Bernice Moore

From post # 25........

Quote B: "The Ferguson memo states that the windshield was removed and stored in a closet and not seen again. Yet there are accounts of people seeing the windshield after that date..... The analysis and fallacy of that memo is also in his chapter in MIDP...."

"Quote :Pamela: You might want to start doing your own research. The Ferguson memo states no such thing. "

...B.........Here is the exact quote from Ferguson's Dec. 18 memo after describing that the windshield had been removed on Nov. 25:

"A Mr. Davis of the Secret Service then took the windshield and put it in the stockroom under lock and key and I have not seen it since."

Also noted later is that Kelllerman examined the damaged windshield on November 27, allegedly a short time before the windshield was replaced

(and two days after Ferguson said it was locked away.)

Discussed on page 137.of "Murder In Dealey Plaza".......

Ferguson un-numbered statement posted below.......

B.........

The Dr.Galanges statements are most compelling and chilling....as is the work of Doug Weldon. So much evidence - so little 'penetration' to the public of it and almost none by the controlled media. Yes, here and there some slips out and the internet is helping mightily, but then you get books like VBs that ignore most of the facts and hand-pick those that indicate the official lie as possible, and many people 'buy' it....sad. Very sad, indeed. Well, before they start to control the internet we had better redouble our efforts - and before all of us who remember and care are too old (or no longer here)......persevere 'group'.

It is interesting that Weldon's info is considered outside of media control when he is, or was, a prosecutor and used some of the same strategies the Bug did in compiling his theories.

One of the issues is that each of the witnesses to seeing a t&t hole in the windshield saw it in different places on the windshield. How can that be? Weldon glossed over that, as it didn't fit his theory.

Another issue is that they all described a hole about the size of a pencil. Why would they say such a thing? Had someone suggested that the windshield was 'special', perhaps 'bulletproof'? The windshield was a stock '61 LCC part. There was nothing special about it. Weldon avoided this fact, as it was inconvenient.

Tie those items into the fact that the windshield that was photographed by Robert Frazier's team at 1 a.m. 11.23.63 during the FBI exam was the same one kicked out by the Arlington Glass men on Monday. That windshield is the one still at NARA. Based on that information, any windshield swapping would have to have taken place prior to the FBI exam and the photographing of it that became CE 350.

A prosecutor can make a case out of anything and make it appear believable. The truth may be something else.

I just read your Hole is a hole site and can't make out exactly what you think the explanation for the crack/hole/defect is and what made it and when. It seems hard for me to believe people would say they saw a hole [as oppossed to a crack] had they not seen one. The fact that people put it in slightly different places is not surprising. Perhaps there was even both a crack and a hole. Given the government's handling of the evidence with just about everything else, anything is possible, and anything they now hold as the 'original' needs to at least be entertained as potentially suspect, IMO. Yet another mystery of that mysterious day. They were using safely glass in 63 weren't they [if, as you say, it was not bullet-proof]? Has anyone taken a similar windshield and tried to see what bullets and fragments of bullets would do to it? Galanges statement seems fairly clear, as did the other statement of a hole clear through. The Greer statement is strange and debated - as are just about all the facts of that day. Perhaps just as someone clearly tampered with the body and autopsy photos, so might they have tampered with the car evidence, and statements made about it - even photos of it. The strange gap in the logbook is curious. Any of these individually can be explained away, but when taken as as whole, alone with the 'whole' of other strange events that day and in the investigation, little the officials say holds water - nor was meant to.

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

Peter :

The last time Doug was an Assistant Prosecutor was in 1985. It also gave him an understanding of how people like the Bug and Specter manipulate evidence...He has not been such in the past 23 years......

There was only One witness who recalled seeing the hole a bit lower in the windshield, than the other witnesses, and that was Stavis Ellis...Doug notes this information in his chapter in "Murder In Dealey Plaza"...and he offers an explanation..He does not gloss anything over.....Doug spoke to Stavis hundreds of times..

Stavis was only certain that there was a bullethole and admitted his recollection as to the exact location could have been flawed...

As for the Arlington glass company, the White House log records show that they were not there Monday, but after that. The F. Vaughn Ferguson memo, may have been a cover-up tool. The Ferguson memo states that the windshield was removed and stored in a closet and not seen again. Yet there are accounts of people seeing the windshield after that date..... The analysis and fallacy of that memo is also in his chapter in MIDP....

Doug also spoke with Willard Hess , the man who was most closely aligned with the limo.....who knew Ferguson and about him....and well, he did not think much about his account.......

As far as what windshield is at the Archives , they will not allow anyone to examine it, sound familiar....Now Livingstone did published a photo, which differed from CE 350.....but I believe he also was not allowed to view it..

Doug Weldon, also has Never stated that the windshield was bulletproof, Nor implied such.......This is discussed also extensively in his chapter in Murder In

Dealey Plaza........

B..............

Bill, any evidentiary value of the mobile crime scene better known as SS-100-X was lost on Monday, November 25, 1963 when the limo was taken to Hess & Eisenhardt in Cincinnati and was essentially stripped. So while it IS a crime scene, it is one in name only since that date.

Kinda like Elm Street in Dallas after repaving and curb restriping.

Agreed. But wonder if any of the men who worked on refurbishing it are still alive to bear witness to what they saw and had to 'repair'?! I'd almost be willing to bet they had to take secrecy oaths or have been just plain threatened to keep their mouths shut....but one never knows...after all this time....

for more info concerning the Limo see: Murder in Dealey Plaza, Part II, The Kennedy Limousine pgs. 120-159, by Douglas Weldon, J.S.

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

Doug Weldon : TMWKK The Final Chapter, ep.1.The Smoking Gun, seg 2

Limo information begins with Dr.2 minutes ..Dr.Galanges......54 seconds into the video..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAW-bxxZfcM

The Limo Windshield, Bullet from Front

Limo to Detroit, Part I

TMWKK, The Final Chapter, ep.1 The Smoking Gun, seg.3

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jmMXfBgjsh0...feature=related

JFK Assassination, Presidential limo SS-100-X, part 5

B.......

So...was It Warrant Officer Ira Gearhart who had custody of the football, or was it CWO Robert M. Powell, as John Ritchson mentioned on another thread yesterday?

AND...if there actually IS confusion as to who had custody, WHY ? It would appear to MY feeble mind that there should be a straightforward, unequivocal answer to the question of who had possession of the football on 11/22/1963.

Or was Ira Gearhart the "alias name and ID" referred to by Mr. Hemming?

Was this issue ever resolved?

Before reviving it, I noticed that this thread petered out around the same time John Ritchson died, and he was the one who had said it was CWO Robrt M. Powell.

Where did he get that name?

Thanks,

BK

Hi Bill :

I have no idea, but to my knowledge......I recall him posting this question on jfkresearch that day, but no information was forth coming....he also inquired on the other forums as well.....

The only other I found in the documentation, was of a proposed manifest of those who would be going to Dallas. below...and Gearhart is listed..

