Jump to content
The Education Forum

Bernice Moore

JFK
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    3,556

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

 Content Type 

Posts posted by Bernice Moore

    Did Zapruder take "the Zapruder film"?

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted · Edited by Bernice Moore

    Yes Don he does....see below..

    and you are correct this is old information, it

    appears some have not done the studies...

    Here is Ron's link..

    The Umbrella Man

    Ronald L. Ecker

    http://hobrad.angelfire.com/umbrella.html

    And though I do not agree with all....this is interesting and dates back to ...78...

    and it shows the linking of the photos and frames, if interested....and

    mentions Tinks name...

    June 1978 issue of Gallery Magazine

    Sprague & Cutler

    http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/TUM.html

    B..... B)

    Richard Randolph Carr

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted · Edited by Bernice Moore

    Hi Dennis.........

    As Don said, words to the effect that when one, is selective and uses ""witnesses who may be no more believable than the two you are so passionately trying to discredit.....""

    That is where the discord and the eh ?? comes in......what one believes is entirely up to them that is a given.......But when they present whatever as a researcher, and the differences of the said, witnesses for and against, have not been included within the information by anyone.......then that becomes a type of misinformation, a one sided view , and it is not complete, and never can be....

    How talking to someone, 10,20, 30, 40 years down the road, after a witness is dead, and or any member of a family, who were not there, clarifys anything, and taking it as a positive, is beyond me.....Their memory is as bad and can be as as some say the witnesses were, and perhaps also there are those who will say anything, for a moments attention, and to be a part of whatever, seemingly a great personality or not, how would one know positively, one cannot......they are after all human..........

    I mainly stick to first day when it comes to within Dealey....and that is usually the big why, if at all possible after the W/C scrambled so much within the testimonys and or did not call so many.......FWTIW......

    There is within the research, mention of others, with SS IDs, being at the back entrance of the TSBD, as I believe it was also mentioned by Romeck or Rackley, one of them.......does within his statement, as well as by other witnesses there that day, as well as DPD, authourities etc...and I question the "why they would be there "and so quickly, seeing that no SS were stationed, within Dealey that day...this could connect, this could possibly be a reason why, witnesses changed their information, a little talking to perhaps, which is known as pressure.....but as some will say they do not believe those witnesses either, even though some are and were the authourities....and that is entirely their choice.......

    There are many out there, who just read, that will not and do not take the time to perhaps go to the witnesses testimony, for instance and or search to find out, what the other side, "the downers "said..in this case being, Rackely and Romack...re Worrell......which is entirely up to them.......but they then walk away with an incomplete picture....and may believe a one sided view........and that spreads.....No matter that there were the two of them or not, and stated the opposite , to what Worrel did, their confusion whihc is seen, within their W/C testimony should imo have been included....and not just within Worrel....with all....

    Also when such is being reseached, one must try to look into the photos, or perhaps work with others who can, which is the other part of the research, to see if what any witnesses may say can be if possible, corroberated..IMO.....In this case, what Rackley & Romack stated about seeing the back door, of the TSBD, . from the photos I posted in the Worrel thread, and am working on, further that I have found within my files, puts great doubt on that information into their statements, and after all as it has been mentioned by Tom, I believe, that whomever may have gotten Carr to blow smokel !!, how do we know that the other three were not..as far as Carr is concerned or Worrel, and they possibly were convinced to.blow it......??

    If one is to be taken serious imo, within their research then they must include , both sides, not just what they feel backs up their thoughts....or scenario.....

    We all at many timess differ, it is not the end of the world, if something new comes to light, that has been overlooked, and that continues almost on a daily basis, we all learn, hopefully new information..

    To each their own, but I believe I see within this choosing of information within any article, by anyone, of a selective nature, in any way... why the research world is really in such a G/D confusing mess....

    Antti : I have found these two photos showing the construction, for you and all, they were taken by Cubluck....one is dated Nov.22/63 the other Nov.24/63....

    Duke :I am also still working within the photos re the viewing by anyone, of the back entrance of the TSBD, that any witness could possibly have had from Houston Street that day......I have not gotten to the photos of the TSBD, as yet, and possibly seeing if anyone there could have been Worrell, but will do so, as I mentioned to you...I would....

    See, I do not know if anyone ran from the back door entrance of the TSBD, chances are I may never, positively, and no one does right now, but there is within, much to be found...IMO....

    Thanks all...for your time....

    B.... B)

    WCD 1035 and the Men running from the TSBD

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted · Edited by Bernice Moore

    Duke :

    You can consider yourself a Roscoe or anyone you wish ...

    :offtopic

    You started out by stating you could make no sense of what I am saying......

    so there is no sense in trying to reply to your long reply post...Right....

    .....Perhaps if you did not bring down every

    thread and only copied and pasted what you were replying to, it would make things

    much easier.....for others to reply to you....

    So, I shall put it plainer so that you do.....though I know by your reply, you got

    the drift...and apparently did and do..

    Why is it that you believe as you call them the downers, and not the witnesses....??

    this has been mentioned not only by myself in all this, but by tothers and more than a few times....

    You state there was no reason for you not to believe the downers..as you call them

    ..I do wonder if you investigated their stories as soundly as you say you have the others....??

    I looked into the two of them, and imo in places they made no sense..and do not...and posted such in my reply to you, that

    you say you did not comprehend...

    Perhaps instead of just zeroing in on the negative that you see, within the witnesses, information...and thereby

    throwing all out.....as you do.....

    and only zeroing in on the downers that agrees with what you think you see....in proving the witnesses wrong, you might find a

    middle ground here somewhere......imo.

    cest le vie....

    B..... :)

    WCD 1035 and the Men running from the TSBD

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted · Edited by Bernice Moore

    Duke :

    Another reply to you.......

    I have spent the time and studied what you stated within this thread in regards to your two witnesses that gave the impression made "toast" out of Worrel's information...along with you mentioning similar in regards to Parr....at times.........first.......

    George W.Rackley Sr......You mention Worrell's poor memory in regards to time and directions.......Did you not see the same within Rackley's testimony, and yet whom you believe as one who saw no one running out of the back entrance of the TSBD.....??

    I am aware you mentioned he was 60 years old...but...

    He did not know the time, he did not hear the shots, he did not see the motorcade nor anything, pertaining to such, except pigeons fly off the roofs....He stood there for 5 to 10 minutes looking at the dock entrance..he says.......???.....Glued...........he did not walk closer...He was with Romack...

    He says....

    Mr. BELIN. Where in Dallas is it?

    Mr. RACKLEY. It is on Ross and Market Street, about two blocks from the courthouse.

    Mr. BELIN. Now where is it with relation to the corner of Elm and Houston?

    Mr. RACKLEY. Well, it is on up on Ross. Two blocks north is where our place is.

    Mr. BELIN. Your place is two blocks north of the corner of Elm and Houston?

    Mr. RACKLEY. Yes, sir.

    snip: Mr. BELIN. Did you see the President's motorcade at all on that day?

    Mr. RACKLEY. No, sir; I didn't

    Mr. BELIN. Were you standing with anyone there?

    Mr. RACKLEY. Yes, sir.

    Mr. BELIN. With whom?

    Mr. RACKLEY. With James Romack. I and him had walked out.

    Mr. BELIN. You had walked out?

    Mr. RACKLEY. I heard the siren; the parade was coming.

    Mr. BELIN. You heard sirens?

    Mr. RACKLEY. Yes, sir. And I had walked out in front of the place, to where I could get a better view, as a fellow says.

    Mr. BELIN. Where were you standing?

    Mr. RACKLEY. Well. I had walked out in the truck lot.

    Mr. BELIN. In the truck lot?

    Mr. RACKLEY. Yes.

    Mr. BELIN. And was that --

    Mr. RACKLEY. You might say would have been in the middle of the street.

    Mr. BELIN. Would that have been in the middle of Houston Street?

    Mr. RACKLEY. Yes.

    Mr. BELIN. In what direction were you facing?

    Mr. RACKLEY. Facing south.

    Mr. BELIN. All right, did you see the motorcade at all?

    Mr. RACKLEY. No.

    Mr. BELIN. What did you see?

    Mr. RACKLEY. I didn't practically see anything.

    Mr. BELIN. Did you hear any sounds at all?

    Mr. RACKLEY. Yes. Heard the sounds of the parade.

    Mr. BELIN. Did you hear the sounds that sounded like firecrackers or shots at all?

    Mr. RACKLEY. No, sir.

    Mr. BELIN. Didn't hear that?

    Mr. RACKLEY. No.

    Mr. BELIN. About how far would you have been from the northeast corner of the Texas School Book Depository when you were standing there?

    Mr. RACKLEY. I would say right at a block.

    Mr. BELIN. About a block. Do you have any idea about how many feet that is?

    Mr. RACKLEY. No, sir; I don't

    Mr. BELIN. Were you just standing there, or were you walking?

    Mr. RACKLEY. I was just standing there.

    Mr. BELIN. Did you see anything happen at all there?

    Mr. RACKLEY. No, sir.

    Mr. BELIN. Did you see anyone in the parade?

    Mr. RACKLEY. The only thing - I told the guy, he was down there, the only thing that I saw that looked suspicious to me, there was something like a hundred pigeons flew up like you shot into them, and I noticed that, but I never heard no shots.

    Mr. BELIN. Where did you see them fly from?

    Mr. RACKLEY. From over the top of the building.

    Mr. BELIN. Which building? The School Book Depository or over on the other side?

    Mr. RACKLEY. The Trinity Building.

    Mr. BELIN. Which building did they fly off of?

    Mr. RACKLEY. I wasn't looking. I just seen they all flew together.

    Mr. BELIN. Did it look like they were flying up from both buildings?

    Mr. RACKLEY. Both buildings.

    Mr. BELIN. You don't know about when this took place?

    Mr. RACKLEY. No, sir; I don't.

    snip:

    Mr. BELIN. Had any of the parade already gone by the corner of Elm and Houston?

    Mr. RACKLEY. I couldn't say.

    Mr. BELIN. So you don't know whether it did or didn't?

    Mr. RACKLEY. No.

    Mr. BELIN. But would you say it was about that time that the motorcade was to be going by there?

    Mr. RACKLEY. It was between 11 and 12.

