Jump to content
The Education Forum
  • Announcements

    • Evan Burton

      OPEN REGISTRATION BY EMAIL ONLY !!! PLEASE CLICK ON THIS TITLE FOR INFORMATION REQUIRED FOR REGISTRATION!:   06/03/2017

      We have 5 requirements for registration: 1.Sign up with your real name. (This will be your Username) 2.A valid email address 3.Your agreement to the Terms of Use, seen here: http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.php?showtopic=21403. 4. Your photo for use as an avatar  5.. A brief biography. We will post these for you, and send you your password. We cannot approve membership until we receive these. If you are interested, please send an email to: edforumbusiness@outlook.com We look forward to having you as a part of the Forum! Sincerely, The Education Forum Team
Sign in to follow this  
Allan Eaglesham

Familiar Faces in Dealey Plaza

Recommended Posts

Makes one wonder why Whatley was supposedly being set-up. Strange character indeed.

James

Here is Gordon Winslow's comments on Whatley and the entire No Name Key operation (from his 12/09/2004 e-mail to me_:

First off Whatley was never arrested by Diosdado, ever. (BTW, I talked with Hambright about Diosdado. He knows of him but has nothing on him. His understanding is the same as mine on the CIA down in the Keys. Talk to him. He knows a lot.) Dick was not there when the 13 were busted.

In reference to Hathcock, GPH knew DW was friends with Hathcock and DW may have introduced GPH to Hathcock but DW was in California when Gerry went to Hathcock.

Whatley NEVER, repeat NEVER was in Guatemala training anyone. He knew nobody by the name Bernardo de Torres and had no information on any Torres and Cubans. DW was NEVER with DEA nor MI. He was deputy sheriff from 1970-1976 under a Torres out west somewhere but it wasn't Bernardo. This may be the confusing undocumented link to any Federal Departments.

What is this about "cells" and "covert work"? The truth is that those people were just a bunch of guys trying to do something they had more-or-less been trained for by serving in the regular military. He, Whatley, has always been secretive in order to be successful on No Name or any where else. (he was the only permanent member of the group who lived on No Name and was in charge of the camp only; Davis was second to Hemming in the overall operation and was in charge of requisitioning food and supplies; Hemming is whatever he says he was on any given day but mostly the group leader and outside contact person. Hargraves was there only for photo shoots, spending most of his time in Miami) The simple fact is that they accomplished very little, none of them were involved in the Kennedy thing (so they tell me) and as a group they were about as cohesive as a "handful of sand". Even Hemming stumbled and stammered in Dallas some years ago when I confronted him about the JFK airport security. None of the others I have talked to remember it, not Davis, not Kolby and not Whatley. Only Hargraves agreed with GPH but then only to say "he knows it better than I do". Hey, look at it practically. Jerry had gotten him a free ride to where we talked to them and free meals. Would you disagree with the person feeding you? I came to believe that anything Hargraves sais were the words and thoughts of Hemming. I never talked to him one on one but rather talked to Hemming so the story was not diluted any further.

He wasn't Sturgis' right-hand man. Whatley was one in a group of about 30 who respected and followed Sturgis. (I have a different slant on Sturgis in case you don't know. I knew of him and knew of me but I would never talk to him knowing anything he said would be questionable and he knew that.)

When Sherry and I drove to No Name last January with two of the men who were there, they kept asking us what the big intrigue was about at No Name. I tried to explain what I thought and told them it was my personal opinion, but they kept shaking their heads. They repeatedly said they were doing the best they could to eat and sleep while helping the Cuban cause for free (no payment). They said if GPH said they were being paid, they never saw any of it. Another told me "I have heard and or read very little truth but an enormous amount of garbage about what we did or didn't do, individually or in a group. Gerry and his author friend accounts for a great deal of this" I think this is a reference to Weberman here. People do not understand Weberman as I do. I have known him since Fonzi introduced me to him during the HSCA hearings. I helped him with some of Cuban "suspects". I credit him for getting my involved with the JFK assassination people. Much of my in-depth Cuban research had been done before I ever heard of a Cuban-JFK connection, del Valle for one example.

As for Kolby, he cannot recall much these days. All he remembers in great detail is jumping into the channel up stream from the Wooden Bridge fish camp and swimming over for a Pepsi.

