Duke Lane

... and a view from the full Murray image would look like ...?

The simplest and most direct answer, I suppose, is that he was sent there.The next question might be, "Why was he sent there?" which actually gives rise to three questions depending upon emphasis: Why was he sent there? This is the preferred form of the question, since it gives rise to the typical answer being that he was a good cop, a trusted cop, a dependable cop, an observant cop and an obedient cop, hence if you were looking for anyone to be able to track down the assassin, Tippit would be your man. Why was he sent there? This is actually a better question because it would require the answer to "why was nobody sent anywhere else?" Was there a special rule in effect that said the Presidential assassins only fled through older neighborhoods to the south? Or that they only fled on foot, and never by train or bus or plane? Why was he sent there? The first part of the answer is that he was an obedient cop, and the second part is that he was a predictable man. Thanks to some people who clearly asked one too many questions, it can probably be said who it was who shot him, and a good case can be made for why he - or any cop - was shot at all. And those answers would probably help to make sense of why Helen Markham described Tippit as being "real friendly like" to the man he'd pulled up beside. Having said all of that, returning to the original question since there's been no additional info, here's another poser: If Marrion Baker was the first law enforcement officer who was to the upper floors of TSBD (with Roy Truly), and if Luke Mooney was the second (other than his partner), who were the two plain clothes officers who came down ... before Mooney got all the way up? Answer that and ask the question that heads this thread again ....

... here's another question just for the sake of it: after Marrion Baker, who were the next five law enforcement (police, sheriff's deputies, FBI, etc.) personnel on the upper floors of the TSBD? Not sure = but I do wonder how easy it would have been for one of the Dallas officers to be one of the shooters and completely escape detection. After all, few people see them specifically go in the building after the shooting, they have a perfectly legit reason for being there, nobody thinks their presence is the least bit suspicious and they basically control the investigation. This is not to cast aspersions on the Dallas police force as a whole, it's just a tantalizing possibility. It is ... which is why I asked who were the first law enforcement personnel on the upper floors. Marrion Baker was definitely first, and I'm thinking Luke Mooney was next, but before I say anything further, I just want to see if you - or anyone - might know about anyone else in between. Five is just a number I picked to cover all the bases.

Not offhand, but here's another question just for the sake of it: after Marrion Baker, who were the next five law enforcement (police, sheriff's deputies, FBI, etc.) personnel on the upper floors of the TSBD?