    Mr. BELIN. It was between 11 and 12?

    Mr. RACKLEY. Yes.

    Mr. BELIN. O'clock?

    Mr. RACKLEY. Yes.

    Mr. BELIN. What time did you - was this before or after you had lunch?

    Mr. RACKLEY. Well. I just eat just any time I get a chance.

    Mr. BELIN. Do you know accurately what time it was?

    Mr. RACKLEY. No, sir; I don't.

    Mr. BELIN. Could it have been as late as 12:30?

    Mr. RACKLEY. No.

    Mr. BELIN. It was before 12:30?

    Mr. RACKLEY. Yes.

    Mr. BELIN. Before 12?

    Mr. RACKLEY. Yes.

    Mr. BELIN. Sometime between 11 and 12?

    Mr. RACKLEY. Well, it was at the time that, really, that they had shot him, because I was there when the policemen covered the place.

    Mr. BELIN. You were there when the policemen covered the place?

    Mr. RACKLEY. Yes.

    Mr. BELIN. With relation to the time that the policemen covered the place, how many minutes before that did you see the birds fly up?

    Mr. RACKLEY. I saw the pigeons there 2 or 3 minutes before that.

    Mr. BELIN. Now after you saw the pigeons, you saw the police covering the place?

    Mr. RACKLEY. Yes, sir.

    Mr. BELIN. Within 2 or3 minutes after you saw the pigeons?

    Mr. RACKLEY. Yes, sir.

    Mr. BELIN. Did you see any people coming out the back door at all?

    Mr. RACKLEY. No.

    Mr. BELIN. Could you see the back door of the Texas School Book Depository?

    Mr. RACKLEY. Yes.

    Mr. BELIN. That was at the dock they have back there?

    Mr. RACKLEY. Yes, sir.

    Mr. BELIN. Were you looking towards that direction?

    Mr. RACKLEY. Yes, sir.

    Mr. BELIN. About how long did you keep your eyes fixed over there?

    Mr. RACKLEY. Oh, I would say 5 minutes anyhow. Probably 10. I was looking up that way at all times.

    Mr. BELIN. Five or 10 minutes, you figure?

    Mr. RACKLEY. Yes

    Mr. BELIN. Did you see any people leave the Texas School Book Depository by way of the rear exit?

    Mr. RACKLEY. No, sir.

    Mr. BELIN. Did you see any people running north on Houston Street?

    Mr. RACKLEY. No, sir.

    Mr. BELIN. Did you tell your company supervisor that there had been some shooting?

    Mr. RACKLEY. No; not right then.

    Mr. BELIN. Later did you tell them?

    Mr. RACKLEY. Yes; I imagine.

    Mr. BELIN. You said you stayed there 5 or 10 minutes looking to the south?

    Mr. RACKLEY. Yes.

    Mr. BELIN. What did you do after that?

    Mr. RACKLEY. Well, when the policemen began to crowd around and they all ...over the place, well then I told him I thought that something had happened over there.

    I wasn't expecting anything like that until I just, of course, seen the policemen all out there running back. They came out the back door and the side

    Mr. BELIN. did you tell that to that you thought something happened there?

    Mr. RACKLEY. Gail George.

    Mr. BELIN. Is that your Forman?

    Mr. RACKLEY. Yes.

    Mr. BELIN. After you said you kept your eyes on this looking south for 5 or 10 minutes, what did you do after that?

    Mr. RACKLEY. Well, I went back to the office.

    http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/rackley.htm

    Now in regards to James Elbert Romack.... First off you mention that Worrel contacted the authourities, so did Romack but not till March 1964....after a phone

    call from the Scecret Service.......on the previous Sat evening ,he then testified for the W/C that next week, apparently from the way it reads...

    ....Romack also states the article he saw in the paper had some guy running towards him, what Worrel stated was the man ran up towards the fence area, Romack was on Houston.....Worrel did not to my knowledge say anyone ran out of the back door of the TSBD and down Houston ? He stated he ran up towards the fence area.......Correct me if I am wrong......tx..

    Romack says he saw a policeman run to the back of the TSBD and then leave, and he takes over on his own, watching the dock entrance....?? from Houston....As far as I know, from the photos......I have pondered over, you cannot see the dock entrance while standing on Houston.....as it was tucked away on a slant, into the right back entrance of the TSBD.......

    ..Romack says the DPO that headed to the back of the TSBD did not stay, he checked and he left..........but then when asked if he could see the dock entrance he says they had it block off, and he could see it as good as anyone ??

    Who are they ? he also mentions two men he thought could have been FBI....that arrived around the back of the TSBD, as others also have mentioned similar showing such ID, as SS...... and yet none were within Dealey.....?? ......and he also states he could only see the dock as good as anyone ??

    He only contacted the W/C after the Secret Service had contacted him on the Sat evening, before his giving testimony, in March 1964......?? After Worrell story hit the front page......????

    Mr. ROMACK. I was on lunch period, Just piddling around out north by east, I would say, from the Texas School Book Depository Building.

    Mr. BELIN. You were standing around Houston Street?

    Mr. ROMACK. It would be just about where Houston would intersect, but the street was under construction at the time. They didn't have it, which they still don't have it opened up for through traffic.

    Mr. BELIN. Were you standing with anyone?

    Mr. ROMACK. Well, Lee and Mr. Rackley, we walked out there together originally to start with. We were kind of piddling around, and I kind of walked off ahead of him.

    Mr. BELIN. Was that George W. Rackley you were referring to?

    Mr. ROMACK. Yes, sir.

    Mr. BELIN. Is he also known as "Pop" Rackley?

    Mr. ROMACK. Right.

    Mr. BELIN. You said you started walking away. Where did you walk?

    Mr. ROMACK..Toward the School Book Depository Building.

    Mr. BELIN. Along what street did you walk?

    Mr. ROMACK. Well, it wouldn't be no street at the time.

    Mr. BELIN. Well, if there would be a street?

    Mr. ROMACK. I guess it would be just about, I don't know whether they are going to split Ross and Houston Street up.

    Mr. BELIN. Would you be looking straight at Houston Street?

    Mr. ROMACK. More or less. I would be looking at Houston Street; yes, sir.

    Mr. BELIN. All right, and what happened as you were walking?

    snip

    Mr. ROMACK. And I looked up and I felt kind of chilly looking down towards the which I am facing the Houston entrance, and I looked down toward where all the people were standing along, the motorcade was passing by, and just immediately after I heard the shots, I saw a policeman running north towards me. He was running to look to see if somebody was running out of the back of this building.

    Mr. BELIN. What building?

    Mr. ROMACK. Texas School Book Depository Building. And he didn't stay but just, oh, he was just there to check and he runs back.

    Well, sensing that something is wrong, I automatically take over watching the building for the man.

    Mr. BELIN. What part of the building were you watching?

    Mr. ROMACK. The back

    Mr. BELIN. Could you see that back dock in the back part?

    Mr. ROMACK. Well, I mean, they got it sealed off. I could see as much as anyone could see.

    Mr. BELIN. Could you see---there are some stairs that go up to the back dock, aren't there?

    Mr. ROMACK. Right here.

    Mr. BELIN. You are pointing to a first floor plan of the Texas School Book Depository?

    Mr. ROMACK. Yes.

    Mr. BELIN. How long did you watch them after you saw the policeman leave?

    Mr. ROMACK. Well, I watched them all the time until someone arrived, and the only time I did take my back off, turn my back to the building was Sam Pate with his KBOX news, he arrived before any of the police or anyone.

    Mr. BELIN. Is that KBOX

    Mr. ROMACK. Yes.

    Mr. BELIN. Is that a radio or television station?

    Mr. ROMACK. It is a radio station.

    Mr. BELIN. How long did you take your eyes off then?

    Mr. ROMACK. He was driving up and they were having a little high---the city has ,a piece of wood that they use to stop traffic coming through, and I'd taken that so he could come through, drive his truck.

    Mr. BELIN. How long did you leave your post?

    Mr. ROMACK. I didn't leave. That was right there, even closer than what we were. But all I did was let that down for him, and then we

    Mr. BELIN. Would that have taken less than a minute?

    Mr. ROMACK. Yes.

    Mr. BELIN. Less than 30 seconds, do you know?

    Mr. ROMACK. Yes.

    Mr. BELIN. How long did you stay after that watching that back door?

    Mr. ROMACK. Well, we were all there watching it then.

    Mr. BELIN. How long a period of time?

    Mr. ROMACK. Pardon?

    Mr. BELIN. Did you see a policeman go up there?

    Mr. ROMACK. I saw policemen up in there. I didn't see anyone come up the back. They came in the front, all---most of them.

    Mr. BELIN. Did you see any employees walk up the back way?

    Mr. ROMACK. There was two other gentlemen which I never said anything. about, that taken over. They were FBI or something standing right here at the very entrance, and just stood there.

    Mr. BELIN. You are pointing again to the back stairway that leads up from the street to the dock on the north side of the building?

    Mr. ROMACK. Right.

    Mr. BELIN. See anyone else?

    Mr. ROMACK. No, sir; other than all the motorcycle officers and squad cars. They started coming in, I would say, in 4 minutes from the time that this happened. They were swarming the building, which naturally. I quit watching anything particular.

    Mr. BELIN. In other words, about 4 minutes after the shots came you quit watching it? Would that be accurate, or not?

    Mr. ROMACK. Well, I would say somewhere in the neighborhood of 5 minutes, 4 or 5 minutes. That would probably be true. I stayed there, but I wasn't particularly watching.

    Mr. BELIN. In other words, then as I understand your testimony, you said that from about the time of the shots until about 5 minutes after the shots, you watched the back door of the building?

    Mr. ROMACK. Right.

    Mr. BELIN. What is the fact as to whether or not you saw anyone leave the building?

    Mr. ROMACK. They wasn't anyone left the building.

    Mr. BELIN. What is the fact as to whether or not you saw anyone enter the building other than a police officer?

    Mr. ROMACK. No one entered while I was standing there.

    Mr. BELIN. Did you see anybody running down the street near you at all?

    Mr. ROMACK. No, sir.

    Mr. BELIN. Where were you standing? How far were you from this stairway going to this Houston Street dock?

    Mr. ROMACK. Well, after this KBOX---you are asking prior to before he got there?

