Thomas Graves

Tommy, you're right, of course, that Sylvia (or Silvia, either way) Odio always hestitated to identify Loran as Leopoldo and Larry as Angelo. She could not identify them from FBI photographs. Her reasoning was that she never saw them before in her life, but Lee Oswald she had recognized from a previous meeting. It makes equal or more sense to me, knowing the extremely violent nature of Loran Hall (and Larry Howard), and knowing that Loran Hall already had Sylvia's telephone number, that Loran Hall would never hestitate for one second to call Sylvia and threaten her life. (To illustrate this well, please refer to this Nat'l Enquirer issue of 1968, in which Hall describes barely escaping with his own life: http://www.pet880.co...Enquirer_NB.pdf ) For some reason, the press and the FBI didn't press Odio very hard for the identity of the two "Cubans" but instead, wanted to know the identity of the "American." It's a little bizarre because actually Loran Hall was a Cuban-American. He grew up in America. Also, Larry Howard was a Mexican-American -- he grew up in Los Angeles. Sylvia did distinguish between Loran and Larry -- she said "one of them appeared to be a Mexican". Yes, that was Larry, who actually was a half-breed (as perhaps most Mexicans are) yet he really showed his mother's features of the Mayan profile. The other one, said Sylvia, "could have been a Cuban", and like many Cubans, Loran was also a half-breed. Yet Loran could speak fluent Spanish (Cuban style) as well as tough street English. Being Cuban herself, Sylvia noted the Cuban element in Loran's heritage. It is my personal opinion (without any proof yet) that Loran Hall called Sylvia Odio several times (not just that one famous time) and that most of those calls threatened violence if she dared name him. What evidence do I have? It is the puzzle that after Sylvia Odio told the FBI her story in late 1964, that the FBI made a bee-line to Loran Hall's address and brought him in for questioning. It was quick. It was so quick that Loran Hall hardly had time to think of a really good lie, so he simply denied the presence of Lee Harvey Oswald during that visit, but he confessed that he and Larry Howard did visit Sylvia Odio. That is a matter of FBI record. Instead of Oswald, claimed Loran Hall, the third man was really William Seymour. (Why this man? The rumors will fly.) It is a fact that the FBI promptly questioned Loran Hall after hearing Sylvia Odio's story. That's my evidence. If there's a better explanation, I would sincerely like to hear it. Best regards, --Paul Trejo <edit typos> I agree, Paul. And thanks for the National Enquirer Article. Good stuff, and it has a photo of Hall I'd never seen before. The only problem I have with the possibility of Hall's being "Leopoldo" is that I've read that Hall was "only" 5'10" (and weighed 160-165 lbs), whereas Sylvia described "Leopoldo" as being at least six foot tall and being "thin." I mean, if Hall really was 5'10"/160-165, was 5'10" considered "tall" for a Cuban or Cuban-American male in 1963? Perhaps so. But Sylvia also did say that "Leopoldo" was "thin." So I gotta ask-- Does being 5'10" tall and weighing160-165 lbs constitute being "thin"? Hall certainly doesn't look "thin" to me in that well-known photo showing him (apparently) lecturing Howard in the presence of Seymour and and unidentified Interpen-type Latin-looking young male. Know the photo I'm referring to? (OK, everything is relative, I suppose. Maybe Sylvia was, metaphorically speaking, a "midget" and "Leopoldo" just looked "tall" to her. I mean, (to use an old Jim DiEugenio phrase), I mean, over the years I've shrunk down to my present measly 6'3.5" and weigh 200 lbs, and even complete strangers will tell me, when prompted, that I do look "thin", especially when I suck my old beer belly in. But perhaps more importantly, Sylvia said several times that "Leopoldo" had an unusual (sloping?) forehead and/or strange (receding?) hairline or top/side hair or something like that and I just don't see evidence of that in the few photos of Hall that I have seen so far. (But, Bernardo De Torres on the other hand, was tall and thin and hairy and did have a sloping forehead and a seriously receding hairline. Hmmm.....) Also, I believe that both Hall and Howard had full beards at that time and Sylvia doesn't mention that, as far as I know, although I think she does say something about one of them having a "moustache" (and no, I'm not talking about the light, few-days-growth-moustache or "shadow" she said the "Oswald" figure was sporting, I'm talking about one of the other dudes). I will say, however that Hall does meet her description of "Leopoldo's" having hairy arms as well as hair showing on his upper chest above his shirt's collar line. Now, regarding "Angel" I believe she described him as having a face that looked sunburned or seriously weathered or something like that about his complexion (but not acne). Is there any indication that this part of the description fits Larry Howard? (It reminds me more of Hargraves, but then again, maybe it was just a temporary sunburn thing.) And while we're at it, does anyone know about how tall Larry Howard was and how much he weighed at the time? I do, however, want to fervently believe that Hall and Howard and Oswald visited the Odio sisters in late September, 1963. Therfore, and assuming that they did, I suppose I'll now have to do some "research" to determine if there's any "evidence" that Hall and/or Howard actually did, as they later claimed, take a bus from Dallas to Miami after the Odio meeting, or whether it's possible that one or both of them accompanied (or followed) LHO at least part way to Mexico City. I should know the answer to this already, but my memory is even worse now than it used to be. Yes, I'm aware that CIA agent Gaudet's Mexican tourist visa number was only one removed from Oswald's and that the mysterious Osborne/Bowen rode on the same bus as Oswald did to M.C. As far as I know, the FBI never did determine how LHO travelled from New Orleans to Houston while on his way to Mexico City. I'm thinking maybe H and H left the trailer in Dallas and then gave LHO a ride to Houston, or perhaps even points farther south. Edit: If they did take a bus to Miami, what did they do with the car? Leave it with the trailer? Thanks, --Tommy P.S. I took the liberty of correcting one of your sentences so that it now reads, "Also, Larry Howard was a Mexican-American -- He grew up in Los Angeles." P.P.S. Is it a fair paraphrasing of the last part of your post to say that you find highly suspicious the fact that Hall so evidently (since he later retracted it under serious death threats/actions directed towards him by fellow Interpen members) "blew it" by substituting the name of Oswald-look-alike William Seymour for LHO (because he hadn't had enough time to make up an equally-plausible story that wouldn't implicate a fellow Interpen member, Seymour, in the assassination of JFK)? If so, I would tend to agree with you. In fact, it reminds me of GPH's telling Weberman, in so many words, "Heck, Hall couldn't even talk straight."