Hicks was outside with Calvery, Westbrook, and Carol Reed. The employee who was alone in the office was Carol Hughes.http://www.history-matters.com/archive/jfk...Vol22_0342b.htm Mea culpa! I think that for some reason, her unusual first name just stuck out in my mind. Anyway, the point was primarily just to name the other South-Western Publishing employees. None of them had anything to say about either Truly or Caster. As to Whatley, she was not alone in her nonchalance over the President's visit, so I don't put much issue to that. Jack Cason left TSBD to go home to lunch, didn't care much about seeing no President. Matter of fact, he heard on the radio that JFK'd been shot, then stopped at a store before continuing home (CE1381 p18). Of course, he may not at the time have drawn any connection between the TSBD and the shooting, as Whatley might not have either. Warren Caster went to the dentist rather than see Kennedy; me, I'd rather do anything than go to the dentist!Helen Palmer took the day off, but in her "defense," she went to Love Field to watch JFK land and went back to the TSBD when she heard about shooting (she couldn't get in, but stuck around for a while anyway @ CE1381 p71). But for some real fun, consider the actions of Madie Belle Reese and Ruth Dean: At approximately 12:10 PM, on November 22, 1963, I, accompanied by Mrs. Ruth Hilliard Dean, left the Depository building by the main entrance and took up a position on the second step from the bottom to the right or west side of the main entrance of the Depository building . Mrs. Dean was standing directly to my left at the time of the assassination of President John F. Kennedy and we both heard the three shots. Following the shooting, I and Mrs. Dean remained in front of the building for about five more minutes and then walked up to the National Bank of Commerce, 914 Elm Street, where I completed some personal business and then returned to the Texas School Book Depository. (CE1381 p77, emphases added) Talk about nonchalance: watch the President get shot, then go deposit your paycheck! Ruth Dean merely said: On November 22, 1963 at approximately 12:35 P.M. I was standing on the front steps of the Texas School Book Depository building with Mrs. Madie B. Reese, also an employee of Macmillan, to watch the motorcade bearing President John F. Kennedy pass by the building. As the motorcade passed by I heard three shots and observed the President slump over in the aumnobile in which he was riding. I was not acquainted with Lee Harvey Oswald, and saw no individuals in the Texas School Book Depository who attracted my attention in any way. Following the assassination, I left the building at about 2:00 P.M. (CE1381 p24, emphasis added) Other than that, no, there's not much else to tell, eh? As to Hughes, you note: Once again rising to the defense, consider that if Hughes had been looking out the window and had seen Kennedy's head get blown off, she might well have been upset. Some people react to upset by getting on the phone, and if that was the case with her, it is very possible that between the shock and upset and concentrating on the phone call, she really could not hear Hine knocking at the door.As to the FBI statement, nothing is "incredible" when it comes to their selective hearing and/or reportage. After all, J. Edna had already told them what had happened almost before it had happened, so if she didn't see Lee with the gun or had seen someone shooting from elsewhere, then obviously she didn't see anything of note. Why take up the WC's valuable time with such drivel? After all, there was a crime to solve! By March 20, Hughes' traumatic(?) experience watching Kennedy get shot was reduced to this: On-November 22, 1963 I went to south window near my desk which overlooks Elm Street to watch the Presidential Motorcade pass along Houston and Elm Streets. I was standing looking out this window when President John F. Kennedy was shot. I was alone in the office as all the other people had gone to the street to watch the Motorcade pass. I did not see Lee Harvey Oswald at that time. I do not know Oswald but I had seen him in the building several times prior to this day. I do not recall seeing any strangers in the building on November 22, 1963. I remained In my office until about 1:30 P.M. when I left for the day and went home. (CE1381 p47, emphasis added) ... and, well, that's about it, nothing out of the ordinary at all. Why do you ask? (Just for the sake of saying so, the deal about "the lights going out" at the TSBD is derived from two incidents, one being that an elevator did not run when it was supposed to have, and the other being Geneva Hine's comment about how she'd been answering phone calls. The "lights" she was referring to that "went out" were the lights on the phone, not those in the building.) All of this goes to show that Lee Oswald was the only TSBD employee who was NOT excited about the President's visit, which was in and of itself quite unusual, even suspicious. In fact, it's so clear-cut based on that alone that LHO did it, that I'm amazed we're even having this conversation!

The guns - one gun was a Remington, single-shot, .22 rifle, and the other was a .30-06 sporterized Mauser (7H387, emphasis added) - belonged to Warren Caster, the manager of the Dallas office of the South-Western Publishing Company, which had its offices on the second floor, room 203, of the TSBD. Caster testified that he bought them on his noon-hour lunch break on Wednesday, November 20, the .22 being for his son's Christmas present. He also stated that "as I entered the Texas School Book Depository Building on my way up to the buying office, I stopped by Mr. Truly's office, and while I was there we examined the two rifles that I had purchased" (ibid). Caster's "we examined" the rifles, and Oswald's interpretation that "Truly ... displayed" them pretty well square up if LHO /a/ recognized Truly better than he did Caster (it is noteworty -?- that he didn't mention Caster as one of the "individuals"); /b/ he did not know who owned the guns; and/or /c/ was just passing by during the course of these events. At this juncture, as far as I'm aware of, there's no indication that Oswald shared Truly's confidence in any way and would have been invited into the office to see or handle the weapons. According to Caster's testimony: Mr. Caster. Well, I'm not really sure who was there. I think you were there, Bill, and Mr. Shelley was there---and Mr. Roy Truly. The only people that I know about, in any event, were there; there were workers there at the time, but I'm not quite sure how many. I couldn't even tell you their names. I don't know the Texas School Book Depository workers there in the shipping department Mr. Ball. In that office, though, Truly's office, how many were there? Mr. Caster. We weren't in Mr. Truly's immediate office, we were just there over the counter. Mr. Ball. In the warehouse? Mr. Caster. We were there in the hall--just right there over the counter in front of the warehouse; that's right. Mr. Ball. And did you take the guns out of the carton? .... Caster said didn't know TSBD shipping people's names, of which LHO was one, so it is reasonable to conclude that LHO didn't know Caster either, but not impossible that he did. Despite being asked twice, however, Caster never did say how many people were there, nor did he say (nor was he asked) if LHO was among them. The only two people he identified by name were Truly and Bill Shelley, who also said that he'd seen the guns and had handled the .22 Remington, but not the Mauser, which "had been converted. It was a foreign make converted to a .30-06" (and was in a carton like new? See 7H390). Shelley also said that this was the only time he had ever seen guns in TSBD before or since November 22 ... not, in any case, through May 14, 1964, the date of his testimony. According to Caster, he took the guns home at the end of the day (Wednesday), and never returned with them to the TSBD. Shelley did not claim to see the guns after Caster had left the first floor. I don't think it "triggered" (pun intended?) any idea in LHO's head other than to remember he'd seen the guns. If he provided any further detail about the weapons or the people in the office, it is lost to history. Also employed by South-Western Publishing were Gloria Calvery, Carol Hughes and Karen Westbrook (all of whom were outside during the shooting), as well as Karan Hicks (who was alone in the office). Caster was 35 miles away in Denton at North Texas State University, now the University of North Texas. Of course (and for what it may be worth), we have only Caster's word that he took the guns home, and the reports of several law enforcement types that a Mauser was found ....

