James DiEugenio

Here is Meagher's fine expose of this fabricator and how the Dallas authorities used him: http://22november1963.org.uk/meagher-the-curious-testimony-of-mr-givens

From Presumed GuIlty, an appendix at the end of the book Author’s note: This is the actual report of the FBI’s first interview with Charles Givens. Givens is reported as saying nothing about the alleged encounter with Oswald on the sixth floor that he was to describe to the Commission much later. Rather, he is reported to have told the FBI on the day of the assassination that he saw Oswald on the first floor at the same time he later told the Commission he saw Oswald on the sixth floor. This FBI report was not published by the Commission or mentioned in the Warren Report. FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION Date 11/23/63 CHARLES DOUGLAS GIVENS, 2511 Cochran Street, advised he was employed by the Texas School Book Depository, Houston and Elm Street, from October 1, 1963, to present time. GIVENS said he has worked at this same position as a wrapper on several occasions prior to this employment. On November 22, 1963, GIVENS worked on the sixth floor of the building until about 11:30 A.M. when he used the elevator to travel to the first floor where he used the restroom at about 11:35 A.M. or 11:40 A.M. GIVENS then walked around on the first floor until 12 o’clock noon, at which time he walked onto the sidewalk and stood for several minutes, then walked to the Classified Parking Lot at Elm and Records Street. GIVENS then walked to Main Street to watch the parade and after th President and the group had passed, he walked back to the parking lot, at which time he heard several shots fired from the direction of the building at which he is employed. He attempted to return to work but was told that he had been released for the balance of the day. GIVENS advised that a white male, known as LEE, was employed in the same building and worked as a wrapper or order filler. He said he saw this same person’s picture on television on the afternoon of November 22, 1963, who was supposed to have been the person being investigated for the shooting of the President. LEE worked on all floors of the building, and on November 22, 1963, GIVENS recalls observing LEE working on the fifth floor during the morning filling orders. LEE was standing by the elevator in the building at 11:30 A.M. when GIVENS went to the first floor. - - When he started down in the elevator, LEE yelled at him to close the gates on the elevator so that he (LEE) could have the elevator returned to the sixth floor. GIVENS said that during the past few days LEE had commented that he rode to work with a boy named WESLEY. GIVENS said all employees enter the back door of the building when JACK DOUGHERTY, the foreman opens the door at about 7 A.M. On the morning of November 22, 1963, GIVENS observed LEE reading a newspaper in the domino room where the employees eat lunch about 11:50 A.M. _______________________________________________________________________ JD: The important things about this report is that there is not one thing in it about Givens going back up for his smokes and seeing Oswald on the Sixth Floor. As we shall see, the 11: 50 time can be disputed, as it was later by Pat Speer. But its clear that Givens did not go up to the sixth floor at 11:55 from this.

This is what I mean about these guys. They do the things they say we do. First there was Tague. Oh he really did not say that he was too far away etc etc. Baloney. That is what he said. Now, here comes Givens, probably one of the worst witnesses you can imagine. Here is a guy who changed his story! He first said he last saw LHO on the first floor to saying he now saw him on the sixth floor. No problem though. We just erase the first testimony off the record. Sylvia Meagher first exposed this lie and how the Dallas Police predicted he could be suborned. Pat Speer then took it even further. When you have to stoop this low, then you don't have a case.

This is really fascinating and Payette just overlooks it like a leaf in the wind in Colorado: You never wonder why, if JFK is expected at the Trade Mart at 12:15, and passing by the TSBD 5-10 mins before that, our little shooter is not even up put on the 6th floor until after 12:15? You should during out the actual exhibits David and let Payette take a look at them.

