cola during the 11/24/63 interrogation was "a different question, about a different time" (i.e., had nothing to do with Oswald's alleged claim on 11/24/63 that he went down to the first floor "vestibule" when the "commotion" started)?

Now, if you can't answer my question (see post # 241, this thread), I completely understand. In which case, perhaps Barto or Parker can?

Thanks,

--Tommy :sun

To repeat myself Holmes was asked that question and answered about a different time.

Holmes gave the only answer he could, that the only mention by Oswald of the second floor was in regard to getting a coke prior to the assassination to have with lunch in the domino room.

Sbohem,

Ed

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[...]

Ed,

That's wonderful. So Baker wasn't such an idiot, after all.

By the way, what did you mean when you said that Belin's asking Holmes about whether or not Oswald had mentioned Coca-Cola during the 11/24/63 interrogation was "a different question, about a different time" (i.e., had nothing to do with Oswald's alleged claim on 11/24/63 that he went down to the first floor "vestibule" when the "commotion" started)?

Now, if you can't answer my question (see post # 241, this thread), I completely understand. In which case, perhaps Barto or Parker can?

Thanks,

--Tommy :sun

To repeat myself Holmes was asked that question and answered about a different time.

Holmes gave the only answer he could, that the only mention by Oswald of the second floor was in regard to getting a coke prior to the assassination to have with lunch in the domino room.

Sbohem,

Ed

Ed,

Thanks for the explanation.

Where, exactly, have you posted said explanation (in green, above) on this forum in the recent past? I must have missed it.

Regarding your use of the word "coke," above, it does make me wonder if Oswald (allegedly) said "coke," "coca-cola," "Coke," "Coca-Cola," "coke-cola," "Dr. Pepper," or "Hires Root Beer."

Putting all seriousness aside, in which document can I read the allegation about Oswald's getting a soft drink of some kind prior to the assassination to have with lunch in the first-floor domino room?

Fritz's notes?

Mahalo,

-- Tommy :sun

Edited by Thomas Graves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...You seem really interested in this Tommy so I'll give it another shot..

"I think I understand correctly that in your neck of the woods people would say "Coke-Cola" when they wanted a (brand name) Coke, right? Or was "Coke-Cola" also used to refer to soft drinks in general? I'm so confused..." -- Graves

".....yes, "coke" was generically used for sodas...." -- Hancock

Sorry, Larry, but that's not what I was asking. I was asking if the slang expression "Coke-Cola" was used to refer to soft drinks in general.

.....no, "coke", small capital c was used, as in the "coke date" I mentioned...and if the girl agreed she could have whatever soda she wanted...

"Was (brand name) Coke even available anywhere in the TSBD? (I don't think so, so maybe this whole "Coke-Cola meant (brand name) Coke in Oswald's case" is a moot point, don't you agree?)" -- Graves

".....have no idea where this question is going, as far as I know there were only two soda machines in the TSBD?" -- Hancock

OK, based on the assumption there were only two soft drink machines in the building, I'll rephrase the question: Do you think it was possible to buy a brand-name Coke (not to be confused with a brand name Coca-Cola) in the building?

.....wow, not following you at all but obviously if you purchased a "soda" from the "Coca-Cola" branded machine...as reflected on the machine's name in photos...then you had a brand named "Coke"...unless

of course someone cunningly restocked the machine with different brands, something that would make the machine operator unhappy I suspect...

