David Josephs

On 7/10/2023 at 10:34 AM, Joseph Backes said:

It's the tail light of the limo.  Why he posted an image with an arrow pointing to it is anyone's guess.

To show that the limo had stopped while he was shot at this point...  why do you come here so woefully unprepared?  He even follows up with a gif showing this... and if you ever took the time to analyze how Hill can possibly get from one vehicle to the other when both are supposedly moving at 10mph, and make it in 2-3 steps - it's not possible.

Look at NIX please and count his steps between the vehicles... now determine the distance both vehicles moved IF they did not stop and how far Hill needs to run... he jumps off the bumper and within 3 steps has run down a vehicle supposedly moving away from him at 7 to 11.2 mph.

Mr. SPECTER. At that time you looked back and saw Special Agent Hill across the trunk of the car, had your automobile accelerated by that time?
Mr. KELLERMAN. Tremendously so; yes.
Mr. SPECTER. Now, to the best of your ability to recollect, exactly when did your automobile first accelerate?
Mr. KELLERMAN. Our car accelerated immediately on the time-at the time--this flurry of shots came into it.
Mr. SPECTER. Would you say the acceleration--
Mr. KELLERMAN. Between the second and third shot.

 

No matter how you slice it, this has been described by all those who saw it at the archives as a black blob floating over the image.  When one crushes out Jackies black hair at the top left, which is the same color as the back of his head, we can see even more plainly the "cover-up" of the right rear of his head.

3 minutes ago, Paul Cummings said:

What year is this?

https://www.amazon.com/JFK-Coloring-Book-Alexander-Roman/dp/1936404486

2014

https://envisioningtheamericandream.com/2013/12/11/coloring-in-the-truth/

1962

On 7/13/2023 at 12:29 AM, Denny Zartman said:

https://www.texasmonthly.com/news-politics/the-two-oswalds/

Sorry if this is old news, but it was new to me. I stumbled across it while researching another aspect of the assassination and I found it interesting.

It seems that for Texas Monthly magazine's November 1998 issue, reporter Joe Nick Patoski interviewed John Armstrong for a story entitled "The Two Oswalds." Apparently by coincidence, Patoski had been a student at Stripling Junior High in Fort Worth at the time of the assassination. Officially Oswald attended Junior High in New York and New Orleans, not in Fort Worth.

Patoski contacted former Stripling Junior High vice principal Frank Kudlaty. Retired in Waco, Texas in 1998, Kudlaty apparently confirmed to Patoski that the day after the assassination the principal of Stripling Junior High (identified in the story as Mr. Wylie) asked Kudlaty to pull Oswald's records and give them to FBI agents.

According to Patoski (who characterises himself as disbelieving the Harvey & Lee theory) Kudlaty looked at Oswald's records and that Oswald's grades weren't very good. Kudlaty expressed doubt that a student with such grades could successfully teach himself the Russian language on his own.

Been emailing John about this Denny.  John lived what he preached which is why over the many years I've known him I respect his never-ending attempt to get at the truth.  I don't have to agree with every page or idea, one just needs to have a little awareness of what internet-researchers such as myself bring to the table, versus those who were actually in the trenches, traveling the world in search of answers.

Haters gonna hate - as the song goes - and nothing said here will change that mindset.  
Take care

12 minutes ago, Paul Cummings said:

Did it come with illustrations and pictures?

Color by number

This is actually page 1 of the JFK coloring book..  "color their noses burnt umber"

14 minutes ago, Paul Cummings said:

The same guy (Colby) who exposed CIA in Congress is Angleton's mole? pfft

"wrote a novel"

a fictitious prose narrative of book length, typically representing character and action with some degree of realism.

43 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

Ouch. Really? I have written book-length chapters on a number of aspects of the case, and remain on the fence on a number of issues. But after studying the behavior of Ball/Belin and analyzing the evidence linking Oswald to the sniper's nest and rifle, I am 99.8% convinced Oswald was not on the sixth floor at the time of the shooting, and did not kill JFK. 

I stand corrected - I would have sworn you arrived at this conclusion fairly recently with .2% still left for doubt.  That percentage seemed to have been much bigger in years past.

Please accept my apology 

On 6/14/2023 at 3:42 PM, Pete Mellor said:

Edward Clare Petty's CI/SIG report to CIA in 1975 stated that the 'mole' in CIA, that Angleton had been hunting for 25 years was, in fact, Angleton! 

IMO the most logical and intelligent manner of mole-hunting... chase yourself forever.

8 hours ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

They've been offered countless times on this forum and others, so there's literally no need to repeat them.

Offer 1 - show your work

The quote was taken from Ben's post - so his name appears. FWIW

8 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

Nowhere in any of Pic's testimony does he say that the person in the photo was NOT his brother.

8 hours ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

Nowhere in any of Pic's testimony

Consider learning to read JC

Mr. JENNER - That young fellow is shown there, he doesn't look like you recall Lee looked in 1952 and 1953 when you saw him in New York City?
Mr. PIC - No, sir.

Mr. JENNER - And you recognize that as your brother?
Mr. PIC - Because they say so, sir.
Mr. JENNER - Please, I don't want you to say--
Mr. PIC - No; I couldn't recognize that.

Mr. JENNER - You don't recognize anybody else in the picture after studying it that appears to be your brother? When I say your brother now, I am talking about Lee.
Mr. PIC - No, sir.

 

42 minutes ago, Michael Griffith said:

So you find Stevens' research convincing and Hargrove's research unconvincing? 

Do you believe that Oswald was ever impersonated in Dallas and/or Mexico City?

Who do you believe was behind the assassination?

It is my understanding Mr. Speer believes Oswald did the shooting from the 6th floor....  his website is a wealth of information yet I for one disagree with his conclusions in a number of areas...  doesn't take away from an amazing body of work.

Kinda like H&L... The wealth of information no one had offered prior to his book since he and Malcolm spent year after year at the Archives (speaking of a research source for information not easily found in the public domain). Some areas and conclusions I simply cannot see given the evidence yet does not take away from H&L being a serious reference book.

Finally MG, there is simply no doubt Oswald's presence in Mexico was established by an impersonator on the phone and potentially a real person on the 27th walking past Teresa Proenza to talk with Ms. Duran.

CIA 104-10059-10423 describes the PROENZA PROJECT - I got mine from scans of Malcolm's collection from his years at the Archives which includes the ID Form cover page.

https://www.archives.gov/files/research/jfk/releases/2022/104-10059-10423.pdf.   File #80T01357A

Maybe Pat can address the last question and correct me if I'm wrong.

5 hours ago, Pat Speer said:

 

Are you claiming to "know" what really happened?  