Would someone please remind me why Hall and Howard decided to take a bus from Dallas to Miami, temporarily leaving the loaded trailer in Dallas rather than continue towing it all the way to its eventual destination of Miami? Could it have been to give Hall and Seymour a plausible reason to be in Dallas a bit later? Thanks, --Tommy Tommy, the connection of Loran Hall and Larry Howard with Lee Harvey Oswald at Sylvia Odio's residence in late September 1963, was the best-kept secret of the Warren Commission. What is interesting to me is that when the FBI took Sylvia Odio's testimony, they almost immediately arrested Loran Hall, even though Odio could not identify his name or photo. How did the FBI know that Loran Hall was the one they wanted? At first, Loran Hall told the FBI that, yes, he and Larry Howard did visit Slyvia Odio, but not with Lee Harvey Oswald -- instead, the third person on that mission was William Seymour, who might look a little bit like Lee Harvey Oswald, thus confusing the sensitive Ms. Odio. The FBI took that as a conclusion, and closed the case. When Ms. Odio objected, they branded her as a neurotic, and that was that -- for the time being. The Warren Report could go to print on schedule. But later researchers spoke with Sylvia Odio to ask if she indeed might have been so exhausted as to mistake William Seymour for Lee Harvey Oswald. Ms. Odio is very intelligent and very well educated, very articulate and very clear. It was Lee Harvey Oswald and nobody else. Not just because he was standing in front of her at her doorway for nearly a half-hour, but more important than that, she stated -- she had seen Lee Harvey Oswald before that time, and actually she had even met him before. This was news to me before I read it only this year -- it might be old hat to many of you. She was asked where she saw Oswald before, and she said that he actually spoke at a Cuban Exile rally in Texas, and she attended it, enjoyed his lecture, and walked up to meet him. It was no big deal, he was not the featured speaker of the evening, but she interacted with him and recognized his voice at her doorstep when he said merely, "Hello." It was not William Seymour, it was Lee Harvey Oswald that day -- and therefore, Loran Hall lied with no shame whatsoever. Why would Loran Hall lie about that? And why would he name William Seymour in Oswald's place? Syliva Odio failed to identify photographs of Loran Hall and Larry Howard as Leopoldo and Angelo at her door that day -- but Loran Hall admitted it at first (and later denied it, claiming that they called upon a different rich Cuban Exile lady to ask for her support for bombing raids against Castro, although he could not remember the name of that lady). Yet Sylvia Odio was not alone in her claim. Her younger sister also saw the three men at their door -- actually she opened the door first. To understand Sylvia Odio's failure to identify photographs, we should bear in mind the extremely violent nature of Loran Hall and Larry Howard. They were desperate vigilantes. Howard (or Seymour) tried to kill Loran Hall for talking to the FBI and seeking out Jim Garrison. Threatening to kill Sylvia or her sisters would have been nothing to these chaps. (And the FBI showed no interest in protecting Sylvia - quite the contrary.) What the FBI wanted to conceal (and continue to conceal through Chief Justice Earl Warren's ruling that major records about Lee Harvey Oswald must be sealed for 75 years) is that Lee Harvey Oswald had many known associates. Far from being a "loner" who went berzerk on his own, Oswald was a social and political personality who was frequently surrounded by people. Knowing Oswald's associates is the first step in finding out the main secret of the Warren Commission, namely, Oswald's accomplices in the JFK assassination. The testimony of Sylvia Odio is striking today because it matches the testimony of Harry Dean so closely. Loran Hall and Larry Howard had the task (and the money) underneath Guy Gabaldon of Mexico, to accompany Lee Harvey Oswald to Mexico in late September 1963. This is what Harry Dean reports. Sylvia Odio provides sworn eye-witness testimony that she saw Hall, Howard and Oswald together before her very eyes, at her very doorstep, for nearly a half-hour in late September 1963. She was not mistaken, she insists. These were the men. This is firmer evidence than before -- we have two witnesses. Can we add more? I think so. Let's return to the question of William Seymour; what links him to Loran Hall? William Seymour, Loran Hall and Larry Howard were all subordinates under Gerry Patrick Hemming in INTERPEN. Gerry Patrick Hemming, who for the last years of his life was a member of this very FORUM, admitted many facts about INTERPEN to us -- for example, they visited ex-General Edwin Walker in Dallas from time to time. Gerry, Loran and the boys would sit out on the back porch at Walker's Dallas residence at 4011 Turtle Creek Boulevard, drinking beers, smoking cigarettes and shooting the bull about right-wing politics. When he was directly asked to offer anything he knew about the JFK assassination, Gerry Patrick Hemming would evade the answer with the factoid that if he ever got any of his INTERPEN pals in trouble with public visibility, he himself could be killed "by accident" soon afterwards. He refused to do that. This topic has a lot of energy. The boys of INTERPEN, simply because they operated with Walker and with several Minutemen, should all be of interest to us. Leopoldo and Angelo should top our list of suspects -- and anybody they hung around with should also be high on our list. For example -- I for one would like to know as much as possible about William Seymour, and where he was on 22 November 1963. Best regards --Paul Trejo Paul, "Of course" (to use an old Tim Gratz standard phrase), I'm already aware of most if-not-all of this, but thank you for putting it so concisely and eloquently (sp?)! I would say, however, that what I've read about the "Odio Incident" indicates that Sylvia (or is it Silvia?) was positive about Oswald's being there, but was much less certain about Hall and Howard... --Tommy