Which leads right into the final question:

If so (i.e., that brand name Coke was available in the TSBD), which do you think Oswald was drinking: A Coke, a Coca-Cola, or a Dr. Pepper? Feel free to speculate at will. Let yourself go, Larry. I promise not to quote you on it. (Fingers crossed behind back)

.......well given that Oswald (if I recall correctly) is on record as preferring Dr. Pepper, I would speculate that was what he bought and had in his hand....purchased from the machine on the first floor. Now if that machine were empty or if he felt especially adventurous that day, maybe he went upstairs to get a Coke. Even us dedicated Dr. Pepper drinkers go wild on occasion. I don't think he ran downstairs and rushed thorough the door and bought a Coke as an alibi....just my opinion of course. I'm not sure about your continued differentiation of Coke and Coca Cola, they were treated as one in the same, just a matter of personal expression. Of course since no bottle from the break room was taken into evidence and the bottle that was ...from either the fifth or sixth floor, depending on whether or not you belveve Alyea apparently was not tested for prints (which if it was from the sixth floor seems like a huge oversight...I mean, prints from cardboard boxes but no print from a bottle found in the area of the so called snipers nest?).

......and if anyone is joining this forum for the first time and this dialog seems sort of obsessive....you're probably right...

Larry,

It's really very simple.

Brand name "Coke" was evidently not available for purchase inside the TSBD, whereas brand name "Coca-Cola" obviously was (ergo the brand name "Coca-Cola" machine and the brand name "Coca-Cola" "empties" box near said machine in the second floor lunch room).

But it gets confusing because the word "coke" (with a small “C”) could also be used to refer to a soda pop in general down there in Dallas back in the day, and since the Oklahoma (Dang! Oh-klaw-home-uh ain't all that fur from Big "D"!) variant of "coke" (with a small "C") was Coke-Cola, that abomination of a slang-word / brand-word-combo could plausibly have been used by Fritz or Bookout or Oswald or Holmes to mean either a brand name "Coke," a brand name "Coca-Cola," or a frickin' Hires Root Beer for that matter.

Sorry to have bothered you.

But I wouldn't call it obsessive. I'd call it dogged.

It would be nice and simple for JFK assassination researchers if there were only two kinds of soda pop that were sold in the TSBD – brand name Coca-Cola (from the machine in the second floor lunch room), and Dr. Pepper (from the machine in the far right corner of the first floor), and if no slang expressions like “coke” (with a small “C”), “coca-cola” (with a small “C”), or, heaven forbid, “coke-cola” were in circulation among the general population in that part of the country for them to use to signify any kind of soft drink whatsoever (including, obviously, Dr. Pepper).

On one hand, if it were nice and simple like I outlined above, then Belin's question to Holmes involving Oswald and the term “Coca-Cola”(read “from the second floor lunchroom soda pop machine”) would not only stick out like a sore thumb more than it already does, but could also point us researchers in the right direction, especially since Holmes answered in the affirmative.

But since Belin's possible use of the term “coca-cola” (with a small “C”), or maybe even his possible use of the mis-transcribed, abominable term “coke-cola”, could have been meant to ask about an unspecified soft drink in general, then all bets are off, and it's a total "bottle of worms," if you will.

I personally would like to think that Belin and Holmes (but not Oswald -- LOL) not only said what they were alleged to have said, but actually meant brand name Coca-Cola, not brand-name Coke, or some unspecified soft drink like Hires Root Beer or Dr. Pepper, when they said it.

--Tommy :sun

Edited by Thomas Graves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[...]

Ed,

That's wonderful. So Baker wasn't such an idiot, after all.

By the way, what did you mean when you said that Belin's asking Holmes about whether or not Oswald had mentioned Coca-Cola during the 11/24/63 interrogation was "a different question, about a different time" (i.e., had nothing to do with Oswald's alleged claim on 11/24/63 that he went down to the first floor "vestibule" when the "commotion" started)?

Now, if you can't answer my question (see post # 241, this thread), I completely understand. In which case, perhaps Barto or Parker can?

Thanks,

--Tommy :sun

To repeat myself Holmes was asked that question and answered about a different time.

Holmes gave the only answer he could, that the only mention by Oswald of the second floor was in regard to getting a coke prior to the assassination to have with lunch in the domino room.

Sbohem,

Ed

Ed,

Thanks for the explanation.

Where, exactly, have you posted said explanation (in green, above) on this forum in the recent past? I must have missed it.