B.....

Bill: Peter

Some below may be of interest.....

I searched the files on CWO Robert M. Powell...

Made after John's request, but I have never found anything further...

Here is some further info from a folder, that you may be interested in, posted below.....this first information did preceed my post from a.. few years ago, link here on the EF, but have not been able to find that older thread so far.....It is from.....the book....

"Cover Up " by Shaw & Harris.

In the book by Jim Moore, "The Day The President Was Shot"..(" a well written but inaccurate book which is, essentially, the Warren Report in narrative form"...Shaw..Harris)...

Bishop tells the story of Officer Ira Gearhart who was a member of the Presidential party, carrying a metal suitcase which carried the all important electronic apparatus so that if needed the President could call, in code, a nuclear strike..He was called the Bagman , he had to remember the combination for the safe dial that opened the Bag, and stay at all times never more than a few seconds away from the President. within the bag there were various bulky packets, each having wax seals...and the signatures of the Joint Chiefs of Staff...The second contained what appeared to be gaudy pages of close text with what looked like color cartoons..more like horror comics as they had been carefully designed so that any one of Kennedy's three military aides could tell him quickly how many millions of casualties would result from Retaliation Able, Retaliation Baker, Retaliation Charlie, etc...Captain Tazwell Shepard had prepared these, what were called the Doomsday Books.......In one were cryptic numbers which would permit the President to set up a crude hot line to the Prime Minister of the U.K...and France on a four minutes notice..

Gearharts only job was to follow the President ,stick around and lug the "Bag" and of course remember the combinations...He and his ghastly burden were necessary...In Harry Truman's time, the on slot of the Cold War, it would have taken him four hours to think things through, by JFK's watch, it has been reduced to 15 minutes and was shrinking...

...Bishop relates how Gearhart becomes separated from the VIP portion of the motorcade as it raced to Parkland...and after arriving he did not know where the President was nor whom he was..The SS kept him away from the booth where LBJ had been placed...and that Johnson and Gearhart had been separated again, when LBJ raced to Love Field..." Somehow in the flight from the hospital ,the new President had overlooked the Bagman and the Major General Chester V.Clifton, who understood the coded types of retaliation..If at this time the Soviet Union had launched a missile attack , referred to in the DOD ....In Manchester's "Death of a President"....He states the advance man for the Texas trip was Warrant Officer Art Bales (Sturdy) 30yr old vet who new every executive in the Southwest Bell Telephone Co...he could bug any line from the nearest manhole or... conduit , and had all the facilities that enabled him to scramble almost any conversation and disconnect it without notice...The President needed one clear circuit to Washington when he was out of town..at all times..which means that Bales could pull the plug more or less on any Cabinet Member, if necessary...In the motorcades Bales would ride in the Signals control car, and he states by tradition this was the last car in the caravan , and that his companion there would be a swarthy Gearhart..When he tried to get into Minor Medicine where LBJ was waiting but he was unknown to the VPs men and was kept secluded in booth 8...until Emory Roberts saw him and identified him..when leaving Parkland, he had forced himself and his bag into a policeman's lap.....Stoughton took photographs of LBJs swearing in, and though he wished he were elsewhere he dutifully performs his duty, in one of the photos can be seen Gearhart's spectacles, identified by two tiny points of light..

&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&

This information below was posted by Ed LeDoux at Lancer..

Thanks Ed....

I have darkened the sentence pertaining to who took turns carrying said football....Rotating Aides...One from each branch of the service..

Per Gil Jesus:

"Gen. McHugh, the "Man with the Football", who usually sat in the front seat of the President's limo between the agents was removed and seated further back in the motorcade, as was the President's physician, Admiral Burkley. This was done on the morning of the 22nd at Love Field, just before the motorcade left. In addition, the order of the......................."

----------------------------------------------------------------

From:SURVIVOR’S GUILT / Chapter 11 by Vincent Palamara

Among countless other trips (Truman–Johnson), McNally was on the

Texas trip, working closely with Chief Warrant Officer Arthur W. Bales, Jr. and Ira Gearhart, a.k.a. “The Bagman” (these two men rode near the end of the motorcade in the White House Signal Corps car).

------------------------------------------------------------------

From: The story about JFK's Bible begins on page 320 of William Manchester's 1967 book THE DEATH OF A PRESIDENT:

Godfrey McHugh was beside John Kennedy's coffin, standing rigidly at attention. Ken O'Donnell withdrew to the corridor. O'Brien participated in setting up the ritual which Lyndon Johnson had said Bob Kennedy wanted; then he retreated behind Sarah Hughes. The feeling extended to members of the permanent Presidential staff. Stoughton himself wished he were elsewhere. In his prints two tiny points of light identify the spectacles of Ira Gearhart, but the bagman and his football had to be there; the thermonuclear threat was no respecter of tragedy. Gearhart was alone. The crewmen had quietly retired. Boots Miller of the baggage detail was in the staff cabin with his face averted, cradling in his arms a paper bag containing Jacqueline Kennedy's ruined pillbox hat, and Jim Swindal recoiled down the aisle to Clint Hill's side and pressed his face against Roy Kellerman's broad back. As 26000's pilot the Colonel should have been present. Nobody had known that he took politics seriously. But beneath his Milton Caniff air the dapper Alabaman had idolized John Kennedy. He had not known he could suffer so. He felt as though he had a stone in his chest. It would have taken every Johnson agent to drag him into the stateroom. As he explained afterward, "I just didn't want to be in the picture, I didn't belong to the Lyndon Johnson team. My President was in that box."...

---------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Apocalypse Soon By Robert S. McNamara

In my time as secretary of defense, the commander of the U.S. Strategic Air Command (SAC) carried with him a secure telephone, no matter where he went, 24 hours a day, seven days a week, 365 days a year. The telephone of the commander, whose headquarters were in Omaha, Nebraska, was linked to the underground command post of the North American Defense Command, deep inside Cheyenne Mountain, in Colorado, and to the U.S. president, wherever he happened to be. The president always had at hand nuclear release codes in the so-called football, a briefcase carried for the president at all times by a U.S. military officer.

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

Next post information from Ed Le Doux......

Background:

The "Nuclear Football," otherwise known as the President's Emergency Satchel, is a specially-outfitted, black-colored briefcase used by President of the United States to authorize the use of nuclear weapons. While its exact contents and operation are highly classified, several sources have provided details of the bag.

It is presumed to hold a secure SATCOM radio and handset, the daily nuclear launch codes known as the "Gold Codes," and the President's Decision Book—the "nuclear playbook" that the President would rely on should a decision to use nuclear weapons be made, based on the Single Integrated Operational Plan.

The National Security Agency updates the Gold Codes daily.

