Gil Jesus

How's this one: Callaway gave an affidavit ( 24 H 204 ) identifying Oswald as the man he saw before he even saw the lineup. In his testimony, Jim Leavelle, who took the affidavits from Callaway and Sam Guinyard ( 24 H 210 ), reported that he took the affidavits "while waiting for the showup". ( 24 H 311 ) Leavelle's WC testimony confirms that the affidavits were taken while the witnesses were waiting for the lineup participants to come down the elevator. Mr. BALL. Did you take statements from them? Mr. LEAVELLE. I believe I took affidavits from them, according to my notes, there while we were waiting for them to come down. ( 7 H 264 ) So the affidavits of Callaway and Guinyard, which identified the "No. 2 man" ( Oswald ) in the lineup as the man they saw running with the gun/pistol in his hand, were taken BEFORE EITHER MAN HAD VIEWED OSWALD IN A LINEUP !!!!

In his testimony, Ted Callaway quoted what Detective Jim Leavelle told himself, Guinyard and McWatters before they viewed lineup # 2 : Mr. CALLAWAY. We first went into the room. There was Jim Leavelle, the detective, Sam Guinyard, and then this bus driver and myself......and Jim told us, "When I show you these guys, be sure, take your time, see if you can make a positive identification.........We want to be sure, we want to try to wrap him up real tight on killing this officer. We think he is the same one that shot the President. But if we can wrap him up tight on killing this officer, we have got him." ( 3 H 355 ) Leavelle indicated to the witnesses that the suspect in Tippit's killing was also a suspect in the shooting of the President and was in the lineup they were about to see. Yeah anybody could have picked him out of THAT lineup:

Mr. BENAVIDES. And so Ted then got in the taxicab and the taxicab came to a halt and he asked me which way he went. I told him he went down Patton Street toward the office, and come to find out later Ted had already seen him go by there. - ( Testimony of Tippit murder witness Domingo Benavides in Vol. VI, pg. 452 ) Why on earth would Callaway ask Benavides which way the shooter went if he had already seen him running down Patton Ave. ? And if he didn't see which way the shooter went, how could he identify Oswald ?

An interesting sidebar to Warren Caster. On the day of the assassination, he was not at work at the Southwestern Publishing Company inside the Texas School Book Depository. He was at the North Texas State University in Denton, having lunch there with Dr. Vernon V. Payne. ( CE 1381 ) Three weeks earlier, student members of the Young Republican Club at NTSU had heckled UN Ambassador Adlai Stevenson during his speech at the Trade Mart and upon leaving the building the Ambassador had been spat on and hit with a picket sign. This "club" was a known satellite of the strident and blustering far-right wing agitator General Edwin A. Walker. Walker made it known at every chance that he regarded JFK as a gutless "Commie-symp" intent on handing the country over to his Kremlin masters. The Dallas Secret Service learned from the Dallas Police, who received information from a student informer, that some of Walker's Denton "troops" were planning something for Kennedy's Dallas visit. One of the suspects that the Dallas Secret Service identified from the Stevenson incident was alleged to have remarked that he and others planned to "drag his [ Kennedy's ] dick in the dirt." Pictures of this student and others who had been involved in the October 24 fracas were circulated to all security personnel at the Trade Mart and a "trip file" was prepared on each subject for use in any future Presidential visits. ( McKnight, Breach of Trust, pg. 249 ) I find it interesting that the very man who brought two rifles into the building just two days before the motorcade, used as an alibi, the very University from which students aligned with General Walker had made threats against the President. And on TOP of all of that, none of these students were placed under surveillance or taken into custody before the Dallas motorcade. No investigation was ever done to determine Caster's political views, the views of Dr. Payne, or if either had any connection with the Young Republican Club or with General Walker.

And for that reason I find nothing sinister with Oswald carrying a gun into a theater.

