Duke Lane

Well, isn't it a relief to actually hear someone say that! My cousin, Francis Xavier Fenton, was off duty at a Hartford (CT) tavern when someone tried robbing the place. Franny acted and ended up dead for his efforts. I've heard from some members of the force who were active 'way back then that, when the news that one of their own was down, even off-duty officers responded.If Tippit was killed, as you say, to "encourage responding officers not to take Oswald alive," then it can only stand to reason that killing Tippit was part of the plan from the very beginning. Either that or it was pure serendipity. If I were a conspirator involved in assassinating the President of the United States, I think I'd do my damnedest to do whatever was necessary to cover my tracks. Even if the entire DPD hated JFK with a passion, the vast majority of them would have reacted in a thoroughly professional manner and done their jobs to track down his killer(s). The proof of this is in the reports that the officers on duty that afternoon filed: all but a very few (who took up roadblocks in their assigned areas, who were assigned to the Trade Mart, or who went to Parkland) immediately responded to Dealey Plaza. I actually have a map of this somewhere. Let's see ... ah, here it is! This is a copy of a Commission Exhibit provided, I think, by Inspector Sawyer. The color-coding is mine. Here's basically what happened and what the map tells you: 12:38 - the DPD dispatcher broadcast "a shooting in the downtown area involving the President." 12:41 - Dispatch radios, "Attention all squads in the downtown area: Code 3 [lights & sirens] to Elm and Houston with caution." Whereupon, according to the channel 1 radio transcript and the officers' reports (filed during the following several days and available among the Commission Exhibits, probably CE2003 - but don't quote me on that!!), all of the officers in the districts marked as red and yellow on the map proceeded to Dealey Plaza. (Obviously, quite a few non-patrol officers did as well.) Those whose districts are not marked (i.e., the white ones) did not file reports - that I've seen, anyway - or were assigned to the Trade Mart or motorcade route. Those colored light blue remained in their districts and most if not all set up road blocks or went on heightened patrol. What this map shows is that most of the patrol districts surrounding downtown Dallas had no patrol officers remaining in them. 12:44:45± - Someone identifying themselves as the unit assigned to district 56, located at the right middle of the radio patrol map, calls to say that he'll be "clear for 5," in other words, out of the car (or out of service) for five minutes. In response, dispatch asks "56, your location?" to which 56 responds "East Jefferson." East Jefferson Boulevard is located only in Oak Cliff, and runs from Beckley to the Jefferson Viaduct into downtown (see second map below; East Jefferson is marked in red); there is no other entry for "Jefferson" anywhere else in Dallas. District 56, on the other hand, is located at the far eastern edge of Dallas, bordering on the towns of Garland and Mesquite. If the individual claiming to be "56" was actually assigned to that area and was in fact on East Jefferson (why he'd say so otherwise is anyone's good guess), then according to Yahoo maps, he was about 10 miles from his assigned patrol district. (56 was last heard from at around 12:28 in conjunction with a garbled transmission regarding "...traffic, on a '56 Chevrolet. I can't see the license number." Six minutes later, at 12:34, dispatch calls him, gets no response, then makes the general query: "Anyone know where 56 is?" (When he reappears to indicate that he is "clear" some 20 minutes later and 10 miles from his assigned area, it is without comment by dispatch other than to ask his location, which also draws no comment ... but seemingly prompts them, after hearing that he's in Oak Cliff, to think that nobody's in Oak Cliff and they need to get Tippit over there right away!) East Jefferson Blvd, Oak Cliff 12:45:30± - Dispatch orders units 87 (R.C. Nelson) and 78 (Tippit) to "move into central Oak Cliff." Tippit responds that he is located at "about Kiest and Bonnie View" in his regular patrol district (dark blue on the map); Nelson indicates that he is "travelling north on Marsalis at R.L. Thornton [Expressway, now I-35E]," just one or two blocks south of East Jefferson at the southeast edge of Oak Cliff. (Nelson will continue into downtown via the Jefferson Viaduct, informing dispatch of his progress - without comment from the dispatchers - until he radios that he is "out down here" at Dealey Plaza. He is not heard from again until after the citizen "officer down" call by T.F. Bowley.) These calls are significant, being just about 30 seconds between them: no sooner does a patrol unit indicate that it is available in Oak Cliff than DPD dispatch decided that - in dispatcher Murray Jackson's later words - "we were draining resources from Oak Cliff" and needed to send his friend, JD Tippit, to cover the shortage of manpower. It should also be noted that the officer who normally patrolled this section of town, W.D. Mentzel, was in the area eating lunch at the Luby's Cafeteria on Jefferson Blvd. Mentzel was the only patrol officer in the entire city of Dallas taking lunch during the time the President was in town (he cleared for lunch at 12:28, when the motorcade was on Main). He would remain at lunch until 1:07, and would then be sent to investigate an accident on Davis St. As is shown by the radio map, Oak Cliff was clearly not the only part of town that had had its "resources drained," and indeed most of the city - including the area immediately surrounding the assassination site as well as large sections to the north, south and east - was devoid of police patrols. The usual question - and the only one that "unofficial spokesmen" for DPD at this time respond to - is "why was Tippit sent to Oak Cliff?" (the usual response being his bravery, dependability and so forth); the real question that should be posed, perhaps, is "why was anyone sent to Oak Cliff ... and why only to Oak Cliff?" 12:54 - Dispatch again radios 78 asking "you are in the Oak Cliff area, are you not?" to which Tippit responds in the affirmative, he is at "Lancaster and Eighth." He is then told to "be at large for any emergency that comes in." It is his last complete transmission. The gist of this sequence of events is that, knowing that there were twice as many officers in Oak Cliff as was usual (albeit with one indisposed at lunch), Jackson anxiously monitored his "friend's" progress into the area and then - as desperate as Oak Cliff was for a police presence - was cut adrift and told to simply "wander around as you see fit" in case something - anything - happened. Fifteen minutes later, he was dead. As I have noted and illustrated elsewhere under this thread, the most likely route that Tippit would have taken from Kiest and Bonnieview takes almost exactly the same amount of time to travel today - at normal speeds - as it took between the transmissions sending Tippit into Oak Cliff and confirming he was there. This is too coincidental to suggest that anything other than what Tippit purportedly did is exactly what he did do. It also suggests a dispatcher who was "watching the clock" to be certain that Tippit got into Oak Cliff quickly. His choice of words - "you are in the Oak Cliff area, are you not" rather than a more colloquial (and most of the dispatches were fairly colloquial) "are you in Oak Cliff yet?" likewise suggests someone who was more than a little "keyed up." According to former patrolman Tom Tilson (hero of "The Black Car Chase," a busy man that day despite his being off duty), who also claims to have been a friend of Tippit's, it was "common knowledge in the department" that JD had a paramour "on the south side of Tenth Street" in Oak Cliff, coincidentally just where he was shot and killed. If that is true - and I cannot state if it is or not - then it is possible that he was expected to show up there soon after he was put "at large," which he did. 1:02 to 1:03± - Dispatch calls "78, location?" There is no response. Not only is there no response, but there is no follow-up call, and no reference to 78 again until after the "citizen call" reporting an officer down; it is the very first transmission following Bowley's giving them the location of the shooting at 1:16 p.m., more than ten minutes after the previous no-response call to Tippit. Is it a complete flight of fancy to imagine that the first non-responsive call was expected, that Jackson knew that JD wouldn't answer, and that he could pay no particular additional attention to him - despite his not answering - until somehow someone would inform them of his shooting, whether by radio or by phone? Upon getting that news, the first order of business would, under such a scenario, be the confirmation that JD Tippit would not and could not answer. The "officer down" call had its desired effect - if that's what it was - of drawing a large number of police who were securing and searching the downtown crime scene away from where the President of the United States had been killed on their watch, under their protection. If one were to imagine any from among a long list of crimes, there are few - if any - others that would cause police officers to drop whatever they might have been doing, however important it may have been, to rush to another crime scene except the shooting of a fellow officer. All this goes to prove that the murder of JD Tippit was not the desperate act of a desperate killer (Oswald) intent on escape, but a cold and calculated diversion to draw the focus of attention from Dealey Plaza as well as to the area where the soon-to-be accused assassin would be found. Underscoring this is the fact that only a short while after being informed that an officer ("56") was "clear for five" on East Jefferson in Oak Cliff, dispatchers did not even attempt to contact him as the officer closest to the scene of Tippit's shooting. 56 was never called, nor did he broadcast on the radio again for the rest of the afternoon: his last call was immediately before JD was sent to his death, letting JD's "friends" in dispatch know he was on the job and ready to roll.

