Emanuel Garcia Gonzalez

[Wade Rhodes]

What do we know about him? Here is a memo from Miami Police:

CITY OF MIAMI, FLORIDA

INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM

TO: Lieut. H. Swilley

Intelligence Unit

FROM: Sgt. Everett Kay

Intelligence Unit

DATE: Feb. 20, 1967

SUBJECT: Suspect in Presidential Assassination

REFERENCES: [none]

ENCLOSURES: [none]

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

I received information this date that a possible suspect as an accomplice in the assassination of President John Kennedy is a Cuban male, MANUEL (or EMANUEL) GARCIA GONZALEZ.

[Ron Ecker]

If there is a chimera in the JFK case, it's this guy.

According to the HSCA's Tanenbaum, Manuel Garcia Gonzalez was a member of the "No Name Key Group," and was standing beside Oswald in the photos of Oswald handing out Fair Play for Cuba literature in New Orleans. Larry Hancock (SWHT, p. 221) says Garcia is not the man in the Oswald photos.

According to a CIA report in the Russ Holmes Work File, Garrison was looking for Garcia on a narcotics charge, and told Quick Magazine that Garcia was "the real assassin" and Oswald was "the decoy."

According to Epstein (The Assassination Chronicles, p. 228) and Hancock (SWHT, p. 221), Garrison had been given the names "Mannie Garcia Gonzales" and "Ricardo Davis," by Dean Andrews, who called them Cuban guerrilla fighters but who later claimed that he made up the names to test Garrison's tactics. But Larry says Davis was a real person, and there was a real Manuel Garcia Gonzalez who had been arrested in September 1966 on a weapons charge.

According to Walt Brown's Global Index, Garcia was said to have been "behind a billboard during the Dallas motorcade." The source for that is apparently Weisberg's Oswald in New Orleans (which I don't have), pp. 378-379.

According to Torbitt, Garcia was a "Mexican professional" who fired from behind the grassy knoll fence.

In Reasonable Doubt, Henry Hurt says of Garcia (in the caption of a photo of the filthy-looking subject), he was "an enigmatic figure sought by Garrison in his investigation. Believed to have been associated with Oswald. Gonzalez's real identity remains unknown, although some private investigators believe he might actually have been a French mercenary."

Put all that together and what have you got? Basically nothing.

[Robert Charles-Dunne]

If there is a chimera in the JFK case, it's this guy.

According to the HSCA's Tanenbaum, Manuel Garcia Gonzalez was a member of the "No Name Key Group," and was standing beside Oswald in the photos of Oswald handing out Fair Play for Cuba literature in New Orleans. Larry Hancock (SWHT, p. 221) says Garcia is not the man in the Oswald photos.

According to a CIA report in the Russ Holmes Work File, Garrison was looking for Garcia on a narcotics charge, and told Quick Magazine that Garcia was "the real assassin" and Oswald was "the decoy."

According to Epstein (The Assassination Chronicles, p. 228) and Hancock (SWHT, p. 221), Garrison had been given the names "Mannie Garcia Gonzales" and "Ricardo Davis," by Dean Andrews, who called them Cuban guerrilla fighters but who later claimed that he made up the names to test Garrison's tactics. But Larry says Davis was a real person, and there was a real Manuel Garcia Gonzalez who had been arrested in September 1966 on a weapons charge.

According to Walt Brown's Global Index, Garcia was said to have been "behind a billboard during the Dallas motorcade." The source for that is apparently Weisberg's Oswald in New Orleans (which I don't have), pp. 378-379.

If Garcia Gonzalez never existed, then somebody went to a lot of trouble to suggest otherwise, including feeding false facts to a variety of newspapers. This, from Weisberg's "Oswald In New Orleans," gives the chronology of events which led to Garrison seeking out this individual for questioning, and illustrates that Weisberg was not the one who originated the tale, but only repeated what he had gleaned:

"There is the "physically powerful and dangerous" Cuban the February 18 States-Item reported was being sought, Manuel Garcia Gonzalez, who is "believed to be one of a group of Cubans who reportedly hid behind a billboard" in Dallas at the time of the motorcade. I hope some of the pictures the Commission, through the FBI, avoided and that I believe I will be responsible for bringing to light may show this, one way or the other. This man, according to the same newspaper, is now believed to have fled the country, one of the consequences of premature release of news of the investigation that others, including me, kept secret in order to try to prevent just this.