If you have any specific questions, please let me know. I will try to answer them. Remember. Things are as they appear unless there is PROOF to the contrary. I try to stick to this way of thinking.

Gordon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What is this about "cells" and "covert work"? The truth is that those people were just a bunch of guys trying to do something they had more-or-less been trained for by serving in the regular military. He, Whatley,  has always been secretive in order to be successful on No Name or any where else. (he was the only permanent member of the group who lived on No Name and was in charge of the camp only; Davis was second to Hemming in the overall operation and was in charge of requisitioning food and supplies; Hemming is whatever he says he was on any given day but mostly the group leader and outside contact person. Hargraves was there only for photo shoots, spending most of his time in Miami)

I came to believe that anything Hargraves sais were the words and thoughts of Hemming. I never talked to him one on one but rather talked to Hemming so the story was not diluted any further.

When Sherry and I drove to No Name last January with two of the men who were there, they kept asking us what the big intrigue was about at No Name. I tried to explain what I thought and told them it was my personal opinion, but they kept shaking their heads. They repeatedly said they were doing the best they could to eat and sleep while helping the Cuban cause for free (no payment).

Much of my in-depth Cuban research had been done before I ever heard of a Cuban-JFK connection, del Valle for one example.

As for Kolby, he cannot recall much these days. All he remembers in great detail is jumping into the channel up stream from the Wooden Bridge fish camp and swimming over for a Pepsi.

If you have any specific questions, please let me know. I will try to answer them. Remember. Things are as they appear unless there is PROOF to the contrary. I try to stick to this way of thinking.

Gordon

A No Name Key photo, and one of the pub on Big Pine, near to the Old Wooden Bridge, taken a few weeks ago:

There's a great photo of Tim Dorsey hanging in the pub - funny guy!

Tim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Tim:

The different opinions show that degree of resemblance, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.  Perhaps unknowingly we each "read" faces differently.

Allan

Just picked a conviently small post to add this query.

My recollection is when Gaeton Fonzi was interviewing Silvia Odio he showed her a whole series of photographs of Cuban exiles (both pro and anti Castro) and she could not identify any as being one of the three men who visited her.

Where are these photos now? Did Fonzi prepare a file memo listing the names of all the Cubans he had shown to Mrs. Odio? Are the photos themselves in the National Archives?

Just a thought re possible photo identification.

Edited by Tim Gratz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Tim,

I don't know if it was Fonzi or not, but Odio was shown images of Loran Hall, Lawrence Howard and William Seymour and she said it wasn't them. I don't know who else she looked at but I got the impression that after awhile, Odio just wanted to be left alone.

James

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't know if it was Fonzi or not, but Odio was shown images of Loran Hall, Lawrence Howard and William Seymour and she said it wasn't them. I don't know who else she looked at but I got the impression that after awhile, Odio just wanted to be left alone.

Sylvia Odio is a credible person who fainted and was hospitalized upon seeing Oswald on the TV. That is not similar to the effect viewing some of these look-alike photos has on researchers; at least none have reported fainting spells. I believe it is very likely that Oswald was at her doorstep. Not "Harvey" or Seymour, but Lee Harvey Oswald, the man in the secure custody of the DPD.

Tim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sylvia Odio is a credible person who fainted and was hospitalized upon seeing Oswald on the TV. That is not similar to the effect viewing some of these look-alike photos has on researchers; at least none have reported fainting spells. I believe it is very likely that Oswald was at her doorstep. Not "Harvey" or Seymour, but Lee Harvey Oswald, the man in the secure custody of the DPD. (Tim Carroll)

Hi Tim,

I agree that Sylvia Odio is a very credible witness. I also believe it was the real Oswald that night on her doorstep. Which of course now brings into question the Mexico City trip and our chunky 'Oswald' photographed there.

I have 3 pages from an Agency Photo Mounting Sheet showing our mystery man. They claim the man in the white shirt and the man in the dark shirt were one in the same. Interesting to note that Richard Nagell claimed they were 2 seperate individuals.

I will send them to you privately as they won't attach here for some reason.

FWIW.

James

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Tim,

I don't know if it was Fonzi or not, but Odio was shown images of Loran Hall, Lawrence Howard and William Seymour and she said it wasn't them. I don't know who else she looked at but I got the impression that after awhile, Odio just wanted to be left alone.