And what has always bugged me about this is Arnold Rowland's description of the rifle he saw firing from the window. Mr. SPECTER. Can you describe the rifle with any more particularity than you already have? Mr. ROWLAND. No. In proportion to the scope it appeared to me to be a .30-odd size 6, a deer rifle with a fairly large or powerful scope. Mr. SPECTER. When you say, .30-odd-6, exactly what did you mean by that? Mr. ROWLAND. That is a rifle that is used quite frequently for deer hunting. It is an import. ( 2 H 170 ) BTW, the rifles were brought into the building on Wednesday the 20th. If my memory serves me correctly, that's the day that a Dallas Police patrol car allegedly saw "men with rifles" behind the picket fence. “Two days before the assassination, two Dallas police officers were making their usual rounds on patrol. As they entered Dealey Plaza, they observed several men engaged in target practice with a rifle. The men were situated behind the wooden fence on the Grass Knoll. By the time the policemen reached the area the men had vanished, apparently leaving in a car parked nearby.” MICHAEL KURTZ in his book, “Crime of the Century” (second revised edition) citing an F.B.I. report dated 11-26-63. “That same morning [Wednesday, November 20, 1963], in the center of Dallas, two police officers on routine patrol entered Dealey Plaza, through which the presidential motorcade would pass on Friday, and noticed several men standing behind a wooden fence on a grassy knoll overlooking the plaza. The men were engaged in mock target practice, aiming rifles over the fence, in the direction of the plaza. The two police officers immediately made for the fence, but by the time they got there the riflemen had disappeared, having departed in a car that had been parked nearby. The two patrol officers did not give much thought to the incident at the time, but after the assassination of the President two days later, they reported the incident to the F.B.I., which issued a report of it on November 26. For reasons that have never been satisfactorily explained, the substance of the report was never mentioned in the F.B.I.’s investigation of the assassination and the report itself disappeared until 1978, when it finally resurfaced as a result of a Freedom of Information Act request.” JOHN DAVIS, in his book, “Mafia Kingfish”

IMO, the Report was nothing more than a brief for the prosecution. There were serious problems with the evidence in the case that a non-partisan, fact-finding panel would have pursued. This is why I laugh at those like Von Pein who say, "well, they made some mistakes." These guys were lawyers. They knew EXACTLY what they were doing. And the paper trail proves it.

The Commission and its staff executed its "investigation" under the presumption that Oswald was guilty. Examination of Commission memos from the period of January-March, 1964 refer to Oswald's guilt and what the Commission had to do to prove it. A January 11 "progess report" from Earl Warren to the other members refers to a Rankin "outline" whose subject headings included " 2.) LEE HARVEY OSWALD AS THE ASSASSIN OF PRESIDENT KENNEDY" and " ( 3. ) LEE HARVEY OSWALD: background and POSSIBLE MOTIVES." So by early January, the Commission had already accepted Oswald's guilt before it even heard from it's first witness. BTW, that first witness ( Marina Oswald ) testified on February 3, 1964. ( 1 H 1 ) In the section, "LEE HARVEY OSWALD AS THE ASSASSIN OF PRESIDENT KENNEDY", under the heading "murder of Tippit" there is a subheading "EVIDENCE DEMONSTRATING OSWALD'S GUILT". Even though the FBI didn't get the Tippit bullets until March 16, 1964 ( 3 H 474 ) and the Commission didn't hear testimony from the first Tippit murder witness ( Markham ) until March 26th. ( 3 H 304 ) In this same section of the outline is "EVIDENCE IDENTIFYING OSWALD AS THE ASSASSIN OF PRESIDENT KENNEDY" , again a presumption of Oswald's guilt because in January 1964, the Commission HAD NOT YET ANALYZED A SINGLE PIECE OF EVIDENCE !!! I can go on and on and on.....but you folks get the idea.

Which allowed them to be able, to some degree, to coverup the crime. You COULD get a screw up here or there in the evidence. Sometimes it happens and when it does, you hope that it's not bad enough to destroy the case. BUT WHEN EVERY SINGLE PIECE OF EVIDENCE IS QUESTIONABLE, how could anyone not believe that "something is rotten in Denmark" ? And why did it only happen in the case against Oswald ? Why didn't it happen in the case against Ruby ? Didn't the same authorities handle the evidence in both cases ? This case is rife with evidence tampering, witness intimidation, falsification of affidavits and flat out lying. And the shame of the American mainstream media is that not only do they accept this fairy tale as fact, they continue to try to "prove" the case. Perhaps there is no "smoking gun" that will direct us to the persons responsible for this crime, but the one thing we CAN do is to show to the world and to future generations, that the official story, as it was told to us, was not the truth.