Parnell is simply ridiculous. Bobby Kennedy also remained silent, which is not surprising since he was more involved with the next generation of plots than even JFK. The IG report exonerates RFK and JFK in the CIA/Mafia plots to kill Castro. And so does the interview for the Church Committee with the guy who co wrote it. Please do not tell me you are not aware of this? The last stages of the CIA plots were Roselli and Harvey, and then Cubela. Geez Tracy think Harvey and RFK were in bed with Roselli? One of the guys RFK was trying to put in jail? Plus Harvey hated Bobby's guts. Cubela wanted proof of sanction from the White House. Helms knew he could not get it so he sent an impersonator. But this is just plain silliness bare of any factual underpinning. For instance, the CIA had to brief RFK on the plots. And they said that the longer we talked the harder he was grinding his teeth. I mean, pulease. How many times does Parnell have to slip on a banana peel before he realizes he should read up a bit. I mean, Paul Hoch----- of all people!

How anyone can write down what Payette did above about LHO getting to work that day and completely ignore the fact that they had a dress rehearsal in Chicago three weeks previous to the one that worked is simply and utterly amazing. This is why I compare him to Specter. That is something he would do. The truth is that JFK was not going to make it out of 1963. Its that simple. They tried to kill him three times and the last one succeeded. In a courtroom, you would be able to admit this as evidence of previous intent. Intent is important in a murder case. Can you imagine putting Vallee on the stand? And he starts talking about who he was, what he did with the exiles, and what he was doing on the day of the attempt? And it all echoes who Oswald was. Just a coincidence right? Wrongo.

BTW, I will never ever click through to any of these links to his site. Because I learned the last time that he is still using the completely discredited CBLA test to prop up the Single Bullet Fantasy. Yessiree, after he said you did not need it. The fact that he still uses it shows you that you darn well do need it even thought its been exposed as a hoax. But that is how desperate they are.

Carlier can you really buy this? This is what I am saying. In a court of law, which is what Santos is saying, you would show the Z film. You would then say: this clearly shows that JFK is hit when he emerges from behind the sign. He is then clearly struck at 313. You put Tague on the stand, and he says I heard the first shot. Then a bullet hit the curb in front of me and the debris flew up and hit me in the face. That is the missed shot. After the back shot. Which sticks you with three shots in 5.6 seconds. No rifleman has ever duplicated that feat without cheating. The WC cheated and CBS cheated, for the simple reasons that they knew it could not be done under normal conditions. The WC knew this which is why they tried to time their 2 sets of tests for six seconds. Then I would bring Craig Roberts on and he would relate what the greatest sniper of the VIetnam War said to him: Carlos Hathcock did it under real conditions and he could not do it. I would then ask Craig: How many certified kills did Hathcock have? Over 90 How many uncertified? Over 200 What did the Viet Cong do to try and get rid of him? Put a bounty on his head How long did he hold the record for the longest kill shot ever by a sniper? over 20 years How far away was he? A mile and half After that your case would be toast.

Tell that to Francois. That guy is so out of it he is up to over eight seconds. And why stop there. Its very simple, the Z film is their evidence, Kennedy is hit in the back, Tague heard that shot. Then at 313 JFK is hit in the skull. Do the arithmetic and its 5.6 seconds.

Joe: Martens was a Grade A cover up artist about the whole JFK case and his close friend Dave Ferrie. And he was that way from the very start, back in 1967. I would not trust anything he said about either subject. When a guy stonewalls you that hard, he is hiding something.

Sorry about that one about the Z film, that is what I recalled Bugliosi saying. You and the WC can do all you can to say, "but if", "well maybe", "it could be" etc etc. But Tague said he heard the first shot. We all know what JFK looks like coming out from behind the sign. He was obviously hit. Tague heard that hit. Then comes Z 313. That is your evidence. You and the WC can make up all kinds of conditionals and improbabilities, but that is what is on the film. If you say the film is genuine, and you do, you are stuck with it. Are you really going to say that JFK was hit at 167 and he did not register a reaction until he is behind the sign? That is baloney. And you know it. A major problem for the other side has always been that 6 second time frame. The WC itself used it for both sets of tests they ran. Which means they knew that was the time frame. Realizing what a problem it would pose when other people read the report, they stuck that page in it that DVP uses. Knowing that the Z film would wreck that qualification, but gambling that no one would go to DC to watch it. Because when you watch it, and when you understand what Tague said, the time frame is six seconds. And it gets even worse when you use the actual rifle--which as we know, is the wrong one.