The playbook is said to contain 75 pages of options, to be used against four primary groups: Russian nuclear forces; conventional military forces; military and political leadership and economic/industrial targets. The options are further divided into Major Attack Options (MAOs), Selected Attack Options (SAOs), and Limited Attack Options (LAOs). With the SATCOM radio and handset, the president can contact the National Command Authority (NCA) and the North American Aerospace Defense Command (NORAD). To make rapid comprehension of the materials easier, the options are described in a heavily summarized format and depicted using simple images. The Football also contains the locations of various bunkers and airborne command-post aircraft, procedures for communicating over civilian networks, and other information useful in a nuclear-emergency situation.

The Football is carried by one of the rotating Presidential Aides (one from each of the five service branches), who occasionally is physically attached to the briefcase. This person is a commissioned officer in the U.S. military, pay-grade O-4 or above, who has undergone the nation's most rigorous background check (Yankee White). These officers are required to keep the Football within ready access of the President at all times. Consequently, an aide, Football in hand, is always either standing/walking near the President or riding in Air Force One/Marine One/Motorcade with him. The case itself is a metallic, possibly bullet-proof, modified Zero-Haliburton briefcase which is carried inside of a leather "jacket". The entire package weights approximately 40 pounds (18 kg). A small antenna, presumbaly for the SATCOM radio, protrudes from the bag near the handle. Contrary to popular belief, the "football" is not handcuffed to aides. Rather, carriers employ a black cable that loops around the handle of the bag and the wrist of the aide.

The concept of the Football came about in the aftermath of the Cuban Missile Crisis. President John F. Kennedy was concerned that some Soviet commander in Cuba might launch their missiles without authorization from Moscow. After the crisis, Kennedy ordered a review of the U.S. Nuclear Command and Control system. The result was the highly classified National Security Action Memorandum that created "the Football.

It has been suggested that the nickname Football was derived from an attack plan codenamed Drop-Kick.

On April 24, 1999, President Bill Clinton left NATO's 50th anniversary summit, being held at the Ronald Reagan Building in Washington, D.C.. The carrier and the football were left behind. The aide walked the half-mile back to the White House alone. The integrity of the football and the state of the officer were intact.

Similar incidents have occurred with Presidents Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, Ronald Reagan <1>, and George H. W. Bush <2>.

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

W/H Communication Branch........Gearhart

" We were approximately six cars and two Press & Staff busses behind the President....The WHCA Com, Car was around two corners from and not in sight of the President's car...

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...bsPageId=326722

FWIW.......

B............

Here you go: Kathy.....

B....

Daily Mirror, 22 November 1968, pp.17-18

A wreath in Dallas

By John Pilger

Five years ago on this day the first of the crop was harvested: John Fitzgerald Kennedy, a true spirit of change, was ambushed and shot to death on Elm Street in Dallas, Texas.

The world stopped that day and, in unison, we all spewed our grief.

Some did not. Some, like the hate-weaned innocents at a school in Dallas, stood and cheered, while their parents hastily convened parties at which glasses were raised in grotesque salutes to what had happened that day; and if these truths are unimaginable then so, too, is the truth of John Kennedy’s death.

For after five years of cataclysm in America, in which three other men of change have been assassinated and the very idea of America as a civilised country challenged, we still do not know the complete story of Dallas. We have, of course, the Warren Commission’s twenty-six volumes of finely-honed yet patently inconclusive reassurance, compiled, it would seem, only for those who needed reassuring, and perhaps in 1964 when the report was published we were not unlike those citizens of Aldous Huxley’s Brave New World who lined up for their peace of mind.

I came to Dallas because on election day, when front pages were filled with poll predictions of the candidates, I read in the Los Angeles Times the results of the most important poll of all. It was taken by the Louis Harris group and it said in effect that 81 per cent of the American people no longer accepted the findings of the Warren Commission and now believed that there was a conspiracy to kill the President of the United States.

So I am in Dallas, in November and a pale ghost of a sun flits across a sky that is both enormous and hard; and down on Elm Street, on the grassy knoll near the Texas School Book Depository, from where Lee Harvey Oswald was said to have done his work, two young soldiers quizzically study a wreath sent by a student group to await the anniversary. On it is written:

Send him not these flowers,

Send us the truth.

Dallas has not changed. The organised forgetting has not worked; only the city’s mask is new.

A great deal of money has been poured on civic wounds and into prefabricated banks, like gargantuan filing cabinets; and yet the John F. Kennedy memorial, Dallas’s tribute, still lies in the planning room of City Council.

It could have happened anywhere, they still chorus. The Mayor of Dallas, multi-millionaire Erik Jonsson said: “We are not ashamed, sir!” The deposed police chief of Dallas, Jesse Curry, who has these five years carried the public guilt for the murderous circus that tried and killed Oswald in his headquarters basement, said: “Please, ah just want to go mah own way now, and forget.”

It could have happened anywhere, but it did not. Dallas was the chosen place and the world said Dallas killed the President with its air of hate and tradition of death and violence, with its assorted nuts of the paramilitary Right and a daily newspaper that believes civil rights is the Communist line. And in reply Dallas asks to be excused. Big D is a doer, they say with pride; Dallas man was born to act, not to contemplate the past. Or anything. Hamlet would hate it here.

Dallas, it must be emphatically said, is not America. The conscience which was custom-made for comfort here is a time bomb ticking away almost everywhere in the United States. Nor is that conscience being aroused by the sworn enemies of the American establishment. Such pillars as Life Magazine and The New York Times, both of which greeted the Warren Report as “exhaustive,” have long since called for a new inquiry.

Life called for a new inquiry on the basis of the film it bought for $25,000 from Abraham Zapruder who, from the grassy knoll in Elm Street filmed the President’s motorcade as it approached and kept his camera running as the shots were fired. The film, according to Texas Governor John Connally, who was seated directly in front of the President and was critically wounded, shows that he was not hit until after President Kennedy was shot for the first time, which suggests that the two men were struck by separate bullets. No one assassin using a bolt action rifle could have fired two shots that fast.

Since February of last year, New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison has been on the stage with his revelation of a conspiracy plot in which, he says, Oswald played only a minor part; and in spite of the guns of scepticism aimed at him, he has gathered enough evidence for three judges to indict a New Orleans businessman called Clay Shaw, of whom the Warren Commission makes no mention, for conspiracy to assassinate the President of the United States.

Perhaps it is indicative of all the assassination intrigue that the strongest case for a new inquiry might eventually rest within the bizarre. Since 1963 an estimated thirty-five to forty-seven people connected with the assassination have died in unbelievable situations.

For example two Dallas reporters who were at a meeting with Jack Ruby the night before he killed Oswald, died violently: one when a revolver “went off” in a California police station, the other by a “karate chop” in the shower at his Dallas apartment. Two strippers who worked for Jack Ruby in his Carousel Club have also died violently, one from gunshot wounds and the other, held overnight in a Dallas jail on a petty charge, was found hanged in her cell.

Columnist Dorothy Kilgallen, who was the only journalist to have a private interview with Jack Ruby during his trial, was found dead in her New York apartment after telling friends she was going to Washington “to bust the whole thing open.”