Commission Exhibit 2011 ( 24 H 412 ) shows the break in the chain of custody of bullet 399. "Darrell C. Tomlinson...cannot positively identify the bullet as the one he found and showed to Mr. O. P. Wright." "Mr. O.P. Wright could not positively identify C1 ( CE 399 ) as the bullet that was found on November 22, 1963." "Special Agent Richard E. Johnson, United States Secret Service, could not identify this bullet as the one he obtained from O.P. Wright, Parkland Hospital, Dallas Texas, and gave to James Rowley, Chief, United States Secret Service, Washington, D.C. on November 22, 1963." "James Rowley, Chief, United States Secret Service, advised that he could not identify this bullet as the one he received from Special Agent Richard E. Johnson and gave to Special Agent Todd on November 22, 1963." All four of the people who handled the "stretcher bullet" before it came into the possession of the FBI could not identify CE 399 as being that bullet.

Pat you bring up something that has bugged me for quite some time, maybe you have an opinion on this. Jarman, Norman and Williams ran toward the west end of the building after they heard the shots. Yet both Jarman and Norman claimed to have heard the bolt of the rifle being operated, and Jarman said he could hear the shells hitting the floor above him. It doesn't make sense to me.

He does this all the time. He gets "taken to school" on an issue and he just goes off on his merry way spreading his disinformation at another forum as if he'd never been taken to the woodshed. Recently, he posted about Oswald's PROVEN ownership of the rifle after getting his proverbial ass kicked here in this forum over it. HE'S LIKE A TV PROGRAM IN RERUNS. I'm no psychiatrist, but I just don't think that's normal.

John, Ruth Paine was a woman with impeccible and meticulous attention to detail. She used her calendar as a diary of the lives of the Oswalds. HOW NORMAL IS THAT ? HOW MANY OF YOU FOLKS OUT THERE HAVE THE LIVES OF YOUR FRIENDS ON YOUR CALENDAR OR APPOINTMENTS BOOK ? --- ROFLMAO Also, how can someone so precise in detail not find her "error" until February 11, 1964 ? Her story is just incredible. She was watching the Oswalds for somebody.

One would think that a notation for a date that significant ( a baby due date ) would have remained in her memory. Also, Mrs. Paine makes no mention of a specific "due date" in her testimony, only that the baby was due in mid-October. ( 2 H 458 ) Mrs. Paine was pretty clear in her testimony as to what the date was about: Mrs. PAINE. I heard on the television that he had purchased a rifle. Mr. JENNER. When? Mrs. PAINE. I heard it on November 23. Mr. JENNER. Yes. Mrs. PAINE. And went back to the page for March, put a little star on March 20 as being a small square, I couldn't fit in all I wanted to say. I just put in a star and then referring it to the corner of the calendar. Mr. JENNER. That is to the entry I have read? Mrs. PAINE. Put the star saying "LHO purchase of rifle." Then I thought someone is going to wonder about that, I had better put down the date, and did, but it was a busy day, one of the most in my life and I was off by a month as to what day it was. Mr. JENNER. That is you made the entry October? Mrs. PAINE. October 23 instead of November. Mr. JENNER. It should have been November 23? Mrs. PAINE. It should have been November 23. ( 9 H 458 ) Ruth Paine kept quite a diary on the Oswalds using her calendar. I find that odd. I also find it odd that a woman who kept such a meticulous record and corrected other mistakes on her calendar would have let this one slide by. Some people might by her story. I don't. Gil, I fully appreciate where you're coming from and what your concerns are - but no one yet has come up with any satisfactory explanation for the "Oct 23" entry. Like you - I certainly don't buy that she could be out by a month. So... her WC explanation holds no water. Therefore an alternative explanation is needed for that date - casting vague suspicion about it is not all that helpful in solving what it means. If we discard her WC testimony regarding this on the basis of "not buying it", and we have no valid alternative explanation, we are left with what she told the FBI prior to that - which was that she did not recall the significance of it. If that can be accepted, the calendar entries can be pieced together - the date makes sense linked to Marina - not to a rifle purchase. I'm no apologist for Ruth Paine. She is deeply involved with or without this being "sinister". "Piecing together" and "making sense" of what Ruth Paine wrote is all speculative. My argument is that IF Ruth Paine marked "Oct 23" with regard to "Marina's due date", why didn't she tell that to the WC ? Why instead did her testimony connect that to the purchase of the rifle ? Her testimony clearly connects the notation "Oct 23" to the purchase of the rifle. She simply said that she got the month wrong, that it should have been November 23. The testimony is there. There is no need for a "valid alternative explanation".