The early morning conversation is ostensibly the reason for calling Olsen, putting Ruby in a distressed state of mind, bawling like a baby over "Jacqueline and the kids" and having to come back to Dallas for a trial. But the fact is that by his own word, he lied about it all from start to finish. He also lied about the "estate." The question is "to what end?" It was all so innocuous, why lie at all? His marriage to Kay also prevented her from testifying against him, and their flight to California prevented extradition (witness the Garrison trial).

Duke, find me this "seemingly sound rationale for why the SBT is at least possible" and I'll sell you some swampland in Florida. The SBT CAN be weakened to the point of invisibility, where no one but the blind could see it as a reasonable possibility. I've attempted to do just that in my presentation, and I believe I've succeeded...As far as re-opening Tippit, I think that would be a serious mistake. The evidence against Oswald in that case is a lot stronger than in the shooting of the President. The eyewitness testimony is much stronger. The ballistics evidence is stronger (he had the purported murder weapon on his person). And there is a motive (his escape). We mustn't pull a Belin and see the Tippit slaying as "the Rosetta stone" of the assassination. Oswald may very well have killed Tippit AND been innocent of killing Kennedy. PAT, I WOULDN'T BE AFRAID OF REEXPLORING THE TIPPIT MURDER, AS THE LINES OF INQUIRY THAT WOULD HAVE MADE THAT MURDER THE ROSETTA STONE AND SOLVED BOTH WERE NEVER FOLLOWED, AND STILL CAN BE. I have often given thought to the notion that WC counsel knew more-or-less-exactly what had gone down, but for whatever myriad political reasons, had a job to do and did it, while at the same time being careful to get some things judiciously on the record.The Rosetta Stone, we will all recall, was written in four writing styles. Just one of those being known at the time enabled researchers to match the known to the unknown, and thus to decipher the other writings on the tablet, and then use those to help to decipher other writings of those styles. Thus, if you can make sense of the Tippit killing, then it will lead you toward an understanding of the Kennedy killing. As a couple of asides, I noticed that the History Channel's "JFK: Beyond Conspiracy" was on again and sighed at "the mainstream media's" continued pushing of the "lone Oswald" point of view. On another channel at the same time was a story about tracking down Nazi war criminals. Who was it who said that "history belongs to the victor?" This all reminds me of those who deny the Halocaust in the face of its evidence, and how its denial would be the "party line" had Germany won. The WC did not exactly win, but the "victors" keep putting the same tired story before us ... as if maybe the Halocaust deniers could win us all over too, if only they had a media outlet? Of course, it "proves there was no conspiracy" behind the JFK murder because, well, a whole nation couldn't possibly have done what the Nazis did, which goes to prove there was no Halocaust? Another observation (in the form of a question) is: has anybody noticed how the main players of that weekend back then were a "lone Commie" and a "lone Jew?" And did you ever wonder why Professor Oliver was really called to testify? Finally, as regards Belin's "Rosetta Stone," it seems like we always ask - or at least always get the answer to - "why Tippit?" instead of what may be the more germane question: "why Oak Cliff?"

Just disappointment that someone could mouth the words of "Oswald did it ... easily," and then admit they couldn't back it up because they'd "never made a personal study of it." It was like, "Okay, you work here now, the topic comes up, here's what you say ..." and shore 'nuff, out poured the words. A more honest "they'd never even think about it" would have been more appreciated.