The screenwriter William Goldman famously said of Hollywood "No One Knows Anything."

The JFK research community--both sides, LN and CT--knows even less than that. 

 

So this means you have nothing from this case to offer as authentic which cannot be easily shown NOT to be authentic.

You can just say so rather than bend yourself into a pretzel NOT saying it.

5 hours ago, Cliff Varnell said:

For all you know Humes and Stringer signed off on the lower mark.

While I appreciate the assist Cliff, "for all we know" is not really what I'm talking about.

Knowing, on the other hand, that this bullet rose 11 degrees to get from supposed entry to exit, back to front, while being shot at a much steeper downward angle, AND that Ford changed the Ryberg fantasy to adjust for that downward angle remains another example of easily refuted physical evidence (or cr@p representations thereof) and would never have been allowed as evidence in a trial.

The actual location of the bullet hole on the shirt superimposed onto Ryberg.

2 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

You're just wrong, David. One guy months later said something that wasn't backed up by the rest of the evidence. Judges don't disallow evidence by one statement by one guy months later. if that were the case, well, pretty much every prisoner in America would be set free. 

I mean, just picture it. A man's fingerprints are found on a murder weapon. He has motive, means, and opportunity. But the fingerprint examiner, when questioned at trial, says he received the prints on a Thursday, when the record indicates they were received on a Friday. Well, GOTCHA! The judge steps in and tells the jury they must disregard the fingerprint evidence.

That's just not how it works, my friend. The defense on cross would probably point out that the examiner's recollections are in opposition to the record. The examinier would then correct himself. And the defense would then use this against him--telling the jury that they can't trust this guy because he doesn't even know what day it is.

Being obtuse doesn't help make you any more right than when you started.

Your middle paragraph is just a joke.  Get SPECIFIC TO THIS CASE.

What happens to the prosecution when the defense destroys the item of evidence's authenticity by showing the witness to be lying about the item?  That the real Chain of custody looks nothing like what is testified to?

Even hear of Lying Under Oath?  Judges disallow evidence all the time.  You saying if new evidence surfaces that repudiates a chain of custody, that evidence is not allowed and will not cause the judge to disallow the original evidence and instruct the jury of same?  What ??

The day something is recorded is not what we are discussing and you really should know better than to offer this weak response as a coherent argument against the establishment of authentic evidence in the JFK case.

As I asked above.. stick to the case and offer any item of evidence which tries to establish Oswald's guilt that you'd like to enter as authentic in a court of law.  

Stop being obtuse and try a real example from the real situation from which we are dealing.

Thanks

4 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

You missed my point, as usual.

The discussion we are having is specific, not general.  The only way any of that junk gets to be entered as evidence is to present lying DPD or FBI members to override the non-existent chain of custody.

They marked the pistol and shells at the DPD ffs. The wallet in evidence is described as being from Irving with no items of evidence described as either ARREST WALLET or TIPPIT SCENE WALLET yet these are the wallets were evidence shos DPD personnel saw and announced what was in these two wallets.

And now those wallets are simply gone with 16 items of evidence - 2 of them HIDELL RELATED - offered as evidence without a shred of authentication they came from anything ever touching our little Oswald.

We are not talking about pictures Pat... we were talking about CE139 which wouldn't have had a chance in hell to be allowed in a court of law as real, authenticated evidence.

If you can name an item of evidence that attempts to establish Oswald's guilt, whose authenticity I can't destroy, I'd love to see it. 

News bulletin Pat - OSWALD DIDN'T DO IT.  

Ergo, evidence establishing his guilt is by definition inauthentic.

 

4 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

None of your witnesses

What the fruitcake are you jabbering on about? 

When did any of the witnesses ever become mine?

2 minutes ago, Paul Brancato said:

I don’t mind your posts at all, but let’s put it on another thread. I’ve always been struck by Pic not recognizing his brother. If you start a new thread and import these posts I won’t leave you hanging.

Been done 100 times Paul.  Do a search before yet another H&L thread begins.  Please

8 minutes ago, Pat Speer said:

To be clear, David, the question is not whether or not we should trust the DPD, FBI or military. My point is that for years certain people have been claiming the evidence prepared by the DPD, FBI, and military, could not be admitted at trial. This is nonsense. As in the O.J. case, ti could be admitted. The defense could then hack away at it. That's the way the system works.

You're mistaken my friend.  The fact the FBI removed all the evidence from Dallas Friday evening and returned more items than they took should be easy enough to grasp and even easier for a defense attorney to make it inadmissible. 

Add further the trial transcripts were rewritten to remove the specific evidence of that which I just described.  Cadigan's desilver-ing of the evidence to make it appear it was not taken and returned - why else desilver non-latent fingerprint evidence?

Cadigan answers "I could only speculate" and basically destroys the Chain
Dulles deletes the answer, reverses it and removes key chain of custody evidence.  

If the FBI only needed to send an expert witness to substantiate the Chain of custody, why change the man's testimony Pat?

22 minutes ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

There is no such person as "Harvey." It is also preposterous to infer from John Pic's Warren Commission testimony that he actually believed his half-brother Lee had been "replaced" by some other human being.

Why are completely vapid posts disparaging the work of many members and researchers in the community allowed?

https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=1133#relPageId=825.  CE281