Greg, You used to be one of the very few people here whose posts I actually looked forward to reading. But now it seems to me that you're acting a bit like a child who, angry at his playmates, leaves the playground in a big huff and takes all his toys with him. I wish you all the best with your book and with your website. --Tommy

Greg I'm one of the few people who is supportive of you over this but even I think you need to chill, let it drop. Every one know you don't believe Armstrong's theory and think he was a fraud. We get it move on. And this time you reignited the dust up with Mike so playing the victim doesn't wash. But let's assume you are right and Mr. Hogan is a bully wouldn't disappearing from the EF be letting him win? At exactly would the point be of deleting your posts. You must have spent hundreds if not thousands of hours writing and researching them. Deleting your posts would be a gift to backers of the "Harvey and Lee" nonsense. seconded I agree.

Would someone please remind me why Hall and Howard decided to take a bus from Dallas to Miami, temporarily leaving the loaded trailer in Dallas rather than continue towing it all the way to its eventual destination of Miami? Could it have been to give Hall and Seymour a plausible reason to be in Dallas a bit later? Thanks, --Tommy

Good questions, Greg. I assume it was Groden who captioned the photos. Perhaps his new book will expand upon that. As for the provenance of the photos, I assume they were taken on 11/22/63 because the traffic looks quite snarled. I likewise assume they were taken at the same time, because they both show that type of traffic, and because we see a white square-box truck in proximity to the bus in each. Taking John Dolva's sage advice about discerning time of day from shadows, it seems to my uninformed eye they were taken mid-day, showing the same type of shadow pattern as photos taken in Dealey Plaza at the same time of day. As for whether it was McWatters' bus, I would have to re-read extensively to determine whether: * McWatters was the only one to drive that route on that or any other day; * If another bus, covering another route, also travelled westward along Elm as part of its route. If no other Dallas transit buses ever travelled westward on that portion of Elm, then we know with some certainty it was the bus usually driven by McWatters, assuming no other driver ever covered his route on a day shift. I am assuming the Commission determined the bus photos were not "relevant" to the assassination for fear that somebody would raise the same questions I have. What are the odds that somebody unconnected to the case would taken photos of the TSBD after the assasination, plus the getaway bus that nobody knew the purported assassin was riding (twice!), plus the arrest of that purported assassin across town? How could Reed's taking photos of: 1) the TSBD after the assassination, 2) the presumptive "get away" bus (from such great distances that it's impossible to see any of its passengers), and 3) the arrest of LHO at the Texas Theater be expected to help the bad guys? Or did Bad Guy Reed take them just to have some momentos of "The Big Event" to add to his photo album/scrap book back home? --Tommy