Is it true that a CIA agent who told friends he could no longer keep quiet about the assassination was found shot in the back in his Washington apartment? The verdict was suicide.

Pilot David Ferrie was found dead in his New Orleans home, ostensibly from natural causes, but with two suicide notes beside him. Four days earlier, Ferrie had told reporters that Jim Garrison had him “pegged as the getaway pilot in an elaborate plot to kill Kennedy.” The odds against these and other deaths have been calculated at 100 trillion to one.

Much of the sequence is already known: what is not known are the answers to a melange of questions that haunt both critics and defenders of the Commission. At random: Why should two-thirds of the eyewitnesses in Dealey Plaza report that shots came from in front of the President, and not from behind as the Commission says? And why were only a small portion of these witnesses interviewed?

And why were all the investigations not published? I have seen a Secret Service report that supports Governor Connally’s two bullets theory. It was not published in the Warren Report. A similar FBI report also was not published.

Why did the doctor who received the President at Parkland Hospital say the bullet entered his throat from the front, only to change his mind to agree with the autopsy performed later in Washington which contended that the bullet entered the back? Why did the chief pathologist at the autopsy burn the draft of his first report? How could the bullet – the only bullet linked to Oswald’s gun – emerge virtually unscathed after a journey through two bodies causing extensive wounds, smashing bones and a wrist?

What of the film that shows a policeman holding a rifle which he had just carried from the School Book Depository before the “Oswald rifle” was found?

The answers to these questions are not proof on their own, but together they mean something, perhaps even the beginning of a way out of the monstrous whodunnit into which the Kennedy assassination has been allowed to sink.

But the whodunnit is real. This year I have spoken to many of its authors and critics and of those I met in Dallas, I should mention here two who most impressed me.

One of them is Penn Jones, Jr., editor of the Midlothian Mirror, in the town of Midlothian, south of Dallas – a crusading small-town editor.

Years before the assassination Penn Jones exposed the John Birch Society in his columns and, for this, his office and printing presses were fire-bombed. He, like almost all the critics, believes in the political conspiracy theory.

“Anyone who has read all twenty-six volumes of the Warren Report knows by his basic common sense that it reeks of whitewash.” He said: “The report is its worst enemy; those who defend it usually haven’t read it; they just can’t conceive something that doesn’t agree with what is thought to be the respectable viewpoint. And those of us who have read all of it – and we’re few – know damn well what’s happening…”

Penn Jones sent me to Roger Craig, whose testimony to the Commission, on page 160 of the report, he repeated for me in a Dallas restaurant.

Now the City Judge and Justice of the Peace of Midlothian, Craig was a deputy sheriff in Dallas five years ago and was on duty in Dealey Plaza on November 22. He saw the President shot. He also saw a man he identified as Oswald running from the School Book Depository building fifteen minutes after the shooting.

He said Oswald got into a station wagon which had been cruising along Elm Street and he later identified him at Dallas police headquarters. He said that Oswald remarked: “Everybody will know who I am now.” What is important here is that Oswald, according to the Commission Report, should have been well on his way home when Craig saw him. The Commission dismissed Craig’s testimony on the basis that his superior officer, Captain Fritz, a man who said he “never took notes,” did not remember the Oswald identification.

Roger Craig is a gaunt, erect man who speaks almost at a whisper. “I have spent my life in law enforcement and I know what I saw. I looked at Oswald’s eyes. It was him.”

Last November, Craig was shot at in a Dallas parking lot, three days after giving evidence to District Attorney Garrison, and today his family live in a virtual state of siege. Molly, his wife, has been followed by the same car for months and their phone is monitored.

The road from Dallas invariably leads to New Orleans and to District Attorney Garrison. He is the only public official in the United States inquiring full-time into the assassination. For all his intriguing without him there would be no public dissent.

“Oswald,” he said, “was a decoy who became a patsy. He never knew the true nature of his job. He never expected to die. There were about seven men involved in an old-fashioned ambush of the President. Shots came from the grassy knoll area, from the Depository building and another building in the Plaza.

“They probably did not leave the scene until well after they did the job.

“The assassination team were fanatical Anti-Castro Cubans and Right Wing paramilitary types and we are investigating connections with elements of the Central Intelligence Agency. Don’t raise your eyebrows: just consider their record outside this country, the Bay of Pigs, the U-2 incidents…

“John Kennedy was working for a peaceful détente with Castro and with all the Communist world. And he was thinking ahead to an American withdrawal from Vietnam. He wanted everything changed. He had to go.”

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

Thank you Paul, may this be copied and reposted?? A very thoughful and informative article of the times...

Another witness to whom Penn Jones gave much credit , for his bravery, was Richard Carr.....who was hounded , threatened, stabbed etc....

a great similarity to Roger Craig....He and his information is still downed ,as they say to this day, as some also still attempt to do so,to Roger...

His statments were also confirmed as was Rogers by other witnesses......

As Pilger writes, ""Much of the sequence is already known: what is not known are the answers to a melange of questions that haunt both critics and defenders of the Commission. At random: Why should two-thirds of the eyewitnesses in Dealey Plaza report that shots came from in front of the President, and not from behind as the Commission says? And why were only a small portion of these witnesses interviewed?""

Amazing is it not, that so many of the witnesses information is and has been "interpreted" by others, as meaning, exactly the opposite in some cases , or with a slight twist, as to what they did state....they have been downed, insulted, called liars, etc etc..

No not amazing, simply put, disinformation, and that still continues on a daily basis.....by the manipulators..

Thanks again, well worth a read....

B......

The Hughes film. I'm not 100% sure of the timing of the film sequences after the shooting, but I thought i'd throw these obsevations in to the discussion.Watch the video carefully a few times, and then give your opinions.

or am I way off course?

Frames from the Hughes Video

Duncan

Duncan :

In the Hughes film, I do not see a rack on the top....do you ?? On second look, perhaps..? white roof...?

In the Hughes frames, thanks...wish I could capture those little devils, from films.

There were two men in seemingly similar light jackets, with a cap, I do believe, one seemingly somewhat shorter and younger

perhaps than DCM......he took off first and is seen running, below, in front of DCM, going up the embankment..on the left, in both...

as DCM appears to ramble along, taking his time..I think the first one running is perhaps whom you have captured...though I do not

see a white cap...??

I do think it may very well be, Roger Craig crossing over to the North side.. ? He is seen in Willis and id by Gary Shaw, shown below, running

down towards the underpass area, then he did cross over, to the North side, as seen within your Hughes frame, and also moved then up towards

the first pegola area...and shown within the photos.....

Then he moved eventually back across...to the South side, as he states within his information, and saw the station

wagon, and could not get back across..when he also heard the whistle and saw ?? picked up........??

FWITW..Thanks..

B

Hi Peter;

I believe the last would be in Wilma Bonds # 8......

I have never found him.. in any photo taken after this...

Perhaps someone else has ??

He is seen at the bottom of the steps area, and that is Um seen standing looking

up towards Elm & Houston...I believe

B.....

