Jump to content
The Education Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Joe Bauer

Earlene Roberts WC Testimony Amazing To Me Yet Disturbingly Ignored.

Recommended Posts

I don't think there's any innocent way to spin the Earlene Roberts story. The tapping of the horn and then slowly driving away sounds like a signal was being given to Oswald, and it does not sound consistent with the typical behavior of policemen. It appears to indicate a conspiracy involving Dallas police or people posing as Dallas police possibly with the assistance of individuals in the DPD. A fellow conspirator in a police uniform and driving a police car would explain why Oswald was not reluctant to approach Tippit.

Has anyone mentioned the convenient extra police uniform Tippit appears to have had with him at the time he stopped LHO?

I believe I've heard enough about Westbrook to consider him suspicious.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Denny Zartman said:

I don't think there's any innocent way to spin the Earlene Roberts story. The tapping of the horn and then slowly driving away sounds like a signal was being given to Oswald, and it does not sound consistent with the typical behavior of policemen. It appears to indicate a conspiracy involving Dallas police or people posing as Dallas police possibly with the assistance of individuals in the DPD. A fellow conspirator in a police uniform and driving a police car would explain why Oswald was not reluctant to approach Tippit.

Has anyone mentioned the convenient extra police uniform Tippit appears to have had with him at the time he stopped LHO?

I believe I've heard enough about Westbrook to consider him suspicious.

Westbrook - the question is why him? I’ve asked several researchers what they’ve dug up on his background. We do know that he went to Vietnam around 1967 for ‘police’ duties. But what about his reported membership in the 488th Military Intelligence Detachment in Dallas in 1963?

Edited by Paul Brancato

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Steve Thomas said:

Jim,

I know Manning Clements did an inventory of the wallet he found on the desk at around 10:00 PM Friday night, but I can't put my finger on that inventory at the moment. I know there was a reference to it in the discussions about the Hidell ID card in the Forum a while back.

 

David Joseph provided a copy of Clements' 11/22 wallet inventory in that Hidell thread I was thinking of.

He didn't give a citation, but I know I've seen it before.

image.png.72968c822f30733773eb957bad4be46c.png

 

Steve Thomas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Steve Thomas said:

Jim,

 

No. No signature on Valentine's Report.

Quite frankly,  I really don't know where this information about the two half-dollar bills comes from. I've never seen a reference to them in any inventory I've ever seen.

Here's an inventory of the items found on Oswald that's in the DPD Archives. I'm sorry, I don't have a citation for you.

http://jfk.ci.dallas.tx.us/27/2707-001.gif

This is a copy of the inventory found in the DPD Archives Box 1, Folder# 7, Item# 43 with some extra notes added on the side. This inventory was compiled on November 30th.

http://jfk.ci.dallas.tx.us/box7.htm

 

Here's Commission Exhibit 1148 This FBI inventory was compiled by James Bookhout and is dated December 10th.

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1317#relPageId=208&tab=page

They match pretty closely I think.

 

I know Manning Clements did an inventory of the wallet he found on the desk at around 10:00 PM Friday night, but I can't put my finger on that inventory at the moment. I know there was a reference to it in the discussions about the Hidell ID card in the Forum a while back.

There's nothing in the DPD Archives that list "torn", "bills", "dollars", or "half-dollars" The only listing for "money" relates to the money Ruby had on him.

 

PS: I noticed those two torn half-dollar bills have different serial numbers on them.

 

Steve Thomas

Thanks, Steve....

The text box on the note appears to say:

PHOTO REPRODUCTION FROM
DALLAS MUNICIPAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS CENTER
CITY OF DALLAS, TEXAS

Here’s John’s full quote about the bills described in the note from our website:

Curiously, neither of these items were listed on the police inventory of 11/23/63, the joint FBI/DPD inventory of 11/26/63 (Oswald's so-called possessions), nor were they photographed. At the National Archives, in Adelphi, MD, I inspected and handled each item of inventory listed on the joint FBI/DPD inventory of 11/26/63. These items were not among the inventory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In Joe Bauer's first post in this topic, in Earlene Roberts' testimony, she gives the police car number as 107, "and it was in a black car...not an accident car."  There are pictures of Tippit's car at the scene of his murder with the prominent number 10 on the side of a black (and some white) car.  That's a very low number for a police force of well over a thousand law officers.  At one time a DPD spokesman tried to say that JDT could not have been driving No. 10 because that had been retired, left with a dealer who restored and sold DPD's old cars.  But then the pictures surfaced.  It DOES look like an older, much-used vehicle, paint's a little faded.  Could that old #10 have been impressed back into service for that day alone?  Because they needed all the cars they could lay their hands on?