One would think that a notation for a date that significant ( a baby due date ) would have remained in her memory. Also, Mrs. Paine makes no mention of a specific "due date" in her testimony, only that the baby was due in mid-October. ( 2 H 458 ) Mrs. Paine was pretty clear in her testimony as to what the date was about: Mrs. PAINE. I heard on the television that he had purchased a rifle. Mr. JENNER. When? Mrs. PAINE. I heard it on November 23. Mr. JENNER. Yes. Mrs. PAINE. And went back to the page for March, put a little star on March 20 as being a small square, I couldn't fit in all I wanted to say. I just put in a star and then referring it to the corner of the calendar. Mr. JENNER. That is to the entry I have read? Mrs. PAINE. Put the star saying "LHO purchase of rifle." Then I thought someone is going to wonder about that, I had better put down the date, and did, but it was a busy day, one of the most in my life and I was off by a month as to what day it was. Mr. JENNER. That is you made the entry October? Mrs. PAINE. October 23 instead of November. Mr. JENNER. It should have been November 23? Mrs. PAINE. It should have been November 23. ( 9 H 458 ) Ruth Paine kept quite a diary on the Oswalds using her calendar. I find that odd. I also find it odd that a woman who kept such a meticulous record and corrected other mistakes on her calendar would have let this one slide by. Some people might by her story. I don't.

I just find it incredible that she could have gotten the day right and the month wrong. If we were talking about any other period in history, I might concede that it was an honest error, but this is the most important event of the 20th century and the accused assassin spent the night sleeping at your house and you CAN'T REMEMBER THE MONTH ?

Jim, this is what I'm saying. How could she write down the wrong month THE DAY AFTER THE ASSASSINATION ? How does she get the right day and the wrong MONTH ? [...] I agree, guys. Looks like a feeble attempt on Ruth Paine's part to explain away her March 20th, 1963 calendar entry(s) which indicated that she knew that that was when LHO ordered (or had ordered?) the rifle. Very "fishy".... --Thomas Speaking of fishy, here's the FBI report on the matter, dated February 11, 1964: First, Mrs. Paine seems to explain the matter, that she wrote it on the calendar after she heard it on TV. Then she says that she wrote it "to determine where it fitted in her acquaintenceship with Lee and Marina Oswald". WHAT THE HELL DOES THAT MEAN ? Then she says that "she cannot recall the significance of the entry Oct 23". She assumes that it's an error and she meant "November 23rd ", but that's "provided that November 23 is the night that the information concerning the date Oswald purchased the rifle was released on news telecasts". THEN SHE SAYS THAT SHE BELIEVES THAT THE INFORMATION WAS BROADCAST AFTER NOVEMBER 23 !!! This woman is all over the place and I find her story incredible.

Jim, this is what I'm saying. How could she write down the wrong month THE DAY AFTER THE ASSASSINATION ? How does she get the right day and the wrong MONTH ? ROFLMAO Here's something else to consider: Ruth Paine testified that she didn't know Oswald's middle name an hence his middle initial, until she had to fill out papers for Marina at Parkland Hopsital. Mrs. PAINE. I might point out that I didn't know Lee had a middle name until I had occasion to fill out forms for Marina in Parkland Hospital. ( 9 H 359 ) Mrs. PAINE. I knew he had a middle name but only because I filled out forms in Parkland Hospital. ( 3 H 44 ) I assume that those forms were for the birth of the Oswalds' second daughter, Rachel, who was born on October 20, 1963. So by her own testimony, Ruth Paine knew Oswald's middle initial by October 20th, meaning she COULD have made that entry on October 23rd.

The notation is marked "Oct. 23rd". I doubt she could have made that notation on November 23rd and been off by a month. Besides, Oswald "purchased" the rifle on the 12th, didn't he ?