John, I'm disappointed that Joesten stepped back from putting ex-General Edwin Walker in the center of the JFK-assassination cyclone on the sheer basis that "it's too pat". That is unsatisfactory as a reason. If it is "too pat" that means there was a lot of smoke (so to speak). Thus Joesten seems to conclude that, "since there is so much spoke there, we cannot possibly suspect any fire." Such a reverse conclusion can be justified on only one ground -- that the smoke was created by Unknown Others who wished to frame Walker. But unless they are named, unless hard evidence is presented about a true frame-up, then we are left with a deathly weak reason. I am curious -- if Walker was "framed" -- or as you wrote, "Walker may have been an innocent fall-guy," what is the evidence? Also, why did you say that you agree, John? Did I get that right? Were you convinced by Joesten that somebody tried to frame ex-General Walker, the guy who was so bold as to start a riot at Ole Miss University on 30 September 1962 to protest JFK's support of sending a black student to study there? If Walker was innocent of involvement in the JFK assassination, I want to see the evidence. His hand was in the attacks on Adlai Stevenson on 24 October 1963, and in the "WANTED FOR TREASON: JFK" handbills that also circulated in October, as well as in the black-bordered Ad funded by the JBS and published by CUSA. Walker was the center of the extremist cyclone in Dallas. He was a leader in the Minutemen as well as the JBS. He was suspect #1 by Bernie Weissman and Jack Ruby (according to their Warren Commission testimony). Until Lee Harvey Oswald was thrown to the wolves (so to speak) ex-General Edwin Walker was suspect #1 in many minds. I find no reason to alter my suspicions of ex-General Walker, based on Joesten's claim that it is "too pat". On the other hand, I agree strongly with Joesten when he claims that the pillars of the JFK plot were: 1. The identity shift of Oswald from Oswald the Minuteman to Oswald the Marxist. Right. This was planned, IMHO, immediately after the attempted assassination of ex-General Edwin Walker by a plot involving Oswald, and very possibly Michael Paine, George De Mohrenschildt and Volkmar Schmidt, among several others. Walker learned the facts about Oswald by Easter Sunday (only days after the shooting). Walker (and the Minutemen) then arranged in April, 1963, to transform Oswald into the patsy of their larger scheme to shift power. That is why Oswald was sent to New Orleans that very month to work with Carlos Bringuier, Ed Butler, Guy Banister, David Ferrie and Clay Shaw. In New Orleans, Oswald's identity was shifted from "the Minuteman" to "the Marxist." 2. That Oswald killed Kennedy and Tippit. Right; Jim Garrison presented ample evidence that casts complete doubt on the Warren Commission's case against Oswald as the sole shooter at Tippit on 11/22/1963. Even the ballistics evidence that is claimed as genuine cannot fully account for all the forensic questions raised. 3. That Oswald did it alone. Right. That was the official position of the US Government in 1964, and remained the official position throughout the period of Joesten's main writings on this topic. However, the HSCA's conclusion (1979) is currently the official position of the US Government, namely, that Oswald could never have acted alone in the face of the forensic evidence. Oswald did not act alone. The HSCA was incapable of finding Oswald's accomplices. Yet we are assured by the evidence that Oswald's accomplices were the very ones who made Oswald into their patsy. Oswald knew who these people were -- he trusted them. They betrayed him. Again -- the evidence I see points in the direction of ex-General Edwin Walker (the only US General to resign in the 20th century). Insofar as Walker was an exhibitionist who loved the limelight -- and also loved a good fight -- I find insufficient strength in Joesten's argument that our suspicion of Walker should be discounted because "it's too pat." On the contrary -- that's actually a perfect reason to suspect the man. Best regards, --Paul Trejo Did Oswald pose as a Minuteman-type to get Minutemen/neo-Facists into trouble and then pose as a Marxist to get Marxists/Communists into trouble? Toward which end of the political/economic/social spectrum did he naturally feel more affinity? Or was he apolitical and not only not attracted to either extreme, but not even to more moderate political/economic/social ideas? Was he just a guy who really liked working undercover as a spy/informer and did whatever his controlers told him to do? Is it possible that he took out charismatic, uber-authority figure JFK because he got tired of being jerked around by those darn authority figure controlers and maybe even wanted to "turn the tables" on them and get them into trouble? Is it possible he tried to set someone else up as a scapegoat in the killing of JFK and ended up getting patsied himself? --Tommy edited significantly and bumped