All I could find was a (yawn!) thread from one of the alt.whatever.jfk newsgroups on this. I found some other Donald Willis stuff (e.g., "Fact After All: Tippit Shot With an Automatic"), but not that. Well, Harry's little bit there sort of shoots the O-giving-fake-address thing, as well as him giving his info to a cop and being told he could leave. I have to admit, though, it did have the ring of truth to it! Ah, but we're no longer certain that he gave a false address, as true to form as that may have been, are we. That he knew something seems pretty apparent, if only from his statement - if I'm remembering correctly that this happened at all - that "it will all come out at my trial," or words to that effect. Of course, if it did, it no doubt redoubled people's concerns about what he'd say about them, and sealed his fate ... if it hadn't been sealed already.I've read of some scenarios where Oz was supposed to have been an infiltrator of sorts - they "listen" pretty well, actually - in Dallas into the whole Fort Hood/Terrell Armory weapons thing. That would lend some sense to why he would have been set up as the patsy - a big "gotcha!" - and might even lend some credence to his getting into someone's car in DP and heading off to Oak Cliff: how could he refuse them? Like an undercover narc who's gotten into a big coke ring or something having to tag along for and even participate in killings to maintain the cartel's trust. But when all's said and done, I really can't imagine anything as to what did or even might have happened at TSBD with Oz after the shooting ... or after he knew there was a shooting. It's just unfathomable to me, I can't get into a dead man's head. Well, I guess that "whole Bircher crew" could include the Roy Trulys of the world. You can't forget the Walker group either, tho' I suspect they really didn't have anything to do with it, but that only from Walker's own attitude about it, having people checking into things and so forth: it almost seemed as if he knew more than the WC did!Have you ever read the testimony of Revilo Pendleton Oliver, "America's premier patriot and scholar?" If not, before you do, read his articles about the assassination first, particularly "Marxmanship in Dallas" and "The Aftermath of the Assassination." Actually, you can check out the website dedicated to his fond memory at revilo-oliver.com, which includes several recordings of his speeches. According to one site discussing his patriotism and scholarship, This book, which is one of many that Oliver wrote during his long career as an academic at the University of Illinois, deals with his association with the John Birch Society, an organization founded to fight Communism. Oliver was a founding member of this patriotic organization and he not only edited their flagship publication, American Opinion, but also wrote numerous book reviews and articles. Oliver also spent many years traveling the Birch speaking circuit, trying desperately to persuade Americans of the dangers of Communism and the values of conservatism. Eventually, Oliver became disillusioned by the conservative movement and John Birch founder Robert Welch, and he turned his energies to what he perceived were the real issues in the struggle against Communism: Jews and the complete ignorance of the white race to recognize its greatness and destiny. It would be gut-busting hilarious if he wasn't so god-awful serious. The man is Rush Limbaugh on steroids. Yes, please do. Yet every single cop failed to see a shotgun ... or to testify to seeing one anyway.As you read those accounts, you'll probably come across Pinky Westbrook's anecdote - which may be the same as above (underlined) - about how (ha-ha) one of the officers' hands was cuffed, someone apparently mistaking it for Oswald's. How, I don't know, it's not like Lee was dressed like a cop or detective. Did it have a gun in it at some point? Nobody who testified before the WC mentioned this incident other than Westbrook. I believe that it was either Thomas Hutson or C.T. Walker who also commented that someone wsa telling Oz to let go of the gun, and he'd responded "I can't" or "I'm trying," like he was unable to let loose of it. Interesting scenario. I'm guessing this will be in the installment about officers' testimonies about the goings-on at the theater? So, who killed him?

I've got to run off to do other stuff, but wanted to respond to a couple of items from the previous couple of posts: I'm familiar with McWatters' statement about his thinking they wanted him to ID the kid, bu there are still the nagging little matters about McWatter's transfer being found on Oswald's person after he'd been arrested, and dear old Mrs Bledsoe's ID'ing him on the same bus. There is one "non-discrepancy" that belies this entire scenario (which I've argued ceaselessly with Drenas) and that is where and when Tippit gave his locations on the radio. At one point (12:46?) he gave his location as being at Kiest and Bonnieview, a location in SE Oak Cliff. Eight minutes later, he was asked his location, and he said he was at 8th and Lancaster.The most direct route from where he was to where he went is Bonnieview, which becomes 8th, which in turn intersects with Lancaster just west of the R.L. Thornton Expressway (I-35E - see map below). I have driven this route several times at "normal" speeds - remember that JD was not told to proceed at code (lights and/or siren) - and guess what? It takes just about exactly eight minutes! They say "the devil's in the details," and this is one that's difficult to fake, "pretending" to get from somewhere you're not to somewhere else in just the right amount of time that it would normally take. But wait! Of course Lee'd have to go to the theater because Tippit was going to fail to deliver him to Redbird because they were going to kill him first! The two possibilities are a contradiction.Gotta run!