Waldman Exhibit 7 appears to show that the rifle was shipped to "A. Hidell, P.O.Box 2915 in Dallas on March 20, 1963. Commission Exhibit 401 is a calendar owned by Ruth Paine. On the month of March for the year 1963, there is a star on the date of the 20th, with a notation at the top of the page noting that the star denotes "LHO purchase of rifle". Ruth Paine testified that all of the handwriting on her calendar was hers. Mr. JENNER. This will be the Commission Exhibit No. 401. Gentlemen for the purpose of identification of the exhibit, it is Mrs. Paine's calendar which she used in part as a diary and part to record prospective appointments and she surrendered it to the FBI. This is not merely a photostat, it is a picture taken with a camera of that calendar. (Commission Exhibit No. 401 was marked for identification.) Mr. JENNER. May I ask you a question or two about it Mrs. Paine. Did you not go through each of the pages of that calendar with me this morning? Mrs. PAINE. Yes, I did. Mr. JENNER. And I asked you, did I not, whether it was all in your handwriting? Mrs. PAINE. You did. Mr. JENNER. Except for the identification on the front, the officer who received it from you--he made a notation of the date of receipt--it is all in your handwriting? Mrs. PAINE. That is correct. ( 2 H 434 ) So one needs to ask the question, how could Ruth Paine possibly know the date on which Klein's shipped the rifle ?

Hi DJ, Certainly the Andrews story is provocative, if true. One can go mad conjuring up possibilities and implications of all the loose threads in this case. I guess that's how breakthroughs are made. To me the bona fides of this incident are weak. If this really happened to Andrews, it is inexplicable why he did not go to the police immediately upon hearing about Tippit's death. Also, Lowery could have found out if Andrews had ever told anyone else of this bombshell. Did Andrews carry this information with him for years until a researcher started asking him about Roscoe White? This is what researcher Bill Drenas wrote in his essay Car 10, Where Are You? This information is provided by Greg Lowrey by way of Bill Pulte. James A. Andrews worked for American National Life Insurance whose offices were located across the street from Austin’s Barbecue. Greg Lowrey was interviewing Andrews to get recollections of Roscoe White who worked out of the same office as Andrews. During the interview Andrews told Greg “Since you are interested in the assassination, let me tell you something that happened” and told the following story. James A. Andrew’s was returning to work at his office in Oak Cliff a little after 1:00 P.M. on 11/22/63. He was driving west on West 10th Street (about eight or nine blocks from where Tippit was shot minutes later, see map). Suddenly a police car also traveling west on West 10th Street came up from behind Andrews’ car, passed him and cut in front of Andrews’s car forcing him to stop. The police car pulled in front of Andrews’ car at an angle heading into the curb in order to stop him. The officer then jumped out of the patrol car motioned to Andrews to remain stopped, ran back to Andrews’ car, and looked in the space between the front seat and the back seat. Without saying a word the policeman went back to the patrol car and then drove off quickly. Andrews was perplexed by this strange behavior and looked at the officer’s nameplate, which read “Tippit” (Tippit was wearing his nameplate on 11/22/63. This is documented in a list of personal effects removed from his body at the time of death. Source: Dallas Municipal Archives) Andrews remarked that Tippit seemed to be very upset and agitated and was acting wild. We know by the statements Louis Cortinas at the Top Ten Record Shop that Tippit was last seen running a stop sign and traveling east on Sunset Ave. The location of Andrews’ encounter with Tippit is approximately 2 blocks northwest of the record shop. Did this event happen before or after Tippit was seen at the record shop? Given Andrews’ statement that this happened a little after 1:00 P.M. let us use the 1:03 P.M. missed call as a benchmark. Since the only documented time that Tippit was away from his car radio was when he went into the record shop, the probability is high that James A. Andrews’ encounter with J.D. Tippit happened just moments after Tippit was seen at the record shop. Tippit could have gone east on Sunset then gone north on Madison or Zangs then taken a left onto West 10th Street and this would have put Tippit traveling in the proper direction to have ‘cut off’ Andrews’ car that was also traveling west on West 10th Street. Why did Tippit choose Andrews’ car to stop? Why didn’t he pull over Andrews’ car using conventional police procedure by using red lights and siren and stopping to the rear of Andrews’ car? Why did Tippit ‘cut off’ Andrews car the way he did? Why didn’t Tippit speak to Andrews or give him any explanation for what was going on? Why was Tippit so upset and acting the way he did? If these questions could be answered it would be very helpful in determining what was going on in the last minutes of Tippit’s life. Exactly where Tippit went and for how long after his sighting at the record shop and after his encounter with James A. Andrews are still unknown. Not really enough to go on, in my opinion. I'm wondering why Tippit being alone in his cruiser, would stop a car and not radio it in.