... from pages 113-114 of CE1974. The transcript ended less than 15 minutes later with the notation of "no other pertinent transmissions through 3:00." Police vehicle? Are you referring to the "squads?" This is actually the DPD dispatcher, as quoted by the FBI from Channel 1 tapes.The only "suspicious" (?unexplained?) police vehicle I'm aware of occurred about an hour and a half or so earlier ... not referring to the mysterious "Car 10" of the blind-in-one-eye Earlene Roberts (which translated into an investigation of Car #207 by DPD, which has an interesting history of its own). While I'm at it, let's add another "questionable" vehicle: the disabled car that Donny Benavides went to get parts for that was parked on Patton St near the Dominoes Club close to Jefferson, and which is a good candidate for why William Scoggins had to park 'way up by the corner instead and walk back and get his coke. Donny never mentioned it again in his testimony (nor was he asked about it), and when I asked him about it several years ago, he refused to talk about it and went off on a drunken ramble about something else instead. (Of course, cause and effect may be difficult to discern here!)

Too many "ifs" in this scenario, Ed. "If" DPDHQ had broadcast the report, which does not appear in any transcript anywhere. "If" Tom Tilson made the call, which he could only have done "if" he'd seen the vehicle in question and chased it as he said, which he could only have done "if" he'd been able to continue up Commerce, turn left on Houston and left again on Elm to catch up with the guy who was "speeding away."The most telling "if" was brought up here by Lee Forman in one of the thread Suspicious Cars and 11/22/63, quoting an age-old article of mine, "The Cowtown Connection," which was originally accompanied by this Mel MacIntyre photo showing exactly the scene Tilson described so many years later, where the limo had just cleared the Triple Underpass and had not yet gotten to the Stemmons Freeway entrance ramp, and - lo and behold! - there is no car where Tilson said there was for the supposed "Ruby look-alike" to jump into and speed off into. Since the car wasn't there, "Ruby" didn't get into it and it didn't speed off, Tilson didn't call in a report about it and didn't chase it, and DPDHQ didn't broadcast a report about and Tippit wasn't listening to it, so therefore it wasn't the reason Tippit did anything at all. It might ... if it had happened. Either event! So is the fact that his daughter was 18 years old at the time and remembers absolutely nothing of this story. He "lost" the paper because he never wrote down any license plate number because he never saw any such car. We can certainly agree on that!! That's another fair guess. When one uses fabrication as evidence, anything is possible. Actually, the car belonged to me ...! (I realize you were only quoting from a story, not necessarily promoting it, but it's still a fabrication.) I won't dispute Julia Ann's report only because it already has been ... and I don't necessarily agree that it's been disproved or debunked. Was it Ruby? Probably not, but that is not by any means to suggest that another man, regardless of what he was doing or not doing on the scene at the time, could not possibly have looked like Ruby. Also, the fact that a cop had "cleared" the men and truck on the scene machts nichts.Ruby, however, did not become an active part of the deal until late Friday or Saturday night when he and his family were threatened. The "lone Communist" was in jail instead of dead, so the "lone Jew" was sent to silence him. My only problem with that scenario, of course, is that I can't imagine who would want Communists and Jews to take the blame for all of this! I mean, qui bono? I mentioned the impossible "trip around the block" (note that, coming from Commerce and Industrial, one can -and could then - take either Commerce or Main through Dealey Plaza, but even allowing that he didn't take the Commerce bend and have to cut across Main again to get to Elm ...?), now let's look at another impossible aspect of it: where Tom Tilson was in relation to everything.The MacIntyre photo was taken at or near the position marked as "A" in bold red on the map below. Tom Tilson claimed to have been at the corner of Commerce and Industrial, marked as "B." As you can see from the map, the Stemmons Freeway (I-35W) is in between where he was and where the limo entered the highway. It is - and was - at that point an overpass (I'll take a picture for you the next time I'm there, if you'd like) meaning Tilson not only had to see this stuff at a distance, but he also had to see it through not one, but two three- or four-lane bridges with a roadway's distance - and then some! - between each of them! In point of fact, if Tilson had seen what he'd seen when he'd claimed to have seen it, he was too far away to have seen anything of inherent value, much less what "Ruby" looked like! And he had other ample opportunity to turn around and give chase before he'd gone through the Triple Underpass, even if he'd have had to scrape the bottom of his car to do it. Remember, if you will, the idea that JFK could have continued straight down Main Street and gone over the curb to get onto Stemmons (and they could have put a temporary macadam ramp over that curb to ease that turn if they'd been so inclined ... which they weren't). (When I was a teenager in the Civil Air Patrol - yes, you read that right - we had someone bus a leg while out on a bivouac. A jeep was headed up the mountain to get the kid, and a dozen or so of us built a ramp over a barricade of three-foot boulders for the jeep to traverse in less than an hour, by hand ... and disassembled it like it was never there in about another hour. Surely the City of Dallas could have made a six-inch ramp in the several days' time that they had!) As to Mr Andrews, I have to agree with JW King's assessment (above) that "I don't understand why he wouldn't have reported it to the authorities or the media at the time it happened. His 'oh, want to hear something funny?' way of bringing it up years later tells me that he, like so many others, wanted his particular 'connection' to the events of that day." Not only did he know Roscoe (who had absolutely nothing to do with the shooting, by the way), but he was in the middle of the whole Tippit deal too (which Roscoe was also not involved with!). I don't think so. Hell, the HSCA was looking for people almost 15 years before he came up with his little ditty; why didn't he tell it then? They managed to get Louie Steven Witt and a bunch of other characters, why not Andrews - and Tilson! - too?