Mr. JENNER - I show you an exhibit, a series of exhibits, first Commission Exhibit No. 281 and Exhibit No. 282 being some spread pages of an issue of Life magazine of February 21, 1964. I direct your attention first to the lower lefthand spread at .the bottom of the page. Do you recognize the area shown there?
Mr. PIC - No, sir.
Mr. JENNER - Do you see somebody in that picture that appears to be your brother?
Mr. PIC - This one here with the arrow.
Mr. JENNER - The one that has the printed arrow?
Mr. PIC - That is correct, sir.
Mr. JENNER - And you recognize that as your brother?
Mr. PIC - Because they say so, sir.
Mr. JENNER - Please, I don't want you to say--
Mr. PIC - No; I couldn't recognize that.
Mr. JENNER - Because this magazine says that it is.
Mr. PIC - No, sir; I couldn't recognize him from that picture.
Mr. JENNER - You don't recognize anybody else in the picture after studying it that appears to be your brother? When I say your brother now, I am talking about Lee.
Mr. PIC - No, sir.
Mr. JENNER - In the upper portion there are a series of photographs spread from left-hand page across to the right-hand page. Take those on the left which appears to be a photograph of three young men. Do you recognize the persons shown in that photograph?
Mr. PIC - Yes; I recognize ,this photograph, the people from left to right being Robert Oswald, the center one being Lee Oswald, and the third one being myself. This picture was taken at the house in Dallas when we returned from New Orleans.
Mr. JENNER - You mean from--when you came from New Orleans after being at the Bethlehem Orphanage Home?
Mr. PIC - Yes, sir.
Mr. JENNER - And you went to Dallas?
Mr. PIC - Yes, sir.
Mr. JENNER - It was taken in Dallas at or about that time?
Mr. PIC - Yes, sir.
Mr. JENNER - The next one is prominent; in front is a picture of a young boy. There is a partially shown girl and apparently another boy with a striped shirt in the background. Do you recognize that picture?
Mr. PIC - Yes; I recognize that as Lee Harvey Oswald.
Mr. JENNER - Do you have any impression as to when and where that was taken?
Mr. PIC - Just looking at the picture, I would guess first, second grade, maybe. I would have to guess at it.
Mr. JENNER - Then there is one immediately to the right of that, a young man in the foreground sitting on the floor, with his knees, legs crossed, and his arms also crossed. There are some other people apparently in the background.
Mr. PIC - I recognize that as Lee Harvey Oswald.
Mr. JENNER - Does anything about the picture enable you to identify as to where that was taken?
Mr. PIC - No, sir.
Mr. JENNER - Then to the right there is a picture of two young men, the upper portion of the one young man at the bottom and then apparently a young man standing up in back of that person. Do you recognize either of those young people?
Mr. PIC - Yes; I recognize Lee Harvey Oswald.
Mr. JENNER - Is he the one to which the black arrow is pointing?
Mr. PIC - Yes, sir.
Mr. JENNER - Then right below that is a picture of a young man standing in front of an iron fence, which appears to be probably at a zoo. Do you recognize that?
Mr. PIC - Sir, from that picture, I could not recognize that that is Lee Harvey Oswald.
Mr. JENNER - That young fellow is shown there, he doesn't look like you recall Lee looked in 1952 and 1953 when you saw him in New York City?
Mr. PIC - No, sir.
Mr. JENNER - Commission Exhibit No. 284 do you recognize anybody in that picture that appears to be Lee Oswald?
Mr. PIC - No, sir.
Mr. JENNER - There is a young fellow in the foreground-everybody else is facing the other way. He is in a pantomime, or grimace. Do you recognize that as Lee Harvey Oswald?
Mr. PIC - No, sir; looking at that picture and I have looked at it several times--that looks more like Robert than it does Lee, to my recollection.
Mr. JENNER - All right. On Exhibit No. 286, the lower right-hand corner, there is another picture. Do you recognize that as your brother Lee in that picture?
Mr. PIC - Yes, sir; that is about how he looked when I seen him in 1962, his profile.
Mr. JENNER - Do you recognize the person, the lady to the right who is pointing her finger at him?
Mr. PIC - No, sir; I don't.
Mr. JENNER - Exhibit No. 287 is two figures, taking them from top to bottom and in the lower right-hand corner, do you recognize those?
Mr. PIC - No, sir; I don't.
Mr. JENNER - Neither one of them?
Mr. PIC - No, sir. The lower one appears to me to look like Robert rather than Lee. The upper one, unless they tell me that, I would never guess that that would be Lee, sir.
Mr. JENNER - All right. Exhibit No. 288, there is ill the lower left-hand corner, there is a reproduction of a service card and a reproduction, also, of a photograph with the head of a man. Do you recognize that?
Mr. PIC - That looks to me approximately how Lee Oswald looked when I seen him Thanksgiving 1962.
Mr. JENNER - Directing your attention to Exhibit, Commission Exhibit No. 289, do you recognize any of the servicemen shown in that picture as your brother Lee?
Mr. PIC - No, sir; I do not recognize them.
Mr. JENNER - Exhibit No. 290, the lower left-hand corner there is a photograph of a young lady and a young man. Do you recognize either of those persons?
Mr. PIC - He appears to me as Lee Harvey Oswald in 1962 when I seen him.
Mr. JENNER - And the lady?
Mr. PIC - She is his wife, Marina, sir.
Mr. JENNER - Commission Exhibit No. 291, at the bottom of the page, there is a picture of a young man handing out a leaflet, and another man to the left of him who is reaching out for it. Do you recognize the young man handing out the leaflet?
Mr. PIC - No, sir; I would be unable to recognize him.
Mr. JENNER - As to whether he was your brother?
Mr. PIC - That is correct.

22 minutes ago, Jonathan Cohen said:

There's no Harvey. Never was, never will be. Any reasonable person studying this case will plainly see that there are numerous perfectly logical explanations for any alleged "conflicts" in the school records that do not require doppelgangers or idiotic, decades-long government conspiracies.

Pithy analysis JC.  Thanks for the vapid support of your conclusion...

"It is because it is" says JC, and then adds the tried and true tactic:  only an unreasonable person can conclude there was a Harvey or even a need for one... and there's plenty of logical explanations... just can't think of one or offer one here, there or anywhere.

So fellow members, start to think and worry:   you don't want JC and his supporters here to think you're illogical and unreasonable do you?  

On 7/11/2023 at 9:09 AM, Mark Ulrik said:

Boone and others guarded the rifle (CE 139) until Day came over and took possession, marked it, etc. This is fairly well documented. The notion that it wouldn't have been admitted into evidence in a criminal trial is just bizarre.

As has been mentioned in recent threads, Norvell did identify CE 573 as the bullet he found (CE 2011).

"Others" include Seymour Weitzman and Roger Craig both stating along with Boone  that the rifle was a 7.65 Mauser, described in virtually the exact same terminology.  If Day called out a 6.5 Italian rifle at the scene, can you think of any reason these men sign an affidavit to a different fact?

 

The rifle in Day's possession as he leaves the TSBD was not CE139... there are a number of visible differences but most notably the lack of a "CAL 6.5" etched in white, the different lengths of the scope end and the lack of markings where "Made Italy" is seen on the only close up images of CE139

 

 

This is the moment DAY picks up the rifle and we see there is no clip protruding from the bottom of the rifle.

On a Carcano Fucile Corte the clip falls out when the last round is CHAMBERED, not ejected.  So unless they jammed a clip back up into the rifle, like the paper bag, there was no clip on the 6th floor.

On 7/11/2023 at 4:45 PM, Pat Speer said:

The reality is that with photos you can ignore chain of possession almost entirely if you have a witness who was there who is willing to say the photos reflect what he saw. That's it.