Since it was late last night to give a detailed response, I'll go through it this morning: The execution of the reconstruction was in disregard of the known actions of the participants, stretching the time consumed for Baker to reach the second floor and shrinking the time of descent of a sixth floor gunman. As already mentioned, the reconstruction timing began after the FIRST shot ( 3 H 252 ) while Baker testified that he didn't respond until after the LAST shot ( 3 H 247 ). That means that for the timing of the reconstruction to be valid, it had to start at the last shot. The Commission claimed in its Report that the span of shots was anywhere from 4.8 to 7 seconds. ( Chap. 3, pg. 117 ) Baker was flanking the last camera car, whose occupants included Malcolm Couch ( 6 H 156 ), Bob Jackson ( 2 H 158 ), Dillard ( 6H 163-164 ) and Underwood ( 6 H 169 ). The men in the car recalled being in proximity to the intersection of Houston and Elm at the time of the last shot. ( 6 H 169, 6 H 158, 2 H 159 ) Had the reconstruction properly started after the last shot, Baker would have reached the TSBD in 8-10 seconds, rather than the 15 seconds ( 7 H 159 ) the Commission claimed it took. Roy Truly told the Secret Service that Baker made his way to the front entrance "almost immediately". ( CD 87 ) And almost a year later, Truly told CBS News that Baker's arrival "was just a matter of seconds after the last shot." The occupants of the last camera car ( Camera Car 3 ) related how their car came to a stop or hesitated in the middle of the turn onto Elm St to let some photographers out. ( 2 H 162, 6 H 165, 169 ) Couch's film begins slightly BEFORE the stop, just as the car was making the turn ( 6 H 158 ). From the testimony of those in the car and the scenes depicted in the film, it can be determined that Couch began filming NO MORE THAN 10 SECONDS AFTER THE LAST SHOT. Camera Car 3 occupant Jackson told the Commission that after the last shot, as his car hesitated through the turn onto Elm, he saw a motorcycle policeman run up the Depository steps toward the front door. ( 2 H 164 ) Since the Commission's reconstruction of Baker's movements took 1:30 and 1:15 in two tests, and since it said that Baker took 15 seconds to REACH the TSBD, his movements AFTER he arrived there actually took anywhere from 1 minute to 1:15. But since the evidence shows that Baker reached the TSBD main entrance within 10 seconds, the reconstruction time is off by at least 5 seconds. Further reductions are in order. The two reconstruction times reflect times taken when Baker "walked" or "kind of run". ( 3 H 253 ) As we can see from the Couch film, Baker did neither---he ran. And the witnesses said he ran. Baker admitted he ran ( 3 H 248-249 ). Truly gave a good description of this mad dash of Baker's. ( 3 H 221 ) So why did the Commission time Baker "walking" and "trotting" through his actions ? Like I said, to stretch his response time. The Commission claimed that Baker's time would have been LONGER because it didn't account for " jostling with the crowd of people on the steps". ( Report, 152-153 ) The Couch film eliminates the possibility that that slowed Baker down. Eddie Piper saw Baker and Truly RUN into the building, not walking or trotting, yell up for an elevator and then climb the stairs. ( 6 H 385 ) Truly and Baker reached the second floor in under 85 seconds and the Couch film introduces the possibility that it may have been as little as 70 seconds since Baker parked his motorcycle within 10 seconds of the last shot. The second part of the resconstruction, that of the actions of the sixth floor gunman, took 1:18 and 1:14 according to the Commission. ( 3 H 254 ) This reconstruction also suffered from serious omissions. After the last shot, a minimum of 2.3 seconds must be added to the reconstructed time because the gunman operated the bolt of the rifle, ejecting the last fired shell and chambering a fourth cartridge. In addition, witnesses claimed that the gunman had been in no hurry to leave the window. ( 2 H 159, 3 H 144 ) The "sniper's nest" was constructed in such a way as to inhibit movement in and out of it. Deputy Sheriff Luke Mooney had to squeeze "between these two stacks of boxes, I had to turn myself sideways to get in there" ( 3 H 285 ). To simulate the hiding of the rifle, the SS man ( Howlett ) "leaned over as if he were putting a rifle there" ( 3 H 253 ). But Deputy Constable Seymour Weitzman reported that the rifle was "covered with boxes. It was well protected as far as the naked eye". ( 7 H 107 ) Deputy Sheriff Roger Craig said that the the ends of the rows between which the rifle had been pushed were closed off by boxes, so that one could not see through them. ( 6 H 269 ) Photographs of the area where the rifle was found support these two men's claims. CE 719 shows that the rifle was found amid a cluster of boxes that did not permit easy access and CE 517 shows that the rifle was upright between two rows of boxes that had partially overlapped on top, thus eliminating the possibility that the rifle had been merely dropped down between the stacks. Concealment of the rifle required much maneuvering. In addition to squeezing between boxes to exit the sniper's nest, the gunman had to move cartons filled with books. The rifle itself had been very carefully placed in its position. The gunman had not left the window in any hurry. He had chambered one last round. To the goverment's minimum time of 1:14 for the gunman to reach the second floor, add 6 or 7 seconds for the rechambering, slow withdrawal and squeezing out of the sniper's nest. Next add another 15 or 20 seconds for the gunman to get to the area where the rifle was placed, place it there and cover it with boxes of books on top and on the ends so that it was not easily found. That's anywhere from 1:35 to 1: 41 total time for a sixth floor gunman to have reached the second floor. Had Oswald been the assassin, he would have reached the second floor AT LEAST 5 to 11 seconds AFTER Baker, and that's if Baker's response had him WALKING ( 1:30 ), which we know he didn't. Since Oswald was in the lunchroom BEFORE Baker, we know he couldn't possibly have descended from the sixth floor.