According to Truly's testimony, he entered the building after Baker. As the building superintendent, it would make sense that he would want to be aware of and assist with police entering the building at any time. As to Baker's perception that Truly "stepped forward," someone coming into the door and through the people standing there - and where Baker had also come from - would seem to be "stepp[ing] forward" out of the crowd from the point of view of someone who was in the middle of the room. I don't know whether Baker knew who was in the building already or who followed him in, only that someone stepped toward him as the person in charge. Truly could have just as easily just entered the door and walked forward as anything else. According to Mrs Reid, Lee was not wearing a jacket when he came through her office area. Yes, it would seem that way, wouldn't it. It depends on what else was going on in the room, if anything, that might have prevented or distracted Baker from noticing Oswald when he was there. What are the cites on where Baker was and where Oswald was? One could speculate how these things were possible, but how would they have been accomplished? Here's what I'm getting so far:Baker gave his report on Friday, stating he saw a man on the 3rd or 4th floor "walking away from the stairs; this person was not Oswald in the second floor lunch room, as evidenced in part by the apparent fact that Baker didn't recognize Lee while he was sitting in the same room at DPD HQ; In the meanwhile, someone (who?) decided that it was unacceptable to have had "the cop" (I'm guessing nobody knew his name?) encounter a conspirator (shooter or otherwise) on his way downstairs, and thus used Geraldean Reid's statement placing Lee in the second floor office coming from the lunch room to re-manufacture the encounter as having occurred on the second floor to coincide with Reid's encounter with him. Some time after this, "the deciders" somehow convinced Baker that he needed to play along with the scenario, which could have been easy enough if only based on Baker's inferior knowledge of the building (vice Truly's: "no, officer, you'll remember that this door was swinging shut ..."), his likely adrenaline rush (he was after someone shooting at the President), and his focus on what may have been going on in the upper floors. Am I missing anything? Here's what I guess I'm not quite getting yet: What was Truly's role in the conspiracy; how did he fit in? As noted elsewhere, he had risen through the ranks at TSBD, so had been there for some period of time, thus he hadn't been at the CIA Conspiracy School or to Cuba, and he wasn't Italian, so who was he conspiring with? If he wasn't tied in with any of the usual groups - or was he? - then how did he come to take a part in all of this? I am presuming that it was not TSBD suppliers who were doing the shooting .... How did Truly & Company "get to" Baker to get his testimony to conform with their "cover story?" What was his (or Campbell's or Cason's) connection to the DPD that they could have brought any kind of pressure to bear on him? Was that connection direct or indirect (i.e., did they know someone or just have their own influence)? Or was it merely a case of continual "reminders" of "what happened" whenever Baker came back to the building for official purposes? Or did maybe Baker come back unofficially to refresh his own memory, and have it "refreshed" for him? How could they have known what Reid's statement was? I don't know offhand when Geraldean gave her statement, or if it was before or after Truly's. Even assuming it was prior, if it was given to DPD or DCSD, how did Truly & Company know what it contained unless they were present when she gave it, or unless they had "someone on the inside" to let them know? And if the former was the case, was Truly's just a case of fast thinking on the feet, or did he have time to confer with others - or did he even need to confer with anyone else?? - so the "correct" story was able to be circulated and "firmed up?" If the latter, you're inferring a different conspiracy than is normally postulated. The thing is, if that's the case, it could not have begun and ended there; it had to continue through to Oswald's own execution and beyond, otherwise we'd have to believe that TSBD had its own "part to play" in the conspiracy and the rest was left to chance. On TSBD's part, it looks from this like it: Hired Oswald, specifically, on a pretense together with Charles Givens when the actual trend was to start laying off employees due to slackening times rather than hiring them. The only "excuse" - if that's all it was - to do so was to have the available manpower to re-surface the upper floors (in which case, why not use the inexperienced men to nail boards to the floor rather than fulfill orders? Enabled the shooter(s) with entry to the building and a guarded exit meaning, too, that the shooter(s) was or were known to them, at least by sight (and none of these people suffered "mysterious deaths!"). This, it would seem, would necessitate some orchestration of the other inhabitants of the building during the crucial period, or else their complicity to one degree or another; Made up and coordinated a story to implicate Oswald that survived - or merely fit into - the recollections of all of the other building employees. The latter case would seemingly require advance or immediate knowledge of what each of those employees said in their statements. I've gotta run for now, but wanted to make at least these few points. By no means am I suggesting that any of this is necessarily impossible, but in order to be even vaguely possible, much less probable, these things would seem to need to be accounted for. Your thoughts?

Don't worry, I'm not confused. Thanks, I've already found copies for sale. Interesting. To whom or what? Maybe so ... but don't you think that someone would have to have a grudge or something against him? I mean, you don't just go killing fellow officer - an observation that is implicit in your reference to his personnel record - because they can't fill out paperwork. You either have to really want the guy dead, or at the very least consider him the absolute pits as a cop. You also would have to think very little of his family or otherwise - as they say the Mob does - "set them up" financially afterward. They would probably have to accept the whole deal for it to be credible, no? Well, it really doesn't matter what authority Shelley or anyone else did or didn't have, what matters most is what the person he told anything to perceived him as having. If he was wrong, it only matters if the person was caught, or if anyone cared to do anything about it. Witness the fate of Lt William Calley. I'll look into the Shelley-leaving-early thing. I see your point again, but it doesn't "listen" well. When was McD supposed to shoot Lee anyway? I don't think it makes sense that McD would attempt to pass off the idea that LHO threatened him with a gun and then not shoot him while the weapon was in his hand. In other words, it's very difficult to prove - or, really, even suggest - self-defense after you've disarmed the perp ... and McD did do just that and handed the gun off to someone else; the threat was neutralized, no good cause for shooting.It would seem the much easier approach given those facts would have been simply to shoot him, turn around and get the gun from someone, put it in the dead guy's hand and then say "he tried to shoot me." No, I think McD was just another "poor dumb cop" if anything. Not in the least, but thanks for your concern!

My reply continued .... The ALT "was part of a network run by H. L. Hunt, Carl McIntire and Billy James Hargis - called the American Council of Christian Churches, a right-wing organization that involved itself politically with many Cold War efforts, including the struggle to free Cuba. . . ." according to Eric Tagg's book on Buddy Walthers. Not familiar with that; have no idea. I'll have to look into it if possible.Still, what you're suggesting here tends toward the local rather than the national .... See police radio transcripts. The false sighting at the library stopped some from searching as they sped off to that diversion, and Hill, in his attempt, was seen coming up the stairs by two ladies inside. They opened the door and told him they'd seen no-one and everything was jim dandy inside. Good enough for Hill, apparently. Now that's a pretty passive role ... or very lucky on the part of whomever had managed to set all of this up ... Truly giving the "go" signal to Oz the patsy ... his managing to get away by the skin of his teeth ... pulling a dumb move like shooting a cop, drawing attention to him and his "friends" ... and then (phew!) along comes that lucky call to the library. Are you sure of all this, or maybe there are some other holes to fill? Like, for instance, if the game plan was to end up at the ALT in the first place and the library call was a planned diversion, then what was the deal with Tippit such that they'd need a diversion from that little murder? Indeed. And in my opinion, he got his hand on before entering the TT. He was trying to plant it on Oswald as an excuse to kill him. Getting him out of the country had failed. This would have to do. Oswald saved himself by making sure everyone heard him say he wasn't resisting. I think you may have something there ... tho' I also don't think McDonald went into it expecting he'd be the next casualty either. And if the gun didn't go off, what would the excuse for shooting Oswald have been? Harry Olsen's memory was so poor, it's not surprising he had to leave the force. If you say so. You do realize that it was the second time he got fired in the previous 18 months, don't you?Here's a summary of what I think you're suggesting: You feel that it's possible that TSBD execs were in on the deal going down and purposely set up Lee Oswald, both weeks before the assassination by hiring him to be in the right place at the wrong time under false pretenses, and then after the fact by /a/ possibly shielding him from what was really going on (say, so he could continue to act innocent), or maybe having his active participation in some role inside the building, and then, in either of those cases, /b/ sending him elsewhere and then calling attention to him by subsequently bringing his absence to the attention of the police. The rest, as they say, is history. Is that about right ... at least up to that point? If so, the next question would have to be to whom the TSBD folks turned control of the situation - and Oswald - over to once Lee had left the building. Another would be why he wasn't just spirited off to, say, Redbird Airport and into a plane to Mexico if the real game plan was to get him out of the country. I mean, why go farting around little ol' Oak Cliff on foot if the "real deal" is hundreds of miles away, presumably by air? Third might be how all these contingency plans (like a fake call to the library, or Nick McDonald attempting to plant a gun on Oswald) happened to be in place in little ol' Oak Cliff if Oak Cliff wasn't part of the plan to begin with? What do you think: did Tippit accidentally stumble upon a man walking down the street (one of many, if Harry Olsen is to be believed from his vantage point six blocks away), decide he was somehow suspicious, and end up getting himself shot and killed for his efforts? Or might he, too, have been a diversion? I mean, the whole library/Nick McDonald thing leads one to the conclusion that the "conclusion" was to be in Oak Cliff, maybe even at the theater, so if you've got to get the cops to kill the patsy, what better way to stir their emotions than to kill one of their own ... or better yet, two of their own? A second cop-killing right in front of their eyes (so to speak) would all but guarantee that whoever did it was not going to get out alive, don't you think? Well, I dunno. You've opened a couple of areas that seem interesting to follow, tho' I don't know that they'd lead anywhere beyond speculation, but it makes for an interesting "alternate scenario" as folks on CompuServe used to bellow for years ago (as in: "if you can't concoct a better and more plausible story than the WC version, then that's what has to have happened"). More later?