Regarding your use of the word "coke," above, it does make me wonder if Oswald (allegedly) said "coke," "coca-cola," "Coke," "Coca-Cola," "coke-cola," "Coke-Cola," "Dr. Pepper," or "Hires Root Beer."

Putting all seriousness aside, in which document can I read the allegation about Oswald's getting a soft drink from the second floor prior to the assassination "to have with lunch in the first-floor domino room?"

Fritz's notes?

Mahalo,

-- Tommy :sun

Edited and bumped for Ed LeDoux.

Edited by Thomas Graves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From Wikipedia:

"Coca-Cola is a carbonated soft drink.[1] It is produced by The Coca-Cola Company of Atlanta, Georgia, and is often referred to simply as Coke (a registered trademark of The Coca-Cola Company in the United States since March 27, 1944). Originally intended as a patent medicine when it was invented in the late 19th century by John Pemberton, Coca-Cola was bought out by businessmanAsa Griggs Candler, whose marketing tactics led Coke to its dominance of the world soft-drink market throughout the 20th century. The name refers to two of its original ingredients: kola nuts, a source of caffeine, and coca leaves. The current formula of Coca-Colaremains a trade secret, although a variety of reported recipes and experimental recreations have been published."

bitwso184.jpg

"Vendo-39" Coke machine, produced from 1949 until the mid-50's. Note the "Have a Coke" logo on the side of the machine.

If Coca Cola was available in the TSBD in 1963, it goes without saying that Coke was also available.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[...]

Gee, Bob.

That's wonderful.

Question:

Nowadays isn't it possible to buy both a "Coke" and a slightly-different "Coca-Cola"?

If so, when did that distinction begin?

Or are "Coke" and "Coca-Cola" made according to exactly the same recipe?

--Tommy :sun

Edited by Thomas Graves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Brand name "Coke" was evidently not available for purchase inside the TSBD, whereas brand name "Coca-Cola" obviously was (ergo the brand name "Coca-Cola" machine and the brand name "Coca-Cola" "empties" box near said machine in the second floor lunch room).

Tommy,

Aren't "band name Coke" and "brand name Coca Cola" the same thing?

If they are not, then what's the difference? Outside of New Coke, Classic Coke, and Diet Coke, I don't remember there ever being two different brand name Coca-Colas.

[...]

So you're saying that there was only one formula, but it was sold in bottles labeled "Coke" as well as in bottles labeled "Coca Cola." Is that right? (No need to get riled up. I just want to understand what you're saying.)

Sandy,

No. I'm suggesting the possibility of two slightly-different tasting soft drinks with two different names, made by the same company.

But it doesn't matter very much.

Never mind. Please?

FWIW, the Hosty - Bookhout report is starting to ring true to me now:

" Oswald stated that he went to lunch at approximately noon and he claimed he ate his lunch on the first floor in the lunchroom; however he went to the second floor where the Coca-Cola machine was located and obtained a bottle of Coca-Cola for his lunch. Oswald claimed to be on the first floor when President John F. Kennedy passed this building. "

Which, in his solo report, Bookhout changed to

" Oswald stated that on November 22, 1963, at the time of the search of the Texas School Book Depository building by Dallas police officers, he was on the second floor of said building, having just purchased a Coca-cola form the soft-drink machine, at which time a police officer came into the room with pistol drawn and asked him if he worked there ".

Credit: Greg Parker in a PM to me.

Given the fact that I think Prayer Man is Oswald, it's obvious that if the passage from the Hosty-Bookhout report, above, is true, then Oswald went up to the second floor to get a "Coca-Cola / Coke," or perhaps to get change from somebody up there so he could buy a Dr. Pepper down on the first floor, before the motorcade got very close to the building.

Prayer Man / Oswald may have gotten to his place on the front steps only seconds before Weigman started filming.