Gil, You wrote... "The significance of this film is in the timing of the event, showing that Baker arrived at the building 5-10 seconds BEFORE the Warren Commission said he did." I'm curious, what time did the Warren Commission say Baker arrived at the building? Todd "Baker's movements were timed with a stopwatch. On the first test, the elapsed time between the simulated FIRST shot and Baker's arrival on the second-floor stair landing was 1 minute and 30 seconds. The second test run required 1 minute and 15 seconds." ( report Chap. 4, pg. 152 ) Baker testified that he didn't rev the motorcycle up until after the last two shots. Mr. BAKER. Yes, sir; I heard--now before I revved up this motorcycle, I heard the, you know, the two extra shots, the three shots. ( 3 H 247 ) The Commission timed Baker from the FIRST shot when he didn't react until after the THIRD shot. So the Commission's timing is in error.

The show is on from 7:00PM to 8:00PM this Wednesday, May 11th. The radio show can be found at this website: http://www.talktainmentradio.com Once on the website, go to “Click Here to Listen Live” You should see “Fight Back” — this is Bob Fitrakis’ show You can listen live on the internet. Call the toll-free phone number 1-877-932-9766 at 7pm EDT Wednesday night.

Oswald told police that he was on the first floor and went up to the lunchroom to get a Coke when he encountered Baker. Commission Exhibit 1118 is the floor plan of the second floor of the TSBD. http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/html/WH_Vol22_0058a.htm The Commission said that Baker " intended to continue around to his left toward the stairway going up but through the window in the door he caught a fleeting glimpse of a man walking in the vestibule toward the lunchroom.." ( Report chap. 4, pg. 151 ) But the only way Baker's line of sight would have allowed him to catch "a glimpse" of anyone "walking in the vestibule" was if that someone had entered the vestibule from the south, using the stairwell in the front of the building and going through either the office space or the corridor to the left of it. http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh22/html/WH_Vol22_0058a.htm This would jive with what Greg said and Oswald told police during his interrogation, that he was on the first floor having his lunch ( 4 H 231 ). Oswald ascending the front stairs from the first floor through the office space into the vestibule, where Baker gets his "glimpse" of him. It only stands to reason that Oswald would use the same pathway leaving the area as the one he used to arrive there--- through the office area and down the stairs to the first floor. Mr. BELIN. From your best judgment, if Lee Harvey Oswald didn't go into the conference room and didn't go back to the door marked around between 27 and 28, how would he have gotten out of the office? Mrs. REID. Right straight out this door down this stairway and out the front door. ( 3 H 278 )