Bernice,

If there were time for DCM to have gone into the parking lot and later driven a car out to pick up a man or men depends upon how long after the shooting the cars/men were seen (e.g., where was DCM at the time of the photo of the Rambler wagon at least partially obscured by the bus?). I've never traced his movements, so have no idea.

Here he can be seen walking west at the time when people were streaming up and across the knoll.

Sorry, don't know the photographer.

Steve Thomas

***********

Thanks Steve.....

That is a Towner 3 photograph..see it below in full......I have quite a collection of DCMs movements after the assassination.....

He took his own sweet time, it could be said, and slowly walked out of history...

I did not want to touch or correct Duke's post...though I should have added the information but did not....

I am pleased that you have clarified this for all.....

Thanks....

John Thanks also for adding to the Craig's studies.....

B.....

Willis 5.....

B......

I need to find a fairly high resolution copy of one of the portraits of LHO in his Civil Air Patrol uniform (NOT the Ciravolo "cookout" group picture). I thought there was one, but I see a very hi-res one in the Peter Jennings program that looks like a different pose.

I need it for a demo edit of a proposed TV program. It will not be broadcast, just used to interest a backer.

Anybdy have a clear version of one of these photos???

Hi Stephen:

These, I am afraid are not high resolution,perhaps they may serve of some use to you....

B.....

For further studies, for anyone interested in educating themselves re the information on

Roger Craig.....

Some information....

FYI, below I've posted all(?) of the entries about Roger Craig to be found in, I guess, most places, from Walt Brown's Global Index to the JFK Assassination. Other citations were also found to other people relative to "station wagon," also below).

Some general observations about all of this: first, that there seem to be enough "independent" observations of a station wagon or a car that a man was (or men were) seen getting into almost immediately after the shooting that lends credence to the possibility since if there were shooters in the plaza area - including LHO or not - they had to get away from the area somehow, or else they had to blend into the crowd fairly effectively (Mooney's "plainclothes officers like me" being a case in point). I quote "independent" because you sometimes have to wonder how many people - especially those cited by authors - actually saw something, vice how many "remembered" it later after having read about it elsewhere ... not to mention how many people may have made up the story they told!

If there were time for DCM to have gone into the parking lot and later driven a car out to pick up a man or men depends upon how long after the shooting the cars/men were seen (e.g., where was DCM at the time of the photo of the Rambler wagon at least partially obscured by the bus?). I've never traced his movements, so have no idea.

More to the point is the testimony of James Romack (6H277-84), who came to the WC's attention at about the time James Worrell was leaving (with Robert Jackson, Amos Euins and someone else whose name I've momentarily forgotten) to go to DC to testify. It seems that Romack had been working at a freight terminal behind the TSBD - along with George "Pop" Rackley, Virgie's father (6H273-77)- and had "stationed" himself in a position where he could see the back of the building "at all times." He testified that he was watching the back and side of the building and saw nobody running from it at any time.

A couple of caveats to that testimony, however, are that he did, at one point, move from his "station" to remove the barricade on Houston St to allow Sam Pate to get his KBOX radio car out of the road construction zone back there, that being a point in time where his attention was directed away from the TSBD (Sam parked behind the TSBD, and on alighting did see someone running across Houston St from the direction of the SE corner/east side of the TSBD); and also that he was not asked - nor did he volunteer - anything about any vehicles in the area.

It is noted that Romack's entire testimony was intended - by his own admission - to discredit the "xxxx" that he thought Worrell was, and so focused mainly if not solely upon someone running from the side entrance. Neither his nor Rackley's testimony, to the best of my offhand recollection, had any discussion about other vehicles or persons in the area.

Other citations:

For "station wagon" see: James Pennington (p.189 in Kurtz, Crime of the Century) who it is said corroborated Craig's claim of LHO getting into a station wagon, as well as Marvin Robinson (driver on Elm Street who witnessed a man run from the Depository and enter a late model Rambler station wagon (32 in Anson, They've Killed the President; 73-74 in DiEugenio, Destiny Betrayed; 119-120 in Hurt, Reasonable Doubt; 132 in Kurtz, Crime of the Century; 110 in Moscovit, Did Castro Kill Kennedy?; 14 in Shaw and Harris, Cover-Up; 242 in Thompson, Six Seconds in Dallas) and Richard Robinson (motorist who witnessed a man run from the Depository and enter a late model Rambler station wagon; may be the same person as Marvin Robinson, cited above), 387 in North, Act of Treason), Helen Forrest (saw a man run from the rear of the TSBD, down the incline, and get into a Rambler; if not Oswald, his twin, according to Mrs. James Forrest: 132, 135, 221, 225 in Kurtz, Crime of the Century; 110 in Moscovit, Did Castro Kill Kennedy?), Glenn Smith (accountant privy to an "Oswald" gun transaction, had actually driven a Russian-speaking woman three times to 2515 W 5th St, Irving after servicing her station wagon: 352 in Brown, Warren Omission; 357-358 in Meagher, Accessories After the Fact; Warren Commission 26 Volumes: noting that vehicle involved was a 1953 or 1954 Plymouth or Chevrolet station wagon, X, 403; TESTIMONY OF, X, 399-405; House Select Committee 12 Volumes: XII, 286-287).

Also(?), Richard Randolph Carr (Dealey Plaza eyewitness, had commanding vantage point in building under construction south of Elm Street: 32 in Anson, They've Killed the President; 395-399 in Brown, People v. Lee Harvey Oswald; 61, 67 in Crenshaw, Conspiracy of Silence; 412 in Davis, Mafia Kingfish; 43, 177-180, 235n, 243n in Garrison, Heritage of Stone; 95-96, 238-239, 281 in Garrison, On the Trail of the Assassins; 121 in Groden and Livingstone, High Treason; 62, 143 in Groden, The Killing of a President; 119-120 in Hurt, Reasonable Doubt; 64, 86, 88 in Jones, Forgive My Grief III; 351-353, 458 in Kirkwood, American Grotesque; 131-132 in Kurtz, Crime of the Century; 21, 318-319 in Marrs, Crossfire; 23 in Menninger, Mortal Error; 387 in North, Act of Treason; 37, 185 in Sample, Men on the Sixth Floor; 12-14, 64, 182 in Shaw and Harris, Cover-Up; 88, 90 in Smith, Second Plot; 241-242, 244, 256 in Thompson, Six Seconds in Dallas; House Select Committee 12 Volumes: XII, 8-9, 22).