    Mr. BELIN. Before KBOX got there first?

    Mr. ROMACK. I would say I moved between 75 yards.

    Mr. BELIN. 75 yards of the northeast corner of the building?

    Mr. ROMACK. 75 yards of the northeast corner of the building.

    Mr. BELIN. After KBOX got there?

    Mr. ROMACK. He got to about, I would say, maybe 35 yards to the building, or 40. That is where he parked his car.

    Mr. BELIN. How long did he stay, KBOX?

    Mr. ROMACK. Oh, I would say 35 or 40 minutes. Then I went and called my wife and was telling her the sad news, and then I went back and stayed again. I ended up laying off work. I didn't even work that afternoon.

    Mr. BELIN. Did you ever contact the FBI?

    Mr. ROMACK. Yes, sir.

    Mr. BELIN. When did you do that?

    Mr. ROMACK. It was on a Saturday night after I got in from work.

    Mr. BELIN. What month was it?

    Mr. ROMACK. It was this past month.

    Mr. BELIN. You mean March?

    Mr. ROMACK. Right.

    Mr. BELIN. What caused you to contact the FBI in March?

    Mr. ROMACK. I was trying to pinpoint the day that I must have come in from It was on the weekend that I'd come home, and there was a paper up left-hand corner.

    Mr. BELIN. You mean the newspaper?

    Mr. ROMACK. Yes, sir.

    Mr. BELIN. Dallas newspaper?

    Mr. ROMACK. Yes.

    Mr. BELIN. Which one, do you know, offhand?

    Mr. ROMACK. Herald, the paper that I take.

    Mr. BELIN. What did you see in the paper?

    Mr. ROMACK. I saw an article that was written by a guy, which I have been concerned about this thing all the way through, the assassination, and I got to reading it, and it is a story that just don't jibe with about me sitting there and watching the building. It just kind of upset me to know there is some monkey just hatched up such a story.

    Mr. BELIN. What is the story that you read that you got concerned about?

    Mr. ROMACK. About a guy seeing a rifle drawn in from the building above him, and he also seen the people as the shots were being fired, and he also seen some character running toward me with an overcoat on which was brown or gray or blue, and he heard 4 shots.

    Mr. BELIN. Let me ask you this. Do you remember what page of the paper this was on?

    Mr. ROMACK. It was on the headlines. I don't mean the headlines. It was on the front page in the left corner of the page.. snip Mr. ROMACK. Right. Unless you called me last Saturday. I don't remember who called me.

    Mr. BELIN. Well, on Saturday, what did someone do, call you and tell you to come down here?

    Mr. ROMACK. Yes, sir.

    Mr. BELIN. Did that person talk to .you about the facts that we were talking about now?

    Mr. ROMACK. No, sir.

    Mr. BELIN. It wasn't I, just for the record. I believe it was the Secret Service that called you, but I am not sure.

    Mr. ROMACK. It was.

    http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/romack.htm

    Duke I am thinking you need to find a couple of better witnesses than you have chosen......and not pick and choose what information in relation to them you mention, when you post, there is simply too much you left out within this thread in regards to them....and you only chose what fit your scenario against Worrell.....IMO...

    ...If you had studied their information that would have been very obvious....... Yet you seemingly allow these two who came forward in March 64.....as showing solid information against Worrell....or anyone that saw any person run out of the back of the TSBD.......??

    ........You mention in this thread how you dissected Worrell's information, I think you should have done the same with Romack and Rackley....

    If I may, I ask a question of you......Why is it, instead of putting all your effort and research to finding and proving, the possibility that there were men in the area that did escaoe, instead you continue, with great effort to down the facts that those witnesses put forth . You only appear to work on proving them wrong with the whomevers you think prove them in error. With these two that you have used as an example.....is a poor choice...and Duke, you are not accomplshing what you have hoped to......imo....

    I still have not been able to find your said article within PDQ ,Walts magazines nor do the two attachments you made, in your bio work to the next two parts, re Worrell, if you could possibly take a moment and check and eanbe them as others would also like to persue all.....

    Thanks again......It certainly has been interesting.....

    B.... :offtopic

    WCD 1035 and the Men running from the TSBD

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted · Edited by Bernice Moore

    Duke from an earlier post in this thread :""More telling is the fact that a photograph was taken of that area of the TSBD moments before JFK was shot, and there is, unfortunately, nobody even remotely matching Worrell's description standing in that location.""

    Hi Duke"

    ****Bernice:As I mentioned there are a few of the TSBD, and though I will re-check, I think that Weston states that Worrell was at the corner, and may have written

    up against the building, or thereabouts......and if my grey cells have clicked in, I will check those photos also, so in implying he was at the front of the TSBD, could be an assumption, I do have them and catelogued, and will check all.. I hope this different colour works out.?

    Duke :"""The only "proof" of such attacks on Carr is Carr's own words, which he made under oath while telling a completely different story to the court than he'd told to either the FBI or Penn Jones, each of which was different than the other; three different stories. Which of the three stories is the true one? If it wasn't the one he told under oath - that he saw something occur on a street that he couldn't physically have seen from where he was (and which he initially said "would have been impossible" for him to have seen) - how do we know that he told the truth about being attacked?""

    ****Bernice :I do not think there is very much in the way of solid proof, to how some of the witnesses were pressured, threatened, and or attacked, physically.....but imo that does not mean that such did not take place, when reports were made out by the local Police establishments, there is little if any

    details and of course the implication, if one can find such reports that is, were that whatever was an accident....and or for instance head problems.Seem to me that was an almost every day occurrance...and I have always wondered the why that was so..?? As if we nay not already know ?.

    Bernice, you've made my point for me. First regarding Dickey Worrell:

    ****Bernice: I did not start out to make any point, other than I do not think anyone should throw out the baby with the bathwater, simply because that is their conclusion, concerning anyone, or anything within what we do have of the assassination materials.....There was too much imo that was altered, destroyed, deleted, and so on, and of course those within the W/C lawyers, who questioned witnesses as we do know, left much to be desired, the questions they did not ask, many a time, would have brought out, perhaps some truths, of what perhaps would have shown us the way, and that was deliberate imo....and as I believe I did mention earlier, how do we definetely know that the answers within the W/C of let alone Worrell or any for that matter were and are correct , we do not, and there are and were too many, such as Nix, Holland, and others who stated theirs was altered.....so we do not know it appears to be the bottom line .....I have found over the years, that nothing can be brought to a solid conclusion, and that imo is the way all was set up..

    What time did he say he got to Dealey Plaza after having seen the President debark from AF One?

    Mr. SPECTER - What time, to the best of your recollection, did you arrive at the intersection of Elm and Houston?

    Mr. WORRELL - Well, about 10, 10:30, 10:45, something around there. There weren't many people standing around there then.

    Mr. SPECTER - Well about how long before the Presidential motorcade came to Elm and Houston did you get there?

    Mr. WORRELL - An hour; an hour and a half.

    Mr. SPECTER - Are you sure you were at Love Field when the President arrived there?

    Mr. WORRELL - Oh yes.

    AF One landed at approximately 11:47, as I recall. JFK arrived in Dealey Plaza at approximately 12:28-12:29. Dickey was there "an hour, an hour and a half" before that, about 11:00 a.m., about 45 minutes before the President landed, almost 2-2½ hours before Kennedy got shot by Worrell's own estimate. Yet he was also at Love Field 40 minutes before JFK was killed. Do we detect the hand of Lieutenant Commander Scott in this somewhere? Even Specter was incredulous, but Worrell wasn't going to be shaken.

    You would have to read my article - I believe it's posted here on the forum somewhere - to see what the bus schedule was, which I went to incredible lengths to find and verify. In it - the first of two or three parts, the last of which haven't been completed - I gave Worrell the benefit of the doubt, concluding that it was possible that he could've gotten there ... if several variables were met, including that the driver of an earlier bus decided to hang around and watch AF1 land instead of sticking to his route, for which there is absolutely no evidence anyone did.

    ****Bernice :Worrel appears to have had a problem, to say the least with times and a sense of directions, and I may say many do......that does not mean they are lying...imo....and I am pleased to see where you have said you did give him the benefit of the doubt....

    ****Bernice :I searched again Walt's Magazine, and cannot find your article..

    ****Bernice : I did find where you had posted the first part on the F, the other parts are not there, they do not come up.......perhaps you could check and take a few moments, as many may be interested in reading your information...

    If not, Dickey had to wait another ten minutes after the plane landed to catch the next bus, which would not have gotten him downtown in order to get to DP by 12:30 (I think it's fair to say that we all agree that he didn't get there at any "10, 10:30, 10:45, something around there," or "an hour, hour and a half" before JFK did) even in the very best of traffic.

    How exactly did he travel to DP, and how did he know to go there?

    Mr. SPECTER - How did you travel from Love Field to Elm and Houston?

    Mr. WORRELL - Bus. No, no; I just traveled so far on the bus. I went down to Elm, and took a bus from there. I went down as far as, I don't know where that bus stops, anyway, I got close to there and I walked the rest of the way.

    He wasn't sure where he'd ended up, yet knew how to get to DP from wherever it was he might've been. Bear in mind that his mission was to get a better view of the President than he supposedly got at Love Field. The bus he took - the only one that could've gotten him anywhere near DP in any semblance of enough time for him to have met the parade there - crossed Main Street about ten minutes before the motorcade did (assuming, that is, that he was on the earlier bus), and there were crowds there. Was there any doubt in his mind that the parade was going to come by this way?

    Who knows, but he apparently made a decision to stay on the bus and go wherever it might take him in hopes that he'd maybe be able to get where he wanted to go (he never explains how he knew to go to DP in the first place) and have enough time to walk or run or, who knows, maybe even get dropped off there. In sum, he passed up a sure thing to bet on an uncertainty.

    His taking the earlier bus would've taken him to the end of that route with enough time to get to DP from the terminus point by the hair of his chinny-chin-chin. He didn't stand a chance on the later bus.

    ****Bernice :I did not see it that way, that he did not know where he was going, he knew where his Mother worked, not all that far away, and seeing that the Presidential route was in the newspaper, and he was a local resident, he in all probabilty, knew exactly where he was heading.....

    How did he leave Dealey Plaza?