Edited by Thomas Graves

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr. BELIN. Did he say where he was at the time of the shooting?
Mr. HOLMES. He just said he was still up in the building when the commotion– he kind of—-
Mr. BELIN. Did he gesture with his hands, do you remember?
Mr. HOLMES. He talked with his hands all the time. He was handcuffed, but he was quiet–well, he was not what you call a stoic phlegmatic person. He is very definite with his talk and his eyes and his head, and he goes like that, you see.
(Was he miming drinking a cola Tommy?)

Mr. HOLMES. Then he said when all this commotion started, “I just went on downstairs.” (Still no soda)

“I went down, and as I started to go out and see what it was all about, a police officer stopped me just before I got to the front door, and started to ask me some questions, and my superintendent of the place stepped up and told the officers that I am one of the employees of the building, so he told me to step aside for a little bit and we will get to you later. Then I just went on out in the crowd to see what it was all about.”


In his report Holmes mentions no soda, Dr Pepper or any bubbly beverage of any kind,

"Before he could finish whatever he was doing, he stated, the commotion surrounding the assassination took place and when he went down stairs, a policeman questioned him as to his identification and his boss stated that "He is one of our employees"


I guess Holmes is a Momma's son too huh Tommy, since he didn't play along with pop?

Edited by Ed LeDoux

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

" Oswald stated that he went to lunch at approximately noon and he claimed he ate his lunch on the first floor in the lunchroom; however he went to the second floor where the Coca-Cola machine was located and obtained a bottle of Coca-Cola for his lunch. Oswald claimed to be on the first floor when President John F. Kennedy passed this building. "

Which, in his solo report, Bookhout changed to....

Because the above means he got a soda on the second floor, then ate his lunch on the first floor and was on this same floor when the President passed.

Yes Tommy, after the suspect was dead there would be some changes...

The joint hosty-bookhout report doesn't mention any cop encounter.

Both the solo Bookhout written account and Fritz' report do - both placing it on the second floor.

The joint report would seem to be more honest - keeping in mind Fritz had simply cribbed his notes from Bookhout.

Point being Oswald was not actually asked about any such cop encounter.
In all likelihood Bookhout and/or Fritz concocted the question - and Oswald's confirmation of second floor encounter was after the Patsy is dead.

This all allegedly happens in interrogations prior to the last one where Holmes sat in.
Letting Holmes question Oswald was a mistake by Fritz. It exposed the changes, the skewing of fact.
Holmes was supposed to stick to questions dealing with his expertise (Mail, Addresses, etc.), but he went and ruined it by asking Oswald about his alibi.

In essence... I don't think anyone asked about what Oswald was doing when Baker was on his gun-totin' rampage.
And definitely no 'what were you doing up on the Third or Fourth floor' questions either.

The only mention by Oswald of the second floor was in regard to getting a coke prior to the assassination to have with lunch in the domino room.

Belin quizzed Holmes about the cola because of the falsehood Bookhout and Fritz had conjured up.
Holmes struggled because he didn't know what answer they wanted.
All Holmes knew about a coke was what Oswald told him, that he had bought one at lunch time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Mr. BELIN. Did he say where he was at the time of the shooting?

Mr. HOLMES. He just said he was still up in the building when the commotion– he kind of—-

Mr. BELIN. Did he gesture with his hands, do you remember?

Mr. HOLMES. He talked with his hands all the time. He was handcuffed, but he was quiet–well, he was not what you call a stoic phlegmatic person. He is very definite with his talk and his eyes and his head, and he goes like that, you see.

(Was he miming drinking a cola Tommy?)

Either that, or miming sipping oh-so-nonchalantly from a bottle of Evian (after doing his assanas), and / or taking a "selfie" with his iPod. Preferably both.

Mr. HOLMES. Then he said when all this commotion started, “I just went on downstairs.” (Still no soda)

Soda? Is that generic for Coke-Cola?

“I went down, and as I started to go out and see what it was all about, a police officer stopped me just before I got to the front door, and started to ask me some questions, and my superintendent of the place stepped up and told the officers that I am one of the employees of the building, so he told me to step aside for a little bit and we will get to you later. Then I just went on out in the crowd to see what it was all about.”