Craig, Roger, (Sheriff's Deputy standing on Main Street when the shots were fired at JFK's limousine; Craig's place in the narrative is unique, and the authors cited only begin to flesh out his story; as is true in too many cases, this seminal figure in the JFK tragedy died, oddly, very young), 77n, 217 in 179, Anson, They've Killed the President; 495-498, 571, 577 in Brown, People v. Lee Harvey Oswald; 35, 130, 145, 149, 160, 243, 300 in Brown, Treachery in Dallas; 142, 206, 280, 308-309 in Brown, Warren Omission; 189 in Davis, Mafia Kingfish; 74 in DiEugenio, Destiny Betrayed; 95 in Epstein, Inquest; 440-443 in Fensterwald, Coincidence or Conspiracy? 94-96, 98, 194, 202, 204- 205, 239, 273-274, 281, 326-327 in Garrison, On the Trail of the Assassins; 114, 121, 123-124, 161-162 in Groden and Livingstone, High Treason; 62, 64 in Groden, The Killing of a President; 118, 160, 245 in Groden, Search for Lee Harvey Oswald; 348 in Hepburn, Farewell America; 102, 120-121, 123, 125, 400, 413 in Hurt, Reasonable Doubt; 25, 29-31, 33-35, 67, 74 in Jones, Forgive My Grief, I; 15, 29-31, 33-37, 64, 79-80, 86-88, 90, 93 in Jones, Forgive My Grief III; 31, 33, 148-149 in Jones, Forgive My Grief IV; 325-326, 458 in Kirkwood, American Grotesque; 9, 19, 122, 127, 130-133, 195 in Kurtz, Crime of the Century; 18, 96, 98, 173-174, 384 in Lane, Rush to Judgment; 20, 328- 333 in Marrs, Crossfire; xxxvi, 59 in Meagher, Accessories After the Fact; 110-111 in Melanson, Spy Saga; 279-281 in Model and Groden, JFK: Case For Conspiracy; 110, 119, 211, 213 in Moscovit, Did Castro Kill Kennedy? 12, 20 in Palamara, Third Alternative; 90-91, 95, 105, 171, 173 in Popkin, The Second Oswald; 259, 446 in Posner, Case Closed; 212 in Roffman, Presumed Guilty; 347, 351 in Sauvage, Oswald Affair; 37-38, 156 in Scheim, Contract on America; 201 in Scott, ed., Assassinations; Dallas and Beyond; 9, 14-15, 26-29, 70, 88, 99, 144, 161 in Shaw and Harris, Cover-Up; 105, 183 in Sloan, JFK: Last Dissenting Witness; 41, 43-44, 137-138, 158-159, 161, 163, 236, 291 in Smith, Second Plot; 243-244, 256 in Thompson, Six Seconds in Dallas; 498-499 in Trask, Pictures of the Pain; 110, 136-137, 139 in Weisberg, Whitewash II; 168 in Weisberg, Photographic Whitewash; Warren Commission 26 Volumes: IV, 245; XIX, 524; XXIII, 817; XXIV, 23; on Nash Rambler, VI, 266-267; seeing sixth floor cartridges a foot away from the window, VI, 268; Lee Oswald's comment regarding station wagon, VI, 270; on not being remembered on November 22, 1963 by Will Fritz, VII, 404; TESTIMONY OF, VI, 260-273; Warren Commission Report: 160-161, 251-253; House Select Committee 12 Volumes: XII, 6, 17-18.

--------------------

Duke Lane

http://educationforum.ipbhost.com/index.ph...=6673&st=15

B.........

Thank you John:

For this further information.....Will you either be adding this to Roger Craigs on line information

page, at the bottom of said page, as you did her first letter, or deleting what you have......?

I wish Deanna well ........and peace of mind.....

The statement :

""Because Jones made money off my Dad""...

Well, Penn would have had something to say...about that I have no doubt......

......it is obvious she has

no knowledge of his circumstances in the self publishing his books..nor the trials

he went through to get his information released....

B.......

Thank you Steve, that is very cool, as you say....

The up and coming......way..

B......

Mark: call it what it is, a Barfing contest.....

And just imagine, how some regard all this, such as those who replied at the beginning of this said thread...

and went to the trouble to find what they had and posted such......

My, My how they must feel about their doing so now......

Call that what it was also.........Suckered......

Well, perhaps some have also learnt whom not to respond to again when such a request is made...

as it was apparently and deliberatley used and planned as a lead in to what has now progressed.....

IMO......

B......

If there are not clarifications made, then future discussions with the same confusion will be re-born again. Sometimes its best to address these issues and get through them than to deal with them everywhere else they have spread. I have seen this type of thing go on in the alteration threads a lot ... please feel free to speak-up in the same manner then too.

Thanks B

I was expecting you to speak up first, and have not been disappointed.....you never do in that regard..

This it seems has been re-born again and perhaps again..and will again ??...and there has been no clarification...

I have spoken up in the past...FYI.....

So take your eh?? to someone else.......your just barfed because you got suckered in also, but in a much bigger way...

you fell in the hole....

Thanks also....

B.....

I'm not a moderator, nor do I play one on TV...neither do I desire the position.

BUT...after three pages of this alleged discussion, I'd like to know how it relates to a clearer understanding of the JFK assassination, or what new information it brings to light. All I see is a urination contest--to use more polite terms that I was originally thinking--that is unnecessarily wasting the bandwidth of this site [think about that the next time you get a "site unavailable--bandwidth exceeded" error message when trying to connect to this discussion board].

If you folks are simply out to flame one another, I suggest you confine it to PM's, and save the forums here for those of us who are serious about either learning something or asking questions. As a politically incorrect pundit once expressed it, "Arguing on the internet is like competing in the Special Olympics: even if you win, you're still retarded."

Can we agree to rise to a higher level...for the sake of the cause here, which last I knew was the discussion of the JFK assassination...?

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

Mark: call it what it is, a Barfing contest.....

And just imagine, how some regard all this, such as those who replied at the beginning of this said thread...

and went to the trouble to find what they had and posted such......

My, My how they must feel about their doing so now......

Call that what it was also.........Suckered......

Well, perhaps some have also learnt whom not to respond to again when such a request is made...

as it was apparently and deliberatley used and planned as a lead in to what has now progressed.....

IMO......

B......

Quote Vince Palamara: "...THE GREAT ZAPRUDER- FILM- HOAX...a book I don't adore." (Sorry in Pop- up.). Close quote

At 0.45 min on this clip:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zm842SWubNw

VP answer me one single question: Which side are you on??

KK

Karl...side of what? Many CTs are not exactly enamored with Fetzer's books. Vince Palamara has said he's been swayed by Bugliosi's book, a book most here believe to be dishonest. In chapter 9b at patspeer.com, in fact, I believe I prove it to be dishonest. But trusting Bugliosi on this issue does not make one a fascist.

Bugliosi, it should be pointed out, has not only written a book about the illegality of the Supreme Court's appointing Bush president, but has just written a new one declaring President Bush to be a murderer. Hardly the work of a neo-con or neo-fascist.

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

And Karl:

""Karl...side of what? Many CTs are not exactly enamored with Fetzer's books.""

Keep in mind, that is Just Pat's Opinion.........

P.S..Thanks for the video links: Vince........But

If you have read only a chapter or two, or a page of this book or that, how can you possibly,

give a book critique.......Not possible imo.......EXCUSE me Vince...........I played this video a

second time, cleaned my ears, and now heard, you are clearly stating how many pages and or chapters you are mentioned in each book.