Roberts was blind in one eye.  She saw car #10, Tippit's car.  I believe she even said that at one point.  You can see in her testimony that they are trying to confuse her.  Whether there was another officer in the car with JDT or just a uniform hanging in it or both, we may never know.

The boardinghouse owner, Mrs. Johnson, sounds like she came to hate Earlene Roberts only because the housekeeper was so forthcoming with her observations.  ER didn't know that the fix was in, or she was too honest to go along if she did.  Mrs. Johnson sure did know that the fix was in, and resented that ER didn't sweep it all under the rug with the vast majority of Dallas.  Mrs. Roberts was hounded and mistreated the rest of her life, which didn't last long after 11/22/63.

The DPD car that stopped at 1026 N. Beckley and went "tit tit" on the horn was probably there for less than a minute.  But the occupant(s) probably thought it was three or four times as long as the time they were there because they were in a panic, hopped up on adrenaline, their hearts pounding three beats a second instead of the usual one per. 

I believe the police shirt hanging in the back belonged to one Roscoe Anthony White, a new cop still on probation.  DPD policy at the time was that new members didn't rate their hats, like "Badgeman" behind the stockade fence atop the North (Grassy) Knoll.  And it's funny: the "Honest Joe's Pawnshop" van that Jean Hill saw in Dealey was a purveyor of used police uniforms.

Maybe RAW took his shirt off and hung it in Tippit's car for two reasons: to go undercover looking for Oswald and to have it there if they found Lee and convince him to wear it "for safety reasons."  But the Wizard of Ozzie was way too smart for them.

Edited by Roy Wieselquist

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Roy Wieselquist said:

The boardinghouse owner, Mrs. Johnson, sounds like she came to hate Earlene Roberts only because the housekeeper was so forthcoming with her observations.  ER didn't know that the fix was in, or she was too honest to go along if she did.  Mrs. Johnson sure did know that the fix was in, and resented that ER didn't sweep it all under the rug with the vast majority of Dallas.  Mrs. Roberts was hounded and mistreated the rest of her life, which didn't last long after 11/22/63.

 

Roy,

 

The history of Mrs. Johnson and Earlene Roberts goes way back.

Mr. BALL. Now, you know Mrs. Johnson, don't you?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Yes; I knew her very muchly so.
Mr. BALL. How long did you work for her?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Well, this last time I was there around 13 months--that was the third time I had went back.
Mr. BALL. When did you start working for her?
Mrs. ROBERTS. I started working for her in 1949 the first time.
Mr. BALL. You did?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL And you worked for her three times altogether?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Yes; I got sick the first time---I'm a diabetic and wasn't able to do the work and one day she called me again and wanted to know if I would do it and I went back and stayed again and I went in a coma and had to leave, and the reason why I left this time, she cut me down so low and the work was too heavy--I wasn't able to do the work.
Mr. BALL. You mean she cut you down on your money?
Mrs. ROBERTS. Oh, yes; and I can't pay my doctor bill and buy my medicine at that price.
Mr. BALL. You mean, she didn't pay you enough--that's the reason you quit?
Mrs. ROBERTS. That's the reason why I quit--the work was too heavy and I wasn't able to do it and not enough pay.

(Here's another one of Jonson's lies):

Mr. BALL. Miss Earlene Roberts was your housekeeper at this time?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, she was.
Mr. BALL. How long have you known her?
Mrs. JOHNSON. I have known Mrs. Roberts, oh, I guess it was 6 years, something like that, 6 years.
Mr. BALL. Where did you first meet her?
Mrs. JOHNSON. I hired her as a housekeeper.
Mr. BALL. At 1026 North Beckley?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. Has she been working for you for that period of time?
Mrs. JOHNSON. No, sir; I let Mrs. Roberts go a time or two, then I would hire her back.
Mr. BALL. there some reason why you let her go?
Mrs. JOHNSON. Well, she would just get to being disagreeable with renters and I don't know, she has a lot of handicaps. She has an overweight problem and she has some habits that some people have to understand to tolerate.