James

The FBI showed Odio the photos of Hall, Howard and Seymour in 1964, shortly after the publication of the WC report. I may not recall the details accurately, but I believe Weberman's web-site states that the photo of Seymour came from the Monroe County Sheriff's mug shot of Seymour when he was arrested at No Name Key in Dec of 1962. (No Name Key is, of course, a very small island in Monroe County, Florida. Ironically, it is within ten miles of the island used by Warner Brotthers to film PT109 in the summer of 1962.) But apparenltly there was a mistake and the first photo she was shown was of Ponce de Leon not Seymour. I think they did ultimately get it right.

But Fonzi definitely showed Odio a whole series of Cuban exile photos while he was workinbg for the HSCA. I think those photos might prove helpful for research purposes if they could be located.

Edited by Tim Gratz

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The FBI showed Odio the photos of Hall, Howard and Seymour in 1964, shortly after the publication of the WC report. I may not recall the details accurately, but I believe Weberman's web-site states that the photo of Seymour came from the Monroe County Sheriff's mug shot of Seymour when he was arrested at No Name Key in Dec of 1962. But apparenltly there was a mistake and the first photo she was shown was of Ponce de Leon not Seymour. I think they did ultimately get it right.

But Fonzi definitely showed Odio a whole series of Cuban exile photos while he was workinbg for the HSCA. Just think those photos might be helpful for research purposes if they could be located. (Tim Gratz)

Tim,

I believe you are correct about the Seymour/Ponce DeLeon mix up. I am also of the belief that Ronald Ponce DeLeon is someone of great interest.

James

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So who exactly was Whatley? Was he one of the 13 No Name Key guys arrested by Diosdado in 1962? (Ron Ecker)

Ron,

I wish I had some solid information on Dick Whatley for you. I don't believe he was arrested in the No Name bust; his name wasn't listed.

I can tell you Whatley was the one who sent Gerry Hemming and Loran Hall to Dick Hathcock to borrow money on the Johnson rifle and the golf clubs. Whatley was supposedly good friends with Hathcock.

Whatley was also in Guatemala training members of Brigade 2506 for the Bay of Pigs. There he encountered Bernardo De Torres and indeed, may have been travelling with De Torres in July of 1963. I have nothing to back that up though.

Whatley's covert work was mainly done from within a small cell which also included James Arthur Lewis and Bobby Willis - Willis being someone I know next to nothing about. (I have added him to the long list)

Whatley went out of his way to not have his photograph taken. He was very secretive. There are 2 individuals who in my opinion should be seriously questioned in relation to the assassination of JFK. Whatley is one of them, Edmund Kolby is another. Both men are still alive.

James

This post is addressed to anyone who has a collection of JFK Photo's available to post on the forum; more specifically I am trying to obtain copies of the photo's which depict the "Cuban" next to the Umbrella Man that were taken at Love Field (he appears among the crowds near the limo, as it is departing the airport). I have seen the photo's myself, but it was at the old JFK Assassination Center in the West End here in Dallas. James Richards would that be you? Any responses greatly appreciated.

Edited by Robert Howard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I have to disagree with the line of thought expressed in response that these people were meant to muddy the waters and throw researchers off. That's giving way too much credit for the foresight of those involved.

Greg,

The first I ever heard of this concept of muddying the waters came from Chauncey Holt, who described that many people associated with various nefarious activities were invited to witness some activity in the Plaza, which was not explained as a presidential assassination. Some, I believe, expected an apparent attempt on the president which, depending on one's affiliation, would have either pretextualized an invasion of Cuba or discredited the far right-wingers at a time when JFK's approval rating was plummeting as a result of his inability to forestall the civil rights movement until after the 1964 election. I think of it as the Agatha Christie-type, Murder On The Orient Express scenario.

Think of the optionality created: if Oswald became the patsy it was a Castro-sponsored attempt (as long as the patsy was killed); if Braden became the patsy then Bobby's war on organized crime is justified to go full tilt boogie; if one of General Walkers' guys became the patsy then the far right extremists are discredited and the civil rights movement immediately gains significant approval. Any one of the above scenarios would have vaulted Kennedy to heroic, profile in courage status. His reelection would be guaranteed. The possibility of some such demonstration planned by the administration was expressed in writing to H.L. Hunt by his security chief, Paul Rothermel, on November 4, 1963.