I don't know what kind of car Andrews was driving but I find this report most interesting as it heavily influences Tippit's alleged mind set moments before he was killed; suggesting that he was flustered and somewhat desperate.From what I can gather, Andrews worked out of the same offices as Roscoe White and was being questioned regarding White when Andrews told the Tippit story. My question is, do we believe Andrews? Also, was there any reports from independent witnesses confirming that the encounter with Tippit actually happened? I've always been skeptical of this account, not least because it's in connection with the Roscoe White story (which "office" did Andrews work in with him?), but more importantly because it came out so late in the game in that same "I know something that you don't know" song-and-dance that is so unfortunately common around Dallas.Granted that it may be paraphrased, but the introduction that “Since you are interested in the assassination, let me tell you something that happened” nevertheless fairly reeks of fabrication. The story goes that Andrews 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. I'm not certain exactly what time "a little after 1:00 p.m." is, but since we're so inclined to parsing seconds to figure out what time JDT was killed based on how far Helen Markham had to walk to catch her bus at what time, whether Tom Bowley's watch was accurate, and how many minutes before 1:16 - the time of the "citizen" call to dispatch - he had actually been shot, there is altogether too little time for this to have "fit in" to the scenario. Consider that JDT had to have gotten from somewhere in the vicinity of 10th and Llewellyn or Van Buren, and back across Zangs and Beckley with a "jump" up to 9th and back down Storey or Crawford for a block in order to be driving easterly on 10th just a short time later. To get to 10th & Patton by 1:10 - the latest time he was shot - he'd had to have been going at breakneck speeds ... which is just what this story suggests: everything in "hurry-up" mode. The trouble is that by the time he gets over to 10th and Patton, he's apparently slammed on the brakes and taken a pacifier since he's cruising slowly on 10th when he's next seen, "calmly" talks to someone beside his car, and then gets out of the car "real friendly like." I can only say that they didn't have stuff like that when I was in college! Moreover, if the Top Ten Records story is true - and I don't have a particular reason to disbelieve it - then in order for Andrews to have encountered JD after 1:00, then it requires JD to cross Jefferson, go north a block, turn left for a couple of blocks, stop Andrews, go through his gyrations, and then go speeding off in the opposite direction to meet his fate. All of the above would still have to hold true as to his complete attitude adjustment and fast braking. It was only sixteen minutes between the time that JD was last heard from on the radio at 8th and Lancaster until he lay dead in the street. If he spend even a couple of minutes on the phone at Top Ten, he didn't have time to go traipsing around time either before or afterward if he was going to get killed on time. (I think it's fair to say, tho', that he didn't know that at the time.) The "attitude adjustment" is the biggest part of the problem, and belies someone who just didn't have a clue about what was supposed to happen shortly after his rendezvous with the man with the mad cop disease ... i.e., he didn't know that JD wasn't driving around like a madman. As further evidence of that fact, JD was first told to move into central Oak Cliff at 12:48 when he was at Kiest and Bonnie View ("point A"). Eight minutes later (12:56) he was at 8th and Lancaster ("point B"). I have driven - several times - the most direct route (in fact, the ONLY route someone from point A to point B would have driven if he had any clue of the layout of the area) and it takes almost exactly eight minutes to drive at normal speeds (35-40 mph, the posted limits). Now, you could say that JD was driving a cop car, could have had his siren and lights going, etc., etc., but the fact remains he was at point A one minute, and at point B eight minutes later. Period. I could have the wrong route, but any other - any other! - would cause him to first be closer to central Oak Cliff, then move away from it and then turn around and go back to it! I think we can all agree that that didn't happen .... The sum total of all of this is that there is nothing that would indicate that JD was either in such a rush as Andrews describes, or had any cause to transmogrify from Mr Hyde into Dr Jekyll. Even the Top Ten guys didn't say he'd left in a "headlong" rush - so why the sudden change of demeanor for Andrews' benefit? (Incidentally, there is no Jack A Andrews currently in the Dallas phone listings, so I can't easily get in touch with him to get clarifications. If someone has more info, I'm happy to follow it up, but lacking it ...?) File this story under "B" for "bull," in my current opinion. I can be convinced otherwise ...(?)