My reply continued .... I think it's fair to say that it was well prior to 1:15 that LHO "may well have been the first to be let go," if that was indeed the case. If so, why was he singled out for a privilege not extended to anyone else for at least another half-hour, such extension of privilege forgotten, denied or disclaimed - and certainly not volunteered - by anyone who would have extended it?It would seem that LHO had to have left the premises before any permissions were given to anyone to take the day off or to "vacate the building." He didn't say (or, nobody says he said, anyway, since we really don't know what he did say behind closed doors) that he was told he could take the afternoon off, only that he "didn't think there'd be any more work" for the rest of the day. If he were already in Oak Cliff by 1:00, then when he left TSBD was before any FBI agent told Campbell to "have all the employees vacate the building," since, if I'm remembering correctly, Forrest Sorrells was the first FBI agent (back) on the scene after the shooting, and he didn't arrive until 1:00 or sometime shortly thereafter. Too, if LHO was given permission to leave - and again, he didn't say he had been - then that would mean that someone told him something nobody else was told, with the sole intent of getting him to leave the premises. Even accomplishing that, there would then have had to have been some way to know (or decide) where he was going to go after he left. An important point, too, is that despite the fact that he had been to Irving the evening before, it still was a Friday, and Irving was his usual destination ... albeit with his co-worker whom he apparently didn't ask about riding home with. Still, anyone trying to set him up simply by giving him "permission" to leave had no way of knowing that he wouldn't go somewhere other than where they'd need him to be. Otherwise, the setup was incomplete and very possibly doomed to failure: what if he'd gone to Irving, or simply gone window shopping downtown, and hadn't been anywhere near where Tippit had gotten shot? Yes and yes ... and I'm also aware of the question that's been posed about how anyone there got that address for Oz, and your explanation makes sense ... if Revill was there soon enough after the shooting stopped to get Oswald's name from Oswald. Was he? Well, since we don't really know when Oz left or how he got to Oak Cliff - I'm sure we can, for example, concoct a scenario where someone else gets the bus transfer into police hands - that's sort of difficult to say.Am I remembering correctly that the list was handwritten, or at least that LHO's was? If handwritten in its entirety, is the handwriting the same? (I recall that something - other than the fact that LHO's name was at the top - stuck out about it.) Also, for the sake of asking, are the people who follow his name in an order that makes sense vis-a-vis CE1381: first the people who were inside the building, followed by the people who couldn't get back in? If not, did Revill keep going in and out until he got everyone? Even still, it would seem to have to be an incredible coincidence that the very guy that "they" wanted to get out of the building and would set up as the patsy was the first one not only whose name was taken down, but who was let loose ... as nobody after him was for at least ... what? Half an hour or 45 minutes? Not trying to be critical (or WC-apologetic!), just trying to fill in the holes, if that's what they are. Despite having most faith in first day statements - whether to DPD, FBI or press, I do think some errors were made - possibly just in how the stories were recorded or perceived by the recorder. One error I think was in Campbell's statement that the Oswald/cop/Truly encounter happened when Truly first went back inside.... No question about Campbell's error ... or is there? Well, assuming the stairwell B/T/O encounter is true (even if the details are wrong), I guess not. So he misperceived something that took place in his own building (well, not actually his; Harold Byrd's) amid the confusion of a rather unusual event happening outside his doors just moments before. Seems reasonable. Seriously.... So it would seem, then, that the same latitude should be applied to Baker's statement about where the encounter took place, especially when you consider that he was in a building he had (presumably) never been inside before. The stairs were half-flights as I remember, requiring going up one, then reversing direction and starting up the next to go up one story. Thus, in haste and confusion - or not even bothering to count, more intent upon reaching a destination he knew he hadn't reached than being concerned with how far along the pathway to it he'd come - he easily could have mistaken the number of floors he'd gone up. And haven't you done the same? Even visited a new friend's house a second time and wondered "gee, it seemed like it was a lot farther/shorter the other night" or something similar? No real idea what floor he was on at first, but after having gone back a time or two (he testified following the re-enactments) he knew it was the second ....? Looking at CE362 (16H958 - not very clear even in its original printed form), the "storage" shown is not very large, not much more than a closet beneath the mid-way landing half-way up to the second floor, tucked away in a corner. I have no idea what might've been stored in there - it doesn't look much bigger than a closet used for execs and secretaries to put their winter coats and rain gear in - but it would seem like a pretty odd place for Oz to spend any appreciable amount of time there without arousing suspicion, nor for his co-workers not to think it odd enough to remark about him having been there. Really: I can't imagine - can you? - that any cop worth even half his pay, even with assurances that the man worked there, would just let someone being found in a place like that just walk away?Perhaps if he'd ducked in there for a moment and ducked out again when he saw an opportune moment, then maybe nobody would have paid much attention ... but if he'd been there any appreciable amount of time - say, long enough for Baker & Truly to have made it up to the 7th floor, looked around and made it back down - it seems unlikely that he wouldn't have been viewed with a helluva lot more suspicion, even by his closest associates. Moreover, if they were actually conducting a "round up" - which may or may not have actually occurred - and he was found then, I can't imagine nobody noticing or commenting on it. If it happened in the first couple of minutes after he'd come downstairs - say, about the time Robert what's-his-name the reporter came in looking for the phone (an "opportune moment?") - then it's a bit more plausible, but that doesn't leave time for Revill to show up and start gathering names. In any case, if we actually propose LHO doing this - being so furtive, almost even desperate to get out of the building unseen - then we've described a man who wouldn't seem very likely to do the (unspoken?) bidding of someone who was trying to get him out of the building so his absence would be noted. And if he was trying to get out unseen - at which he was apparently successful, at least insofar as people who weren't looking for him were concerned - then he must've been nabbed by someone else when he'd managed to squeak out. His exits would have been limited to the front door; the door on the east loading dock; and the doors at the west loading dock. The latter two present problems in that on the west side, cops and sheriff's deputies were combing through the parking lot behind the grassy knoll where so many of them thought shots originated; not a very good place to run to; and on the east side, you've got patrolman W.E. Barnett watching the side of the building and fire escape, along with James Romack playing at sentry duty at the rear. Neither saw anyone exit from the building, at least not for the first few minutes following the shooting. After that, there was also the KBOX news crew to contend with. Well, it does make it harder... but it can be pieced together... the peices are scattered, but they're there. They're there in first day statements, Fritz's notes, intorrogation reports and press reports. I find it difficult to lend any credence to notes that didn't exist for 25 years, and may or may not have been in original form when the did begin to exist. As also noted previously, first impressions are not always the best impressions. By vouching for him with police and telling him he could go. Then others would have seen him, and the whole plan goes belly up. Oswald had to be a party to events in some way, if what I'm proposing here is correct - which in turn means he would not be watching from inside the doorway. Again, I take your points, and it gets hairy here ... and you're right, it does require Oswald to be a party in some way if the direction you're going is correct. The question is, in what way? I think it's fair to say that it was not as a witting patsy ... wittingly as a patsy, that is: I have difficulty imagining someone - anyone - going along with the plan that "you're going to get blamed, you have to run, you're probably going to get killed." I likewise have difficulty imagining someone as reasonably intelligent as Lee Oswald thinking that his leaving TSBD after the shooting - assuming he knew (and how could he not?) that that's what spurred his having to go into action - thinking that his leaving would not cast suspicion on him.So if not that, then what? More shortly. I sometimes think that this forum doesn't like to many "quote" sections and subsections, and if that's the case, I've passed my limit for a single message. BRB!