Tim

I tried to post this where I felt it was the most appropriate. Does anyone have access to the Robert Hughes film, where they could view it in it's entirety, or the Groden produced "JFK Assassination Films" on DVD which also includes the Hughes film? I have the Groden video and have found something interesting on the Hughes film. The film is approximately 1:34 seconds in length; at appx. 1:02 seconds into the film for the next five seconds the film shows the area on the west side of the TSBD panning the individuals in the parking lot (with the trains in the distance) at this point there are three individuals. I have slo-motion and zoom features on my DVD player, and I would like someone (James Richards?) or anyone else to look at this. I may be totally mistaken but one of these individuals resembles Ted Shackley (it is definitely not Larry Florer) Can someone help me on this?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Stephen Turner

Dont know if this is what your after Robert, but lets give it a go.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Dont know if this is what your after Robert, but lets give it a go.

No. What I am referring to takes place at appx. 1:02-1:07 in the 1:43 second Robert Hughes film. The camera goes from showing a shot of the west side of Main Street on the South side (directly in front of the Terminal Annex Bdlg.) then the footage picks up on the "area on the West side of the TSBD between the Depository and the parking lot" there is a fairly large number of individuals gathered in the parkng lot area, then and individual in a suit begins walking towards the camera; you can tell that he sees someone and is walking towards them. He almost disappears from sight for a moment, then starts walking in front of the camera with the two other individuals, they appear to be in a very intense conversation. The individual walking towards the camera at an angle is wearing glasses has on a suit as do the other two individuals; one's face is obstructed due to the angle but you can see the other clearly. I really need someone to see this. I have seen practiacally all of the Dealey Plaza photos that we are all familiar with these individuals are not to the best of my knowledge Dallas Police Detectives, they are obviously not officers, and I don't think they are journalists.

Edited by Robert Howard

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Stephen Turner

Dont know if this is what your after Robert, but lets give it a go.

No. What I am referring to takes place at appx. 1:02-1:07 in the 1:43 second Robert Hughes film. The camera goes from showing a shot of the west side of Main Street on the South side (directly in front of the Terminal Annex Bdlg.) then the footage picks up on the "area on the West side of the TSBD between the Depository and the parking lot" there is a fairly large number of individuals gathered in the parkng lot area, then and individual in a suit begins walking towards the camera; you can tell that he sees someone and is walking towards them. He almost disappears from sight for a moment, then starts walking in front of the camera with the two other individuals, they appear to be in a very intense conversation. The individual walking towards the camera at an angle is wearing glasses has on a suit as do the other two individuals; one's face is obstructed due to the angle but you can see the other clearly. I really need someone to see this. I have seen practiacally all of the Dealey Plaza photos that we are all familiar with these individuals are not to the best of my knowledge Dallas Police Detectives, they are obviously not officers, and I don't think they are journalists.

Ah, with you now, give me a couple of days and I will see if I can oblige..Steve.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Dont know if this is what your after Robert, but lets give it a go.

No. What I am referring to takes place at appx. 1:02-1:07 in the 1:43 second Robert Hughes film. The camera goes from showing a shot of the west side of Main Street on the South side (directly in front of the Terminal Annex Bdlg.) then the footage picks up on the "area on the West side of the TSBD between the Depository and the parking lot" there is a fairly large number of individuals gathered in the parkng lot area, then and individual in a suit begins walking towards the camera; you can tell that he sees someone and is walking towards them. He almost disappears from sight for a moment, then starts walking in front of the camera with the two other individuals, they appear to be in a very intense conversation. The individual walking towards the camera at an angle is wearing glasses has on a suit as do the other two individuals; one's face is obstructed due to the angle but you can see the other clearly. I really need someone to see this. I have seen practiacally all of the Dealey Plaza photos that we are all familiar with these individuals are not to the best of my knowledge Dallas Police Detectives, they are obviously not officers, and I don't think they are journalists.

Ah, with you now, give me a couple of days and I will see if I can oblige..Steve.

Thanks, I hope this is worthwhile. I certainly think it is at this point. I have been looking at this clip for quite a while over the last two day's.

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
Sign in to follow this  

×