Wow, I said that? I'm impressed!

There is only one opinion among the informed: there was no "tampering" of the body in the coffin other than that actually performed as part of the proceedings (e.g., removal of the head and jaw, etc.). It still held Marina's ring where she'd put it (on his little finger), so it was the same Lee Oswald in the box that Marina knew and buried, even if he didn't look quite the same.

Oops. Duplicate post removed.

No comment or update, but what number is this one on your list of "suspicious vehicles?" ... from pages 113-114 of CE1974. The transcript ended less than 15 minutes later with the notation of "no other pertinent transmissions through 3:00."

Based on the timing of the dispatches, I believe the person being described below is Lonnie Ray Wright:At 1:12 # 243 calls in on Channel 2. #243 is Patrolman B. L. Apple “I’m down here with this three wheeler at the dead-end of Laurels (sic) and he has got black hair. He is 42 years old and got a light colored jacket on and he is pretty drunk but he has been walking down these railroad tracks. Do you want me to take him up there or what do you want me to do with him?" .... Speaking of "suspicious vehicles" ... well, that's not exactly fair to say, since the one I'm going to refer to is actually a police vehicle ....Just for curiosity, wasn't Apple a motorcycle officer? What became of him after this transmission? Didn't he transmit again later on about waiting for someone in a car to come pick the drunk up since he obviously couldn't transport him on the back of a bike. I'll get back to the police car later since it'll be a bit of a possible surprise ...!