Gil nails it once again.  and once again Mr. Speer seems to forget that the DPD and FBI lied there a$$es off.  Pat is talking about the process of AUTHENTICATING REAL EVIDENCE for acceptance in court which includes as he says, a witness: https://practice.findlaw.com/practice-support/rules-of-evidence/summary-of-evidence-rules--overview.html 

Generally, authentication can be shown in one of two ways. First, a witness can testify as to the chain of custody through which the evidence passed from the time of the discovery up until the trial. Second, the evidence can be authenticated by the opinion of an expert witness examining the evidence to determine if it has all of the properties that it would be expected to have if it were authentic.

The chain of custody requires that from the moment the evidence is collected, every transfer of evidence from person to person be documented and that it be provable that nobody else could have accessed that evidence.

What Pat fails to include is who were are relying on in this case to authentic this evidence or the chain.
If the DPD or FBI is the witness corroborating this chain how reliable is it?  When, in fact and with this rifle, the earliest evidence signed by Boone and Weitzman makes it impossible to authenticate as a 6.5 Carcano...  there is no photo of the caliber on the 6th floor, or the clip, or the paper bag, or even the shells where they were found.

Again, I appreciate Mr. Speer, but it remains a bit naive to simply state that if an FBI witness says the photo is what they say it is, then you don't need a proper chain of custody.

And finally Pat "There is no real evidence ...." only means you have not found anything in the millions of pages of public docs or the unknown pages not available but from private collections.  and by your own words, all we need is someone to testify that Bobby did and the chain of custody of that brain is rendered unimportant?... Really ?

On 7/11/2023 at 5:28 PM, Pat Speer said:

there is no real evidence

15 hours ago, Sandy Larsen said:

In John Armstrong's book, Harvey & Lee, John mentions the principal of Stripling Junior High when the FBI got LHO's records. Unfortunately, instead of using the correct name, Harry Wylie, he used the name of the principal when LHO was attending Stripling, Weldon Lucas.

Have to correct you here my friend, Lucas was Kudlaty's boss when Oswald attended in 1954 and the weekend after the assassination

Lucas was principal from 1953 - 1963 but died in the summer of 1964 of a heart attack in the employee parking lot at Arlington Heights where he was to become principal in the fall of 1964.  Kudlaty was with Lucas in the hospital when he died.

2220 Thomas, owned by a friend of Fred Korth (attorney for Ekdahl in the divorce from Marguerite - not Harvey's caretaker) is across the street from Stripling

Marge lived at 2220 Thomas the day of the assassination despite having purchased 4029 Byers in 1962 with the Byers Ave deed was not recorded until 1965.
I have all these docs but have run out of room to post them.  I have all the Oswald real estate transactions which include Korth as trustee for Ekdahl in the purchase of commercial land before he went back to NY.

Harvey most certainly went to Stripling while Lee attended school at Beauregard JHS.  As to his attending there in the fall of 1953 in conflict with NYC records, it remains my POV they are mistaken about the conclusion of that analysis.  Search for "NYC school records"... I've written extensively on the topic.

 

37 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

LHO's (HARVEY's) writings (if they are his) from inside the radio plant in Minsk are fairly sophisticated. And they look like a first draft, at that. With editing and a second draft, I doubt many 22-year-olds could match. And LHO (LEE) never got through high school.

Thanks Ben, well said.

I don't think we'll ever know the extent of Harvey's education, but as you said... and adding his talks on radio and at lectures - which on its face it difficult on it's own - he was extremely well versed...  rehearsed his own words or words provided is the question.  

John Edward (who married the daughter of Hungary Communist immigrants) knew it was not his brother ... 
Robert deserves much more scrutiny than he's been given.  his testimony timeline does not jive with the facts. (See bottom images)

1 hour ago, Paul Brancato said:

Or met with silence. I’ll bite, but not with vitriol. Could you summarize how this theory elucidates the assassination itself? Was one of the Oswalds a shooter, or a patsy? If either, what was the other one up to? 

As I see it,

• Harvey Oswald was made the patsy for the Tippit and JFK murders with evidence specifically created to do so.  He was building his bona fides to better infiltrate and report on the "Cuban" situations which turned out to also implicate him in the murders
• Lee Oswald is a mystery from 1959 until the summer of 1963* - his involvement in the assassination and/or setting up Harvey is a matter of interpretation and analysis of the individual events.  In their Hubris, the two Oswalds could have simply been a CIA experiment to see if they could do what the Russians and Germans and English had already perfected in their spy-craft - doppelgängers with sophisticated backstops   

Harvey being fingered for the JFK patsy makes the most sense when we see him somehow being steered to the TSBD job above all others.   Yet even this occurs weeks before Tampa and Chicago... If Vallee becomes the killed patsy... what becomes of Oswald and all that incriminating evidence... only FOUND after 12:30 on 11/22?  My take?  It never gets found as most of it never existed prior to 11/22.

Clear as mud? 

FWIW: The lies of Bill Randle to the FBI after telling the Secret Service something completely different is yet another aspect receiving little attention... see below

 

*August 1963
Dorothy Marcum was dating Jack Ruby in the summer of 1963 and her aunt worked for Ruby.109 Dorothy told the FBI she knew for a fact that Lee Oswald and Jack Ruby knew each other, because Oswald worked for Ruby in June and July (1963). In the summer of 1963 Jack Ruby was interviewing Francis Irene Hise for a job as a waitress when a young man came into the Carousel Club.  Ruby acknowledged the man by saying "Hi, Ozzie" and later joined him in the back room after finishing the interview with Francis. After Ruby hired Miss Hise the same young man came into the bar and asked if he could buy her a drink. After the assassination Miss Hise recognized "Ozzie" as "Lee Harvey Oswald."110

Other Ruby employees who claim to have seen Oswald at Ruby's Carousel Club include William Crowe, Wally Weston, Dixie Lynn, and Kathy Kay. In all, there were dozens of people who saw Lee Oswald and Ruby together in the summer of 1963-precisely when Harvey Oswald was working at Reily Coffee and residinf with his wife and child on Magazine Street.
During the last week of July (1963) Western Union employee Marshall Hicks delivered several telegrams to "Lee Harvey Oswald" at the Rotary Apartments,  1501- 1503 W. 7th Street in Dallas.113 The FBI made no attempt to locate copies of these telegrams.

Sept 1963
Dallas Police Detective H.M. Hart, of the Criminal Intelligence Division, received information from a Dallas Police confidential informant who knew Ruby. The
informant said that in September, 1963 Ruby rented an apartment at 223 South Ewing, for Lee Oswald (next door to Ruby's apartment building). The informant said the manager of the apartment asked Oswald to move because the manager did not like Oswald.114 The significance of these Ruby /Oswald sightings is that they occurred in the spring and summer of 1963, while Harvey and Marina were in New Orleans. It was Lee Oswald who knew and associated with Jack Ruby in the summer of 1963 and was familiar with CIA operatives, anti-Castro Cubans in Miami, Robert McKeown, and Cuban exiles from the Lake Pontchartrain camps. These sightings help to establish the time frame during which plans were formulated to use Lee Oswald to set up Harvey Oswald as a "patsy " in the assassination of President Kennedy.