    Mr. SPECTER - All right. What did you do next, Mr. Worrell?

    Mr. WORRELL - Well, I went on down this way and headed back to Elm Street.

    Mr. SPECTER - Indicating you went on down to Pacific?

    Mr. WORRELL - Yes.

    Mr. SPECTER - And then proceeded --

    Mr. WORRELL - No, no; that is wrong. I went on Pacific and --

    Mr. SPECTER - Just a minute. You proceeded from point "Y" on in a generally northerly direction to Pacific and then in what direction did you go on Pacific, this would be in an easterly direction?

    Mr. WORRELL - I went east.

    Mr. SPECTER - You went in an easterly direction how many blocks down Pacific?

    Mr. WORRELL - I went down to Market and from Market I went on Ross ....

    He only went as far north as Pacific. Pacific is just one block north of Elm, and roughly coincides with the back corner of the TSBD. Without looking it up, I recall that he'd said it took him a "minute, minute and a half" or some ridiculously long time to "run" that block because, y'know, he was 20 years old and smoked. Pacific is at no point "100 yards" from the TSBD. If he was on Pacific and 100 yards away, he was east by at least 1½ blocks (you can measure it on Google Earth pretty accurately) and wouldn't have been able to see the side of the TSBD where he claimed to have seen a man run from - and run toward Elm Street - because the Dal-Tex building would've been in the way.

    He clearly didn't know times, distances or much about the geography. Does anyone suppose it was because he was 20 years old and still in high school, or just as likely that he wasn't there and simply couldn't describe the area where he wasn't and the events he didn't see?

    ****Bernice : I differ, as to me that appears again that you have thrown all Da babies out with the bath water...

    ... I also have found an article.......with further information by William Weston...

    You will note that another man, George Rackley was also some 100 yards away from the TSBD and yet could see the back entrance, that is not a great distance......

    One of my neighbours lives approximately that distance from us, we have no problem seeing him and all.etc...when we look that way. ....

    Of course, I never said that you couldn't see 100 yards to the TSBD, only that Pacific wasn't any 100 yards away from the TSBD. Worrell did say that he was "at the corner of Houston and Pacific" when he saw a man run out the side of the building, didn't he.

    George "Pop" Rackley (related to Virgie?) said that he was "about a block" from the northeast (back) corner of the TSBD, but couldn't state "how many feet" that was. He also didn't know the time - it could've even been before noon, he said - and didn't hear any shots, but only that "the only suspicious thing" he saw was pigeons flying off of the building and, about 2-3 minutes later, police surrounded the TSBD. He didn't see anyone running from behind or out of the side of the building, and he was watching the area behind and beside the building "I would say 5 minutes anyhow. Probably 10. I was looking up that way at all times." He also didn't see anyone running - or presumably speeding in a car - north on Houston. He did say, however, that he could see the side and back doors of the TSBD: "I just, of course, seen the policemen all out there running back. They came out the back door and the side door with guns."

    Pop was 60 years old at the time, btw.

    ****Bernice : Rackley was never close to or did not bother to see the motorcade up close..?? and stood only seeing the back of the TSBD building, at all times, and with all going on in the area, through all, who wrote that up.?? I might ask..?? So, he was 60, some of the best undeniable witnesses were of such an age and older....I must look further into his statements........thanks..

    James Elbert Romack was only 39. His testimony follow Pop's in Volume VI (Pop's on page 273, Romack's on page 277). Romack likewise could see the side and back of the building and didn't see anyone coming out, although as someone (Willie Weston?) pointed out, his attention may have been distracted momentarily when he moved the roadblocks from Houston Street so Sam Pate could get his red KBOX Pontiac station wagon onto the paved part of the road ("I watched them [stairs] all the time until someone arrived, and the only time I did take my back off, turn my back to the building was Sam Pate with his KBOX news, he arrived before any of the police or anyone").

    ****Bernice : With all going on, in that specific area at that time, I do not think anyone, kept their eyes on any back door, 100 % of the time.......nor did they stay in one specific spot glued to the cement sidewalk......imo. I so have a problem with such..that is soooo Iffy ....

    Strange, though, that he didn't see, hear or otherwise notice (like possibly by getting run over by it?) the gray Rambler station wagon that men he didn't see come out of the TSBD jumped into and sped north past him. Neither did Sam.

    ****Bernice : We have another Romack, who did not walk down to see the motorcade, even though it may have been his lunch time ? and I realise that many in the area had no use for JFK, any background on 39 year old Romack, I wonder ??.......and another who stood with his vison glued to the back door of the TSBD, something just does not come off to hoyle, with these two or three, of course it goes without saying the authourities, did not want anyone seeing anyone who may come running out of any of the TSBD's four entrance and exits.....?? After all at 1.40pm on Nov 22/63, the arrest report made out by the good old biys at the DPD, has LHO guilty of killing the President and Tippit.....so nothing new or surprises there..hmmmmm..

    He'd been standing "...it would be just about where Houston would intersect, but the street was under construction at the time. They didn't have it, which they still don't have it opened up for through traffic," standing out there with "Lee and Mr. Rackley, we walked out there together originally to start with. We were kind of piddling around, and I kind of walked off ahead of him" toward the TSBD. He also estimated being "100-125 yards" from the nearest corner of the TSBD. (Again, no big issue: I've no argument with someone being able to see that far, tho' I suspect it was a shorter distance than that.)

    What's more interesting about Romack's testimony, however, is why he even came to be telling his story to the WC: he'd seen Darwin Payne's article about Worrell in the newspaper and was incensed because he didn't believe the man (Worrell) was telling the truth. Asked why he'd contacted the FBI in March, he said that it was because "I saw an article that was written by a guy, which I have been concerned about this thing all the way through, the assassination, and I got to reading it, and it is a story that just don't jibe with about me sitting there and watching the building. It just kind of upset me to know there is some monkey just hatched up such a story. ... About a guy seeing a rifle drawn in from the building above him, and he also seen the people as the shots were being fired, and he also seen some character running toward me with an overcoat on which was brown or gray or blue ...."

    The article was written by Darwin Payne (who says that he recalls Worrell as being "credible," btw) and featured not only Worrell, but also Amos Euins and photographer Robert Jackson, who were all going to Washington to testify. This article was their "send-off" article, so to speak. And Worrell's story incensed Romack, whose story is fully corroborated by Pop Rackley.

    Worrell's story does not corroborate Carr's at least inasmuch as Dickey didn't notice the car that would've come speeding toward him. But it doesn't matter since even Willie Weston - who is usually quick to latch onto something suspicious, concedes that:

    23. This statement [of Carr's] was given to the FBI on Feb. 4,1 964. Five years later, he gave a different story at the Clay Shaw trial. The Nash Rambler was not parked on Record Street, as stated in 1964, but rather it was parked on Houston, next to the TSBD, facing north. After the shooting, two or three men came out of the Depository and got into the Rambler. The car was last seen speeding north on Houston. With some variations, this story was repeated to J. Gary Shaw in 1975 in Cover Up, (p. 13.). Unfortunately for Carr's credibility, the second version contains one significant difficulty: it is impossible to see this part of Houston Street from the new courthouse building, as the old structure would have completely blocked the view. This consideration leads us to the troubling conclusion that Carr had given a partially fictitious story at the trial. While arguably this assessment of his testimony is serious enough to warrant a complete rejection of everything he has said on the matter, I think that before we take this step, it is only fair to consider the severity of assassination-related persecution that he was suffering at the time of the trial, including at least two demonstrable attempts on his life (see Cover Up, pp. 13-14.) Given these circumstances, Carr's self-destructive credibility becomes more easily understandable as a matter of survival. When seen in this light, his early statements in 1964 actually gain in value--an account so important that the plotters of the assassination could not afford to leave it unsuppressed.
    Of course, the only thing that makes "at least two" attempt on his life "demonstrable" is that someone else wrote about them.
    Duke: Could you please let me know what photograph you are referring to, I have quite a few of the front of the TSBD , and very few are clear, but a couple are, and it depends exactly where he was standing, in the area......you apparently have one in particular and I would like to check it, could you post it for us....? and or let me know the photographer's name...... also could you give me, us, the full description of Worrell, many thanks...

    Duke :""More telling is the fact that a photograph was taken of that area of the TSBD moments before JFK was shot, and there is, unfortunately, nobody even remotely matching Worrell's description standing in that location.""

    I would if I could, Bernice, but I've never been any good at cataloging photos, mentally or otherwise. There is also a film that shows Marrion Baker running toward the TSBD which does not show anyone running from Worrell's claimed position (tho' I'd initially thought it might have).
    Duke: "In an article entitled "Imaginary Witness," published in Deep Politics Quarterly (January 2007?), I dissected Worrell's purported movements vis a vis the President's arrival, the motorcade's route, the bus schedule and the shooting. In it, I determined it was possible for Worrell to have been in DP at 12:30, but only if the bus he got on at Love was running 10 minutes or more late, and he knew exactly where he wanted to go after getting off the bus (and that after having crossed through the crowds on Main Street to get there, i.e., bypassed the obvious parade route).""

    This below is what Worrell stated in his W/C testimony, re Love Field and how he left Dealey, to me it somehow differs with what you have posted....above..

    I'm sure it could have been off; I don't look up everything before I post it, and as often as not go from memory, which is no longer anywhere near as perfect as it never was anyway. It was close, in any case.

    I also have gone through the DPQ, and cannot find your article, "Imaginary Witnesses"... Don't know what to say; I know Walt published it, complaining a bit about its length, and I'm sure I have a copy of it around here somewhere. No matter: do a keyword lookup on "Imaginary Witness" and I'm pretty sure it's here anyway.

    Now that said, has it also not been the opinion of many at times on the Fs, that thre FBI lied, and altered statements, many a time...and the rest of the said Government.....? Also Penn Jones, whose work I value and respect, has also been accused of not quite printing, exactly what he was told...... It comes down to at times, it would appear, the difference in the telling of the story, is by the story teller...It is in the retelling of the beholder in otherwards... As for reference to one saying a dark complexioned man and then a negro, is only after all, a choice of words at the given time, nothing really to do with his information, as you are seeing it, in mo...

