Thomas Graves

Being the kind of person who believes in giving credit where credit is due ... I would like to say that I am currently in communication with Brian Doyle, the researcher who deserves full credit for discovering that the "Running Woman" in Couch-Darnell is Margaret "Peggy" Burney, and who claims that he recently independently confirmed, by speaking on the phone with Gloria Calvery's son, that Gloria Calvery is the tall woman visible above the windshield in Betzner3 (as I posted unbeknownst-to-Brian on the Forum last March), and that Gloria Jean Calvery is the tall woman who is standing directly to the left of John Templin in the Robin Unger-labeled Z-Frame. Brian Doyle recently referred me to the 2013 Sixth Floor Museum interview of Buell Wesley Frazier that I referenced in an earlier post in which Frazier, starting at the 14:00 mark, talks about a "crying woman (Gloria Calvery?) who came by the steps after the assassination and announced that the president had been shot," and how he (Frazier) had turned to a "Sarah" at that time and confirmed with her that they had heard their disbelieving ears correctly. Brian Doyle has told me that he believes that Frazier's "Sarah" was none other than TSBD employee Sarah Stanton, and that Sarah Stanton has, therefore, been misidentified by serious researchers as "Prayer Man." -- TG PS And I must say that ... gulp ... I'm inclined to agree with Brian Doyle on this scenario.

Andrej, Frazier said he returned to the Depository from where? From the front steps, or from somewhere else? -- TG

Once again, can you think of anyone who isn't already on the list? -- TG

Can you think of anyone who isn't already on the list? -- TG

1) James Angleton 2) Allen Dulles (retired, but hey!) 3) David Phillips 4) Bill Harvey 5) David Sanchez Morales 6) Rip Robertson 7) David Ferrie 8) Guy Banister 9) Ruth Paine 10) Michael Paine 11) George DeMohrenschildt 12) Roy Truly 13) Buell Wesley Frazier 14) Bernard (Macho) Baker 15) Ann Egerter ... to be continued Whom am I forgetting? There must be many more. -- TG Edit: Oh yeah! ......

Andrej, Did Frazier ever say he saw Oswald on the front steps? Do you believe him? If so, who was "Prayer Man"? -- TG

Sandy, Could "Prayer Man" have been ... gasp ... Sarah Stanton? Starting at the 34:00 mark in his 2013 Sixth Floor Museum interview (below), Buell Wesley Frazier says that, "before Shelley and Lovelady left the steps to walk towards the Triple Underpass," a "crying woman" (Gloria Calvery?) "came by and said that the president had been shot." Frazier then mentions in the interview that he turned towards a "Sarah" and that he and she kind of asked each other what the heck the woman had said. (At one point he also says that after standing there "for a couple of minutes," he went down to "the first step where Lovelady was standing.") Now, in a blown-up slow-mo (?) version of Couch-Darnell, you can actually see Frazier turn his head towards "Prayer Man." Question: Are Frazier and "Prayer Man" talking to each other in Couch-Darnell? If so, couldn't that mean that "Prayer Man" wasn't a man at all, but Frazier's "Sarah" i.e., ... Sarah Stanton? -- TG

These two are the best ones for discerning Stella Mae Jacob's darker (Native-American) complexion. Credit: James Darnell. From Robin Unger's photographic pages at JFK Assassination Forum And this one is the best one for comparing with Gloria Jeanne Holt's (the gal in the middle) high school photo, if I can ever figure out a way to get my "screen capture" of it uploaded to this thread and others ... -- TG

David, That's because you evidently weren't following our posts when they "hot off the press," and now, unfortunately, the $400-to-replace photos that were in them are gone ... -- TG PS I do remember that a year ago Sandy and I convinced Andrej Stancak that Robin Unger's "Hicks" (and, now, Karen Westbrook's buddy "Calvery") was Gloria Jeanne Holt. Why don't you ask him?