Duke, in the scheme of things, it's difficult to blame Campbell. You are quite wrong in saying Truly was a VP. The structure was this: Cason - President and Treasurer; Campbell - VP and Secretary; Truly - Superintendent. Directors - Cason, Campbell and Truly. Company stock owners - Cason and Campbell. Truly had worked his way up through the company. You're quite right. Truly had said in his testimony that he was a director of the company. It was my bad memory thinking he'd said VP. That's two assertions so far that are wrong. I won't criticize you for it, as I have made assertions here myself which have been wrong. I will correct you, though. Nearly every time the FBI wanted to check on something to do with the TSBD, they checked with Campbell. The full list of FBI interviews with Campbell is CE 1129, CE 1435, CE 1887 (23H692), CE 1965 (23H816), CE 1970 (23H824-827). Right again. I cited them above (locations in blue in your list), but didn't turn the page. Couldn't agree more. At the very least, Truly aided in the plot by creating a temp vacancy on a false premise. True. I think it was Bonnie Ray Williams who made the statement that TSBD was putting the boys to work at odd jobs to keep from laying them off as business usually got slow as the holidays approached. If that's so, then why did they ADD Oswald just a few weeks before? I have never disputed his encounter with Reid, so I don't know where you are coming from here... Only to the point you raised that LHO didn't encounter B&T on the second floor at the lunchroom. What mitigates in favor of that is that LHO apparently was in the lunch room at about the time B&T would have been going by there - shortly before two minutes after the shooting - getting a soda pop. For B&T to have not seen LHO in the lunchroom and still guessed correctly that he'd been in there doing what he'd been doing is a bit of a stretch.The point being that Oz apparently was in the lunchroom getting a coke, and that apparently B&T knew he was, so to eliminate the encounter completely seems to lack basis. Some employee statements from CE 1382 .... You mean CE1381? That's the trouble with quoting things from memory ... at least in my case. Either way, I don't disagree with what you selected, but there are also quite a few instances where employees said that they could not get back into the building at various times and for various reasons, including (as I recall) at least one where "the door was locked." I've got an analysis on one of my web pages. With many of them kept outside - and nobody really specified that they'd hung out right in front of the doorway - the rest of them weren't necessarily immediately available if someone wanted to "round up" the employees. More in just a little bit ....

I am looking at the tax rolls for Dallas County right now, and there is no parcel legally described as '601' Murdock anywhere in the county. The only 'Murdock' is in Dallas, and of 14 parcels numbered between 500 and 625, 11 of them have assessed values under $50,000; four of them have improvements with under 1000 square feet (with two more being 1000-1200 sqft); and five of them - #600, 605, 609, 547 and 543 - show no improvements at all, i.e., vacant lots. (The 500s were included only to include the possibly of '501' being mistakenly written as '601.') The largest of the improvements in this block is under 2100 sqft.The parcels on the Nassau Circles (North and South) are all numbered between 7000 and 8999. The largest home on the Nassaus is 2052 sqft. In a neighborhood as old as this one is, it is unusual for two or more parcels to be combined into one (e.g., 601 and 605), and rarer still - even in newer, larger subdivisions - that they're combined into a parcel with the higher number (i.e., if 601 and 605 were combined, they more likely would become 601 than 605).

Campbell was a VP in the TSBD operation (as was Roy Truly, another VP - tho' Campbell made out as if Truly was his subordinate; Jack Cason, the president, had gone home for lunch ... another "missing employee" of TSBD!) and was standing beside Truly outside the door, on or near the steps, according to Truly and Jeraldean Reid, before the shots. Campbell gave no testimony, but was mentioned several times in others'. 2H44; 3H189, 202, 214, 219-221, 230, 273-274, 279; VI, 339, 370, 397; 7H219-220, 379-380; 22H110, 845; 23H692, 816, 824-827; on shots from knoll, 3H274; Report: 154 He was questioned by the FBI on 11/24 and stated that he was not personally acquainted with LHO, but that Roy Truly had told him that all of the company employees "had been rounded up and one employee ... was missing," which is hearsay at its best (CE1435). Otherwise, his only direct contribution to the record was his 11/28 statement, comprising one paragraph about Oswald's pay records (CE1129). One could almost be tempted to snicker at his reference that Oswald "did not have permission to leave the building" as if such permission was necessary, or that anyone else who was outside or away from the building - which were several - did have permission. The temptation is lessened because it's frightening in its way that some of the very people he worked with - and worked for - began to paint him in a sinister light almost immediately: no shocked disbelief, no outward shows of support, no kind words amid the dismay ... just allusions of guilt. Makes ya wonder .... An encounter with police on the first floor hardly precludes another encounter with others elsewhere. Jeraldean Reid testified to his crossing through her second-floor office toward the elevator and stairway at the southeast corner, with the clear presumption that he went down one or the other to the main floor since they didn't lead anywhere else ... and to right near the front entrance to boot.Hence, Oz clearly would have "experienced" officers on the first floor, although in the immediate aftermath, I'm not certain how clear it is that they were "taking details from employees for later contact" (if they were, why didn't they get his instead of just letting him pass?). He may have been challenged on the first floor, and either Truly or someone else may have vouched for his working there if so ... although nobody stated - or admitted - as much. While "my superintendent of the place" would certainly seem to be Roy Truly, we have to remember that Holmes was relating this discussion second-hand: if those were indeed LHO's exact words, it may be indicative, but we have no way of knowing whether they were or not: he could also have said "my boss" or "my supervisor," which would have been Bill Shelley. Parsing second-hand statements is risky. More to the point, Jeraldean Reid was back at her desk within two minutes of the shooting, and Oswald pass through her office moments later, headed downstairs. Whether or not the Baker encounter ever took place (on the second floor or elsewhere), Baker and Truly were on their way up six more levels as Oz was making his way down one. It would seem unlikely that, if Lee went directly out the door - or even lingered for just a few moments (since nobody mentioned seeing him) - it is doubtful that Truly could have been there and upstairs at the same time ... or even that he could have taken the elevator down in time to be there to vouch for Oz after taking Baker on the guided tour upstairs. Whoever vouched for Oswald on the first floor - if anybody did - it most likely was not the "superintendent of the place," Roy Truly, who was the only "superintendent of the place." Unfortunately, the only person who could have told us exactly what transpired was killed under suspicious circumstances just a couple of days later. I see your point with regard to Truly, but can you explain how - short of a cohort of his grabbing Oswald and spriting him away - Truly "ensured" that Oswald left the premises? At best, I can only see that Truly could have diverted police attention from persons, places or events within the building, but not that he could have ensured that Oswald (or the "mystery coke-drinker" in the lunchroom) was not detained, or anything else for that matter. What if Oz had decided to watch the events from inside the doorway?That he was the only employee "reported missing" even while several others were absent and away from the building is beyond doubt ... but not "beyond question," since one legitimate one is: "why weren't the others reported missing, too?" Just curious, what made the ALT a "safe house" other than that, if anybody was hiding in it, they weren't found? What witness accounts track someone to that location? And who was it that caused it not to be searched?Personally, if I were to build a scenario that had Oswald getting framed - and killed - for the murders, I would probably have him dying in a hail of gunfire in the theater after Nick McDonald was shot ... except that the "big bang" didn't happen, and there was no time for a second try before McD got his hands on the gun. Then, I'd get Harry Olsen in the picture ... as if he wasn't already! (See the thread Jack Ruby, There can be only one?.)

You're Jack White. He's John ("Jack?") White. Your avocation is Kennedy. His middle name is Kennedy. Could you possibly be one person just using different photos and writing back and forth to each other? Hmmm....

John, the place was known as Simon's Garage, located at 1300 Jackson, Dallas.Here's what "Johnny" had to say about it: Page one of this exhibit was a cover letter dated September 1 stating that the interview of "one 'Johnnie' (Last Name Unknown)" was requested by the WC by letter dated August 25, 1964. All of the underlined sections above indicate those that differ from Harry and Kay's April 1964 depositions. There does not appear to be any follow-up to the contradictions by anyone investigating the situation. Of course, by September 1 - plus the time it took for the report to reach DC - it really was moot as the WC was already closing up shop. An interesting item for the record, tho'.This incident as well as Harry's guarding of the "estate" in Oak Cliff are so minor in the grand scheme of things that weekend, one really has to ask: "Why lie, Harry? What are you hiding?"