In his report Holmes mentions no soda, Dr Pepper or any bubbly beverage of any kind,

You are incredibly observant, Eddie.

"Before he could finish whatever he was doing, he stated, the commotion surrounding the assassination took place and when he went down stairs, a policeman questioned him as to his identification and his boss stated that "He is one of our employees"

I guess Holmes is a Momma's son too huh Tommy, since he didn't play along with pop?

Yes. He and you and who else, Edward? (Nice attempt at witty humor,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Robert Prudhomme, post #272-

Please note that WCD 897 p. 35 states that Peggy Hawkins "estimated that the President's car was less than fifty feet away from her when he was shot."

Therefore, since President Kennedy was shot when his limousine was in the vicinity of the Stemmons sign, I felt it was appropriate for me to synopsize Hawkins' statement by describing her as "in the vicinity of the Stemmons sign", rather than look up her exact location, since it had been a long day. It was not misleading to describe her that way. And after all, her specific location mattered little, since she said that she hid with her small child behind the retaining wall upon hearing shots. And this action took up too much time for her to have any chance of witnessing Truly & Baker in the front lobby.

I cannot help you with your anger-management problem, but rather than being a one-line cheap shot artist, you might find some way to express it off-line.

Edited by Richard Gilbride

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ed,

Thank you for taking the time to fill us in on Marrion Baker's background. My apologies for my mistake on crediting him with only a 6th-grade education. Nobody is perfect, I had taken a 2-second glance at the 1st page of his testimony and raced back to my work overload.

But on top of Stavis Ellis painting Baker as a MommaSon, Baker was referred to as "dopey"- my memory is that information was provided by Duke Lane. I probably jumped on the Baker's-a-dummy bandwagon too loudly, but based on the "dopey" reference, would still place him as below average.

Your repetition of Marvin Johnson, Will Fritz & Stavis Ellis as (?) separate sources (?) for a 4th-floor sighting is attributable to a Chinese whispers retelling among the DPD upon learning of Baker's "3rd or 4th floor" man. These "separate sources" wouldn't hold up in a court of law.

I have to re-emphasize the 6 conditions I listed in post #131, which Bart admirably took on, and the conditions still remain as listed in post #281. These are the strongest items that speak for the incident's reality and speak against a hoax.

It is a grave misdiagnosis of the ambiguous evidence presented, which depends upon convolutions holding up simultaneously (like a plate-spinner on Ed Sullivan), for a way of thinking that gives zero substantiable results. The hoax is only accepted by a small minority of researchers- and Bolshevik-style applause does not add one iota to its being true.

Either it happened, or it did not. The hoaxers have presented the ambiguities about the lunchroom incident, but failed to demonstrate that it did not happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Re: Robert Prudhomme, post #272-

Please note that WCD 897 p. 35 states that Peggy Hawkins "estimated that the President's car was less than fifty feet away from her when he was shot."

Therefore, since President Kennedy was shot when his limousine was in the vicinity of the Stemmons sign, I felt it was appropriate for me to synopsize Hawkins' statement by describing her as "in the vicinity of the Stemmons sign", rather than look up her exact location, since it had been a long day. It was not misleading to describe her that way. And after all, her specific location mattered little, since she said that she hid with her small child behind the retaining wall upon hearing shots. And this action took up too much time for her to have any chance of witnessing Truly & Baker in the front lobby.

I cannot help you with your anger-management problem, but rather than being a one-line cheap shot artist, you might find some way to express it off-line.

Peggy Hawkins states she was less than fifty feet from JFK at the time he was shot, and that she hid behind the retaining wall following the shots. Considering that the majority of the population has difficulty accurately estimating distance, this hardly pinpoints Ms. Hawkins location at the Stemmons sign. If JFK's limo had passed her before the shots were fired, her estimation of fifty feet could have placed her at the concrete island across from the steps of the TSBD. At this location, she could have hidden behind the retaining wall by merely stepping behind it, instead of having to climb over it, as would have been necessary if she was down by the Stemmons sign. This is a far more likelier scenario. wouldn't you agree?