A belated "Welcome to the Forum," Michael! Are you on Facebook, by any chance? Most everybody is these days, but I can't seem to find you. Would love to become FB "friends" with you if you so desired. (My FB page is very easy to find.) SUNY has 64 campuses. Which one did you graduate from if you don't mind my asking? -- TG

That's right, Sandy. I'd forgotten about that one. Thanks. -- TG

Yes I would, David. Too bad you didn't see the photos and clips Sandy and I posted here about a year ago, and which have since disappeared. -- TG

David, I thought you could read better than that. Please read my post again. You've never seen the Darnell clip showing Unger's (or somebody's) "Calvary (sic), Hicks, and Reed" walking back towards the TSBD? I can no longer find that very short Darnell clip which was viewable on this forum about a year ago, but I can post two frames of it for you here. Shall I do that for you, David? In one of them in particular, you can see that the woman who is labeled Calvary (sic) has a dark complexion and a classic Native American nose. That's because that woman is not Thierry's and Roberdeau's and Unger's Gloria Calvery, and neither is it Westbrook's "Carol Reed ... maybe," but self-described Native American Stella Mae Jacob, instead. The high school photos of Gloria Jeanne Holt are no longer on this forum, either. But at least I had the presence of mind to take a "screen shot" of that Photobucket page when it was here, and if I can figure out how to take that screen shot and downsize it and upload it here, or e-mail it to Sandy for him to do that technical stuff, you will soon be able to see for yourself that Westbrook's "Calvery" was, indeed, Gloria Jeanne Holt. -- TG

David, It wasn't only Jacob and Holt that said that, but their colleague Sharron Simmons (Nelson), too. Since the wording in their three FBI statements is identical (iirc) regarding where they were during the assassination, I would say that maybe they were all three in the interview room at the same time, and the first one to give her statement made that simple, easy-to-make mistake, and the other two women "followed suit." Either that, or the secretary who typed up their statements, after realizing that they had been together, somehow made that mistake for them. Regardless, they all said they were standing near Elm Street. Can you find three women close together on the south side of Elm Street in Zapruder or any of the other films / photographs? Sandy and I and others went all over this subject about a year ago. Apparently you missed it. -- TG You do realize that Robin Unger's "Calvary" (sic) in the labeled Z-Frame is dark-complected, don't you? As is discernable in a "side profile" from the Z-Film of that woman's face, as well as the way she looks in a Darnell clip that was made, a few minutes after the assassination, as she and her two lighter-skinned colleagues were walking back towards the TSBD? And you do realize, don't you, that Stella Mae Jacob described herself as a Native American? Have you seen Gloria Jeanne Holt's high school photos? (They've disappeared from the Forum.) If you had, you would already know that Westbrook's "Calvery" is actually Gloria Jenne Holt. Etc.

You're right, Sandy. Brian told me by FB Messenger yesterday that he'd spoken with Mr. Calvery on the phone, and that Mr. Calvery had directed his attention to the tall woman in black, above Queen Mary's windshield, in Betzner3, and informed Brian that that woman was his (Mr. Calvery's) mother. I commend Brian Doyle for swallowing his pride (he asked me to give you his apologies, btw) and confirm that you and I and Bob were right all along about Gloria's being on the steps of the TSBD about 25 seconds after the assassination. -- TG

Yes, David, I'm very aware of the Westbrook interview. Haven't you been following my posts on Calvery, Holt, Jacob, et al.? By the way, your big yellow arrow isn't pointing to Karen Westbrook (or to Carol Reed, for that matter) in the Z-Frame,, but to Sharron Simmons, one of self-described Native American Stella Mae Jacob's colleagues. Regarding light-skinned and perhaps red-haired Calvery's location during the motorcade (as well as Westbrook's own), Westbrook-Scranton was seriously mistaken. As was for so many years and in a different way, Thierry Speth, Don Roberdeau (he finally got it right on his revised map), and Robin Unger. Which is totally understandable for Westbrook-Scranton to do, seeing as how her Sixth Floor Museum interview (above) not only was made some fifty-five years after the fact, but that the figures by the Stemmons Sign are not visible from the front, but from the behind. -- TG