 

The last image we know of LEE Oswald is from the image on his 1959 passport.  (The comparison is based on making the ears match as closely as possible)

All we know of Oswald, related to the assassination, is Harvey. 

On August 9 (Friday afternoon in New Orleans) Harvey Lee Oswald began handing out Fair Play for Cuba Committee leaflets in the 700 block of Canal Street, unaware that he was in the process of being set up as a ''patsy."   CIA Agent William Gaudet watched Oswald as he passed out the FPCC leaflets from his office in the International Trade Mart, while FBI informant Orville Aucoin took films of Oswald (later shown on national television). FBI photographers filmed the event with a 35 mm camera from across the street, while FBI informant Orest Pena watched.19   After talking with Oswald and the Cubans the arresting officer thought the leafleting incident was a staged event, designed to draw attention. The officer was correct but was unaware that two of the Cubans, Carlos Bringuier and Miguel  Cruz, were FBI informants and the third, Celso Hernandez, was a CIA contact.

 

The rest of the FBI report acknowledges Bill's awareness of Oswald working with Wesley and living a few doors down.

 

 

I know this will be met with the usual vitriol - my armor is reinforced - really depends on which Oswald we speak...

the big, dumb Lee Harvey or the smaller, slighter intellectual Harvey Lee

The man Ruby killed was not a "dimwitted 12-year old"

Harvey on the left, August 1953.. turns 14 in Oct.  / On the right is 20 months earlier as a 6th grader at 5'4 115 lbs.

Boys don't hit puberty and get smaller and less muscular.

Further examples of the duality of Oswald below.  Yes, they are supposed to all be the same man

Namaste... DJ

.

 

 

On 6/16/2023 at 10:38 AM, Benjamin Cole said:

Great review, but I take issue with this:

"On the flip side, he (LHO) was a high-school drop-out with the writing skills of a dim-witted 12 year old, horrid with a gun and not professionally stable." ---Bleau

---30---

Writing skills: LHO had spelling problems, and not even a high school education, let alone a college degree.  It has been a while since I read his memoirs-diary (he wrote as advised by Mohrenschildt), but aside from the spelling, they were not so bad. 

Remember, LHO appeared on a live radio program, in an adversarial situation, and acquitted himself. Not so easy to do---at age 23 (?).

LHO was not "horrid with gun"; he managed to pass his last shooting test with the Marines. In any hunting party, he would probably be mediocre. "Mediocre with a gun," might be about right.

"Not professionally stable": LHO was well-regarded by Wesley Buell Frazier, his immediate supervisor at TSBD.  LHO had a honorable discharge from the Marines, and had gotten through Marine boot camp at age 16 or 17.  He job-hopped a little upon return to US. He held down his job in Russia. 

LHO was a chess player, and read an interesting and hardly low-brow only assortment of books from the New Orleans Public Library. 

Titovets in Russia, and Mohrenschildt, both smart guys (regardless of their politics), regarded LHO as an interesting conversationalist. Really, LHO was a dullard? 

Also, the idea that the Russians had low regard for LHO: Possibly true, but then possibly LHO wanted out of Russia and was not keen on making favorable impressions, and he seemed to instinctually distrust authority. 

The Russians may not have found LHO useful---but why? As LHO's loyalties were not to Moscow? 

 

 

 

 

 

A little visual context on the paper bag(s)...

142 & 626 are 2 WCE's of the same bag with 364 the "replica".  I had gotten an email from Gary Mack about Montgomery's oral history where he states that a venetian blind is holding up the bag in the photos of Monty taking the bag out of the building...  yet since we know Oswald didn't bring that bag... where does Monty get it?  And in fact it was M JOHNSON who signs the CCCS report turning in this bag. See testimony below contradicting Studebaker about the size and his partner claiming he never touched it.

He also claims the bag was both long/narrow and folded/small within 15 seconds.

 

Mr. MONTGOMERY. Which sack are we talking about now?
Mr. BALL. The paper sack?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. The small one or the larger one?
Mr. BALL. The larger one you mentioned that was in position 2.
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Yes.
Mr. BALL. You picked it up?
Mr. MONTGOMERY. Wait just a minute no; I didn't pick it up. I believe Mr. Studebaker did. We left it laying right there so they could check it for prints.

Mr. STUDEBAKER. It was doubled - it was a piece of paper about this long and it was doubled over.
Mr. BALL. How long was it, approximately?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. I don't know - I picked it up and dusted it and they took it down there and sent it to Washington and that's the last I have seen of it, and I don't know.
Mr. BALL. Did you take a picture of it before you picked it up?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. No.
Mr. BALL. Does that sack show in any of the pictures you took?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. No; it doesn't show in any of the pictures.

Studebaker's drawing - cause y'know with only so much film, couldn't take the same exact photo BEFORE removing this bag... . Notice too the column of boxes that closed in the area is gone.  Many, many of the photos are reconstructions done hours/days later.

Mr. BALL. Now, we have here a picture which we will mark "G."
(Instrument marked by the reporter as "Studebaker Exhibit G," for identification.)
Mr. BALL. This is your No. 26, and that shows the box, does it?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes, sir.
Mr. BALL. And that was its location with reference to the corner?
Mr. STUDEBAKER. Yes, sir; that's the exact location.
Mr. BALL. Can you draw in there showing us where the paper sack was found?
(Witness Studebaker drew on instrument as requested by Counsel Ball.)

Mr. JOHNSON. Yes, sir. We found this brown paper sack or case. It was made out of heavy wrapping paper. Actually, it looked similar to the paper that those books was wrapped in. It was just a long narrow paper bag.
Mr. BELIN. Where was this found?
Mr. JOHNSON. Right in the corner of the building.
Mr. BELIN. On what floor?
Mr. JOHNSON. Sixth floor.
Mr. BELIN. Which corner?
Mr. JOHNSON. Southeast corner.
Mr. BELIN. Do you know who found it?
Mr. JOHNSON. I know that the first I saw of it, L. D. Montgomery, my partner, picked it up off the floor, and it was folded up, and he unfolded it.
Mr. BELIN. When it was folded up, was it folded once or refolded?
Mr. JOHNSON. It was folded and then refolded. It was a fairly small package.

1 hour ago, Matt Allison said:

Every so often I like to remind folks of some of the fine UAPs/UFOs built right here in the good ole U.S.A.

 

Call 'em alien and you get a Netflix special. 