 

Steve Thomas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Roy and Steve, Mrs. Johnson was an extremely hostile witness towards Earlene Roberts. 

To me Johnson's WC testimony is suspicious in her blatant attempt to paint Mrs. Roberts in a negative and bad credibility light.

She had to point out to the WC that Roberts was blind in one eye, that she exaggerated and liked to embellish stories and talked too much to residents of the rooming house. Johnson described Roberts as "overweight" which caused her "handicapped problems" and how she was "disagreeable" to residents.

It's almost as if a prosecutor trying to depreciate Mrs. Robert's credibility and honesty and dismantle her testimony and specifically her story of the DPD car with two uniformed police officer occupants parking in front of her residence and honking twice ( especially at the time she states this happened ) put Mrs. Johnson on the stand for this purpose by having her state highly subjective and pejorative views of Mrs. Roberts as an employee and a person in general.

You would've hoped that at least one of Mrs. Johnson's WC questioners might have pointed out how clearly hostile Mrs. Johnson seemed toward Mrs. Roberts in her testimony about her personal feelings and takes on Robert's and asked her to try to stick to more objective facts in responses to their questions to her about Roberts. And maybe asked Johnson why she kept Roberts as an employee as long as she did if she was as bad and personally flawed as Mrs. Johnson stated she was?

Mrs. Johnson hardly gave Ms. Roberts any credit at all for what appeared to be good and honest work on Robert's part in doing this obviously physically demanding and low pay housekeeper domestic work and for years at a time. And in bad health and tired later years to boot?  No empathy for Roberts and her difficult hard work life at all from Mrs. Johnson.

And incredibly, Johnson  ( who left this part out of her WC testimony) actually "lowered" Ms. Robert's salary at a time when Robert's situation with her job had become incredibly stressful on her due to the Oswald affair!

Talk about a Scrooge mentality and treatment on Johnson's part toward her employee Roberts.  No wonder Roberts quit.

Johnson further revealed her money obsessed cheapness when she boldly inquired about getting the original Oswald related paper she gave to the WC back, telling them it was worth money to her.

Talk about character flaws?

Mrs. Roberts sweated through her low pay, no respect domestic work until the age of 59. 

Mrs. Johnson couldn't hold Robert's shoes in the category of work integrity and commitment under their disparate life and burden circumstances.

Yet here she is, telling the WC what a flawed character Ms. Roberts is and was. And how she had the gall to walk off her job without notice. 

Ms. Roberts obviously finished her daily work before she left ( there's integrity ) and cheapskate, character disparaging Johnson didn't deserve notice.

I believe Robert's story regarding a DPD car and two uniformed men parking and honking at the exact time Oswald was in his boarding house room.

Roberts was right there at 1026 North Beckley on 11,22,1963.. And if any event would be clearly, honestly and powerfully etched into ones memory, it would be specific words, actions and observations on the day JFK  was killed.

And in Robert's case especially. She was interacting with Oswald himself! 

And Roberts wasn't so feeble minded that she would have a hard time remembering details of such a dynamic encounter just 5 months previous to her testimony.

Roberts shared her Dallas PD car parking and honking story to other authorities before the WC. Kind of hard to keep a " made up" story straight telling it several times under stressful conditions. Sounds like the only part of her story that equivocated much was the actual car number.

And with all of Mrs. Johnson's disparaging remarks about Roberts, did Johnson ever have any situation with Roberts where she caught Roberts flat out lying to her? Or doing anything else unethical like going through boarder's belongs when she was alone in their rooms?

I worked and still work in hotels. Every day, housekeepers ( almost all relatively low paid and struggling ) go into 6 or 7 guests rooms and are surrounded by personal items that are often of great value.  Talk about temptation! Yet, only once in 10 years did I ever hear a complaint or charge by a guest that they felt a housekeeper had stolen something from their room.

It's a huge sign of good character that housekeepers are almost universally honest, humble and hard working persons in my experience.