edited and bumped -- TG

bumped

David, Excellent point. Scroll down to some of what Bagley had to say about Leonard McCoy in his PDF Ghosts of the Spy Wars, a 2014 follow-up to his excellent 2007 book Spy Wars: Moles, Mysteries, and Deadly Games : The history of Cold War espionage—KGB vs. CIA—remains incomplete, full of inaccuracies, and cries out for correction. It received a big infusion after 1991 by the opening of some files from both East and West, but that left the more biting questions unanswered—like those pertaining to still-unknown moles inside Western governments and intelligence services. Those undiscovered traitors still hover like ghosts over that history. I saw and had a share in some doings of the first half of the Cold War. The facts and events of which I write here are all part of the public record and have been officially cleared for publication, like my own books Spy Wars and Spymaster. 1 Tennent H. Bagley , Spy Wars: Moles, Mysteries, and Deadly Games (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2007) and Spymaster: Startling Cold War Revelations of a Soviet KGB Chief(New York: Skyhorse Publishing, 2013). [Google Scholar] But details are easily forgotten, so pulling some out from their present context and getting a glimpse of the ghosts lurking behind them may be useful. In the future an alert journalist or historian, inspired by some new revelation, may remember one or another of these old ghosts and dig deeper to lay them to rest. Most of the ghosts I stir up here still hover undetected because back in the second half of the 1960s the CIA changed its mind and decided that the deeply-suspected KGB defector Yuri Nosenko had, after all, genuinely defected and had been telling CIA the truth. 2Throughout this article I treat Yuri Nosenko as a sent KGB plant, deceiving the Americans. The CIA's official position since 1968 has been the opposite. For some insight into the debate, see the Appendix. [Google Scholar] That change of mind began in 1967, five years after Nosenko first appeared to the CIA. By then the CIA's Soviet Bloc (SB) Division had concluded, on the basis of years of debriefing, interrogation, investigation, observation, and analysis, that the KGB's Second Chief Directorate (internal counterintelligence) sent Nosenko to CIA with the aim (among others) of diverting leads to its spies in the West that CIA had been given a few months earlier by the genuine KGB defector Anatoly Golitsyn. The SB Division summarized its reasons in a 439-page report, one copy of which they apparently mounted in a “notebook.” But then the tide shifted. A reports-and-requirements (R&R) officer of the Division, alerted to the notebook's existence by a colleague, 3 The colleague was Richard Kovich, who though not involved in the (closely-held) handling of Nosenko, had been subtly seeking for a year or more to learn—and had evidently found out—the dire assessment of Nosenko's bona fides and his situation. [Google Scholar] got hold of it and, without checking with his Division superiors, drafted a forty-page paper and three memoranda for higher Agency supervisors, pleading that his Division's position on Nosenko as set out in the notebook was wrong, mindless, and indefensible. He urged that it be reconsidered “by a new team of CIA officers.” This evidently launched the Agency's re-review of the case, with new interviews of Nosenko by others, culminating in a 1968 report by security officer Bruce Solie that exonerated Nosenko and led to his acceptance as an advisor to the Agency's anti-Soviet operations. 4Tennent H. Bagley, Spy Wars, pp. 197–220. [Google Scholar] THE MCCOY INTERVENTION The SB/R&R (Soviet Bloc Reports-and-Requirements) officer who started the process, Leonard McCoy, was later made deputy chief of CIA's Counterintelligence Staff (under a new CI Staff chief, previously unconnected with anti-Soviet operations, who had replaced James Angleton). There, he continued fiercely to defend Nosenko's bona fides 5 See, for example, Spy Wars pp. 218–219 and its Appendix A with its endnote 3. Also, Leonard McCoy, “Yuri Nosenko, CIA,” CIRA Newletter, Vol. XII, No. 3, Fall 1983. [Google Scholar] and, in the guise of cleansing unnecessary old files, destroyed all the CI Staff's existing file material that (independent of SB Division's own findings) cast doubt on Nosenko's good faith. 6As testified by CI Staff operations chief Newton S. (“Scotty”) Miler in a handwritten memorandum which is in the files of T. H. Bagley. [Google Scholar] Not until forty-five years later was McCoy's appeal declassified and released by the National Archives (NARA) on 12 March 2012 under the JFK Act “with no objection from CIA.” McCoy opened, as we can now see, with his own finding and with a plea: “After examining the evidence of Nosenko's bona fides in the notebook,” he wrote, “I am convinced that Nosenko is a bona fide defector. I believe that the case against him has arisen and persisted because the facts have been misconstrued, ignored, or interpreted without sufficient consideration of his psychological failings.” The evidence, he said, is that Nosenko is “not a plant and not fabricating anything at all, except what is required by his disturbed personality.” He recommended “that we appoint a