John, I'm disappointed that Joesten stepped back from putting ex-General Edwin Walker in the center of the JFK-assassination cyclone on the sheer basis that "it's too pat". That is unsatisfactory as a reason. If it is "too pat" that means there was a lot of smoke (so to speak). Thus Joesten seems to conclude that, "since there is so much spoke there, we cannot possibly suspect any fire." Such a reverse conclusion can be justified on only one ground -- that the smoke was created by Unknown Others who wished to frame Walker. But unless they are named, unless hard evidence is presented about a true frame-up, then we are left with a deathly weak reason. I am curious -- if Walker was "framed" -- or as you wrote, "Walker may have been an innocent fall-guy," what is the evidence? Also, why did you say that you agree, John? Did I get that right? Were you convinced by Joesten that somebody tried to frame ex-General Walker, the guy who was so bold as to start a riot at Ole Miss University on 30 September 1962 to protest JFK's support of sending a black student to study there? If Walker was innocent of involvement in the JFK assassination, I want to see the evidence. His hand was in the attacks on Adlai Stevenson on 24 October 1963, and in the "WANTED FOR TREASON: JFK" handbills that also circulated in October, as well as in the black-bordered Ad funded by the JBS and published by CUSA. Walker was the center of the extremist cyclone in Dallas. He was a leader in the Minutemen as well as the JBS. He was suspect #1 by Bernie Weissman and Jack Ruby (according to their Warren Commission testimony). Until Lee Harvey Oswald was thrown to the wolves (so to speak) ex-General Edwin Walker was suspect #1 in many minds. I find no reason to alter my suspicions of ex-General Walker, based on Joesten's claim that it is "too pat". On the other hand, I agree strongly with Joesten when he claims that the pillars of the JFK plot were: 1. The identity shift of Oswald from Oswald the Minuteman to Oswald the Marxist. Right. This was planned, IMHO, immediately after the attempted assassination of ex-General Edwin Walker by a plot involving Oswald, and very possibly Michael Paine, George De Mohrenschildt and Volkmar Schmidt, among several others. Walker learned the facts about Oswald by Easter Sunday (only days after the shooting). Walker (and the Minutemen) then arranged in April, 1963, to transform Oswald into the patsy of their larger scheme to shift power. That is why Oswald was sent to New Orleans that very month to work with Carlos Bringuier, Ed Butler, Guy Banister, David Ferrie and Clay Shaw. In New Orleans, Oswald's identity was shifted from "the Minuteman" to "the Marxist." 2. That Oswald killed Kennedy and Tippit. Right; Jim Garrison presented ample evidence that casts complete doubt on the Warren Commission's case against Oswald as the sole shooter at Tippit on 11/22/1963. Even the ballistics evidence that is claimed as genuine cannot fully account for all the forensic questions raised. 3. That Oswald did it alone. Right. That was the official position of the US Government in 1964, and remained the official position throughout the period of Joesten's main writings on this topic. However, the HSCA's conclusion (1979) is currently the official position of the US Government, namely, that Oswald could never have acted alone in the face of the forensic evidence. Oswald did not act alone. The HSCA was incapable of finding Oswald's accomplices. Yet we are assured by the evidence that Oswald's accomplices were the very ones who made Oswald into their patsy. Oswald knew who these people were -- he trusted them. They betrayed him. Again -- the evidence I see points in the direction of ex-General Edwin Walker (the only US General to resign in the 20th century). Insofar as Walker was an exhibitionist who loved the limelight -- and also loved a good fight -- I find insufficient strength in Joesten's argument that our suspicion of Walker should be discounted because "it's too pat." On the contrary -- that's actually a perfect reason to suspect the man. Best regards, --Paul Trejo Did Oswald pose as a Minuteman-type to get Minutemen/neo-Facists into trouble and then pose as a Marxist to get Marxists/Communists into trouble? Toward which end of the political/economic/social spectrum did he naturally feel more affinity? Or was he not attracted to either extreme and was perhaps not even a political/economic/social "moderate" but just really liked working undercover as a spy/operative and did whatever his controlers told him to do? And/Or did he take out charismatic, uber-authority figure JFK (by himself or with others) because he got tired of being jerked around by those authority figure controlers and maybe even wanted to turn the tables on them and get them into trouble? Did he try to set someone else up in the killing of JFK and end up getting patsied himself? --Tommy