"Garrison and some of his staff were in Miami early in the year looking for Gonzalez, equipped with a photograph. I understand they were within 30 miles of their quarry when he heard of the quest and disappeared. This man is believed to have been with Oswald on his handbill operation in the summer of 1963. In the London Daily Telegraph of Feburary 19, Dominick Harrod quotes the Miami Herald as saying that this man was in the picture and also was behind the Dallas billboard.

"In early March a number of papers again identified the behind-the-billboard Cuban as Manuel Garcia Gonzalez. It was also reproted that Garcia Gonzalez received help from the Catholic Cuban Relief in New Orleans.

"This name attracted transitory attention when Russo testified that at the party where the assassination was discussed he recalls two Latin-looking men named "Julien" and "Manuel." Immediately Shaw's counsel secured a subpoena for the Immigration and Naturalization Service records of Manuel Garcia Gonzalez and Julien Buznedo, then reported living in Denver. George Lardner reported March 16 that Garrison had been seeking these two men since mid-January. They were not found.

Anyone who's read Weisberg knows of his characteristic and richly-deserved contempt for all those in government who should have conducted a thorough investigation, yet failed to do so. What I find interesting is that Shaw's counsel immediately sought to procure INS records regarding Garcia Gonzalez and Buznedo.

This is the very thing I would have thought CIA would have done regarding Miguel Casa Saez and Gilberto Policarpo in order to confirm or debunk allegations made about them as participants in the assassination. As I've been pointing out to Tim Gratz for over a year, this oversight [since I can find no evidence that this most basic investigatory procedure was undertaken] illustrates at least one [but perhaps more] of several possibilities: that CIA didn't care who killed the President, even if it may have been the very Castro-proxies it might have relished proving were responsible; that CIA knew there was no credible evidence for these contentions and didn't wish to draw attention to that paucity of evidence; that CIA manufactured these contentions for its own purposes, and didn't wish them subjected to independent scrutiny that might demonstrate CIA's own perfidy in floating them; or, that CIA's own so-called "investigation" into the President's death was an inch-deep exercise in going through the motions, designed more to deflect suspicions about the Agency than to actually plumb the true circumstances surrounding the crime. If Tim Gratz has evidence to the contrary - that the Agency actually tried to seek confirmation for the assertions it raised about Casa Saez and Policarpo - I would invite him to submit it here, as I've been inviting him to do for the past year-plus, now. It seems like the very first thing CIA should have done - as Shaw's defense counsel did - yet one can locate no record of any such attempt.

According to Torbitt, Garcia was a "Mexican professional" who fired from behind the grassy knoll fence.

In Reasonable Doubt, Henry Hurt says of Garcia (in the caption of a photo of the filthy-looking subject), he was "an enigmatic figure sought by Garrison in his investigation. Believed to have been associated with Oswald. Gonzalez's real identity remains unknown, although some private investigators believe he might actually have been a French mercenary."

Put all that together and what have you got? Basically nothing.

Perhaps so, Ron. However, somebody seemed to be feeding data to the New Orleans and Miami papers about this chap, which raises the question why it was deemed necessary or expedient to do so.

We should also recall that - despite Dean Andrews' subsequent claim that he'd made up both men's names on the spur of the moment - Garrison announced that he had located a prior concealed weapons charge laid against a Manuel Garcia Gonzalez in New Orleans, indicating that such a man did exist, even though he may not have been the same Manuel Garcia Gonzalez implicated by Andrews.