This probably was Frank Ellsworth of the ATF - I don't recall the Intel guy's name - conferring on the Terrell Armory/Fort Hood arms thefts. At least, that's what Ellsworth once had to say. Whether it was related or unrelated to LHO in any way is a matter of debate.

I have read many accounts of how LBJ might have been behind or at least had advance knowledge of the whole deal, but I've noticed that anyone seems to have drawn any connection between the story that LBJ wanted Connally - his political protege - to ride with him in the VP car, and for Ralph Yarborough to ride with JFK. The story goes that the two of them - JFK and LBJ - got into a heated argument about this (in Fort Worth?), and that JFK prevailed.IF LBJ knew about what was going to happen (I've always thought that photo of him standing behind JFK in Fort Worth spoke volumes!), it not only makes sense in light of the above that LBJ would want his buddy away from the gunfire - with Yarborough as acceptable possible "collateral damage" as Connally turned out to be - and it sure sheds a different light on Connally's comment in the car, "My God, they're going to shoot us all [and not just Kennedy]!" Just some random thoughts ....

John, it was a parking area - garage or lot, I'm not sure, but I think the former - not a gas station. Harry's testimony identifies its location; I don't remember it offhand, but can get it for you if you really need it.Obviously, Jack was never asked about it; on the other hand, Jimmy - actually, his name was Johnny; I don't recall his last name at the moment, but I've got the info around here - was. Harry didn't know Johnny's last name (because he didn't really know Johnny except in passing) but the FBI has its resources, and found and interviewed him at his home in Grand Prairie a short while later. His story is markedly different than Harry's, which amounts to that it didn't happen the way Harry said it did. At all. Johnny stated that yes, he recognized Harry and Kay from their having parked there before, and knew of Jack Ruby and had seen him, too, but that he'd never spoken with any of them at any length (beyond, say, "thank you, sir, have a nice evening"), and with respect to that particular conversation - which he'd witnessed - said that he "didn't overhear" any of it, and "certainly" didn't know any of the participants in it "well enough" to engage in protracted conversation with them, and was not a participant in the conversation Harry described and claimed he took part in. Harry lied. And then lied some more: We're all familiar with Harry & Kay's story (they were husband and wife at this point, and could never be called to testify one against the other, but had obviously concocted a story to tell) about how Jack was "bawling" about "poor Jacqueline and the kids," a regular babbling idiot. Clearly the man was out of his mind with grief and should not be held accountable for his actions (seeing as how he was on trial at the time, it's almost a wonder anyone was even asked about him for the record!). One can understand how such despair would stick out in someone's mind ... which would then make one wonder why Harry's original story doesn't match his testimony: in December 63, when interviewed by the FBI in his Dallas hospital bed following a car accident, he said that Jack was "no more upset than the average guy" after Kennedy's assasination. Four months later, Harry sings a different tune from California. ...And we're not even going to start delving into the rest of his testimony here, but it's definitely "post-doctorate" work (you've heard about technical degrees? BS, MS and PhD? Right: Bull S__t, More S__t, Piled Higher and Deeper).

I happen to be reading a book unrelated to the assassination - Peter Wyden, Bay of Pigs: The Untold Story, Simon & Schuster, 1979 - apparently one of the first (if not the first) in-depth analysis of the "fiasco" (a generous description, given what Wyden describes) and my attention was drawn to the repeated mentions of - and emphasis on - an "umbrella" of air protection covering the Brigade, with or without the Brigade's own B-26 air cover.Immediately prior, I read through the LaFontaine's Oswald Talked, which postulates involvement of the "betrayed" Brigade Cubans (probably as much or more by the Dallas mayor's brother than the President), and as I read the passages in BOP, the thought suddenly struck me: whoever came up with the "Neville Chamberlain" idea? No, I would say that if indeed TUM was trying to make any kind of a statement (besides "bang, you're dead!"), it had nothing to do with Chamberlain, but rather a reference to the "umbrella" of air protection that never materialized over the BOP. The location of TUM - and the complexion of his companion - better suggest a case of "in case you're wondering in the next few seconds what's happening and why, here's your answer." It would - in theory at least, if he had ever heard the term or indeed if he had any idea of what had been promised to the Brigade by the men on the ground with them prior - mean more to Kennedy in that respect than any vague reference to Neville Chamberlain ever would. Unless, of course, it really was just Louie Steven Witt making sure all the rain had dried off his raingear. In any case, BOP does make interesting reading, and I recommend it to anyone interested in that aspect of history: if you ever wondered why "fiasco" got attached to it so firmly, you won't wonder anymore after reading this!

Or any of the rest of 'em either. How can we be sure Jack Kennedy's really even dead? The faked Z-film or the bogus autopsy photos or maybe the coerced and altered testimonies of the Parkland doctors, or the doctored DPD tapes? No reason to start thinking any of it is real!(The real deal is that, in those days, ex-presidents could only retire, not latch onto lucrative board and consulting jobs, so ol' Jack, thinking ahead, knows his only saving grace will be as a martyr, so fakes his death and now collects royalties off of all the books and films and such. Be sparing with your word$$ here!) On the particular topic above, I said it once, I'll say it again: Tom Tilson Tells Tall Tales. Sosumi.

Any idea where that Coke bottle is from? Any chance it was on the retaining wall? Looks like they are handling it to preserve any prints that may have been left on it... It is not a Coke bottle. It is a DR PEPPER bottle...a distinct difference. As I recall it was found on the fifth floor with the chicken bones. Jack,Dern straight there's a difference ... especially to someone who drinks Dublin Dr Pepper! But damn if they still don't all come in "coke bottles" ... even 7-UP, 'cept o'course everyone knows ain't no "coke bottle's" green! Speaking of Texana (Texas lore, to all y'all uninitiated), one must go back to the segregationist South - and Dallas - of the '60s to wonder at just how subjugated the average black folk were back then. For example, if in fact the coke (small "c") bottle, lunch sack and chicken bones were found on the 5th floor, we'd have to wonder at the fact that ol' Bonnie Ray Williams done testified to eatin' his lunch on the 6th floor 'fore going down the elevator to the 5th floor to meet up with ol' Junior and Slim, leaving his leftovers behind ... even described where he'd left them right, just the same as others say they'd found 'em. Now if that wasn't the case, how'd it come to pass that ol' Bonnie Ray done got his story straight with the officers'? Maybe it's not outside the realm of possibility that on the eve of his appearance, some of the boys just come 'round to have a little ol' talk with him to 'splain how things really happened, maybe a couple of times just so's to be sure he remembered right an' all. I mean, he does like his job down there at the ol' Book Depository an' all, doesn't he? (Sure does.) But was everyone so compliant in the early '60s? That's not to say that his gettin' the facts straight don't also jibe with the every-bit-as-unlikely scenario that them three boys done heard those itty-bitty ol' shells hittin' the floor up yonder, even knockin' some dust onto ol' Bonnie Ray's head an' all ... while all durin' the parade and after, none of 'em heard a peep - much less a footfall - from ol' Jack Dougherty, who done tol' them Warren Commission boys that he'd been up on both the 5th and the 6th floors durin' the same ol' lunch hour before the shots. That man musta moved like a ghost, y'know? And, y'know they didn't see Jack neither when he was but fifty feet or so from 'em when they go rushin' over to that there window yonder by the railroad tracks and he's over by them elevators - accordin' to Jack anyway - that he wouldn't send down to ol' Roy Truly his boss man when Truly called up for one (but gets right to ridin' down on one soon as ol' Roy gets to clompin' up them stairs alright). 'Course, they didn't hear or see ol' Ozzie Rabbit neither, and sometimes I wonder why not. I mean, an eyewitness or two might'a been nice t' have, even if they only seed ol' Oz outta the corner of their eyes or something. They worked with him, after all, so I'd guess even a little glimpse could'a been pretty conclusive, wouldn't ya think? 'Course too, all this just leaves me to wonderin', Jack, about you and ol' John here. I mean: Jack :: John White :: White Kennedy :: just a hobby? (c'mon, what's up with that?) But ya know I'm pullin' yer leg on that'n there, it's not like I ain't thinkin' yer writin' back-n-forth with yourself quite yet or nothin', but gosh, if I were a conspiracy theorist, I could have a field day with that'n, doncha think?