I believe that the WC knew Ms. Robert's was telling the truth regards the DPD car pulling up to and parking in front of her residence and honking twice and then slowly pulling away at the exact same time Lee Harvey Oswald was in his room briefly ( just 50 feet from them!) after bustling in minutes before.

And the WC knew what the potential was with this scenario altering the entire truth of the "Oswald as lone gunman" script and narrative they needed to establish to justify their final no conspiracy finding.

That is why I think Earlene Robert's story and WC testimony ( as true ) is so incredibly important.

 

 

Edited by Joe Bauer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Roy Wieselquist said:

In Joe Bauer's first post in this topic, in Earlene Roberts' testimony, she gives the police car number as 107, "and it was in a black car...not an accident car."  There are pictures of Tippit's car at the scene of his murder with the prominent number 10 on the side of a black (and some white) car.  That's a very low number for a police force of well over a thousand law officers. 

Roy,

 

You know what I'd like to see?

I'd like to see a couple of pictures of some other cars in the DPD force.

It strikes me that if you wanted to disguise a certain car, police or otherwise, you might slap a magnetic sign on the side of it that looked realistic, but had a fake number painted on.

Have you ever seen a picture of another Dallas police car that had a number in the 200's or 300"s?

 

Steve Thomas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Joe Bauer said:

Roy and Steve, Mrs. Johnson's testimony is very suspicious in it's blatantly hostile attempt to paint Mrs. Roberts in a negative and bad credibility light...

This whole post was well-said, and a excellent defense of hardworking people like Roberts.

What kind of attention-getting or exaggerated story is that anyway? If Earlene Roberts was truly the type who wanted to exaggerate a detail to get attention, doesn't it seem logical that Oswald would be the subject? Imagine the attention she would have gotten if she told the world that Oswald passed by her muttering a confession to killing JFK and his intent to kill a policeman next.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/4/2018 at 3:50 AM, Steve Thomas said:

Joe,

 

For me, the most momentous part of Earlene's testimony comes in this passage:

Mrs. ROBERTS. Well, they asked him if there was a Harvey Lee Oswald there.

Mrs. ROBERTS. No---he registered as O. H. Lee and they were asking for Harvey Lee Oswald.

 

CE 2003 located in (24H259) is the list submitted of TSBD employees to Captain Gannaway through Jack Revill . It is dated November 22, 1963. Heading that list is Harvey Lee Oswald at 605 Elsbeth.

 

Steve Thomas

 

The man whose picture Earlene Roberts saw on the television, and knew as O.H. Lee,  could have been known to military intelligence as

Oswald (comma) Harvey Lee

Oswald, Harvey Lee

O.H. Lee

 

Steve Thomas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So nobody ever asked officer's Alexander or Charles Burnley what they stopped to shoot the xxxx with Earlene about?  Not the DPD, FBI or Warren Omission? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎12‎/‎4‎/‎2018 at 12:25 AM, Joe Bauer said:

Are we to believe, once again, this mind boggling fact of two uniformed Dallas police officers stopping their car "right in front" of Oswald's rooming house and honking their horn … ?

If that were a fact, I'd cheerfully agree that it was mind-boggling.  What is a fact, however, is not that this occurred.  What is a fact is that an uneducated housekeeper who was blind in one eye and had a propensity for tall tales reported several days after the assassination, after previously having been interviewed by officials and reporters without having said any such thing, that this had occurred.

Two rather different things, it seems to me.

One of the disappointing things I learned after joining here is how many of these threads create the illusion that the participants are serious researchers who actually have some idea as to what they are talking about.  Fortunately, it didn’t take me long to recognize that this was indeed an illusion.  I realize that some of the following summary repeats what has been stated above, but bear with me as I bring my pathetic little Lone Assassin perspective to the discussion:

  • By her own admission (WC testimony of April 8, 1964), Roberts was “completely blind in [her] right eye.”
     
  • Roberts didn’t mention any police car until almost a week after the assassination, despite having been interviewed repeatedly by officials and reporters in the interim.  (The officials and reporters were, of course, all either part of whatever conspiracy your pet theory happens to favor or intimidated into cooperation by the conspirators.)
     