Thanks for that, John. I haven't had the time to pull 26H off the shelf as yet (it takes too long to print the exhibits from the web a page at a time and too small to read without zooming on it). I'm just wondering if I'll find the other TSBD employee with the means and opportunity on the list of those whose prints weren't taken. You can get a list of the employees who were fingerprinted from 26H beginning at page 799: http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...2&relPageId=835. I like using this site because you can blow up the magnification of a page. It makes it much easier to read. I guess you could compare that against a list of all the employees and determine who was not fingerprinted. The list of TSBD employees is on pages 802 and 803 I think. In the back and forth between Hoover and Rankin, there is also a list of the FBI agents and DPD officers who handled the boxes. It's interesting. Truly refused to let the FBI fingerprint any female employees. Steve Thomas Thanks, both John and Steve. CE1381 also contains statements made, around 3/20/64, of all of the TSBD employees plus a couple of those who worked at the Houston St warehouse as well. This is, as best as I can tell, a complete listing of everyone who worked in the building at the time, or even just for that day. As to female employees' prints, one could argue as to relevance: why take their prints for elimination when their gender alone ostensibly does exactly that? I'd recall that all of the employees' prints were taken save two, but that turns out to have been a mistaken recollection Additional questions follow; first the findings: According to CE3131 (which is to say "according to J. Edgar Hoover and the FBI"), referenced above, as of September 18, 1964, only one latent palm print - and no additional finger prints remained to be identified. With that in mind, it was only on September 17 - one day before - that Truly had refused to have the women fingerprinted, for three (ostensibly) very good reasons at the time, none being that there was no hint of a female's being involved. This exhibit deals only with prints found on four cartons supposedly comprising the "sniper's nest." Hoover notes that O.V. Campbell made himself and two other male employees available for printing, and that of the prints previously obtained, none matched any of the latent prints of either sort found on the boxes. Hoover also notes, however, that "the Bureau is presently processing several other palm prints obtained in connection with this project." I don't have any reference to these. There were, according to other correspondence in the exhibit, "19 identifiable latent fingerprints and six identifiable latent palm prints," not including "one fingerprint and one palm print on the four cardboard cartons which have been identified as those of Lee Harvey Oswald." That sounds like a total of 20 finger- and seven palm prints. Truly stated to the FBI that the boxes contained "'Think and Do' books, 'People and Progress,' and 'Second Rolling Reader' books." I don't recall what the orders later found in the TSBD on the clipboard showed LHO had been collecting that morning, tho' I remember "Rolling Reader" books being among them. There is not, to the best of my knowledge, any record of what other order-fillers were picking that day ... but it seems that the guys generally worked on particular publishers' books, so it is at least possible that nobody else was picking these particular books (and I don't recall what Jack Dougherty said he was getting). The only employees or former employees who were apparently fingerprinted were only those who "could possibly have handled the cartons," who were listed as follows (those who were fingerprinted are starred in red): Hank Norman Carl Jones Eddie Shields Danny Arce Jack Dougherty Buell Wesley Frazier Charles Givens Junior Jarman Frankie Kaiser Roy Lewis Billy Lovelady Eddie Piper Bill Shelley Troy West Bonnie Ray Williams O.V. Campbell (?) All of the above were fingerprinted except Carl Jones, who no longer worked at TSBD in September 1964; neither did Hank Norman (he and Jones are listed as "former employees"), but Norman somehow managed to get printed anyway while Jones did not. That Troy West was one of those who "could possibly have handled the cartons" sort of belies this investigation further inasmuch as he had testified that he worked wrapping the outgoing boxes on the first floor, and never left his work area except to make morning coffee and, presumably, to use the john. He no more "could possibly have handled the cartons" than Roy Truly by this measure. Jack Dougherty was on the sixth floor several times during the day to "get stock," but his prints were not on the boxes (or at least not identifiably so). It may have simply been that he didn't retrieve any of these particular items that particular day. Other men who were not (at first glance, anyway) finger- or palm-printed were: Jack Cason (went home to lunch at 12:10) Warren Caster (at Denton, 35 miles away) Spaulden Earnest Jones (lunch at Blue Front diner) Herbert Junker (ditto) Haddon Spurgeon Aiken (worked at N Houston St warehouse) Franklin Wester (ditto) Lloyd Viles Otis Williams (bookkeeping supervisor) Joe Molina (bookkeeper) Steven Wilson These are all apparently TSBD people who could not "possibly have handled the cartons," no how, no way, not ever. All of them, however, had alibis - and most had alibi witnesses - for the 12:15-12:45 time frame, and consequently most likely were not on the sixth floor during - or immediately before or after - the shooting. Some of the prints on these boxes were identified as having come from cops, including Captain Doughty, Lieutenant Carl Day, and Detectives Livingston and Studebaker. In addition, another detective - Bobby Gene Brown - had handled the four boxes, and his prints, too, were taken for elimination. Of the identified fingerprints, they were: 18 belonging to Studebaker (box "A"); 5 of Studebaker's on Box B; 1 of Studebaker's on Box c; 2 on Box B belonging to an FBI clerk; 1 of the clerk's prints on Box C; and 2 of the clerk's prints on Box D ... in addition to one belonging to Lee Oswald, thus leaving just one unidentified. Of the latent palm prints: 2 on Box A belonging to Studebaker; 1 on Box B belonging to Studebaker; 1 on Box C belonging to Studebaker; and 1 on Box A belonging to the FBI clerk ... in addition to one belonging to Oswald, leaving just one unidentified. In sum, the fingerprints that were taken did not match up to any identifiable prints on the boxes, and only one finger- and one palm print remained unidentified as of the time the WC was wrapping up operations. It is seemingly, then, of no particular consequence that these men - and all of the women - did not have their prints taken for, even if they had handled the boxes, the prints on the boxes could not have been identified and matched up to theirs. Or so, at least, said J. Edgar Hoover. But all of this pertains only to the four boxes that made up the "gun rest." Hoover mentioned "other prints" being investigated, but given the late date at which they were still running tests on them, I don't know if (and doubt that) this information made it into the twenty-six. The Hoover communique in CE3131 also does not mention where the prints that his lab was "still investigating" were turned up. Does anyone have any additional information on these, or know where I might start looking some more? More later, it's late here ....