... Also - if I can attach a map - you'll notice that the Beckley St exit from R.L. Thornton (I-35E ... the same highway as Stemmons Freeway, BTW, just a different section) is almost as far south of 1026 N Beckley as 1026 is south of TSBD: in other words, if it was LHO, he'd have to have gone about as far AWAY from work to hitchhike as he would have had to walk TO work! ... I didn't mean to crop R.L. Thornton's full route from the above map because, seeing it - and today, it's pretty much as it was in '63, intersecting with I-30 (which was then the Fort Worth Turnpike, Donald Wayne House's route home ... tho' he didn't quite get that far) in pretty much of a maze. What you have is two 60-mph four- to six-lane divided highways intersecting and sharing the same roadway for a little more than a half of a mile, with vehicles merging in different directions depending upon where they want to go (east or west on I-30, north or south on I-35E) and where they're coming from. Add to the mess of the orderly confluence of vehicles the disorder created by people who don't know where they're going (and where to turn off to get there), and people who thought they knew where they were going, but turned out not to have (stopping and slowing down, moving over - or trying to - several lanes, even stopping), plus the fact that there are downtown entrances and exits in the midst of it ... and don't forget the frontage/service road, too! The point is that, even as short a distance as it is from S Beckley to DP, just negotiating this confluence of highways can take you four minutes, even when traffic's not that heavy. I'll time it one of these days if I think of it. I just came through the same route as Yates took last Sunday - lots of traffic even then, and more than a little amount of the confusion I'd described - but nobody told me we'd be talking about this then (shame on y'all!! ) so I didn't time it. I'm not even going to estimate how long it took right now because I'm sure to err in either direction by as much time as Antti thinks the whole trip might've taken!

Lee this FBI statement is quite confusing. This individual is relating an unbelievable story. First off, the distance travelled is 3 miles. At 10:30 a.m. on November 20th or 21st (Wednesday and Thursday), I doubt traffic was an issue, so I assume the trip took maybe 4 minutes total.How could the person hitch hiking relate all these things in 4 minutes and this fellow remember each thing they said (and showed a photo) with apparently astonishing accuracy? I think either this person made up the whole thing after the fact, or then he's just off his rocker. The one thing that mitigates in favor of this statement is that it was given so soon after the assassination, just two business days - and four full days - afterward (I only mention 'business days' from the standpoint of someone possibly thinking they couldn't contact the FBI on weekends).At that point, I don't know (but I'm sure a 'lurker' somewhere will set me straight!) that specifics related to the paper bag or the backyard photos had been released yet. If not, how else could he have known about them? Moreover, he stated that the events described occurred "at approximately 10:30 AM" on either the Wednesday or Thursday before the shooting, when there is no question that LHO was at work. Also - if I can attach a map - you'll notice that the Beckley St exit from R.L. Thornton (I-35E ... the same highway as Stemmons Freeway, BTW, just a different section) is almost as far south of 1026 N Beckley as 1026 is south of TSBD: in other words, if it was LHO, he'd have to have gone about as far AWAY from work to hitchhike as he would have had to walk TO work! (1026 N Beckley is marked by an 'X' and the highway entrance by a 'Y' ... and TSBD by a 'Z') EDIT: Each square is approximately 1/2 mile So our Mr Yates may be "off his rocker," but if so, perhaps only as much as people who watched LHO shoot and talked with him at the Sportsdrome, or drove with him from Downtown Lincoln-Mercury. Of course, if that info was known at the time, then what mitigates against it in most major form is the fact that Yates got the wrong part of Beckley (south of Jefferson ... or "South Beckley") and a bad time. Too bad Dempsey Jones wasn't interviewed as well (or was he?).

Just a couple of minor corrections above. There is also the fact interspersed among these others that Truly and Baker (T& first go to the elevator shafts at the rear of the first (ground) floor, find that the elevators aren't there, look up and see the bottoms of both elevators at the fifth floor, and yell for someone to send one down, which doesn't happen. That is when T&B start up the stairs.After the encounter with LHO, they continue upstairs to the fifth floor where they find one elevator, the other one having gone down while they were "creating a commotion" and making a lot of noise running up the stairs. Truly speculates that the person who rode down - without being seen or heard by either T or B - must have been Jack Dougherty, who also testified to having done exactly that, albeit without having heard his boss yell up to him to send an elevator down. B&T then board the elevator and go up to the seventh floor, bypassing the sixth, and searching around upstairs before coming down again to the sixth, then again go onto the elevator and down to the first floor, whereupon Baker exits the building. Leaving aside any and all speculation or theories of who it could have been, if there were ever a time when someone on the fifth and/or sixth floor(s) could have left the building undetected by Baker, there were two: riding the elevator down while B&T were running up (and making a lot of "cover noise"), and again when T&B rode the elevator from the fifth floor past the sixth floor, and spent time poking around on the seventh. Also note that LHO didn't become a "fugitive on the run" anytime immediately following the encounter with Baker since Jeraldine Reid watched LHO walk from the lunch room, nonchalantly ("calmly") through and across her office (open like a steno pool) and out the opposite (east) door. Whatever interrupted LHO's "calm" demeanor from that point on is anybody's good guess, but it does not appear that the Baker encounter was any kind of direct catalyst. From where he was last seen by Reid, he had two means of egress (three, if you count him doubling back around the office via the encircling hallway and back down the rear stairs or elevator), those being a passenger elevator at the southeast corner area that went only between the first (ground) and second floors, and a short stairway in the same general area that only went between the same floors. From there, it was a short walk out the front door, near which - as I recall - he supposedly said that he'd directed someone to the telephone. None of these things suggest to me someone "on the run."

If I remember correctly, Carr said that it came "from the rear" of the TSBD as opposed, perhaps, to "from behind" it. I have always pictured in my mind that he was referring to it having been parked on the west side of Houston St near the rear of the building and coming south to Elm. Didn't he also allege that he'd seen someone run "alongside" the TSBD and jump into the car, which then sped off southward on Houston to ... was it Main?I have also heard - but not observed for myself - that from where Carr said he was, you can't even see TSBD - or at least not at street level, such that you could see someone running from the front or around the side. Maybe one of these days when I've got extra time on my hands, I'll try to get up to look and take a photo. If that's the case, then it really doesn't matter what Carr said he saw if he couldn't see what he said he saw, does it. Incidentally, the self-appointed "guard" watching the back of the TSBD was James Romack. He is somewhat corroborated in his statements by DPD W.E. Barnett, and "Pop" Rackley, Virgie's dad, who worked with the same company as Romack.