Call 'em a story to cover for Military Tech usually 30-50 years ahead of civilian tech and you get a rubber room.

Go figure

57 minutes ago, Benjamin Cole said:

As an aside, some researchers go to extraordinary efforts to exonerate LHO entirely even of an unwitting role in the JFKA. There is a blurry picture of someone on some steps, so that must be LHO on the TSBD first floor landing during the JFKA. That is fine, everyone is entitled to their opinion, and there is value to testing hypotheses.

But then should we also make the same effort to exonerate others who are implicated on the basis of iffy evidence? 

Should we also carefully and scrupulously review evidence against the Secret Service, the FBI and the CIA, and put on our "defense attorney" hat? 

Unfortunately, so much evidence is missing, destroyed, or never existed.

Ben - why do you suppose Oswald didn't just keep repeating "I was on the steps" ?  Kinda would have solved his involvement if that was indeed him.  He could have said a number of things he did not.

The evidence we have available points to the cover-up perpetrated by those you named, plus a few more acronym agencies.  IDK about you but I do carefully and scrupulously review that evidence and correlate it with other evidence to form a picture...  while you are right, what we have left is only a snapshot, it is a very revealing snapshot..

The SS, FBI and CIA along with ONI, Army intel and I&NS were playing together in this charade... whether each knew how their role fit into the whole, or began seeing what was really up as it progressed, is what we try to discover. 44

Why would this man then lie about it unless he was possibly part of the propaganda campaign to remove this event from history?

 

9 hours ago, Benjamin Cole said:

For me the Chicago case may be instructive. Two Cuban gunman show up in Chicago, with sniper rifles, and rent a place along the motorcade route. Two guys, that is it. That is their plan: Shoot the president as he passes. Vallee may be unconnected.

Hi Ben,  There was a bit more than that my friend.. and you seem to be dismissing the other 4 locations prior.  Were you able to read "The Chicago Plot?"  I was sure that only 2 got caught, that 2 more got away... Edwin Black:

A few hours after that meeting adjourned, the phone rang in the Chicago office of the Secret Service. Agent Jay Lawrence Stocks was for a few hours the ranking agent, so he took the call. It was the Federal Bureau of Investigation calling from Washington. The FBI man warned Stocks of a serious and dangerous four-man conspiracy to assassinate Kennedy at the Army- Air Force game. The suspects were right during para-military fanatics armed with rifles and telescopic sights. The assassination itself would probably probably be attempted at one of the Northwest Expressway overpasses. This information came from an informant named "Lee".

A break came the next day, Thursday, October 31. A near north rooming house landlady telephoned the Chicago police with a tip. Four men were renting rooms, and in one of them, she observed four rifles with telescopic sights. In as much as she knew the president was coming to Chicago in two days, perhaps there was some threat here. Would the police look into it. The police immediately informed the Secret Service. Acting agent in charge of Maurice G. Martineau scooped up the message and made the connection. This was it.

A 24-hour surveillance was set up on the rooming house. Agent Jay L. Stocks spotted and followed two men fitting in the landlady's description, all the time maintaining radio contact with Martineau. <snip>

The two men were taken into custody (but not actually arrested or booked) in the very early Friday hours and brought to the Secret Service headquarters. There are no records that any weapons were found in their possession or back at the rooming house.

The story goes on to other aspects...  And if you can, Abe Bolden's book is worth a read, as well as the essay by Palamara, "Boring is Interesting".   Another from Boring:  https://www.maryferrell.org/showDoc.html?docId=10721#relPageId=13       @Steve Thomas you will notice the use of only "Harvey Lee Oswald" with Lee Harvey not being named as an alias.

Reproduced here from a copy I've had a long while.

BORING IS INTERESTING.  3/22/95 by Vincent M. Palamara

Without question, Secret Service agent Floyd M. Boring, the Assistant Special Agent in Charge of the White House Detail during the Kennedy Administration (SAIC Behn's direct assistant),bears a heavy burden in any analysis of JFK's mortal trip to the Lone Star state of  Texas in November of 1963, whether we view the President's murder as the act of a lone nut (Oswald) or as the result of a deadly  conspiracy.  Boring, who was not physically present in Texas with the President (that 'honor' went to a third stringer, ASAIC Roy H. Kellerman), had just recently been with the President in Florida (11/18/63), where JFK visited Tampa, Miami, and Palm Beach.  According to Agent Sam Kinney, SAIC Jerry Behn was finally able to take a vacation coinciding with the time period of JFK's Texas trip, which left ASAIC Boring able to oversee things from his home in Washington, D. C. (you don't always have to be physically present to be in charge of things, such as when the SAIC of the Protective Research Section, Robert Bouck, monitored  the 11/9/63 Joseph Milteer threats made in Miami from the Executive Office Building in Washington).  In other words, Floyd Boring was in charge of PLANNING the Texas trip (based off my two interviews with Mr. Boring, 9/22/93 and 3/4/94, as well as an important reference on page 558 of Jim Bishop's "The Day
Kennedy was Shot", not to mention several conversations with Sam Kinney)!

It was during the President's last trip before the Texas tour, in Tampa, Florida, where Boring took it upon himself to order the agents who were riding in protective positions on the rear of  JFK's limo to dismount and return to the follow-up car (despite 5 April 1964 reports to the contrary1, Sam Kinney, Dave Powers, Rufus Youngblood, Gerald Behn [author of  a report], Robert Bouck, John Norris, Abraham Bolden, Bob Lilly, Maurice Martineau, Marty Underwood, and, surprisingly, FLOYD BORING himself [author of a report and the primary sources for the other 4 reports; Clint Hill named him as the source  during his Warren Commission testimony]2 told me that JFK did not restrict the agents from doing anything!).  By blaming JFK for this action, Boring was able to keep the attention away from himself.  In addition, by his absence
from the Texas trip, Boring was kept out of the swirling controversies involving what should-and should not- have happened in regard to security matters (Behn was interviewed in Executive session of the HSCA , while Roy Kellerman, Chief James Rowley, and Inspector Kelley testified to both the Warren Commission and the HSCA) .WHY did Boring (and the others after him) blame JFK for this order? I was unable to get a definitive answer, but one thing is for certain: if John Ready and Clint Hill had ALREADY been stationed on the rear of the limo in Dallas during the shooting on Elm Street, these men would have been able to protect JFK from, at the very least, the fatal head shot that ultimately killed him(Greer and
Roberts inactions notwithstanding).