  • The FBI report dated November 29, 1963 (WC Exhibit 2781) states that Roberts identified the car as number 207.
     
  • Based on the FBI report, the DPD diligently attempted to determine the whereabouts of car number 207 on the day of the assassination.  J. M. Valentine provided a statement dated December 2, 1963.  W. R. Westbrook addressed a report to Chief Curry dated December 4, 1963.  O. A. Jones summarized this investigation and others in a report to Curry dated December 24, 1963.

The Valentine statement is in the DPD archives, http://jfk.ci.dallas.tx.us/, in Box 5, Folder 7, Item 46; the Westbrook statement is in Box 5, Folder 7, Item 47; Jones’ report is in Box 7, Folder 7, Item 6.  (Valentine, Westbrook and Jones were, of course, all part of whatever conspiracy your pet theory happens to favor.)

Valentine had turned over the keys to car number 207 to J. M. Putnam sometime after parking in front of the TSBD.  Putnam turned over the keys to this car and all others in the vicinity to the “Third Platoon commander” at approximately 3:30 p.m.  There is no mystery – unless you need one to prop up your pet conspiracy theory.

  • Roberts’ affidavit of December 5, 1963 doesn’t mention any car.  (Even though the FBI report of a week earlier does mention car number 207, and Valentine and Westbrook had already nailed down the whereabouts of this car, the omission is highly suspicious to a true conspiracy theorist.  A Lone Assassin theorist might suggest that the omission was because car number 207 was no longer a serious issue as of December 5.)
     
  • Roberts testified for the WC that the way the car honked was “the way Officer Alexander and Charles Burnely would do when they stopped” in car number 170 to gossip with her.

Despite the hordes of Serious Conspiracy Theorists combing the woods, apparently no one attempted to locate Alexander and Burnely [sic] until Dale K. Myers (BOO! HISS!) did so in 1997.  Myers learned that there was indeed a Charles Burnley [not Burnely] in the DPD in 1963.  Alas for conspiracy theorists, this Burnley said that he had learned of Roberts’ claim only a few years previously and “certainly didn’t know her.”

But then things got even worse – for conspiracy theorists.  There had been a Sgt. Alexander in the DPD – but he had resigned in 1957.  He had indeed known and employed Roberts – but as a mere housekeeper, not an informant.  He recalled her as “not very bright” and someone who would “do almost anything to get attention.”  (Burnley and Alexander were, of course, all part of whatever conspiracy your pet theory happens to favor, while Myers is a traitor to the cause and not to be trusted.  And, of course, Alexander and Gladys Johnson conspired to tell their “Roberts is a goofball” tales, albeit some 30 years apart.)

  • Even a conspiracy theorist must acknowledge that Roberts’ WC tap dance regarding the car number became rather humorous:

Mr. BALL. You remembered the number of the car?

Mrs. ROBERTS. I think it was--106, it seems to me like it was 106, but I do know what theirs was--it was 170 and it wasn't their car.

***

Mr. BALL. On the 29th of November, Special Agents Will Griffin and James Kennedy of the Federal Bureau of Investigation interviewed you and you told them that "after Oswald had entered his room about 1 p.m. on November 22, 1963, you looked out the front window and saw police car No. 207”?

Mrs. ROBERTS. No. 107.

Mr. BALL. Is that the number?

Mrs. ROBERTS. Yes--I remembered it. I don't know where I got that 106---207. Anyway, I knew it wasn't 170.

Is it just me, or does it seem rather unlikely that if the Forces of Evil got to Roberts before her WC testimony, she would fumble around with two different numbers, with the first two digits of each just happening to match Tippit's car number 10?  Is this yet another example of what I have lovingly come to refer to as the "Diabolical Geniuses at Steps 1-3-5-7-9 / Inept Bumbling Fools at Steps 2-4-6-8-10 Syndrome"?

  • Oh, I almost forgot:  In Conspiracy Land, Roberts was mercilessly threatened and intimidated before giving her WC testimony.  In her own words, here’s just how bad it was (please, avert your eyes if you’re sensitive to police brutality):

Mrs. ROBERTS. Well, they put me through the third degree.

Mr. BALL. Who did?

Mrs. ROBERTS. The FBI, Secret Service, Mr. Will Fritz' men and Bill Decker's.