BTW, the story that Kirk refers to above near the end should have gone viral. But not only has it not, but now people over at Politico, Washington Post Jr. are mocking the story. As Kirk says it goes to the heart of Trump's fairy tale about his success. He became extremely wealthy because he and his family cheated the government by lying about their assets. But the story just did not catch on. I have no idea why? Is this how much the media worships success?

I doubt it. At the AARC conference in 2014, Blakey did not appear on the same panel as they did.

Davey do you know how to count? Going with your scenario of three shots: No one will ever say that the shot in the back was the third shot. Not with that scenario. Now when Tague heard the first shot, which he says he did, that is the shot he heard. Which leaves Z 313 as the third shot. As you can see above, 5.6 seconds is their time span with the Tague hit included. Something Hoover did not want to admit at all. And the WC did not want to include either. Until they just could not cover it up anymore. BTW, if that WC excerpt that Davey posts, is it not incredible that those cover up artists do not refer to the Z film at all? In fact, if I recall correctly, they do not mention the film in the 888 page report. Bugliosi trying to defend that in RP is one of the unintentionally funny parts of his book. (Which is saying something, since a lot of it is risible.) But when you time this out with the Z film, that is you figure in their idea of the oak tree obstruction, then you divide the elapsed frames until the head shot, you come out with 5.6 seconds. I do not believe any of that BS myself, but I am just working in the confines of the Single Bullet Fantasy. Which traps them every time.

I think he was in charge of that. Did Dulles not save Meyer from McCarthy? By the way, the CIA always denied they had a program called Mockingbird. In one of their recently declassified docs, they actually admitted it to the Rockefeller Commission.

If you want to see what bankruptcy is, check out Payette's reply to me above on Flusche, and Ruby's polygraph. The point is what Bill Turner said it was: FBI agents do not perform like that. Unless the fix is in. Herndon knew what he did was OK. As the FBI did not want to expose Ruby as a xxxx. If you read the report, they indicate that was the case. Now if Ruby lied and Dean lied, and you can actually see Ruby hiding behind Harrison before Oswald comes out--another point Ruby lied about--then what is their testimony worth? (BTW, Harrison drugged himself before his polygraph) Payette calls this "incompetence"? He does not want to admit it was a cover up. Since that leads to the question: Of what? I will post another Shirley Temple clip if you wish Lance.

Btw, I should also deal with DVP here and his well, it may not be six seconds mantra. The WC specified this because they said it may be the case in case the first shot missed. Here is the problem. The WC was stuck with three shots. Period. They also had two anchors, the oak tree and car going behind the sign, and Z 313. One shot they say hit JFK in the neck (which we now know they lied about the position) and one in the rear of the skull. Which leaves one shot left. This is the Tague shot. Tague said he heard the first shot. So he had to have gotten hit with the second shot. Ipso facto, three shots in six seconds, just do the arithmetic on a calculator. Now this has driven the other side mad. So they sometimes say the Tague hit was really a fragment. But in his fine book, Gerry McKnight takes care of that one quite well. There is no way a fragment would have displaced a cement block from 200 feet away and dislodged it that far upward. The other problem is even worse. There was no copper and the FBI knew it and covered it up for years on end. In fact they actually carved out the piece of cement, and then redid it. They then said the mark came from street cleaning. Yep, and I'm Steven Spielberg's brother. IF anyone has ever seen a copper covered bullet from WCC, you will know that there is no way the coper came off from a twig from a tree (Posner) or from spinning off the street and the contact stripping off the compete outer layer. (BugliosI) As I said with Lance, this is the kind of crap lawyers use when they have no case. That shot and what Hoover did with it is evidence of conspiracy pure and simple. Hoover knew it and showed what VB calls Consciousness of Guilt.