And his birthday party would have been ruined by this report in the International Herald Tribune which shows America's standing in the world at an all time low: http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/06/13/news/pew1.php There is, of course, no way to know these things because, obviously, if he had lived, at least some things would have been different, leading to different things today: a different succession of Presidents dealing with different issues and bringing about different policies, different actions, different perceptions. Can it be said, in sum, that his death changed the world? To some extent, each and every death does that. The degree to which it influences anything else is directly proportional to the influence the decedent had in life. Quite true, but even the Test Ban was just the first step in JFK's larger goal of General and Complete Nuclear Disarmament. He liked to quote the Chinese proverb that the journey of a thousand miles begins with the first step.Could JFK have accomplished this goal if he had another five years as President? I do not know, but I have a feeling that if a lesser man had proposed a moon landing, no one would have believed him. I don't know how "great" Kennedy was, but having already reached the office of President - even having been seriously considered for it - shows an achievement far greater than any of us here have attained, and at an age younger than many of us are today as well. So that's definitely something.Clearly, he did not lack vision whether or not - as we'll of course never know - he had to wherewithal to carry the vision to reality. He also had "what it takes" to make others believe that his vision was possible. A moon landing was the stuff of fantasy ... but more had been achieved in the previous 30 years than in the three centuries before, so why not this too? On the other hand, some of his other visions - coexistence with Blacks and Reds, for example, and not killing the Yellows - were not so fantastic to others. And so, he died. ... And, of course, we'll never understand exactly why Lee did it, will we ...?

I've heard it said (and never disputed) that JFK is the only President who is remembered more (among those who are remembered at all) on the date of his death rather than on the date of his birth.In fact, it doesn't appear anyone here - myself included - happened to call attention to May 29. Jack Kennedy would have just turned 89. This thread is almost QED except that rather than either date, it is another even more obscure date selected. While an inspired speech (weren't most, by today's standards anyway?), does it rank higher than his inauguration speech, that exhorting a moon landing before the decade was out, his (ungrammatical) Berlin Wall speech ...? What dates were those (other than the first), anyway? Come to think of it, when was the Gettysburg Address and why isn't Lincoln commemorated on that date rather than his birth date ... y'know, the moment when all that he did became possible? So when might we have a "JFK Day" be if one were ever to be had in our lifetimes?

Thanks for that, John.I haven't had the time to pull 26H off the shelf as yet (it takes too long to print the exhibits from the web a page at a time and too small to read without zooming on it). I'm just wondering if I'll find the other TSBD employee with the means and opportunity on the list of those whose prints weren't taken.

What's a modem?

You can get a list of the employees who were fingerprinted from 26H beginning at page 799.I like using this site because you can blow up the magnification of a page. It makes it much easier to read. I guess you could compare that against a list of all the employees and determine who was not fingerprinted. The list of TSBD employees is on pages 802 and 803 I think. In the back and forth between Hoover and Rankin, there is also a list of the FBI agents and DPD officers who handled the boxes. It's interesting. Truly refused to let the FBI fingerprint any female employees. Steve Thomas Thanks, Steve; you da MAN! Just what I'm looking for short of the print cards! CE1381 also contains statements made, around 3/20/64, of all of the TSBD employees plus a couple of those who worked at the Houston St warehouse as well, but of course it doesn't go into fingerprinting at all.As to female employees' prints, one could argue as to relevance: why take their prints for elimination when their gender alone ostensibly does exactly that? It would have seemed like a collossal waste of time and - at the risk of offending - could have only served to prolong the women's upset to be fingerprinted "like a common criminal" as if having worked in the building wasn't enough. Or, at least, that's a perception. I recall, tho', that all of the employees' prints were taken, save two. (I ain't often right, but I've never been wrong ... and I guess we'll just have to see which of those it is this time!) Thanks again, let ya know what I turn up!

Actually, I'd probably concern myself more with a run for the White House ...!

A researcher named James (Jim) Olmstead has been working on the fingerprint evidence for years, has consulted numerous experts, etc. You could probably find out a great deal by reading his postings on the McAdams forum. Mr. Olmstead has a reputation for being very generous towards fellow researchers. I have been meaning to sit down and study Olmstead's work, but just can't seem to find the time. I hope you will share your discoveries with the forum. Thanks, Ray ... tho', if I found his posts, he doesn't seem as generous with his opinion of those terrible CTers!