    I will agree that three out of four instances of his statements are those related by others, and only one certainly directly from Carr's own mouth. Still, is it not odd that a "Negro" to both an FBI guy and Penn Jones (who specifically pointed out Carr's use of the word "Negro") becomes "a Latin" when spoken in court in the Quarter?

    One of the 1964 statements, however, is quoted from a handwritten statement. I have a copy of the handwritten version, and it reads the same as the typed transcript. I certainly cannot swear that it is in Carr's handwriting or that Carr had anything to do with seeing or signing it (as opposed to it being cooked up wholly between FBI agents who decided to affix his signature to it since nobody would know what it looked like anyway), or that if he did, that he wasn't told what to write, that someone else wrote it for him and told him what to say, or anything of the sort ... but given how innocuous the information was at the outset, in 1964, there seems little enough reason for the FBI to have bothered falsifying what he'd said when all they had to do was write nothing and say they'd never heard of the man.

    And then Carr sought out Penn Jones, and changed his story yet again when he got in front of Garrison. Maybe Jones was known to exaggerate or sensationalize, even wildly, but I hardly think he'd have "mis-heard" that Carr had seen the guy on the knoll behind the fence if Carr had said nothing of the sort. Do you?

    The bottom line is that nobody corroborates Carr's story, and physical evidence - the placement of the buildings - disproves at least the part about the men and the car beside the TSBD. Worrell's story doesn't corroborate it, Rackley and Romack's stories refute both, and even Craig's story doesn't corroborate it beyond that both contain Ramblers of different colors.

    And the bottom-bottom line is (in response to Bill Kelley's comment) is that yes, I have discredited many things that shouldn't be credited. It is as important to separate the wheat from the chaff, even if the chaff does make for a good story. If it's a bedtime story you want, don't bitch about research that doesn't reach the same happy ending as the one you heard as a child, just go on dreaming those happy dreams.

    There are enough REAL questions and issues out there without chasing after wills o' the wisp and outright lies. Sorry if you don't like me popping balloons.

    That's all for now, thanks Duke.......

    B... B)

    P.S I do hope the different colour shows...eh?? :lol:

    ****No this did not work out, so I am putting astericks beside my replies, next time I go back to copy and pasting..... :blink:

    WCD 1035 and the Men running from the TSBD

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted · Edited by Bernice Moore

    Robert :

    I also have found an article.......with further information by William Weston...

    You will note that another man , George Rackley was also some 100 yards away from the TSBD and yet

    could see the back entrance, that is not a great distance......

    One of my neighbours lives approximately that distance from us,

    we have no problem seeing him and all.etc...when we look that way.

    I also try to keep in mind, how many of the witnesses stated at different times, how

    their testimony and statements were altered, the shame and the truth is, we simply do not know......

    and Specter is not about to inform us.. after all....there was to be only one

    guilty man...of both the killing of the President and Officer Tippit....

    See the DPD document below, and note the time and the date and how cut and dried

    the charges were......He was guilty of both killings and that was a period, at 1.40pm on Nov.22/63..

    the verdict was in..

    I fully understand and agree with your standing, there is a huge difference between being

    what I call open-minded and one that is severely closed..to other possibilities......

    Thanks again, carry on.....

    B... :lol:

    P.S Also I enclose an aerial view taken Nov.22/63.......by Jerry Cabluck... The red line, is Pacific Street, you will note how from the corner

    of such and Houston, one could have viewed the rear of the TSBD....

    The Man in the Dark Sports Coat

    by William Weston

    A man in a dark sportcoat and light colored pants dashed out of the back door of the TSBD about three minutes after the shots had been fired at the motorcade. He was in his late 20's or early 30's, about 5'8" tall, and had dark brown hair. As he ran south on Houston Street, his coat was flapping backward in the breeze.

    Who was this man and why was he running away? Was he a conspirator escaping from the scene of the crime, or was he just an excited TSBD employee? Finding an answer to that question is not an easy undertaking, as there is much conflicting testimony. Nevertheless, a proper analysis of these eyewitness accounts will demonstrate that the apparent conflicts are really non-existent ones. In this article, I shall compare and combine the details of what was seen and heard in order to obtain a unified picture of what was happening behind the TSBD.

    Let us first examine the matter through the eyes of Jams Worrell, a senior in high school living with his mother and sister in Farmers Branch, a Dallas suburb.1 On November 22, he decided to skip school to see the President, and hitched a ride to Love Field, arriving at 9 am and then wait-ing for the President's arrival.

    When the Presidential party arrived and disembarked, the large airport crowds prevented Worrell from getting a good view. He considered alternatives for seeing JFK, and hit upon a bus ride to Dealey Plaza, the final "slow" point of the motorcade, which would be direct, while the motorcade itself would take an indirect route at reduced speed to enhance the President's visibility. Worrell caught his bus and wound up awaiting the motorcade underneath the "sniper's window" in the TSBD.

    At 12:30 he could see the presidential limousine as it made its successive slow turns onto Houston and Elm Streets. He could not see the President well, how-ever, as the press of the crowd again defeated his purpose. When the limousine had gone 50 to 75 feet past him, he heard a shot that sounded like it came from above. He looked up and saw about six inches of a rifle projecting from either the fifth or sixth floor window--four inches of barrel extending from two inches of stock. [The Mannlicher-Carcano barrel extends five and one half inches from the stock.] Worrell looked down the street to see where the rifle was aiming. A second shot was fired and the President slumped down into his seat. Worrell again looked up and saw a small discharge of flash and smoke as the rifle fired again. At that instant he heard people screaming and others were yelling, "Duck." He sought cover by going around the corner of the TSBD. Just as he was rounding the corner, he heard a fourth shot.2 Continuing on towards the rear corner of the building, he turned right and crossed the street. Stopping to catch his breath at the s.e. corner of Houston and Pacific, he waited for perhaps two to three minutes, and then saw the man in the dark sportcoat come bustling out the back door, and run toward Houston and Elm, where he disappeared among other bystanders. Worrell watched him as long as he could, but after losing sight of him, he turned eastward and walked along Pacific St. Reaching his mother's office at Ross and Ervay, he took a bus from there to school, and then hitchhiked home.

    The next morning as he watched the ongoing television coverage, he saw Jesse Curry make a plea to anyone who had seen the shooting to notify the police. Worrell did so and was soon taken to City Hall to make a statement. Three and a half months later, he testified before the Warren Commission and his account of the mysterious man running from the back door of the TSBD was reported in the local papers. One man who read this story was outraged, for he knew very well that no one had come out that way.

    James Romack, a truck driver for Coordinated Transportation3 had been watching the back door from the very moment the shots were fired. He did not cease watching it until after the police had arrived to seal off the building. He was angry that some fool could get away with putting forth such nonsense. To set the record straight, Romack contacted the authorities and told them exactly what happened.

    On the morning of Nov. 22, Romack had been working at the railroad yard. He had been conversing with co- worker George Rackley at a spot 100-125 yards from the rear side of the TSBD.4 The sirens of approaching motorcycles drew their attention to the crowds gathered at Houston and Elm. Shortly thereafter, Romack heard three rifle shots. Rackley, curiously enough, did not hear the shooting, as he was 60 at the time and it is possible that his hearing might have been somewhat impaired. He did, how-ever, notice a large flock of pigeons that rose up from the roof of the TSBD.5

    The pedestrians near the TSBD were either falling to the ground or scattering. Conspicuous among them was the distinctive blue uniform of a policeman running along the sidewalk. He was headed towards the back area of the building. Romack told the FBI that he saw the policeman "within a minute" after the shooting.6 When he testified before the WC, he used the words "just immediately after."7 Since the meaning of the word "immediately" has some elasticity, we can thus conclude that the policeman was seen during a time period of not more than 60 seconds after the shooting.

    This time estimate was confirmed by the officer, W.E.Barnett.8 As he stood near the front of the Depository, he heard what sounded like three shots that came from up high. Barnett looked up and scanned the roof line for a gunman. If he was up there, he might try to make a getaway down a fire escape, of which there was one on the building's east side. Was there another one on the rear side? To find out, he made a dash for the back end of the building.9 No fire escape was on that side, but there was a back door that no one was guarding. He decided to position himself at a spot where he could keep an eye on both the fire escape and the back door. While he stood there, two young women opened the door and came out.

    Victoria Adams and Sandra Styles had been on the fourth floor, watching the parade from one of the windows.10 They heard gunfire as JFK's car disappeared behind a tree. To learn what happened, they ran down the back stairs and went out the back door. Adams estimated that she and her friend were going outside about a minute after the shooting. They were stopped by a policeman. "Get back into the building," he said.

    "But I work here," Adams pleaded.

    "That is tough, get back."

    "Well, was the president shot?"

    "I don't know. Go back."

    The two women obeyed, yet they complied not by returning the way they came, but rather by going all the way around the west side to reenter the TSBD through the front entrance--talking to people along the way. Technically, they were disregarding the instructions of a police officer, and Barnett should have stopped them, but he must have had too many other things on his mind than to chase two young ladies determined to satisfy their curiosity. His main worry was the front entrance. As he looked in that direction, he saw police officers and sheriff's deputies all running towards the Triple Underpass. No one seemed to realize that shots came from the building itself, putting Barnett in a quandary. Should he stay in place and hope that another officer would do likewise at the front door? Or should he, Barnett, go to the front door and alert someone to take his vacated back door spot? He decided on the latter and ran toward the front of the building.

    Before he reached the front entrance, he was stopped by Howard Brennan in his construction hat, who told him that he had seen a gunman on one of the upper floors. Then a police sergeant came and ordered him to find a sign on the building by which it could be identified. He had to go out into the street to see the words near the rooftop ledge. It was the Texas School Book Depository. When he finally got to the front door, he estimated that about 2 1/2 to 3 minutes had passed since he had heard the final shot.11

    When Romack saw the back door being guarded by an officer, he assumed a suspect might be coming out. (Neither he nor Barnett mentioned the exit of the two women, apparently attaching little significance to them.) After the officer left the rear door, Romack decided to take up the task of guarding the rear door himself. He continued the approach to the TSBD he began at the time of the shots, reaching a sawhorse barrier that crossed Houston St., located approximately 25 yards from the TSBD to block northbound traffic into a road construction zone.12 This barrier, as we shall see, is crucial to this study, for it is the means by which a reconciliation can be made between Romack's testimony and Worrell's.