The Bell film shows that Houston was blocked off north of the Elm intersection BECAUSE IT WAS BEING PAVED AND WIDENED NORTHWARD. See fresh concrete in middle of frame. So the street WAS ALREADY CLOSED north of Elm.Jack So there was no way for a car to head in the direction of the construction? In other words, if a car was parked behind the TSBD in the loading dock area, it would have to make a RIGHT turn, toward the front of the building? I don't know. The street just north of Elm (behind the DalTex Bldg) MAY have been open, but it deadends into Houston. In the next block, the street curves to the east, as the Bell frame shows. Houston was then two-way, not one-way as now. But during and after the assassination it was blocked to traffic. I do not know additional traffic details.Jack Jack is correct about the construction, even if you can't see it clearly in the screenshot of the MPEG. At least two people testified before the WC about it, and I have information on the construction from the newspapers at that time to verify it.While the street was unquestionably closed off for construction, that did not prevent anyone from entering it, if they didn't mind bumping along rather than riding over smooth macadam. Sam Pate drove several blocks through it from the other direction, in a red 1962 Pontiac station wagon belonging to the radio station he worked for (call letters slip my mind at the moment). It was, from what I gather from talking extensively with Sam about this, a "pretty rough ride," but not one that apparently did any serious or permanent damage to the vehicle, or kept it from making it from one end to the other. The only difficulty of note was that, at the end of his trip at the rear of the TSBD, someone had to move a barricade to let him back out onto the pavement and then into the TSBD lot. He has never suggested that he encountered barricades - in place, anyway - anywhere else entering or passing through the construction, which was several blocks in size. While it was at least possible that a car could have left the rear of the TSBD and turned left on Houston into the construction, it doesn't appear likely that it happened any time within, say, 15 minutes of the shooting. Quite a number of people were back there including not only Sam (intermittently) but also a man - whose name escapes me at the moment - who basically put himself on "guard duty" watching what went on back there for at least several minutes. He was watching for persons running - which he did not see - so you'd have to make your own guess as to whether a car was so big that he couldn't have missed one if it came along, or whether he could have missed it because he was so intent on looking for a person.

Report, page 112: Other eyewitness testimony, however, supports the conclusion that the first of the shots fired hit the President. As discussed in chapter II, Special Agent Hill's testimony indicates that the President was hit by the first shot and that the head injury was caused by a second shot which followed about 5 seconds later. James W. Altgens, a photographer in Dallas for the Associated Press, had stationed himself on Elm Street opposite the Depository to take pictures of the passing motorcade. Altgens took a widely circulated photograph which showed President Kennedy reacting to the first of the two shots which hit him. (See Commission Exhibit No. 900, p. 113.) According to Altgens, he snapped the picture "almost simultaneously" with a shot which he is confident was the first one fired. Comparison of his photograph with the Zapruder film, however, revealed that Altgens took his picture at approximately the same moment as frame 255 of the movie, 30 to 45 frames (approximately 2 seconds) later than the point at which the President was shot in the neck. (See Commission Exhibit No. 901, p. 114.) Another photographer, Phillip L. Willis, snapped a picture at a time which he also asserts was simultaneous with the first shot. Analysis of his photograph revealed that it was taken at approximately frame 210 of the Zapruder film, which was the approximate time of the shot that probably hit the President and the Governor. If Willis accurately recalled that there were no previous shots, this would be strong evidence that the first shot did not miss. The Report should have referenced Willis Exhibit 1, slide 5 in this same batch of evidentiary photos, but did not, nor was Willis 5 published in the Report at all. According to the quoted analysis, Altgen's photo was taken "30 to 45 frames (approximately 2 seconds)" after the President was first shot, which by the same analysis happened when Phil Willis shot his Slide 5, supposedly at Z210. Yet W5 is not published, so there's basically no way to compare one photo with the other to compare or contrast them. (Even what was published in the Hearings & Exhibits (21H770) hardly compares in quality with even a copy of (a copy of?) the original.) I don't disagree with your basic thesis, which is that the WC showed the "jury" what they wanted it to see; that is, the basic evidence that supported their view, presented and interpreted in such a way as to bolster their position. That is no different than any prosecutor or defense attorney will want to do (avoid presenting evidence - however obvious - that paints the perp as possibly innocent, or the client as possibly guilty). As noted, the WC were able to do so because there was no adversary to counter their argument or present another. Those who've done so since then, of course, are all amateurs and "kooks," again no different than the view of any prosecutor or defense attorney ("how dumb can the jury be? It's unbelievable that they reached the verdict that they did, given the evidence we presented" ... which was apparently countered more effectively by the opposition!). I have never said that the WC was fair and unbiased, or even honest: I've read and evaluated 'way too much to ever reach that conclusion! My mere point is that the finer points of the photos were probably not examined - nor used in setting up the photos in the first place - as closely as has been done since then in selecting what they would present as their "evidence." At first glance, the photos appear to be nearly identical - and in fact they are "nearly" identical - so if they could choose where they thought Altgens was standing, shoot a photo that looked "about right," then that was all the "homework" they had to do to "prove" their point. I find it difficult to fathom that they would take a series of photos from various places - from where Altgens was to where they wanted him to be - then compared and contrasted with his photo until they found one that put him where they wanted him to be that hadn't gone too far astray from what was shown in his actual photo. The only reasons I have difficult with that are because /a/ if you succeed reasonably enough doing it the easy way, why complicate matters; and /b/ there are none of the "other" photos still in existence. Is it not still possible that someone took the shots, chose the one they liked and destroyed the rest? Sure. But if they were so good at "creating" evidence and getting rid of what "didn't fit," they certainly would have done a better job of it, like burning the Executive Session transcripts and such: the whole thing would have been "lily white and pure," not even vaguely open to opposing interpretation ... but clearly that's not the case. I guess my dilemma is choosing when to consider then clumsy and when to consider them crafty, which they alternately seem to be portrayed. Were they both, and if so, did they deliberately choose when to be one or the other, or was it simply fate? The long and short is that the Report is, as Mark Lane characterized it, a "prosecutor's brief," and all the evidence should be viewed in that light.

Thomas, by no means do I mean to argue that the WC - or any other investigation of this incident, official or otherwise - did not try to make its "evidence" fit its "solution," which IMHO it clearly did. I am merely addressing the issue of the photo.As a photographer myself, I have often attempted to duplicate others' photos for various reasons; most are approximations, "close enough for government work." Speaking as one who has looked through many a viewfinder, IMO the lettering between the tree branches was simply too distant to use as a gauge of whether or not you were at the right angle - and therefore in the right position - or not: even IF you could make it out, it looks "close enough" to the original to make one think they were in the right place. The alternatives are - and can only be - that multiple photos were taken and the one that was WRONG was the one that was chosen as a "re-enactment," and/or Altgen's position was "pre-determined" (incorrectly), the photo taken, examined closely, and determined to be "proof" of the "correctness" of that pre-determination despite its "obvious" error. Frankly, I don't believe anyone examined it that closely. At best, it was determined to be "close enough," and nobody went back to try to correct it since it "proved" the WC position as to Altgen's location just the way it was. Unfortunately, the letters no longer exist on the building, so it is impossible to re-create both photos exactly today, at least not using the letters as a gauge. Thus, on that basis only, you can't determine even if the re-enactment photo was taken where the WC placed Altgens or just somewhere nearby. Or at least you can't do it by trying to re-create either photo. On the other hand, the photo does clearly prove that the WC did not go to great lengths to ensure that what they did re-create was accurate, and that they were happy to allow "close enough" to be passed off as "exact proof." The question in this thread really comes down to just this: was the WC's "un-evidence" carefully calculated, or was "looks good, sounds good" simply good enough to serve as "proof," ignoring exactitude whenever it didn't support the pre-determined conclusion, and being "exact" only when necessary to support it? I tend toward the latter: the simple fact is that they would never have gotten any assistance or support in determining the actual truth had they pursueed it, they knew it, and they just did what they had to do to come up with the result that they had no choice in coming up with. Basically, they were doing what all criminal lawyers do: they built the case their client paid for, and they got away with it simply because there was no adversary to contradict or disprove them.