Mr. BALL. They did?

Mrs. ROBERTS. Every time I would walk out on the front perch somebody was standing with a camera on me they had me scared to death.

  • Contrary to what has been suggested, the WC did follow up on Roberts' testimony of April 8, 1964.  By letter dated May 19, 1964, the WC advised the FBI of Roberts' change in the car number and the FBI followed up with the DPD.  The FBI's pretty extensive (14-page) report dated June 15, 1964 (WC Exhibit 2645) identified all DPD cars in action on the day of the assassination as well as their assigned officers and whereabouts.  (For you suspicious types, all of the cars have low numbers such as 24, 25 and 32 - the highest was 242.)

For those of us who have not imbibed the Conspiracy Kool-Aid and donned our Conspiracy Blinders, there is just no mystery to this sequence of events.  Roberts' tale is simply not credible.  She was a goofball who embellished the actual events, simple as that.  If you're going to prove me wrong, it's going to take a scenario that plausibly deals with all of the above points and affirmatively presents something more than raw speculation.

I know, I know:  I keep saying I’m moving on.  But then the little Monty Python demon on my shoulder eggs me on:  “Come on, Lance, you old fart, have another Guinness Stout and play along with the wackiness for a little while - it'll be fun!”)

Edited by Lance Payette

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

For those of us who have not imbibed the Conspiracy Kool-Aid and donned our Conspiracy Blinders, there is just no mystery to this sequence of events.  Roberts' tale is simply not credible.  She was a goofball who embellished the actual events, simple as that.  If you're going to prove me wrong, it's going to take a scenario that plausibly deals with all of the above points and affirmatively presents something more than raw speculation.

I know, I know:  I keep saying I’m moving on.  But then the little Monty Python demon on my shoulder eggs me on:  “Come on, Lance, you old fart, have another Guinness Stout and play along with the wackiness for a little while - it'll be fun!”)

Lance, you call Roberts a "goofball" ..."who embellished the actual events, simple as that."

You also say that Robert's didn't mention the police car until a week after 11,22,1963.

In whatever documents that are available concerning what Earlene Roberts did or did not say to the press and the authorities right after 11,22,1963, can you say with researched certainty that she never mentioned the police car to anyone in that week?

Ms. Roberts said she was stressed to the max with all the reporters and authorities descending on her every day that week.

I could easily imagine a single, older woman in quite poor health and struggling to make necessity ends meet in a low pay physical job, being discombobulated and exhausted enough to not easily organizing all her thoughts and recollections of her experience that day after being descended upon by a horde of press, police and other authorities on the most crazy and stressful day and week of her life.

And maybe she was "afraid" to share everything she heard or saw that day. Afraid of saying something that might jeopardize her job with the scrooge Mrs. Johnson as well?

And as far as embellishing what she saw and heard that day, Ms. Roberts shared a very succinct and sparsely described bare bones account ( very true to what people who knew Oswald would expect ) of what she saw and heard regards her personal encounter with Oswald bustling in past her to his room and the fact he said nothing in response to her saying to him he sure was in a hurry and with absolutely nothing said back to her by Oswald as he left minutes later as well.

If Roberts was such a teller of "tall tales" and who did this for attention, wouldn't someone like this embellish her encounter with the "now world famous" Oswald more than she did ( which she didn't at all ) for some "real" attention instead of just her later added on, off-the-wall weird "tall tale" about a DPD car parking in front of her residence and honking twice, which even she had the sense to know would bring her the wrong type of attention and just add to her greatly stressed situation?

The reality of Mrs. Robert's not at all exaggerating or embellishing her personal one-on-one encounter with Oswald around 1:pm on 11,22,1963  is starkly contrary to the extremely negative and discrediting image assigned to her by her critics who don't address this dichotomy.

And I also believe Robert's DPD car story is just too illogically removed from the strongly pushed motive of her making up exaggerated "tall tales" for attention for at least two reasons.

One:

it is too detailed an account with car color and type descriptions, honk types and numbers, two uniformed officers inside, exact time of and time length of occurrence, direction and speed of departure and even some comparative past police car pull up visit claims ( which were actually verified by DPD officer Alexander ) to be made up just for the purpose of attention in that any story with that many details is an extremely risky one to present because so many of those details could be easily proven to be false if they were simply made up.  The reported official documentation and under oath testimony record countering Robert's story details seems weak with holes at best.