    According to his statement to the FBI, Romack heard from somewhere behind him the sound of a car bouncing erratically over large chunks of asphalt. He turned and watched in amazement and disbelief as a shiny red 1963 Pontiac Catalina station wagon bumped and banged laboriously over the broken-up street. It followed the curve that joined Ross to Houston and stopped at the barrier on the other side of the railroad tracks.13 Painted on the side of the car was "KBOX Radio News." Two occupants were in the front seat. To give the news- men a helping hand, Romack walked in front of the barrier, and helped remove it to aid the car's access. In performing this task, Romack had tuned his back to the Depository.14 The car passed the barrier and parked about 15 yards from the n.e. corner of the building. (See map showing positions at 12:34 pm.)

    Romack said that the news vehicle arrived on the scene about 3 minutes after the shooting.15 His time estimate was confirmed by Sam Pate, one of the car's occupants. He said that the car came to a stop near the Depository about 4 minutes after the shooting.16 We can thus pinpoint its arrival between 12:33 and 12:34. The importance of this cannot be overstated, for this was also the same moment when Worrell saw the man in the dark sportcoat coming out the back door. The time span when Romack had turned his back to the building could not have been more than a couple of minutes, yet it only takes a few seconds for someone to dash out of a building and run down the street.

    What about other witnesses in the area, who had the door within their field of view? One man who said that no one came out was George Rackley.17 He did not close in as Romack had, but remained in his original location, over 100 yards from the TSBD. Although he would indicate he saw no one emerge, that does not necessarily prove that he had the rear door in focus the entire time. An indication of his distractibility is that fact that he missed the arrival, at a distance of 25 yards, of the KBOX news vehicle, accord-ing to his WC testimony. If his awareness of his surroundings was so limited that he failed to notice a wild feat of rugged-terrain driving only 25 yards away, how could his testimony be used to settle a controversy involving a relatively inconspicuous event over 100 yards away? No doubt the awesome panorama of crowds surging into the railroad yards was an overwhelming spectacle to Rackley, and it would be understandable if he did not notice such peripheral circumstances as the arrival of a news vehicle or the brief appearance of a solitary figure coming out of a building.

    Another witness who had the back door within his view was news reporter Sam Pate.18 From his vantage point inside the station wagon, he would have had an unobstructed view of the TSBD during that crucial moment when Romack had dropped his guard. Yet Pate did not have the same awareness of the TSBD as the source of the shots that Romack had. Pate's main concern then was finding out where the action was, and at 12:33 his attention would have been riveted on the onslaught of humanity into the parking lot and the railroad yards. Any latecomer to the scene would naturally assume that whoever fired the shots was not inside the building. (This consideration would also apply to the other occupant in the car, Josh Dowdell, who apparently made no statement about his observations.)

    The sum total of these considerations leads to the conclusion that there is no testimony strong enough which could effectively refute Worrell's contention that a suspect ran out the back door.

    The evident existence of this man is corroborated by the statements made by Carolyn Walther.19 She had been stand-ing on Houston in front of the County Records Building. Less than a minute before she saw the motorcade, she happened to look up at he Depository and said she saw two men at a fifth floor window in the far east corner. One of them was kneeling at the lower open half of the window and he had a short gun or rifle in his hands. Standing beside him was a man wearing a brown suit coat. His clothing could be seen through the open window, but his face was obscured by the glass. this was the extent of her observations, for at that instant she turned her attention to the approaching motorcade. Going by the detail of the suit coat, we can suspect that the man whom Walther saw could be the same one that Worrell saw a little over three minutes later. It is relevant to mention here that this interval of time correlates exactly with the three minute passage of time between the firing of the shots at 12:30 to the use of an elevator by someone on the fifth floor going down to the ground floor at 12:33.20

    Still another sighting of this man was made by an unemployed steel worker, Richard R. Carr.21 Shortly after noon, he was looking for work at the site of the new courthouse on Houston St. He was seek-ing out the foreman on the ninth floor, and as he ascended, he stopped at the sixth floor, from which he could view the top floor of the Depository. He noted a heavy-set man looking out a window next to the one on the far east end. This man was wearing a hat, glasses, and, according to Carr, a tan sportcoat.22 For a short time, Carr studied the man, and then he continued his ascent.

    About a minute or two later, he heard a loud noise that sounded like a firecracker. The was a slight pause and then he heard two more reports in rapid succession. He turned his eyes toward the triple under-pass, which was where he thought the shots came from. In the grassy area between Elm and Main he could see several individuals falling to the ground. To learn more, he immediately began to descend the stairs.

    After Carr reached the ground, he again saw the man whom he had previously seen on the seventh floor of the Book Depository. He was rapidly approaching Carr at a very fast walking pace. When he got to the corner of Commerce, he turned left. On the next street over was a 1961 or 1962 Nash Rambler station wagon, parked facing north. It had a luggage rack on top and Texas plates. In the driver's seat was a young Black. The heavy-set man opened the rear door and got in. The car was last seen heading north on Record Street. This momentary sighting dovetails with the observation of sheriff's deputy Roger Craig, who also saw a Nash Rambler station wagon, also driven by a dark-complected man, about fifteen minutes after the shooting, heading west on Elm. It stopped in front of the TSBD and a man later identified by Craig as Lee Harvey Oswald got inside. The car was last seen going under the triple under-pass in a direction that could have taken it toward Oak Cliff.

    In the course of this study, we have looked at a good number of incidents that occurred within a very short period of time -- about fifteen to twenty minutes. To show how these wide-ranging circumstances can be combined into a logical sequence, the following chronology is presented:

    12:28 A man in a tan sportcoat is seen by Carr on the seventh floor of the TSBD.

    12:29 A man in a brown suit coat is seen by Walther on the fifth floor of the TSBD, standing next to a gunman.

    12:30 Worrell sees a gun firing at the President from a window on the fifth or sixth floor. Romack starts walking toward TSBD, keeping back door within his view.

    12:31 Barnett runs to the back area of the TSBD. He encounters Adams and Styles coming out the back door.

    12:32 Barnett returns to the front of TSBD

    12:33 The KBOX news car arrives on the scene. Romack removes a portion of a barrier, allowing the vehicle to pass. Meanwhile, the man in the dark sportcoat dashes out the back door.

    12:34 The KBOX car is parked near TSBD. The man in the tan sportcoat is seen by Carr walking south on Houston. He gets into a Nash Rambler driven by a Black man.

    12:45 Deputy Roger Craig sees "Oswald" escaping in a Nash Rambler driven by a dark-complected man.

    The chronology shows that there is a common thread of truth that ties widely disparate points of view into a unified whole. Each person on the scene corroborates the others and demonstrates the value and trustworthiness of the eye-witness testimony. While it is equally true that the best evidence in a homicide would be tangible items such as documents, photographs, bullet fragments, and autopsy specimens, in the case of the Kennedy assassination, where so much of that evidence has been grossly mishandled or falsified, the best source of data often turns out to be the inter-connecting memories of ordinary people.

    NOTES

    1. 2H 191-201 (Worrell)

    2. Worrell had estimated that about four to six seconds had elapsed during the shooting. When he was told later that all the firing came from one bolt-action rifle, he could not understand how it could have been fired so rapidly.

    3. 6H 279-283 (Romack)

    4. 6H 280 (Romack)

    5. 6H 275 (Rackley)

    6. FBI report, March 13, 1964, p.2.

    7. 6H 281 (Romack)

    8. 7H 539-544 (Barnett)

    9. It should be noted here that Barnett was running exactly the same way along the east side of the building as Worrell. Worrell had a head start, however, for he began running before the shot sequence ended, whereas Barnett did not start until it was over. By the time Barnett was on the move, Worrell must have already been crossing the street.

    10. 6H 388-393 (Adams)

    11. 7H 543 (Barnett)

    12. FBI report, March 13, 1964, p. 5

    13. Dennis Ford, "North of Elm on Houston," Fourth Decade, July, 1995, p. 41.

    14. 6H 281 (Romack)

    15. FBI report, March 13, 1964, p. 2

    16. Ibid., p. 6.

    17. 6H 274-277 (Rackley)

    18. FBI report, March 13, 1964, p.6

    19. 24H 522 (FBI report, Carolyn Walther)

    20. For more information on the circumstances inside the TSBD, see "The Fifth Floor Sniper," The Third Decade, May, 1993.

    21. Commission Document 385. Reprinted in Josiah Thompson, Six Seconds in Dallas , (NY: B. Geis, 1976), pp. 308-309.

    22. The time when Carr saw the man in a tan sportcoat on the seventh floor was within a minute or two when Carolyn Walther saw a man in a brown suit coat on the fifth floor. What probably happened was that the man whom Carr had seen had immediately gone down to the fifth floor where he was seen by Walther, just before the appearance of the motorcade.

    23. This statement was given to the FBI on Feb. 4,1 964. Five years later, he gave a different story at the Clay Shaw trial. The Nash Rambler was not parked on Record Street, as stated in 1964, but rather it was parked on Houston, next to the TSBD, facing north. After the shooting, two or three men came out of the Depository and got into the Rambler. The car was last seen speeding north on Houston. With some variations, this story was repeated to J. Gary Shaw in 1975 in Cover Up, (p. 13.). unfortunately for Carr's credibility, the second version contains one significant difficulty: it is impossible to see this part of Houston Street from the new courthouse building, as the old structure would have completely blocked the view. This considerations leads us to the troubling conclusion that Carr had given a partially fictitious story at the trial. While arguably this assessment of his testimony is serious enough to warrant a complete rejection of everything he has said on the matter, I think that before we take this step, it is only fair to consider the severity of assassination-related persecution that he was suffering at the time of the trial, including at least two demonstrable attempts on his life (see Cover Up, pp. 13-14.) Given these circumstances, Carr's self-destructive credibility becomes more easily understandable as a matter of survival. When seen in this light, his early statements in 1964 actually gain in value--an account so important that the plotters of the assassination could not afford to leave it unsuppressed.