James, From my M/S book and CD...... When Kennedy visited Mexico City in late June of 1962, Gabaldon, in league with some rightist Mexican Federal police officials, was set to shoot the president. Only a last minute escape problem aborted that attempted assassination scheme! In late August, 1963, Gabaldon and I kept an appointment with former U.S. Congressman John H. Ruosselot then Western Director of the John Birch Society at his San Marino, California office. Gabaldon picked up ten thousand dollars as pre-arranged, from Rousselot. The money was for the ' Mexico Operation'. Some of these funds were given to Lee Oswald. Two other of our anti-Castro, anti-communist associates, Lawrence John 'Larry' Howard - aka Alonzo Escuido, and Loran Eugene 'skip' Hall, aka Lorenzo Pacillo, were dispatched by Gabaldon to enlist Oswald in the CIA {Central Intelligence Agency}. In late September Oswald accompanied the pair to Gabaldon's Mexico City area office. Oswald then recieved instructions and the funds from the impressive, but phony 'CIA officer Gabaldon'. The fate of both Oswald and Kennedy were there forever sealed! The Trio later returned to the U.S., Hall and Howard 'eventually' to California, and Oswald to Texas where two weeks later, October 15, 1963 he began working at the book depository building in Dallas. .........a previously framed fall-guy {Oswald} with recently arranged {by my associates} pro-communist connections to the Russian and Cuban embassies, {in Mexico City} would be assumed guilty,especially after and because of his own sudden death. .........Oswald's alleged guilt destroyed the powerful and subversive Fair Play For Cuba Committee, and with it, Castro's influence in the American hemisphere. bump

As other members of the Forum may already know, on 11/09/64 J. Edgar Hoover wrote to Warren Commission General Counsel J. Lee Rankin saying a man by the name of Celio Sergio Castro Alba told the FBI on 9/24/64 that he had accompanied Loran Eugene Hall and Lawrence John Howard from Los Angeles to Dallas in late September 1963. The letter says that Loran Eugene Hall told the FBI on 9/16/64 that he and Howard were accompanied to Dallas not by William Seymour, but by a Cuban he knew as "Wahito". The letter also says that Lawrence John Howard told the FBI on 9/20/64 that he "accompanied Hall to Dallas, Texas, in September, 1963, with a Cuban refugee named Cellios Albas". Howard was also reported in the letter as saying that this "Cellios Albas" was also known as "Quarito". . http://jfk.hood.edu/...ges 531-535.pdf I think I've found two mugshots of the Cuban whose warname was "Wahito/Quarito". These are the only (IMHO very probable) photos of him on the Internet that I know of. It looks like he's been in prison in Monroe County Florida twice now. One of the mugshot websites with the photo for "Cello Castro" says that one of his aliases was Cello Sergio Castro-Alba. Bingo! It says that he was born 7/28/31 and was 5'9" and 200 lbs. at the time of the photograph in 2012... To see the photos, do a Google Search or Images search for "Cello Castro" and another search for "Celio Sergio Castro". Put both names in quotation marks for their respective searches and click on "cached". It looks like one of the photos was taken when he was 71 and the other one was taken when he was 81. I believe the guy in the photos may have been one of the three men who visited Silvia Odio. --Tommy Edit: It's interesting to note that Gerry Hemming, in Weberman's Nodule 13, says that (Cuban refugee) Celio Castro was 71 years old in 1963 but acted (my emphasis) like he was 40, had a bad leg from the Machado Revolution, and was, in so many words, a stoned cold son-of-a-gun. It's interesting that Hemming didn't say if Celio Castro looked anything close to as young as he "acted". One would think that if Celio Castro really had been one of the three men who visited Silvia Odio, she would have said that he looked significantly older than the other two. Perhaps Hemming has him "acting" a lot younger than he really was, knowing that most people would take that to mean that Celio looked to be 40 years old, as well. I wonder if Hemming was lying (and embellishing it a bit to make it sound more plausible) to help dispell Loren Hall's original statement to the FBI on September 16, 1964 that, in so many words, Hall, Howard, and Seymour had been together in Dallas in late September 1963 and that they had visited Silvia Odio.