You obviously believe the part of her statement about hiding behind the retaining wall, yet don't believe she is telling the truth about seeing Baker in front of the TSBD, simply because it does not agree with your theory. This is not a good way to conduct research.

Edited by Robert Prudhomme

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Robert Prudhomme- You obviously believe the part of her statement about hiding behind the retaining wall, yet don't believe she is telling the truth about seeing Baker in front of the TSBD, simply because it does not agree with your theory. That is not a good way to conduct research.

WCD 897, p. 35- "... She stated she was aware that the President had been shot and was concerned for her own safety and that of her small child who was with her...

She stated she stayed behind the retaining wall until she realized there would be no more shots and then walked back to the front of the TSBD Building. She stated that a motorcycle police officer was in front of the building at this time and that she heard over his radio some remarks about the railroad yards near the building. Mrs. Hawkins said that she then re-entered the TSBD Building by the front door and went upstairs to the third floor by elevator."

With film of Baker sprinting for the front steps, and with Peggy Hawkins statement that she walked from the retaining wall with her small child, and no comment from her that this motorcycle police officer was still around when she entered the building, true, it does not agree with my theory that "Hawkins was in the front lobby in time to see Truly & Baker there."

The bold words are what I put in my post to Bart. And you, Robert, want to construe me as tailoring the evidence to fit my theory, by saying that I "don't believe she is telling the truth about seeing Baker in front of the TSBD." Putting words in my mouth I never said. Or even implied.

Is this the reason you got into JFK research, to make one-line cheapshot insults against a person who upsets your world-view about the TSBD, to make false accusations against that person? I'm going to take you up with the moderators if your stalking behavior continues.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To whom it may concern,

Has there not been a solid 8-10 years of postulating that Baker encountered someone on the 4th floor? And what has pondering about that actually led to? (besides the near-immediate realization that Baker's description doesn't fit Dougherty, Jarman, Williams & Norman).

Q- Where did 4th floor man vanish to?

A- Into thin air.

Is this not a complete dead-end? Hopelessly insoluble?

Which makes "4th floor man" useless as a working hypothesis (i.e. as a working construct out of the hoax hypothesis)- this construct does not give a solution that leads anywhere. All we can say is, if there was a 4th-floor man, he vanished into thin air. That's all we can deduce about what went on, just after the assassination, by utilizing the hoax hypothesis to figure out what went on inside the Depository.

And so "4th floor man" is an entirely unsatisfactory line of thought. And so the past 2-3 years has found instead favor for postulating that Baker had an extended encounter with PrayerMan on the landing- and this had to be kept secret, which is why the lunchroom encounter was hoaxed.

With film evidence of Baker sprinting to the bottom of the steps, and with an affidavit of his that states, "I jumped off my motor and ran inside the building"- the hoaxers are postulating that: no, Baker was on the landing at least several seconds, PrayerMan probably gave him directions upstairs (which, since Oswald was poison, no witness ever mentioned seeing), Baker also interacting with Truly was slowed enough to miss Adams & Styles- and so Baker & Truly went up to the 5th, took the elevator to the roof, came back down and then Baker went out to Parkland and Love Field.

And so the hoax necessarily began with Baker's false statement in his affidavit that he "ran inside the building". Meaning that it had to have begun well before Truly mentioned the "snack bar" to the FBI later that evening.

And so the idea that Baker had an extended encounter with Oswald on the landing requires that tangible evidence of a hoax starts accumulating once Baker begins writing his affidavit. Does this not imply that a fake lunchroom encounter be agreed upon while Truly & Baker are up on the roof?

Such convolutions have not, and cannot, produce sustainable results. After 10+ years, a viable hypothesis should produce at least one lasting fruit- one solid deduction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...