    Used by permission. All rights reserved. JFk/DPQ PO Box 174 Hillsdale, NJ 07642

    http://www.manuscriptservice.com/DPQ/sports~1.htm

    WCD 1035 and the Men running from the TSBD

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted · Edited by Bernice Moore

    Peter,

    Right on..... :lol:

    Duke :

    Could you please let me know what photograph you are referring to, I have quite a few of the front of the TSBD , and very few are clear, but a couple are, and it depends exactly where he was standing, in the area......you apparently have

    one in particular and I would like to check it, could you post it for us....? and or let me know the photographer's name...... also could you give me, us, the full description of Worrell, many thanks...

    Duke :""More telling is the fact that a photograph was taken of that area of the TSBD moments before JFK was shot, and there is, unfortunately, nobody even remotely matching Worrell's description standing in that location.""

    *******************

    Duke: "In an article entitled "Imaginary Witness," published in Deep Politics Quarterly (January 2007?), I dissected Worrell's purported movements vis a vis the President's arrival, the motorcade's route, the bus schedule and the shooting. In it, I determined it was possible for Worrell to have been in DP at 12:30, but only if the bus he got on at Love was running 10 minutes or more late, and he knew exactly where he wanted to go after getting off the bus (and that after having crossed through the crowds on Main Street to get there, i.e., bypassed the obvious parade route).""

    This below is what Worrell stated in his W/C testimony, re Love Field and how he left Dealey, to me it somehow differs with what you have posted....above..

    I also have gone through the DPQ, and cannot find your article, "Imaginary Witnesses"....scroll down...

    http://www.manuscriptservice.com/DPQ/

    Is there another link to such...Thanks.....

    Worrell W/C Testimony.....

    Mr. SPECTER - Did you leave Love Field before the President did?

    Mr. WORRELL - Oh, yes.

    Mr. SPECTER - Why did you happen to leave Love Field before he left?

    Mr. WORRELL - Well, so I could see him better.

    Mr. SPECTER - Couldn't you get a good view of him a Love Field?

    Mr. WORRELL - No, I just saw him get off the plane and I figured that I wasn't going to see him good so I was going to get a better place to see him.

    snip

    Mr. SPECTER - How did you travel from Love Field to Elm and Houston?

    Mr. WORRELL - Bus. No, no; I just traveled so far on the bus. I went down to Elm, and took a buds from there. I went down as far as, I don't know where that bus stops, anyway, I got close to there and I walked the rest of the way.

    Mr. SPECTER - What time, to the best of your recollection, did you arrive at the intersection of Elm and Houston?

    Mr. WORRELL - Well, about 10, 10:30, 10:45, something around there. There weren't many people standing around there then.

    Mr. SPECTER - Well about how long before the Presidential motorcade came to Elm and Houston did you get there?

    Mr. WORRELL - An hour; an hour and a half. Mr. SPECTER - Are you sure you were at Love Field when the President arrived there?

    Mr. WORRELL - Oh yes.

    snip

    Mr. SPECTER - All right. What did you do next, Mr. Worrell?

    Mr. WORRELL - Well, I went on down this way and headed back to Elm Street.

    Mr. SPECTER - Indicating you went on down to Pacific?

    Mr. WORRELL - Yes.

    Mr. SPECTER - And then proceeded --

    Mr. WORRELL - No, no; that is wrong. I went on Pacific and --

    Mr. SPECTER - Just a minute. You proceeded from point "Y" on in a generally northerly direction to Pacific and then in what direction did you go on Pacific, this would be in an easterly direction?

    Mr. WORRELL - I went east.

    Mr. SPECTER - You went in an easterly direction how many blocks down Pacific?

    Mr. WORRELL - I went down to Market and from Market I went on Ross.

    Mr. SPECTER - You went left on Market down to Ross, and then?

    Mr. WORRELL - From Ross I went all the way to Ervay.

    Mr. SPECTER - Where were you heading for at the time?

    Mr. WORRELL - For the bus stop near my mother's office. And I rode the bus from there out to the school and hitchhiked the rest of the way to Farmer's Branch.

    http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/m_j_russ/worrell.htm

    Duke :""The only "proof" of such attacks on Carr is Carr's own words, which he made under oath while telling a completely different story to the court than he'd told to either the FBI or Penn Jones, each of which was different than the other; three different stories. Which of the three stories is the true one? If it wasn't the one he told under oath - that he saw something occur on a street that he couldn't physically have seen from where he was (and which he initially said "would have been impossible" for him to have seen) - how do we know that he told the truth about being attacked?""

    Now that said, has it also not been the opinion of many at times on the Fs, that thre FBI lied, and altered statements, many a time...and the rest of the said Government.....?

    Also Penn Jones, whose work I value and respect, has also been accused of not quite printing, exactly what he was told......

    It comes down to at times, it would appear, the difference in the telling of the story, is by the story teller...It is in the retelling of the beholder in otherwards...

    As for reference to one saying a dark complexioned man and then a negro, is only after all, a choice of words at the given time, nothing really to do with

    his information, as you are seeing it, in mo...

    Thanks....

    B..... B)

    WCD 1035 and the Men running from the TSBD

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted · Edited by Bernice Moore

    Robert:

    ""I also wonder about Dan Rather...wasn't it documented that he was holding a reel of film that was picked up just seconds after the assassination? What was that all about, can someone enlighten me regarding this?""

    As for Rather, he stated he was on the other side of the underpass...see photo....

    He was no where near the TSBD area.....and well, deep research has shown there

    was serious differences within..his statements...

    B..

    Many, many thanks Bernice, you obviously went to a great deal of trouble, in providing the images. It is strange how Richard Randolph Carr has resurfaced in a few current threads......Eh.....

    There is a lot going on right now, and this topic is pretty much at the top of the list.......

    Thanks to everyone who contributed.....The last thought I will leave you with is that even though I do not get involved in the Zapruder thread's, I am not ignorant of the issues involved......I will just add that I have examined the famous Altgens photograph, from the day after the JFK Assassination and noticed something extremely strange about it, and I asked a dispassionate bystander [a librarian, who had no idea what I was thinking] if she noticed anything strange about it....

    You know what she said?

    "Yeah, It looks like some of the people in the photograph have been photoshopped in."

    I have also observed the same dynamic in the photograph in which it was claimed Allen Dulles and Jack Ruby were in the crowd, which is when the motorcade turns onto Main Street, if you didn't know.......

    And here's where it gets even stranger......

    It is alleged that that was the corner that someone tried to warn JFK that he was about to be assassinated....according to an article in the Continuing Inquiry, although that is a very murky area.

    Now before anyone writes me off, yes it does sound very, very odd...an understatement...But when you consider that a writer for the Dallas Morning news stated implicitly that a key line was deleted from an article she wrote immediately after the assassination......It does not sound so crazy, does it.....One is written, the other is a photograph

    The long and the short of it, is that I get the same type of sensation when I initially read the document that started this thread.....

    ******************

    Yes Robert many ehs!! keep coming around....again......

    ....As they say, are we having fun yet....?.

    Agreed some do for some reason, appear to be photoshopped......not only the Altgens.....

    no reason to ever wonder the why....

    Some years ago I read where an elderly man stated the proof was in the Altgens....

    I have never forgotten those words...and that photo has gone round and round the bush for many years now.

    The running man in the Main St, area, was bounced firmly and flatly on his tothers...if you are referring to the same..

    and by the SS....

    Here is another similar to the one line being deleted, that you mention, but how about an article being relegated to the back pages

    of the Dallas paper...I believe the DMN.....and then surprise, !! disappearing entirely....and it also connected with the...

    a la Zapruder......How about the name Vivian Castleberry, very interesting story that, like many others

    did not go anywhere....more eh!!s....

    Aw, never feel bad Robert, if whomevers write you off, after all who are the whomevers .. :blink: just whomevers.... :lol: been there and done that..

    and one carrys on..lotsa games....

    Best of luck in your research, and you are very welcome....

    B....... B)

    WCD 1035 and the Men running from the TSBD

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted · Edited by Bernice Moore

    Robert:

    ""I also wonder about Dan Rather...wasn't it documented that he was holding a reel of film that was picked up just seconds after the assassination? What was that all about, can someone enlighten me regarding this?""

    As for Rather, he stated he was on the other side of the underpass...see photo....

    He was no where near the TSBD area.....and well, deep research has shown there

    was serious differences within..his statements...

    B..

    WCD 1035 and the Men running from the TSBD

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted · Edited by Bernice Moore

    Hi Will:

    I believe , think , hope, North .East ....1st floor....see below...

    B.... :ice

    Thanks, Bernice...Before I posted this, I was at maryferrell's site, trying to get a jpeg of the TSBD, that would be a panorama type image of the front, didn't have much luck. Before I go on I think it bears repeating what the document stated regarding the origin of the film......

    Mr. Waldman advised that this film was recieved from Television Station KRLD, a CBS affiliate in Dallas, Texas.

    Bearing that in mind, there is a thread on the Forum that mentions a CBS "truck" perhaps in between the TSBD and the Union Terminal Annex Building where Harry Holmes and allegedly three other individuals were watching the events unfold with binoculars.....Such clairvoyance!

    At any rate, the position of the truck would perhaps shed some light regarding whether it was the western or eastern part of the rear that these two individuals emerged from......I also wonder about Dan Rather...wasn't it documented that he was holding a reel of film that was picked up just seconds after the assassination? What was that all about, can someone enlighten me regarding this?

    And another note....

    From They've Killed The President pages 31-32....

    "Like many witnesses to the assassination, James Worrell was frightened, worried that perhaps the shooting was not over. He ran from Elm, where he had watched the motorcade, past the Depository onto Houston. He did not stop until he reached the corner of Pacific Street, a hundred yards from the Depository. As he paused to catch his breath, he saw a man burst from the back door of the Depository. From where Worrell stood the man seemed to be young, dark-haired, medium height and build, wearing light pants and a dark sports jacket. That was all Worrell could see. The man was running away."

    After I wrote this, I just discovered that Anson's reference is WCH 16 H 959

    http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...bsPageId=138627

    Worrell's description, its an affadavit; is actually a little more specific....

    height 5'8 to 5'10, no hat, nothing in hands....

    It is also kind of obvious, but WCD 1035 does not mention either of these two men getting into a car, ie the Rambler......

    Last question, regarding the initial seconds after the assassination...isn't it true that someone testified or stated in an affidavit that they witnessed someone running parallel to the south fence around the knoll, between it and the Western portion of the TSBD, also vanishing out of sight?