I did not realize that the research has gotten to this extreme point in time, where it is only, all about you...... Even though this is your new video, and you have the right to say whatever you would like. May I ask that you please get off your high horse, and come back down to earth with some of us, and get real again.....Thanks.......

B..........

`

You know, I just saw this picture the other day while brousing through Penn Jones' photos at Baylor University Political Archives, but I don't know if its a better quality shot.

BK

Can anyone post a better copy of this photo? Thanks!

Thx Bill,

Do you still have that article research of LHO being seen in that parking lot in a car AFTER "LHO's" arrest at the Tex Theater?

I'd like to see that !!

Edit: contraction

Hey Bill..

Take care...

Miles, is it the car, station wagon, that you would like to get a much better shot of....??

I have looked further and did find this, copy, which is Penn's.....

and an enlarged but..

FWIW...

B......

B

Paul ....all

FWTAW.......

B.....

If Vince Palamara was a plant, he did what he was supposed to do

These repeated insinuations and accusations against Mr. Palamara are false and defamatory, and are calculated to bring this forum into disrepute.

If you have any evidence beyond the imaginings of your own mind, then produce it, otherwise please cease and desist from impugning Mr. Palamara's character.

Vince has produced, after many years of diligent research, the first detailed study of how the Secret Service of the United States failed in its basic mission, that of protecting the President. In his study, Vince quite rightly gives the SSA the benefit of doubt when trying to determine whether certain acts or omissions were deliberate. In logic, that is known as the PRINCIPLE OF CHARITY. In Law it is known as the presumption of innocence. It is one of the fundamental principles of civilization.

THe question that Vince set out to examine had nothing to do with the identity of the assassin(s), and Vince's views on that subject are really irrelevant.

and now he's made his exit from the stage, you say. IN YOUR DREAMS, I say.

ROCK ON, VINCE.

*********

Agreed this is all supposition, and if any enlightenment is to come about, then eventually we shall see...from Vince through his actions, as well as his associations...

......Till then it is somewhat a waste of resources to continue to guess at what Vince may or may not be thinking...doing, was, is, or may be....

His work on the SS still stands, and he has been nothing but kind and generous, with the sharing of his research......But I suppose some will think that is how he suckered us in.....wouldn't be surprised....

That worm turns so quickly...doesn't it..Give it a rest......

B...

Hi Miles :

That photo is a William Allen, not a Jim Murray, though they were together at the same time, within

the same area, and that is the why we have the continuous spread of photos showing that particular

activity.....and they do get confused....

Here is Robin's full copy......

B..

I read the following, which is an unpublished manuscript

written by the late Roger Craig:

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

In it Roger Craig mentions that Jim Garrison showed him a picture of a man who was in Dealey Plaza on November 22nd 1963 at the time of the assassination. Craig says he identified the man as the same man who drove the Rambler station wagon, which he claims Lee jumped into.

Quote from the article refrenced above:

" I had several meetings with Jim Garrison. He showed me numerous pictures taken in Dealey Plaza on November 22, 1963. Among them was a picture of a Latin male. I recognized him as being the same man I had seen driving the Rambler station wagon in which I had seen Oswald leave the Book Depository area. I was surprised and I asked Jim who the man was. Jim did not know but he did say this man was arrested in Dealey Plaza immediately after the assassination but was released by Dallas Police because he could not speak English! This was, to me, highly unusual. In my experience as a police officer I had never known of a person (or prisoner) being released because of a language barrier. Interpreters were, of course, always available."

Does anyone know who this latin man is that Craig identified? Does anyone have any other interesting comments relating to R. Craig?

Thanks.

Antti

Speculation says this man - who allegedly screamed something in Spanish during the motorcade, but was released. Not sure if this is the same photo that was shown to Craig - not sure if Craig had the right guy either.

- lee

Hi : Lee:

The photo is from the Marsh collection, who got it from Jim Garrison, there was nothing related that the man screamed anything during the motorcade.. is that new....information...from him ...?

Just that he was arrested after the assn, as well as others......and released by the PDP..because he spoke no English...When Garrison showed it to Craig he thought it was the man driving the station wagon....?? .......

FWIW....

B.......

Bill: re.....

(Mac Kilduff's announcement of JFK's death was the first). Gary Mack...

So does this mean that Mac Kilduff, spoke only the once, in announcing the President's death....??

That afternoon.

And there were no audio, microphone recordings of what he stated....as there were no recording

devices set up as yet...??

Thanks

B.....

Thanks, Bernice. I just noticed that in Bugliosi's book he gets around the two versions of the same report problem by claiming they are two different reports about two different pieces of paper, one on the sample removed on 11-22 and one on the simulated bag made on the 1st. What nonsense! I have my own questions on this report--why does everyone cite Shaw as finding it in the Archives? Isn't it still there? If so, in what file? If not, did anyone else ever see it?

I recently picked up where I left off last August. In chapter 2 at patspeer.com I have a slide entitled Not Exactly in the Bag, which shows that the bag described by Frazier was less than half the size of the bag pulled from the building. In chapter 3 I have another slide entitled Ye Old Switcheroo? which once again shows that the bag pulled from the building was way too small. Finally, on chapter 4 I have a third slide, entitled Most Definitely Not in the Bag, in which I recreate the photo of Montgomery leaving the building, but with a bag 8 inches wide. It's clear the bag in the original photo is much much wider, probably 12 inches wide.

In the article at the link you provided there are a couple of imaqes whose provenance would be helpful if known. The Dallas photo with the paper...where can that be found? The other photo which arouses my curiosity is the one with a bag right by the gun, with the bag seemingly shorter than the one now in the Archives. Where did that come from?

Any help appreciated.

Hey Pat:

Da Bug gets around, whatever he has a mind to...whatever and whenever.....just like the W/C...they just skip on

by it......imo..

I will have a look at the Ye Old Switcherro, great title...got a link ??

I have gone into my folders and found a bit more info,

gathered along the way...The photos of Montgomery do not comply with what later is written within the w/c..

as to size..If I recall correctly..but then what does...In the Det Montgomery photos, that particular bag is wider..

The Dallas photo with the paper ?? I had another look, but do not see which you mean...

Unless the photo showing the rifle on the table......that is from the DPD files...

The bag by the gun I have no idea....here is the email address for contact.....

jfkresearch@mail.com ....re Jerry McLeer's article..

re The Paper Sack, I am sure they will supply that info..

FWTAW......some you may have.......B......

STUDEBAKER, ROBERT LEE

Sources: CE 3131; CE 3145; CD 897, pp. 158, 167-168; CD 1497; HSCA Vol 6, p. 153; Whitewash I, Weisberg, pp. 73, 79-83, 190

Mary's

Comments: Detective, Crime Scene Search Section, Identification Bureau, Dallas Police Department. Described place where paper bag was found as "in southeast corner [of TSBD 6th floor] lying in 16" space between cardboard box and south wall." See Studebaker Photograph No. 26. Died April 7, 1994.