So, is that it?  Is that all Boring is responsible for (although quite important, nonetheless)?  Far from it:

1)     Gave Advance Agent Winston Lawson the Dallas assignment on 11/4/633, coinciding with Behn's---or SOMEONE's---call to Sorrels.
2)    Several days later, Lawson phoned Behn's office about the critical Trade Mart decision-Lawson wasn't sure he actually spoke to Behn.4  In light of the fact that Behn was dead set against going to the Trade Mart after seeing pictures of the catwalks, an excellent perch for snipers("We'll NEVER go there", he said5; along with Jerry Bruno and Ken O'Donnell, he wanted the Women's Building, which the Secret Service conceded was the better choice from a security standpoint6), and the fact that Kellerman did not become involved with any planning until four days later (11/8/63),it appears quite likely that Lawson spoke to Boring and received information which was conducive to some kind of approval for this site as a selected spot for JFK's speech (which, in turn, had a direct bearing on the potential route choices , the speed of the limousine, and the security of the building !
3)    Of the 3 known PRS checks of potential threats to the President in Texas, with the particular focus on Dallas, Boring was involved in at least 2, all three of which yielded NO information at all, which Roy Kellerman (to the WC7) and Abe Bolden (to me) both said was very unusual [Lawson inquired into the first check on 11/8/63-Boring told him there wouldn't be any information of any consequence until this date; Kellerman inquired into the second check on 11/10/63-he even said Boring was probably involved with this particular inquiry; Youngblood inquired into the third known check on the morning of 11/22/63 thru an UNNAMED agent8].  What makes this even more unbelievable is the following-
4)    As the agent in charge of Kennedy's trip to Florida, Boring had to have been much aware of the Joseph Milteer threats, as well as the anti-Castro Cuban Community's threats AND the organized crime threat, which, according to Sam Kinney, gave the agents a scare down there9.  A motorcade in Miami was deemed unwise (it was not canceled, it was nipped in the bud), as the Secret Service (including Bouck in Washington and the agents from the Miami field office)  believed via their knowledge of the aforementioned threats.

However, although Advance Agent David Grant came from Florida to assist in motorcade security in Dallas on the evening of 11/18/63 (along with Donald Lawton, Sam Kinney, Emory Roberts, and Bert deFreese later on10), and Boring was in charge of planning the Texas trip, the threat knowledge was NOT relayed to the advance team in Dallas!!!  Perhaps this is why Jerry Behn told me he was asked about the Florida trip in Executive Session of the HSCA-Behn wasn't on this trip either, and none of his testimony was published...
5)    David Grant was a key player in the planning of the motorcade route (which was CHANGED shortly after his arrival on 11/18/6311-prior to this date, only Main Street was mentioned, although, as Sam Kinney and Win Lawson told me, there were ALTERNATIVE routes12 Behn told me the route was indeed changed, yet another matter the HSCA brought up in its 'private' forum13), the "uniquely insecure" removal of  flanking  motorcycles(in direct contrast to the prior Texas motorcades in San Antonio, Houston, and Fort Worth  on 11/21-11/22/63!14), the deletion of  the Dallas police squad car15 (Chief Curry Wanted this car there), the reshuffling of the motorcade order ( with Lawson16), and the placement of the press, Dr. Burkley,  Godfrey  McHugh and Ted Clifton  to the REAR of the motorcade procession(Burkley protested, McHugh told CFTR  radio this was "UNUSUAL", and photographer Tom Dillard said this effectively  and uniquely brought them out of the picture, as the press usually rode on aflatbed truck directly in front of JFK's limo, not to mention the press buses which usually follows the follow-up car...17).  Grant(who was involved in the drinking incident18)  worked hand-in-glove with Boring in Florida, too...
6)    On 11/21/63, Dallas Sheriff Bill Decker agreed to offer Dallas Agent Forrest Sorrels his "full support" to motorcade security for 11/22/63 (as verified in Sorrel's report published in the WC volumes19). Yet, on the morning of 11/22/63, according to Roger Craig (and as verified in several films/photos), Decker had his men standing idle on the corner of Main and Houston as "spectators" and nothing more.20 According to author/ researcher Gary Shaw21 and Dr. Grant Leitma 22 (a Maryland researcher) these unusual standdown orders came TO Decker via a call from a still unknown source in the nation’s capital (recall that Chief Curry stated in his book that the security arrangements were directed from Washington 23)!  If true, it is quite possible that Mr. Boring, stationed in Washington and  in charge of planning the Texas trip, gave these orders...

Boring has a rich background- he was President Truman's temporary Chauffeur (Bill Greer drove Truman, as well) and, on 11/1/50, while Truman was Sleeping in Blair House during the renovation of the White House, two Puerto Rican Nationalists began their assassination attempt with guns ablaze while Boring was TEMPORARILY in charge of the White House Detail for that day (see Baughman's book and 
McCullough's book on Truman) and guarding Blair House (with agents Vincent Mroz and several White House policeman).As it turned out, Boring fired the only official bullets ever fired by a Secret Service agent in their long history of protecting the nation's presidents24-he killed one of them, Grisselia Torreselo, while the other, Oscar Collazo, was wounded but survived (Sam Kinney later guarded him in the hospital; Collazo, who was later inexplicably pardoned by Jimmy Carter, passed away in 199425)!

Interestingly, another agent, Stu Stout, was guarding Truman inside Blair House, fending off the many shouts of angry housekeepers with his Thompson submachine gun, refusing to budge from his assigned position in the chance that the assassins made their way passed Boring (Stout was later commended by Secret Service officials for his action, the housekeepers notwithstanding26). Ironically, on 11/22/63, 
while President Kennedy was the victim of a successful assassination, Stout assumed the very same position-safely away inside a building (the Trade Mart).Kinney and Boring told me that  Stout died not long after 11/22/63, the first agent to die after the assassination (cause unknown...they wouldn't say).I guess it is true that history does repeat itself from time to time...

Boring, whose code name was Deacon (later used by Jimmy Carter!27), served in the Secret Service from FDR's administration until 1967, when he retired as an Inspector during the Johnson administration (although Youngblood's book [ghost-written] states that both Boring and Behn became Inspectors -a highly coveted position of power-after the assassination, Behn told me emphatically that he did NOT become an Inspector, although Floyd Boring did(Behn considered his January 1965 transfer out of the
White House Detail a "demotion", as he went with another former SAIC, Stu Knight [from LBJ's detail],to a division known as "Special Investigations", which was a non-protective function, whose goal was to investigate violations of the Gold Act, among others28).In fact, it is ironic that Boring appears to have been the only agent in a supervisory capacity in JFK's DETAIL to have benefited after the murder(Rowley took much heat, before, during, and after both his Warren Commission and HSCA testimony, and was later replaced as Chief in 1972 during the Watergate crisis by none other than Stu Knight;  Behn retired in 1967 and went to the Post Office Department [his boss was JFK Aide  Bill Hartigan, the same man who would later interview Behn for an extremely tight-lipped JFK Library Oral History in 1976]; Roy Kellerman's power  was usurped at Parkland Hospital by his deputy, Emory Roberts, and he would later become an Assistant Administrator in charge of payroll and the like-a desk job[he retired in 1968])! 