Edited January 29, 2006 by Robert Charles-Dunne

[Ron Ecker]

"There is the "physically powerful and dangerous" Cuban the February 18 States-Item reported was being sought, Manuel Garcia Gonzalez, who is "believed to be one of a group of Cubans who reportedly hid behind a billboard" in Dallas at the time of the motorcade. . . . In early March a number of papers again identified the behind-the-billboard Cuban as Manuel Garcia Gonzalez. It was also reproted that Garcia Gonzalez received help from the Catholic Cuban Relief in New Orleans. . . . "

Robert,

Thanks for this info. While it would certainly appear that Garcia existed, it does sound to me like someone was feeding this "Cubans behind a billboard" business to the papers. If Garcia and others were seen behind a billboard during the motorcade, then obviously there were witnesses, someone had to see them. So where are those witnesses now? Who were they? Where are their accounts or where are they quoted outside of these now inaccessible newspapers? Why has this info since remained buried in Weisburg's book? I've read a good deal of the JFK literature and I've never heard of these Cubans behind a billboard until today. I assume there are many others who have been long deprived of this info too. Who here on the forum knew about Cubans behind a billboard?

Ron

[Tim Gratz]

Robert Charles_Dunne wrote:

This is the very thing I would have thought CIA would have done regarding Miguel Casa Saez and Gilberto Policarpo in order to confirm or debunk allegations made about themas participants in the assassination. As I've been pointing out to Tim Gratz for over a year, this oversight [since I can find no evidence that this most basic investigatory procedure was undertaken] illustrates at least one [but perhaps more] of several possibilities: that CIA didn't care who killed the President, even if it may have been the very Castro-proxies it might have relished proving were responsible; that CIA knew there was no credible evidence for these contentions and didn't wish to draw attention to that paucity of evidence; that CIA manufactured these contentions for its own purposes, and didn't wish them subjected to independent scrutiny that might demonstrate CIA's own perfidy in floating them; or, that CIA's own so-called "investigation" into the President's death was an inch-deep exercise in going through the motions, designed more to deflect suspicions about the Agency than to actually plumb the true circumstances surrounding the crime. If Tim Gratz has evidence to the contrary - that the Agency actually tried to seek confirmation for the assertions it raised about Casa Saez and Policarpo - I would invite him to submit it here, as I've been inviting him to do for the past year-plus, now. It seems like the very first thing CIA should have done - as Shaw's defense counsel did - yet one can locate no record of any such attempt.

To RCD:

IMO it became the position of the "powers that be" in DC that they did not WANT any evidence of foreign involvement in the assassination. Hence, the CIA's failure to investigate Policarpo Lopez and Casa Saez. Did this mean the CIA "did not care" who killed JFK? Well, let us put it tghis way: I believe the hierarchy at the CIA was more concerned with other objectives (avoiding war; covering up its own mistakes (CYA); protecting its surveillance methods) than it was in solving the assassination. So in answer to your question whether the CIA sought to confirm evidence possibily linking Policarpo Lopez and Casa Saez to the assassination, my reply is that it probably did NOT do so.

Ron wrote:

I've read a good deal of the JFK literature and I've never heard of these Cubans behind a billboard until today. I assume there are many others who have been long deprived of this info too. Who here on the forum knew about Cubans behind a billboard?

I always love Ron's ironic humor! I think the humor is made funnier by the tragedy that is the subject of our inquiries.

[James Richards]

In Reasonable Doubt, Henry Hurt says of Garcia (in the caption of a photo of the filthy-looking subject), he was "an enigmatic figure sought by Garrison in his investigation. Believed to have been associated with Oswald. Gonzalez's real identity remains unknown, although some private investigators believe he might actually have been a French mercenary." (Ron Ecker)

Manuel Garcia Gonzalez was an alias for Michel Nicoli.

James

[Ron Ecker]

James,

And who was Michel Nicoli?

Ron

[James Richards]

James,

And who was Michel Nicoli?

Ron

Ron,

He was a low life scum bag but check this link out for a basic rundown.

http://www.members.optusnet.com.au/tnorth/introduction.htm

James

[Ron Ecker]

He was a low life scum bag but check this link out for a basic rundown.

http://www.members.optusnet.com.au/tnorth/introduction.htm

James,

Thanks. I knew he was a low life scum bag from his picture (if that's him in Hurt's book), but I didn't recall him from the French connection story.

Ron

[James Richards]

He was a low life scum bag but check this link out for a basic rundown.

http://www.members.optusnet.com.au/tnorth/introduction.htm

James,

Thanks. I knew he was a low life scum bag from his picture (if that's him in Hurt's book), but I didn't recall him from the French connection story.