There is nothing worse than a Bugliosi/Posner type lawyer on this case. Look, Flusche said that there was no way that Ruby came down Main Street and walked down the ramp. He said that he had parked his car across from the ramp to wait for the time when Oswald came down. Now Lance, do you think he was looking at the sky to count the birds or the cloud formation? Do you think he was looking down the street the other way for a traffic jam that he was going to have to sort out? But this in the kind of crud that prosecutors use when they have no case. Here is what Moriarty wrote about his interview: "There was no doubt in his mind that Ruby did not walk down the ramp and further, did not walk down Main Street anywhere near the ramp." And what does Payette in his best Arlen Specter impersonation say he calls this a "non observation". LOL, ROTF, LMAO Now if you want to do more than just throw spitballs into a trash can, then find the guy. Or find Moriarty. The burden of proof is on you, or maybe you forgot that standard. After all its only the JFK case. The lawyer then says well, the polygraph of Ruby was "flawed" but that does not mean anything. I mean really, where does this guy get this baloney? The HSCA panel of professional examiners said that Bell Herndon violated at least ten standards of practice. Those were so grievous that Bugliois had to l-i-e about them in his book. And there is no other way to characterize what he did. Since VB was working from the same source material that everyone else was. That report is absolutely blistering. Just about everything a polygraph specialist could do wrong, Herndon did wrong. And Payette has the chutzpah to call this test "flawed". They wrote that Herndon simply lost control of the entire process since there were too many people in the room who interfered with the proceedings. I mean Alexander had off the record talks with Ruby about the questions while the exam was in process!! Another one was the length of the exam, which was about five hours. As the report says this is preposterous. When any exam lasts that long it means that there are way too many questions. Which was the case. Why is that bad: because liars get immune to lying after awhile. Therefore the detection process will not work even in case of an obvious lie. The panel had never heard of any test containing this amount of questions or lasting that long. Further, the panel discovered that there was a definite problem with the questions: control, irrelevant and relevant. Herndon had confused them since some of the control questions simply were completely dysfunctional. That is they would not work as an indicator. In other words, by wearing Ruby down, the charted physiological response would not be detectable,. By confusing the types of questions, there would be no accurate landmarks to gauge the test by. But that was not all. There was a fallback. Herndon set the GSR machine at 25% power at the start. He then lowered it from there. The report said this was completely contrary to what he should have done. It never should have been that low to begin with, but it should have been raised as the test went on. Galvanic Skin Response is a sensitive indicator of deception since it registers things like someone blushing. The report said that Ruby's GSR was simply useless. They even suspected that the machine Herndon used was broken. They also said that his readings of the test were actually wrong. And they show why in technical terms. Payette/Specter calls this process "flawed". Yep and the American preparations for the Tet offensive were also "flawed'. After reading that report, any objective person--which excludes Payette-would suspect that the test was rigged. And that the operator would never do such a thing unless he got the OK from above. As Bill Turner once said in examining the reports filed by the FBI in the case, "FBI agents just do not perform like that." If you want to be Shirley Temple fine. But some of us don't buy the good ship lollipop anymore.

Yawn. Lance, there is a big difference between a plot to sell a stash of cocaine and a plot to kill the president. The latter is something that is so ingrained against the psyche of the MSM and academia that to this day, many texts do not admit the Lincoln conspiracy. And by the way, in that one, the guy who almost killed Seward said later "they only caught but half of us." Do the arithmetic. There was no way that the MSM was going to call the WC on this one. Not with the likes of Dulles and McCloy on board. In fact Peter Khiss of the NY Times later admitted that their inquiry had discovered the critics were correct, but the Times decided they were not going to admit that. That was in the last bunch of docs of the ARRB, somehow that great research you do missed it? So please, go back to your UFO's you are out of your depth here.

Do you believe this? It existed in the sixties but not now. Alec Baldwin could not get a JFK special on the air at the fiftieth, because we know what happened at that time: Tom Brokaw etc. So he goes to the president of NBC. He pitches his idea. The guy replies with words to the effect, Alec, thanks, but we have come to terms with the official story on that subject. This is Alec Baldwin, one of the biggest TV stars there is at the time. When I heard that, I understood the concept of institutional memory. And it also explained why Rachel Maddow is a stooge on the JFK case. How big a stooge, click here https://kennedysandking.com/john-f-kennedy-articles/rachel-maddow-jfk-and-easy-money FInally, the MSM has a leftwing slant? This guy should look up what happened to Phil Donahue when he wanted to have an open debate on the invasion of Iraq. Or else, he is from Breitbart and thinks that HRC is a liberal. And her husband. That is how bad the USA has gotten.