    ************

    Robert I shall post a few photos below, but I do not think they are what you would like...FWTAW...

    There is a panorama available, I will see if I can find the link....

    Carr & Worell were not the only who mentioned the Rambler as Craig did he stated it was a light colour with a rack on the top...as you are aware...

    A bit further.....from the files I have gathered....

    [[ posted on alt.conspiracy.jfk on 8-22-96, by

    bhart@cyberramp.net (Michael Parks) ]]

    ========================================================================

    -------------------- THE NASH RAMBLER --------------------------------

    Several Dealey Plaza witnesses reported seeing a man get into a

    Nash Rambler shortly after the assassination. Among these

    witnesses is Richard Randolph Carr. He had seen a man in an

    upper floor of the TSBD and later watched this man get into a Nash

    Rambler. He said the driver of this car was either Spanish or Cuban

    and "real dark complected."

    Another witnesses was Marvin C. Robinson. He saw a "light-

    colored Nash station wagon" stop in front of the TSBD and a white

    man come down the knoll and get in the car. His story was

    omitted from the W.C. Exhibits.

    *****************************************

    Mrs. Helen Forrest was standing among a group of people on the incline

    between the TSBD and the area known as the grassy knoll. She saw a man

    run down the incline from the rear of the Book Depository and enter a

    Nash Rambler station wagon. She later told historian Michael L. Kurtz,

    "If it wasn't Oswald, it was his identical twin" (36). Another witness,

    James Pennington, saw the exact same thing (37). Due to the mysterious

    circumstances perceived to surround the deaths of a number of witnesses,

    Pennington told his story only with great reluctance (38).

    Marvin C. Robinson had been driving south on Houston at about 12:30 pm,

    and had to wait for several minutes at Houston and Elm until the

    motorcade had passed. An employee of his at the Garland, Texas, Ling

    Temco Vought (LTV) plant, Roy Cooper, was following him in his own car to

    Robinson's home in Oak Cliff. Robinson had just made a right turn and was

    driving his Cadillac west on Elm Street when a light-colored Nash Rambler

    station wagon pulled out in front of him and abruptly stopped in front of

    the Texas School Book Depository; Robinson had to slam on his brakes to

    avoid hitting it. A young man came down the grassy incline and got into

    the vehicle, which sped away under the triple underpass in the direction

    of Oak Cliff. Robinson was interviewed by the FBI on November 23, 1963.

    He said he would be unable to identify the man he saw. He was not called

    to testify before the Warren Commission, is not mentioned in the Warren

    Report, and his statement was not published in the Warren Commission

    Hearings volumes ....CD 5.70: 12 HSCA 18.

    Roy Cooper of Euless, Texas, had just turned right on Elm Street and was

    driving west directly behind the Cadillac belonging to his supervisor,

    Marvin Robinson's. He saw a light-colored Nash Rambler station wagon

    which "pulled our real fast in front of the Cadillac driven by his boss,

    and his employer had to stop abruptly and nearly hit this Nash Rambler."

    He observed a white man between the ages of 20 and 30 come down the

    grassy incline, wave at the station wagon, then get in when it pulled up.

    He was interviewed by the Dallas FBI on November 23, 1963. "Cooper could

    not see who was driving the Nash Rambler and could not furnish any

    further description of the man who jumped in the car. They drove off at a

    rather fast rate of speed and went down toward the overpass toward Oak

    Cliff. . . . He believed that Robinson could give further information

    about the Rambler station wagon, also the driver and the rider" (40). Roy

    Cooper was not called as a witness by the Warren Commission or the House

    Select Committee on Assassinations; his FBI report was classified until

    at least 1992. It was discovered at the National Archives II building in

    College Park, Maryland by researcher Chris Courtwright in 1996

    ( Kelin, "Yet Another Eyewitness" Fair Play # 17

    In another voluntary statement to the sheriff's department dated November 22, 1963, Jesse C. Price of Dallas was quoted as saying he also saw a man fleeing from the plaza after the assassination. Price said in his notarized statement that at approximately 12:35 p.m. on November 22, 1963, he was on the roof of the Terminal Annex Building and saw the Presidential motorcade proceeding west on Elm Street until it was a short distance from the overpass.(159) After hearing the volley of shots, Price saw a man run toward the passenger cars at the railroad siding. In the sheriff's statement, Price described the man as about 25 years of age with long, dark hair. He was wearing a white dress shirt with no tie and khaki-colored trousers.(162) Price said the man was carrying something in his hand and that it may have been a "head piece"

    Price was interviewed by the FBI in Dallas on November 24, 1863. However, that report quotes Price only as saying he looked in the direction of the overpass at the time of the shots, but "saw nothing pertinent."

    http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/russ/jfkinfo4/jfk12/hscawtns.htm

    One more Jean Hill, though Specter tries to confuse her and all, she gets it out and in the record...

    Mr. SPECTER - North side of Elm Street?

    Mrs. HILL - That's right. I saw a man up there running, or getting away or walking away or something--I would say he was running.

    Mr. SPECTER - Where was that man when you first saw him?

    Mrs. HILL - He was right up there by the School Depository, just--not at the corner where they say the shots came from, at the other end, right up on the slope at the top of the slope.

    Mr. SPECTER - Would that be in front of the School Book Depository Building?

    Mrs. HILL - Yes.

    Mr. SPECTER - At the west end?

    Mrs. HILL - More to the west end.

    http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/hill_j.htm

    I will have a furtrher look for a truck in that immediate area.....or perhaps others may

    find such..

    For now...

    B.... :ice

    WCD 1035 and the Men running from the TSBD

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted

    Robert:

    Below is the window where LHO's said jacket was found....W/C..

    ************

    Amazing , say what?? Other films, photos and such disappearing, perhaps

    the likes of Carr, Oliver, Craig etc and many other witnesses who have

    been dragged through the mud, were actually telling the truth.

    Perhaps there is a possibly of some hope out there yet...

    B.........

    488th Military Intelligence Detachment

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted

    John wrote:

    ...Deputy Police Chief George L. Lumpkin, and a fellow member of the the 488th Military Intelligence Detachment, drove the pilot car of Kennedy's motorcade. (Lumpkin would later tell the House Select Committee on Assassinations that he had been consulted by the Secret Service on motorcade security, and his input had eliminated an alternative route). Also in the car was Lieutenant Colonel George Whitmeyer. The pilot car stopped briefly in front of the Texas School Book Depository, where Lumpkin spoke to a policeman controlling traffic at the corner of Houston and Elm....

    Does anyone know the name of this Dallas police officer who was stationed at Houston and Elm on traffic duty?

    BK

    ***************

    DPD Officer Joe Marshall Smith......also there for crowd control..He was at the corner when a woman ran up to him,yelling..

    "They're shooting the President from the bushes"....

    He also thought the shots came from the bushes beside the overpass.......

    Testimony Of Joe Marshall Smith

    Vol V11 ......W/C......p.532- 535

    http://jfkassassination.net/russ/testimony/smith_j1.htm

    B......

    Excerpts from Gen. Maxwell Taylor's Deposition Testimony

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted · Edited by Bernice Moore

    Bill:

    FWTW.....

    B..

    NARA Record Number: 202-10002-10038

    CUBA

    General Taylor papers

    http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...amp;relPageId=1

    B, that appears to be National Security Advisor McGeorge Bundy, General. Taylor, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, JFK POTUS and Gen. Andrew Jackson looking over their shoulder.

    Merci Bouchoups,

    BK

    **********

    Bill :

    I noticed old Andy perhaps having a listen to every word, oh if portraits could only talk... what secrets we would know....and

    perhaps some truths.... :blink:

    That is S of D Robert McNamara , Taylor and JFK....I did mean to ID them......

    Here he is also below.....Oct, 12/61.........also one of George McBundy......

    Tres Bien...

    B......

    The Sling

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted · Edited by Bernice Moore

    John :

    You may be interested.....

    THE "SNIPER'S NEST":

    INCARNATIONS AND IMPLICATIONS

    by Allan Eaglesham

    http://www.manuscriptservice.com/SN/snipos.htm

    ----- Museum TSBD Pipes

    Sept. 6, 1998 News

    http://karws.gso.uri.edu/Marsh/Jfk-conspiracy/0906kend.htm

    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

    Pat......

    Photos taken from Dal Tex appeared in the "Saturday Evening Post Magazine"....

    TSBD on the right.....They made the mistake of also printing that they were taken from

    the snipers nest..... :)

    B......

    Fetzer -Thompson debate paper

    in JFK Assassination Debate

    Posted · Edited by Bernice Moore

    J:

    It is not what Dr.Fetzer states in this information........

    It is what the contributors have... if you had read the information within I think you would have known such...

    For instance......

    ""Moorman: Uh, just immediately before the presidential car came into view, we were, you know,there was tremendous excitement. And my friend who was with me, we were right ready to take the picture. And she’s not timid. She, as the car approached us, she did holler for the president, “Mr. President, look this way!” And I’d stepped out off the curb into the street to take the picture. And snapped it immediately. And thatevidently was the first shot. You know, I could hear the sound. And .

    . .

    The principle upon which photographs are most commonly admitted into evidence is the same as that underlying the admission of illustrative drawings, maps and diagrams. Under this theory, a photograph is viewed merely as a graphic portrayal of oral testimony, and becomes admissible only when a witness has testified that it is a correct and accurate representation of the relevant facts personally observed by the witness.

    The practice of the Warren Commission and apologists for its findings appears to be the opposite, where photographs and films—including X-rays—have been used to discount the testimony of eyewitnesses, which is the better legal evidence.

    A widely-held belief holds that eyewitness testimony tends to be unreliable. It was one of the remarkable aspects of Mantik's research, therefore, that he discovered a strikingly high degree of agreement among multiple witnesses about shots that hit the President's head. This led him to a review of the current literature on the reliability of witnesses, including a book by Elizabeth Loftus, EYEWITNESS TESTIMONY (1996). On Table 3.1, he discovered a summary of research with 151 subjects, which reported that, when subjects consider what they were observing to be salient (or significant), they were 98% accurate and 98% complete with respect to their observations—reinforcing their importance as evidence and offering one more indication that popular opinions are not always true. ""

    B.......

×
×
  • Create New...