Ron

Hi Ron,

I don't know what picture is in Hurt's book as I don't have it but this image below shows Nicoli circa early 1970's.

James

[Ron Ecker]

James,

The picture in Hurt's book is the one on the left in the link below.

His appearance seems to have improved slightly with age, or perhaps with more lucrative income.

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/CRIgonzalez1.htm

Ron

[Robert Charles-Dunne]

Robert Charles_Dunne wrote:

This is the very thing I would have thought CIA would have done regarding Miguel Casa Saez and Gilberto Policarpo in order to confirm or debunk allegations made about themas participants in the assassination. As I've been pointing out to Tim Gratz for over a year, this oversight [since I can find no evidence that this most basic investigatory procedure was undertaken] illustrates at least one [but perhaps more] of several possibilities: that CIA didn't care who killed the President, even if it may have been the very Castro-proxies it might have relished proving were responsible; that CIA knew there was no credible evidence for these contentions and didn't wish to draw attention to that paucity of evidence; that CIA manufactured these contentions for its own purposes, and didn't wish them subjected to independent scrutiny that might demonstrate CIA's own perfidy in floating them; or, that CIA's own so-called "investigation" into the President's death was an inch-deep exercise in going through the motions, designed more to deflect suspicions about the Agency than to actually plumb the true circumstances surrounding the crime. If Tim Gratz has evidence to the contrary - that the Agency actually tried to seek confirmation for the assertions it raised about Casa Saez and Policarpo - I would invite him to submit it here, as I've been inviting him to do for the past year-plus, now. It seems like the very first thing CIA should have done - as Shaw's defense counsel did - yet one can locate no record of any such attempt.

To RCD:

IMO it became the position of the "powers that be" in DC that they did not WANT any evidence of foreign involvement in the assassination.

That's a most interesting statement, given that all the data suggesting foreign involvement in the assassination came solely from CIA [and/or its proxies like DFS].

Hence, the CIA's failure to investigate Policarpo Lopez and Casa Saez.

If the Agency was so concerned about truncating any investigation that might disclose foreign conspirators, perhaps you could explain why CIA was still generating documents about Casa Saez as late as the last day of January '64? Or why CIA generated and swapped with FBI documents on Gilberto Policarpo Lopez [sometimes also Rodriguez] throughout '64 and as late as 1977? Or why similar documents were generated for years about Oswald's alleged contacts in Mexico City with alleged DGI personnel? You have made two wholly untrue claims in this Forum [and many other incorrect and disingenuous claims]: that CIA was ordered to instantly cease its investigation [if so, why all the subsequent attempts to document a foreign conspiracy?]; and that we are only now learning all this purportedly critical information [you may be only learning it now, but those who've paid attention for the past 40-plus years are under no such illusion.] Please cease and desist from making these inaccurate statements, or prepare to have them challenged at every turn.

Did this mean the CIA "did not care" who killed JFK? Well, let us put it tghis way: I believe the hierarchy at the CIA was more concerned with other objectives (avoiding war; covering up its own mistakes (CYA); protecting its surveillance methods) than it was in solving the assassination. So in answer to your question whether the CIA sought to confirm evidence possibily linking Policarpo Lopez and Casa Saez to the assassination, my reply is that it probably did NOT do so.

And yet you rely for confirmation of your spurious Castro-did-it campaign solely upon an Agency that you now claim truncated its own investigation for political and/or ass-covering reasons? Does it never trouble you that so craven and cowardly a governmental institution cannot be trusted? Does it never trouble you that a governmental institution that itself trafficked in professional mercenary assassins to do its dirty-work should be investigating a list of suspects that should rightly have included itself? For a man who claims that he only wishes to achieve the truth of who killed the President, how can you blind yourself to these realities and then insist that all others here should follow your lead?

Ron wrote:

I've read a good deal of the JFK literature and I've never heard of these Cubans behind a billboard until today. I assume there are many others who have been long deprived of this info too. Who here on the forum knew about Cubans behind a billboard?

I always love Ron's ironic humor! I think the humor is made funnier by the tragedy that is the subject of our inquiries.