http://www.ebay.ca/i...o-/160856208258 Has anyone seen this early photo of Loren Eugene Hall (when he was still in the Army) yet? I'm guessing it was taken when he was in his early twenties because he was 29 years old and already out of the Army when he was imprisoned in Cuba in April 1959. I tried to paste just the photo here, but it didn't work, so I had to copy and paste the whole dang ad. Is it my imagination, or does he somewhat resemble LHO in this photo? According to the 1940 Census, his first name was spelled Loren with an "e", the same way it's spelled with this photo.. Edit: Does anyone know how tall he was? --Tommy

Written in 1966,one of 10 verses,Re Lorenzo and Alonzo. If any would think that I jest And fun at me would press Of Kennedy's plotters I shall say Two more lived here in East L.A. To their war names they did resort They are Leopoldo and Angelo in the warren report. Harry, Did you know Lorenzo and/or Alonzo personally? Were the other nine verses about them as well? Edit: Was this "Lorenzo" the same person as Loren Eugene Hall (aka "Lorenzo Eugenio Pascillo" and "Skip Hall")? If you knew Hall personally, how tall would you say he was? Thanks, --Tommy

Harry, I'm glad you made it. --Tommy

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- [i've edited and expanded my original reply, below. --T.G.] John [Dolva], I think the guy wearing the coat and tie directly behind Oswald's nose in this photo is Gordon Novel. I know that James Richards pointed out a long time ago that this guy is holding a cigarette in other "captures" of this scene in the video/film, whereas Novel was a pipe smoker. My current theory is that Novel, not wanting to be "caught" on film with LHO, bummed a cig from one of his buddies (or already had some with him) and used it as a prop in helping to obscure his face when he was more visible to the camera.. [i "lifted" this photo from the John McAdams website. -T.G.] --Tommy P.S. I've always wondered what kind of "message" the Japanese guy (Junichi Ehara?; on the left in above photo) was trying to convey to/about Oswald by standing and walking around with his arms "akimbo" like that. I suspect it was some kind of dirty inside joke about his perception that LHO was "gay" and/or being manipulated into a patsy role... Here's another "capture" of the same scene. [Lifted from the Wikipedia article on LHO]

John, I think the guy wearing the coat and tie directly behind Oswald's nose in this photo is Gordon Novel: [i "lifted" this photo from the John McAdams website. -T.G.] --Tommy P.S. I've always wondered what kind of "message" the Japanese guy (Ehari?) on the left was trying to convey to/about Oswald by standing and walking around with his arms "akimbo" like this. I suspect it was some kind of dirty inside joke about how LHO was being manipulated into a patsy role...

Is that Gorden Novel, Richard Nagel, or "Gordon Nagel"? --Tommy

Bernice, If memory serves, Gary Mack said on another thread that Dillard took this photo 15 to 20 seconds after the shooting stopped, not 3.5 seconds. --Tommy

That's what I'm saying, Mikey. I don't see anything unusual about that, given the circumstances. What was he supposed to do, jump on top of her to "protect" her? Drag her to the pergola structure? Lie down next to her and start singing "Kumbyya My Lord"? No? OK, then how about "The Lord's Prayer"? He realized that she was already relatively safe in her prone position. Safer than standing up. So what did he do? He killed two birds with one stone: 1) He got into a safer position himself (you know, inside that beehive of nefarious activity, the pergola structure), and he 2) looked through the pergola wall for any bad guys in the parking lot. --Tommy P.S. He probably realized that the other guy was walking towards her, anyway. You know, to ask her if she was okay. So why not take a quick look for the bad guys? Timing is everything, and he had a once in a lifetime opportunity to see who had killed the most powerful (and charismatic) man in the world. I would have done the same thing.

If it's a gun, WHAT'S THE GUY AIMING IT AT in the Hugh Betzner photo you posted? Tosh Plumlee and Sergio on the hillside across the road? --Tommy

IMHO, "...Charles Hester leaves his wife laying [sic] in the grass..." to look through the pergola wall for anything unusual taking place in the railway yard/parking lot. --Tommy

I agree, Greg. Perhaps David should start proof reading his posts before (and after) he posts them. I find some of them hard to follow. --Tommy

Paul, I wonder if LHO recruited his accomplice(s) or if one (or two) was provided to him? --Tommy