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...ult&id=9211

DRAIN, VINCENT E.

CE 3131; CD 5, p. 129; CD 205, p. 120; Whitewash I, Weisberg, 73, 148

Special Agent FBI. Hand-carried rifle to Washington night of 11/22/63. Drain signed FBI report that paper bag found on 6th floor of TSBD WAS identical to Kraft paper used by shipping department of TSBD. Vincent's brother, Lee Drain, was Secretary-Treasurer of Republic National Bank, Dallas.

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...ult&id=3438

Wesley Liebeler staff attorney W/C memos

-----The Long and Bulky Package-----

1. The last sentence states: "Frazier could easily have been mistaken when he stated that Oswald held the bottom of the bag cupped in his hand, or when he said that the upper end was tucked under the armpit." On the very next page of the galleys, in the discussion of the prints that appeared on the paper bag, it is stated that the palmprint was "found on the closed end of the bag. It was from Oswald's right hand in which he carried the long package as he walked from Frazier's car to the building."

I am advised that the palmprint is right on the end of the bag, just where it would be if Oswald had carried it cupped in his hand. If we say in the discussion of prints that that print was put on the bag when he carried it to the TSBD [the Book Depository Building] (which we don't quite do) and if the print is where it would be if he carried it cupped in his hand, then we must face up on the preceding page and admit that Frazier was right when he said that that is the way Oswald carried it. If the print story is right and the implication left there as to when the print was put on the bag is valid, Frazier could not have been mistaken when he said Oswald carried the bottom of the bag cupped in his hand. (11 HSCA 225; 9/6/64 memo)

2. The last paragraph of this section is misleading when it attempts to show the falsity of the curtain rod story by stating that Oswald's room at 1026 North Beckley had curtains, and does not take account of the fact that Frazier specifically testified that Oswald said he wanted the curtain rods to put in an apartment. This takes on added significance when we remember that Oswald was talking about renting an apartment so that his family could live in Dallas with him. That aspect of the problem should be specifically treated if we are going to mention the fact that his roominghouse had curtains. (11 HSCA 225; 9/6/64 memo)

PAPER BAG, Q-10 -----Gary Shaw

CE 2723; CD 5, p. 129

3/19/64 attempt by J. Edgar Hoover to explain two conflicting reports on samples of paper from TSBD compared to "gun" bag. On 11/30/63, Lt. Day wrote: "....This paper was examined by the FBI Laboratory and found to have the same observable characteristics as the brown paper bag shaped like a gun case which was found near the scene of the shooting on the sixth floor..." This page was paginated on the typewriter. Years later, Gary Shaw received another p. 129 among documents completely unrelated. This page was paginated by hand (as were the other approximately 500 pages of CD 5) and Lt. Day had written: "....This paper was examined by the FBI laboratory and found not to be identical with the paper gun case found at the scene of the shooting. The Dallas police have not exhibited this to anyone else..."

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...ult&id=7301

Below is from a Mike Griffith article, I do have his permission to post his info, as long as nothing is changed within, and he is given the credit due.

Sylvia Meagher discusses some of the problems with these items:

The Commission . . . offered no firm physical evidence of a link between the paper bag and the rifle. The [Warren] Report does not mention the negative examination made by FBI expert James Cadigan. Cadigan said explicitly that he had been unable to find any marks, scratches, abrasions, or other indications that would tie the bag to the rifle. Those negative findings assume greater significance in the light of an FBI report (CE 2974) which states that the rifle found on the sixth floor of the Book Depository was in a well-oiled condition. It is difficult to understand why a well-oiled rifle carried in separate parts [as the WC claimed] would not have left distinct traces of oil on the paper bag, easily detected in laboratory tests if not with the naked eye. The expert testimony includes no mention of oil traces, a fact which in itself is cogent evidence against the Commission's conclusions.

Equally significant, there were no oil stains or traces on the blanket in which a well-oiled rifle ostensibly had been stored--not for hours but for months. This serves further to weaken, if not destroy, the Commission's arbitrary finding that the Carcano rifle had been wrapped in that blanket until the night before the assassination. (Meagher 62)

In fact, although the paper bag was allegedly found in the sniper's nest, incredibly, the Dallas police "failed" to take a crime-scene photograph of the bag lying in the nest! The bag does not appear in any of the pictures that were taken of the sniper's nest that afternoon. Some WC apologists have suggested that Lt. Day and Detective Studebaker, the two policemen who took snapshots of the nest, didn't photograph the bag because they didn't notice it. This is surely a farfetched explanation.

The bag, which the Commission said measured 38" x 8" and was allegedly shaped "like a gun case," would have been in plain view and could not possibly have been "missed" or "overlooked." Since Day and Studebaker "noticed" the three spent shells lying on the floor, it strains the imagination to think they would not have noticed the 38" x 8" bag lying in the same small area. (Rusty Livingston, a former Dallas Police Crime Lab detective, says the bag was about 42 inches long. In a photo of the bag, which was taken long after it was "discovered," the bag is seen to measure 38 inches in length, although there appears to be a four-inch flap folded over on the left edge of the bag.)

The bag, say some WC supporters, was folded and thus was not easy to spot. But three of the policemen who saw a bag in the nest gave no indication that it was folded; they said it was a small bag and that a partially eaten chicken leg was lying beside it. One police officer specifically described the bag he saw as a small manufactured bag, such as the kind found in a grocery store's produce department. Another policeman described it as an ordinary lunch bag.

The other explanation offered by WC apologists to explain the "failure" to photograph the bag is that the bag was "accidentally" removed from the nest before it could be photographed. However, the police officer who supposedly removed the bag prematurely indicated that no evidence was removed until AFTER Day and Studebaker "took pictures and everything" (7 H 97). As one studies the WC testimony about the bag, one is struck by the utter confusion and contradiction in the accounts. The accounts differ markedly about where the bag was located, who found it, what it looked like, whether or not it was folded, whether or not it was even a "bag" at all, when it was removed from the sniper's nest, and who handled it.

It should be mentioned that for some reason the bag did not leave the TSBD until three hours after it was supposedly discovered. The small paper bag seen in the sniper's nest probably had nothing to do with the long bag that was later presented as evidence by the Dallas police. Many researchers believe that the police and/or federal agents made the long bag partly with paper that Oswald had previously handled in an effort to strengthen the case against him. This would explain why only two of Oswald's prints were found on the bag (more should have been found), why the bag was devoid of gun oil even though the Carcano was well oiled when discovered, and why the bag did not leave the Depository for three hours.

Faulty Evidence : Mike Griffith

http://ourworld.cs.com/mikegriffith1/id184.htm

Frazier Bag,,,,,

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...absPageId=73558

Bag replica

http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/...p;relPageId=160

Here are the Montgomery photos, in case.....the first comparing LHO to the rfile was done by John Dolva...

and Short bag, lightened .....

B.....