new judge and jury for the Nosenko case consisting of persons not involved in the case so far” and proposed six candidates. According to McCoy, it was not only Nosenko's psychology that should determine his bona fides, but also his reporting. “The ultimate conclusions must be based on his production,” McCoy asserted, specifically claiming to be the only person qualified to evaluate that production. Certain of Nosenko's reports were important and fresh, he stated, and could not be considered KGB “throwaway” or deception, as the notebook described them. In reality, however, the value of Nosenko's intelligence reports had not been a major factor in the Division's finding. It had judged him a KGB plant on the basis of the circumstances of the case (of the sort listed in the “40 Questions” of the Appendix). McCoy did not explain—or even mention—a single one of these circumstances in his paper, so his arguments were irrelevant to the matter he pretended to deal with. His was not a professional assessment of a complex counterintelligence situation but, instead, an emotional plea. He referred with scorn to his superiors' “insidious conclusions” and “genuine paranoia” and called their analysis “very strange, to say the least.” The case against Nosenko, he wrote, was based on (unnamed) “assumptions, subjective observations, unsupported suspicions, innuendo, insinuations [… and] relatively trivial contradictions in his reporting.” Nosenko's failure to pass the lie detector test, McCoy asserted, “rules out Nosenko immediately” as a plant—because the KGB would have trained him to beat it. He dismissed (unspecified) findings as “trivial, antique, or repetitive” and cited one which “borders on fantasy. … In fact, it is fantastic!” (sic—with exclamation point). “I cannot find a shred of solid evidence against Nosenko,” he wrote, “The case would be thrown out of court for lack of evidence.” Closing his paper he asked, “What kind of proof do we need of his innocence, when we call him guilty with none?” McCoy used as argument his speculation about what the KGB would or would not do. His paper was studded with untruths, distortions, and unsupported assertions like those cited above—all designed to discredit any doubts or doubters of Nosenko's bona fides. For instance, he judged the defector Pyotr Deryabin, a former KGB Major of more than ten years' experience, to be “not experienced.” When Deryabin decided that Nosenko was a KGB plant, wrote McCoy, he was making a “snap judgment … after having been briefed on the mere facts of the case.” In reality, Deryabin had spent years reviewing and commenting upon the full record of this and related cases, listening to tapes (and correcting the transcripts) of every meeting with and debriefing of Nosenko—and had then personally questioned Nosenko in twelve long sessions. McCoy told the demonstrable untruth that Nosenko “damaged the Soviet intelligence effort more than all the other KGB defectors combined” and that “no Soviet defector has identified as many Soviet agents.” Had Nosenko not uncovered William Vassall as a spy, McCoy wrote, certain secret British documents (shown by Golitsyn to be in KGB hands) “could have been assumed to come from the Lonsdale-Cohen-Houghton net”—though they could not conceivably have been. He said that Sgt. Robert Lee Johnson “would still be operating against us” had Nosenko not uncovered him—though by then, in fact, Johnson had already lost his post and his wife was publicly denouncing him as a Soviet spy. McCoy asserted that it was Nosenko who identified Kovshuk's photo whereas Golitsyn had made the identification. He confused two separate KGB American recruits, following Nosenko's line and successfully hiding the active, valid one. And he made uncounted other equally unfounded assertions. But by then the Nosenko case—the CIA's holding of a suspected KGB plant—had become a thorn in the side of the Agency leadership, an “incubus” and “bone in the throat,” as Director Richard Helms put it. So the CIA happily accepted McCoy's authority and as a result many KGB moles were never identified. Let's have a look at some of these ghosts. ....... https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/08850607.2014.962362 ....................................................................... -- TG

I've just now come upon this 2007 post by Douglas Caddy, so I'm bumping it for y'all. -- TG

(edited and bumped 3/24/18) Robin, That's correct. In some of the un-blurry "frames" of this GIF you can see his white t-shirt under the darker shirt, his eyes and mouth, and hair on the side of his bald forehead. I believe you can even make out some of the plaid pattern of his shirt. -- TG PS Also note that Buell Frazier is turning his head to his right and appears to be talking with the person in the corner.

Left to Right: Stella Mae Jacob, Gloria Jeanne Holt, Sharron Simmons.

Bart, Two serious questions: 1) Have you been able to spot Gloria Calvery in the Z-Film or in the Couch-Darnell clips? 2) If so, do you believe "Running Woman" is Gloria Calvery? Please don't equate me with Sandy Larsen. He's much more intelligent than I am, as evidenced by the fact that he fervently believes in the Harvey and Lee theory, and I don't. -- TG

edited and bumped