Joe, Are you sure it wasn't the Boys Clubs of America instead of the Boy Scouts? It was started in 1956 and J. Edgar Hoover was one of the co-founders. C. W. Murchison III of Dallas, Texas is listed in this Wikipedia article as one of "their successors in the Boys and Girls Clubs of America": http://en.wikipedia....lubs_of_America I seem to remember reading about Clint Murchison, Sr's trying to get tax exempt status (or something) for the Del Mar Turf Club horseracing track by founding "Boys, Inc" or the "Boys Clubs of America" and "donating" the racetrack's proceeds to it, but I could be wrong. Ahh, here it is! http://www.sandiegor...itics-la-jolla/ http://webcache.goog...n&ct=clnk&gl=us From page 2 of 4, Part II: "Two weeks after Del Mar closed for the season on Labor Day, 1953, Clint Murchison [sr.] wrote [J. Edgar] Hoover with details of his scheme to buy the track using a charity as a front. “I have talked with my tax man as to the methods we should use to make this a tax-free organization,” he said in his September 15 letter, excerpted in Clint, a 1986 biography written by Murchison’s longtime personal secretary Ernestine Orrick Van Buren, who said she had exclusive access to Murchison’s personal files. 'Assuming I am successful in making proper overtures in Chicago, I want your permission to tell them that I expect you to head it on an honorary basis in the beginning and that when you arrive at the period of your retirement from the FBI, you expect to devote your every effort to the furtherance of this project. I do not want to use your name in vain, so I would appreciate it if you would give me permission to tell the owners of the tracks in Chicago that I expect to have your cooperation.' On June 11, 1954, Murchison and [sid] Richardson staged a press conference in the Gold Room of the Beverly Wilshire Hotel in Los Angeles, where they appeared, flanked by Hart and Louis B. Mayer, to announce their takeover of Del Mar. Time magazine reported they were buying a 40 percent controlling interest for $1.2 million. On July 12, the New York Times reported that C. Ray Robinson, a Merced-based attorney for the Texans, had outlined a plan to take over a total of six racing operations across the nation. 'Del Mar would be the nucleus of the planned chain of tracks,' the Times said. Ninety percent of the operation’s net would be given to Boys, Inc., a nonprofit that had been incorporated in Delaware on June 3, 1954. 'The foundation would operate a chain of centers in underprivileged urban sections from coast to coast,' the Times reported. 'These centers would have recreational facilities, guidance counselors, and vocational training facilities in which industrial concerns might participate. 'The sponsors would like to have J. Edgar Hoover, Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, head Boys, Inc., whenever he sees fit to retire from the Federal Service. Mr. Robinson said Mr. Hoover had been approached on the matter and expressed enthusiastic approval of the foundation idea but had not committed himself on taking the position.' 'It was a racket, if you want to know what it was,' George Allen, a longtime Washington insider and crony of both presidents Truman and Eisenhower (as well as Murchison and Richardson), told Ovid Demaris in the 1970s. 'You see, they could go in and buy the track with their foundation, the Boys’ Club deal, and there’s no taxes. They would lend the money, then get it back, but you see, they would then control the track. Sure the Boys’ Clubs would get something, but it was a tax racket. One time they wanted to buy all the tracks in the United States. George Humphrey, who was Secretary of the Treasury, wouldn’t let them do it.' The board of directors of the new operation, according to Murchison biographer Van Buren, was composed of Clint Murchison and his son John; Sid Richardson and his nephew Perry Bass; and Dallas attorney George C. Anson. On September 10, 1954, the state Horse Racing Board granted a one-year license to run the Del Mar racetrack to Operating Company, a corporation owned by Clint Murchison and Sid Richardson. But the controversy over handing the Texans control of the track had not subsided; if anything it had gotten more heated. The state Senate’s Committee on Racing, citing a loss of taxes to the state and federal government caused by the charity setup, protested the move. When it became obvious that the Horse Racing Board would award the license anyway, Senator Harry Parkman told the New York Times, 'We’ll propose new legislation to take care of a situation like this. We’ll amend the law to require the owners of a track to operate it.' Parkman did not carry out his threat, and the state ultimately gave Boys, Inc., a ten-year lease to operate the track. But the protests continued, and the Texans were persistently rebuffed when they attempted to get the Boys Clubs of America to accept their money. In April 1957, according to Van Buren, Boys Club board member E.E. “Buddy” Fogelson, a frequent Del Charro guest, wrote his friend Murchison, saying, '…the National Organization would not accept directly or indirectly income derived from racetracks.' 'Not one cent has been turned over to Boys, Inc. I do not know where the money went,' said Gen. Holland Smith, a retired Marine general whom Clint had retained as a front man; they later had a falling out. 'It is my considered opinion that no money will be transferred to Boys, Inc., for at least five years, if then. I hope I have given you a fair idea of what I think of Mr. Murchison and Mr. Richardson…' Sid Richardson died September 30, 1959. John Connally, as co-executor of Richardson’s estate, replaced him as a board member of the Del Mar track; Sid’s nephew Perry Bass, who had inherited the bulk of Richardson’s empire, also went on the board. Murchison, who had suffered a series of strokes, was replaced by his sons John and Clint Jr." (emphasis added by T. Graves) --Tommy