And BTW, that is because it many history text books, that is what the implication is. That Booth was the only one. And Parnell says, well look at those textbooks. Yeah Tracy. Look at how bad they are. In reality, the plan was to kill three people: Lincoln, Seward and Johnson. Seward was almost killed. Johnson got off when the guy assigned to him got drunk. Booth was killed while escaping, but nine people went to trial. Four were executed. One escaped to Europe was apprehended later. These guys remind me of Allen Dulles at the first WC meeting passing out the book about American assassins and how they all acted alone.

And Cory, I went through all that stuff, but you took it back to the Egyptian and Campisi. BTW, was he not the first guy to talk to Ruby after he was incarcerated? Don Flusche did not mean anything to these deniers. And the fact that the DPD kept him from the WC means less. Neither did Griffin blowing up at Dean--and this was the WC!! Even Griffin knew Dean was lying. Flunk your lie detector test--even though you wrote the questions--does not mean anything either. Pass your polygraph with flying colors, like Vaughn, so what? The FBI rigs Ruby's polygraph, hey says lawyer Payette, what do you want to make of that? Well Lancel, how about that the WC fell for it, hook, line and sinker. And Jean Davison did not note it even though her book was published four years after the HSCA. This is the kind of scholarship DVP likes. The HSCA concludes that Ruby came in the back way, and Dean lied about that door being secured. Big deal says the lawyer. Its just perjury. DVP says oh really where did they say that? BTW, the last really did happen. DVP did not even know that was in the HSCA volumes. This is objective reasoning says Lance. Geez,

Its called denial Cory. BTW, why did that idiot Thompson call his book Six Seconds in Dallas?

This one is even funnier. Does Parnell read anything? Paul Bleau did a very fine article for us on this issue. The main authors of HS history textbooks were interviewed by Paul. He asked them about their knowledge of things like the Church Committee, the HSCA, etc. They said, words to the effect, "Didn't Posner cover that?" "Didn't Bugliosi cover that?" "Didn't Shenon cover that?" And this is now both they and the MSM work in tandem. I mean come on Parnell. The MSM blew this case from the start. In 1964, NBC proposed a special but they told the FBI they would follow their lead on the case. Roger Feinman and Bill Davy have proven that CBS hired McCloy and Dulles as their advisors on their 1967 special. This has all been documented by the ARRB and by the files Feinman got from CBS. This is called an ethical journalistic violation. One does not investigate a public controversy by having the people who perpetrated that scandal run the program you are preparing. If that would have been fine, then why did CBS keep it a secret? And then why did McCloy and Dick Salant then lie about it afterward to Roger? And why did Roger then get fired for trying to expose how bad this really was? Don't tell me you are ignorant of that one too? The entire top management of CBS, Salant, Stanton and Paley, literally rolled over the middle management and producers who wanted to do a real inquiry into the WC, since they suspected it was a bunch of crapola, which is the case. Imean this is the way that power works in this country. Or are you not aware of that either? Look at what happened to Gary Webb, Dick Sprague, Jim Garrison, Bob Parry, Judge Joe Brown etc. And did you never hear of that great line by Upton Sinclair, "It is difficult to make a journalist understand a point when his paycheck depends on him not understanding it." He should know since the LA Times wrecked his candidacy for governor. Just like they ruined Webb's career and life. I mean, you need to read some stuff about how the Power Elite works. Either that or you are feigning obtuseness.

You know Tracy, your desire to present yourself as some kind of neutral arbiter simply does not work. Did you even read the article, or you just don't give a GD what it says? He altered the rifle. He also raised the time limit from the WC six seconds. Keep this up and I will put you on ignore.