Yeah, there's nothing quite like watching a man have his brains blown out in broad daylight to get the guffaws and bellylaughs going. I guess like truth and beauty, humour is in the eye of the beholder. I also read Ron's comment and didn't see anything funny in it at all, nor do I believe he intended it to be, ironic or otherwise.

[Ron Ecker]

I also read Ron's comment and didn't see anything funny in it at all, nor do I believe he intended it to be, ironic or otherwise.

Thanks, I was asking a serious question, and I don't see any irony in it. If there are others here who knew about a group of Cubans being reportedly seen behind a billboard during the motorcade, then I am not as well informed about the events of that day as I thought I was. And I would be interested to know where they read about the sighting.

[Scott Deitche]

He was a low life scum bag but check this link out for a basic rundown.

http://www.members.optusnet.com.au/tnorth/introduction.htm

James,

Thanks. I knew he was a low life scum bag from his picture (if that's him in Hurt's book), but I didn't recall him from the French connection story.

Ron

Hi Ron,

I don't know what picture is in Hurt's book as I don't have it but this image below shows Nicoli circa early 1970's.

James

...and so it goes. 6 degrees of separation.

Nicoli worked extensively with Sicilian mobster, and eventual turncoat, Thomas Buscetta in the heroin trade. Another part of that group was Giuseppe Tramontana. THe seeds of this Sicilian organziation eventually morphed into the Pizza Connection.

Giuseppe Tramontana relocated to Miami in the late 70's where he was murdered, along with Giuseppe Romano. THe alleged murderer was Sicilian mafioso John Galatolo, a business and criminal partner of Steven Bruno Raffa.

Steven Bruno Raffa was in charge of the Miami faction of the Trafficante crime family and a frequent confidant of Santo Jr.

[Robert Charles-Dunne]

I also read Ron's comment and didn't see anything funny in it at all, nor do I believe he intended it to be, ironic or otherwise.

Thanks, I was asking a serious question, and I don't see any irony in it. If there are others here who knew about a group of Cubans being reportedly seen behind a billboard during the motorcade, then I am not as well informed about the events of that day as I thought I was. And I would be interested to know where they read about the sighting.

Ron:

Here's a hypothesis [let me stress that it is only hypothetical] for where this originated. I'm sure you're already well aware of at least some of the following, being the diligent sleuth I know you to be.

In early March 1967, the Philippines National Bureau of Investigation arrested a Puerto Rican man for plotting to assassinate Ferdinand Marcos. His name was Luis Angel Castillo and he was placed into an hypnotic trance by the Philippino authorities, under which he divulged that he had several names and had been involved in a variety of prior bad acts. One of those, he said, was taking part in the JFK assassination, during which he had been assigned as a member of a "B" team which - IF MEMORY SERVES - was hiding behind a billboard along a latter portion of the motorcade route. This "B" team was to strike in the event that the "A" team in Dealey Plaza hadn't scored a hit on the target.

The earliest CIA docs on Luis Angel Castillo [aka ANTONIO ELORIAGA-REYES] predate this Philippines incident by years, and soon after his bust in the Philippines, CIA docs were generated about him in April of '67, the titles of which in several instances include an alleged assocation with Oswald.

If he is the same Luis Castillo ["Angel Luis Castillo Cabrera"] mentioned in the 1967 CIA Inspector General's report, he was also the brother-in-law of Eddie "Bayo" Perez.

Given the dates involved, it seems likely that Garrison learned of the story told by the Luis Castillo in the Philippines, and decided to investigate it for any truth it may contain. The earliest CIA docs mentioning both Castillo and Garrison stem from February 6, 1968, and the Harold Weisberg-cited press accounts I posted earlier originated on February 18 and 19 of the same year. [if this hypothesis is correct, I suspect CIA may have played a role in divulging these details to the press, for whatever distractionary value they may have provided, and to further frustrate Garrison's efforts.]

How the Luis Castillo story may have intersected with the assertion that Manuel Garcia Gonzalez was also behind that billboard in Dallas eludes me. Perhaps Garrison knew more about this episode than has been disclosed, or perhaps he jumped to some untenable conclusions during his staff conferences that were then leaked to the press. In either case, I think this may help explain the genesis of the "billboard" story.