Although ASAIC of  V.P. Detail Rufus Youngblood , who  was to become the SAIC of this particular detail on 11/25/63, advancing ahead of the equally-absent  Stu Knight,  went on to become one of the ASAIC's of LBJ"s  Presidential Detail (due to LBJ's call to Rowley), he was, of course, already an "LBJ man", so to speak (Youngblood  became one of the ASAIC's of the White House Detail immediately after the murder[Behn, Boring, and Kellerman temporarily kept there nominal positions] until January 1965, when Youngblood became THE SAIC of the White House Detail[we already know what happened to Behn and Knight] with Kellerman now HIS deputy along with a new deputy ASAIC, Thomas "Lem" Johns, another Dealey Plaza veteran29).According to Sam Kinney, Emory Roberts became the Appointment Secretary to LBJ, and Sam assisted Emory(Emory died of an alleged heart attack in the late 1960's, the same time an unknown agent took his own life with a handgun, according to Agent Marty Venker30.  Interestingly, Mrs. Juanita Roberts, LBJ's Chief private secretary, MAY have been Emory's wife, due to the circumstances of his later position-I'll try to find out...).  Nevertheless, it was Boring who immediately advanced the highest and the fastest after the tragedy (Knight became the Chief 9 years later, while Agent Clint Hill was SAIC of the White House Detail during the Ford administration, some 10-12 years later).

Boring, now 80 years old and a partial stroke victim, still has an agile mind; it is a crime that he was not interviewed by either the Warren Commission or the HSCA-of the book's he was interviewed in (former Chief Baughman's "Secret Service Chief" and McCullough's "Truman"), there is Nothing but fodder for Truman historians.  The only Kennedy book he is quoted in, Manchester's "The Death of a President"31, is a true enigma-Boring was NOT interviewed for this book(see the book's endnotes; also, Boring confirmed this to me on two occasions)!Alas, the story is not over just yet:  in regard to ANOTHER author we have come across who is known for his errors and ALLEGED interviews, Gerald Posner, during the course of my research, I attempted to find out if what Posner claims at the end of his book was true-that, via Hamilton Brown, the Executive Secretary of the Former Agents of the Secret Service(formerly on Joseph Kennedy's Detail on 11/22/63, first name actually "Percy"), Posner was able to locate and speak with several former agents32. Since none were credited in the text or his endnotes, I began to get suspicious;
this was heightened when Ann Eisele of the Washington Post called me in November 1993 and wanted to get in touch with Brown(along with  some Italian and English journalists, I was contacted a lot that fall in regards to the Secret Service).  I gave her the number after I received confirmation that a) she was who 
she said she was and b) that she would NOT let Brown know I gave her the number (as readers may be aware, Brown told me angrily to "cease and desist from contacting anymore of my associates", and I did not want to incur his wrath again!33).Even under these circumstances, with her impeccable credentials and no causes for alarm, Brown would not communicate with her or give her ANY information on how to
get in touch with former agents (although that was his job, and she was working with Newsweek and CBS for an Oswald-did-it piece for TV and print)!So, I thought-why the hell would Brown help this relative nobody named Gerald Posner out unless... hmmm....unless, just as Posner received exclusive access to Nosenko from the CIA in exchange for a book to their "liking", Brown was somehow assured by Posner
-and Random House- of the same thing.

However, there is one little wrinkle in this story-there was ONE agent who I was able to confirm who WAS contacted by Posner, and it was THIS agent that referred him to Brown for reason or reasons unclear:  Floyd M. Boring34.

Boring is interesting.

3/22/95 by Vincent M. Palamara

1 18H803-809

2 2H136-137

3 4H336

4 4H337

5 " The Lone Star- the Life of John Connally" by James Reston, Jr. (New York: Harper and Row, 1989) p. 258; 11HSCA 516; HSCA Report 12/13/77-interview with Jerry Bruno

6 21H546; 11HSCA516

7 2H107-108; 11HSCA523

8 "The Third Alternative-Survivor's Guilt: the Secret Service and the JFK Murder" by Vince Palamara (self-published,1994) pp. 11,50

9 author's interview with Sam Kinney 4/15/94

10 WR421; 18H789; 17H601; author's interviews with Winston Lawson and Sam Kinney

11 author's interview with Gerald Behn 9/27/92

12 see also 4H326

13 author's interview with Gerald Behn 9/27/92

14 11HSCA527-529; NBC video of Houston motorcade 11/21/63

15 11HSCA530

16 25H786; author's interview with Winston Lawson 9/27/92; "The Third Alternative", pp18,49

17"The Third Alternative", p.49; Tom Dillard on C-SPAN 11/22/93

18 18H684

19 21H547

20 "Two Men in Dallas" video; Hughes film

21 author's phone conversation with Gary Shaw 8/23/93

22 letter to author 12/14/93

23 "JFK Assassination File" by Jesse Curry, p. 9

24author's interviews with Floyd Boring, 9/22/93 and 3/4/94

25 author's interview with Sam Kinney 3/5/94; "Confessions of an Ex-Secret Service Agent" by George Rush (New York: Pocket Books, 1988), p. 133

26 "The Secret Service Story" by Michael Dorman (New York: Dell, 1967), P.69

27 "The Death of a President" by William Manchester (New York: Harper and Row, 1988 Edition), p. xxi; "Air Force One: The Planes and the Presidents-Flight II" video (1991)

28 author's interview with Rufus Youngblood 2/8/94; author's interview withStu Knight 10/22/92

29 author's interviews with Rufus Youngblood, 10/22/92 and 2/8/94

30 "Confessions of an Ex-Secret Service Agent", pp. 216-217

31 "The Death of a President", p. 37; the author contacted Manchester about This dramatic contradiction in August of 1993, but he refused to show me his notes or any other means with which to back up his published claim

32 "Case Closed" by Gerald Posner (New York: Random House, 1993), p. 503

33 author's interview with Hamilton Brown 9/30/92 (former agents' Bob Lilly and Sam Kinney were offended at Brown's conduct, but the Secret Service HAS traditionally advised against ANY interviews other than those channeled through the "official" Public Affairs Department)

34 Boring told me that he did not tell Posner anything other than Brown's phone number, and he was unsure if Posner even followed through with the call (it is very interesting that Mr. Posner picked up on Boring's importance to the assassination).