Two:

This car parking and honking story would not immediately make Roberts anymore attention popular to the press and others simply because it's is so off-the-wall and it's relevance and importance would not be easily and quickly understood. If Roberts was as dumb as one Dallas police officer claimed she was, then she herself would have a hard time explaining why she would make up such an odd story just for attention.

And on another note;  neither I nor several other newer non-researcher members who are posting fairly regularly on this forum now are trying to create an "illusion" that we are credible and deep researchers.

We all say often we are not. However,  I think we still feel our respectfully presented observations and views of well known aspects of the assassination truth research are worthy of sharing if for any other reason than their pure JFK truth seeking passion and enthusiasm. And this forum has had a large influx of such posters and readers from what I remember seeing just a couple of years ago ( when it almost shut down ) and seems much more  participatory and popular as a result imo.

"Roberts’ affidavit of December 5, 1963 doesn’t mention any car.  (Even though the FBI report of a week earlier does mention car number 207, and Valentine and Westbrook had already nailed down the whereabouts of this car, the omission is highly suspicious to a true conspiracy theorist."

Lance, as it should be.

And lastly, addressing Mrs. Roberts blindness in one eye and how this handicap supposedly taints and weakens the credibility of her DPD car parking and honking story from a visual aspect.

One of my longest and best friend friendships ( 57 years going back to elementary school ) is with a practicing lawyer who was completely blinded in one eye in a tree trimming accident 30 years ago. He is 67 now. He lives a completely full and productive life and drives his car alone everywhere.

We occasionally have lunch together at a local "subway" sandwich shop. He can see very well even at some distance with his one good eye.

Mrs. Roberts rooming house front windows were what...maybe 30 to 40 or even a few more feet away from the curb in front of her residence?

The ability of her with one good eye ( even if aided by glasses ) to identify a car pulling up there as a police car and to see how many occupants were in this car at that relatively close distance is easily possible. 

 

 

Edited by Joe Bauer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember, all, the Wizard of Ozwaldskovitch rode Whaley's taxi two blocks past his roominghouse.  That busy corner where he was dropped off may have been a potential place for LHO to meet someone he trusted.  AND he could see if he had unannounced visitors lying in wait when passing his house.  If he had seen arresting officers there at that time, a few minutes before one, he probably would have ducked down in the front seat and feigned tying his shoe.  And he had that two block walk back north to check things out.

He had Whaley drive him to the intersection with Chichi's Mexican Restaurant on one corner.  What a coincidence, that's where one of the Ozzie lookalikes (I bet Laverne "Larry" Crafard) was sitting in a car around two o'clock with Carl Mather's (J D Tippit's best friend) license plates.  Problem is it wasn't Mather's car.   It was a late model red Ford Falcon, not an older blue Plymouth family car beater.  Too bad for the Nutters that the witness who took down the plate number was a mechanic, T H White.  Can't say he couldn't tell a Ford from a Chrysler.  Then he told sports reporter Wes Wise, future mayor of Dallas,  within a couple weeks when Wes was giving a talk at, guess where, Chichi's.

Undeniably, there's a bunch that's hinky about that little stretch of North Beckley in Oak Cliff that early afternoon 11/22/63.   What are the odds that the above don't point to a bunch of massive machinations?  Absolutely zero.   That soft "tit-tit", just by itself, speaks volumes.

And what are the odds that a highly skilled and courageous mechanic would witness the faux Ozzie in a car with faux plates?  And that an observant and courageous housekeeper would witness something surreptitious from professional surreptitioners?  Fairly small odds, but sometimes we just get lucky.  The right guy and gal are in the right place at the right time.  That quiet "tit-tit" speaks more truth than any average 1,000 words in the WARren COmmissioN RepOrT.

 

I can't get enough of that "tit-tit" because it's so apropos.  You have to admit Earlene Roberts was a fairly buxom woman.  (Any women offended by that, please send your complaints to Joe Bauer.  He started it.)

Edited by Roy Wieselquist

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  

×