David Von Pein

Gary Mack has supplied a copy of the Tom Dillard photograph in question, and has also added the picture to the Sixth Floor Museum website. Thank you, Gary. As it turns out, I had seen that Dillard photo previously. It's in Vincent Bugliosi's book, "Reclaiming History". It's printed, in a cropped format, on the next-to-last page of Vince's second of two photo sections in the book. The photo is linked below, along with Gary's latest e-mail to me regarding this Rybka/Lawton subject: Subject: RE: Gerald Blaine book... Date: 11/17/2010 4:29:17 PM Eastern Standard Time From: Gary Mack To: David Von Pein -------------------------- Dave, The photo is now on the Museum’s website: TOM DILLARD LOVE FIELD PHOTO You can even see the Secret Service lapel button on Lawton! Gary

That's correct, I was absolutely certain it was Henry Rybka at that time. And that was based on Rybka's SS report in CE2554, wherein he describes performing the exact movements that we see "shrugging man" performing at Love Field just as the motorcade begins to roll. I am now convinced it is Lawton, that is correct. But my switch is not just based on the fact that Blaine and McCubbin have said it is Lawton. The clincher for me (in conjunction with Blaine's and McCubbin's statements) is a Tom Dillard photo that Gary Mack told me about, which is a photo taken just prior to the motorcade commencing which depicts THREE agents in virtually the same position, one behind the other, on the right side of SS-100-X and Queen Mary. And the MIDDLE of those three SS agents would have been in just exactly the position that Rybka said he was in--i.e., between 100-X and the SS car to stop people from going between the cars. It makes sense, therefore, that Rybka was the MIDDLE of the three agents, and Lawton was the agent in front--next to JFK's door. I have no ironclad PROOF that Mr. Shrugger is Lawton. But Gary Mack makes a good case for it being Lawton--and, as I said, the Dillard picture that Gary says he has seen seals the deal on that for me. Or do you perhaps think Gary Mack is lying about that Dillard photo? Do you think he just made it up? I'll try to find the picture in question online somewhere. I don't think I've ever seen it before, and even Robin "JFK Photos For Any Occasion" Unger doesn't have it in his collection at Duncan MacRae's site. Maybe Gary Mack can e-mail me a copy and I can post it here. I'd love to see it. Is that possible Gary?

Because Oswald didn't have a jacket on when he entered the roominghouse OR when he was on the bus. (You just said you believed that fact too--or it sounded that way--when you talked about Bledsoe.) Bledsoe saw a hole in Oswald's ARREST SHIRT. How could she have seen that hole if LHO had it covered by a jacket? She couldn't have. And Earlene Roberts said that LHO was not wearing a jacket when he entered his room. IMO, Whaley thought Oswald's brown outer shirt (which he had on over a white T-shirt) was a "jacket". And Officer Marrion Baker made that exact same error when he briefly encountered Oswald in the TSBD lunchroom. He, too, thought that Oswald's untucked brown shirt was a jacket.

Almost all conspiracy theorists do, yes. Of course they do. It's in their CT blood.

Subject: Secret Service Confusion Date: 11/15/2010 11:05:51 PM Eastern Standard Time From: David Von Pein To: Gary Mack ------------------------------- [Gary,] So, you're saying that BOTH [Don] Lawton and [Henry] Rybka must have peeled off just after the motorcade started rolling, correct? Rybka said he was at "the rear" of JFK's car when he was moving with it: "I [proceeded] to the follow-up car 679-X and stationed myself at the right front fender of 679-X and the rear of 100-X. There I stopped everyone from going in between the cars. Once the motorcade began to move, I moved along with it, until the motorcade picked up speed." -- Henry Rybka [CE2554] I'm now wondering who the agent is on the LEFT side of the cars in this still image from the WFAA tape (arrow points to him). I'm wondering if this could be Rybka on the LEFT side of the cars. Perhaps he switched from the RIGHT FENDER of 679X to the LEFT side when the cars began to move. I suppose that's possible: DVP ================================================ Subject: RE: Secret Service Confusion Date: 11/16/2010 3:46:54 PM Eastern Standard Time From: Gary Mack To: David Von Pein ------------------------------- Dave, A Dillard photo a few seconds before departure shows an agent behind the right front fender of 679-X, another agent, apparently Rybka, at the bumper on the back end of 100-X, and a third agent wearing a darker suit standing even with JFK. All three men have their left hand on the car they are next to but, unfortunately, their faces cannot be seen. Since the source isn’t in the book, I asked writer Lisa McCubbin how the Lawton identification was confirmed and here is what she wrote: Confirmed by Clint Hill, Paul Landis, and Don Lawton. The logical explanation is that Rybka was farther behind 100-X and just barely out of camera range before and shortly after the motorcade departed. Rybka’s report stating he “moved along with” the motorcade makes sense if he had dropped behind 679-X when that car appeared on camera, thus putting himself impossible to see at that moment. Gary Mack ================================================ Thank you, Gary, as always. Gary Mack has now convinced me that "Shrugging Man" is, indeed, SS agent Donald Lawton and not Henry Rybka. I was convinced when Gary mentioned the existence of a Tom Dillard photograph which depicts THREE Secret Service men in just about the same location on the right side of the cars (probably Lawton standing right next to JFK on the right side of SS-100-X, and probably Rybka BEHIND Lawton, and then yet another unknown agent behind the person who is probably Rybka). Gary Mack's explanation now makes perfect sense (thanks to his mentioning that Dillard picture). Once again--thank you, Mr. Mack, for your valuable input (even regarding such an extremely unimportant matter such as this one concerning the exact identity of a Secret Service agent who was merely doing his job at Love Field as JFK's motorcade departed for downtown Dallas). However, the information about the "shrugging" SS agent being Lawton instead of Rybka is important in one way: It should forever silence the conspiracists who like to talk about how the security for JFK's motorcade was being "stripped away" at Love Field. Why should it silence them with respect to the shrugging agent? Because, as far as I am aware (via Emory Roberts' assignment sheets), Donald Lawton was never assigned to be a part of the team of agents in the follow-up car (SS-679-X). Lawton's assignment was "to remain at the airport to effect security for the President's departure" (a direct quote from Lawton's 11/30/63 report, CE2554. The conspiracy theorists have always been able to argue that Emory Roberts had initially penciled in Henry Rybka's name to be one of the SS agents assigned to sit in the follow-up car during the Dallas parade. But no such argument can be made regarding Don Lawton, because Lawton knew what his assignment that day was going to be--to stay at Love Field and help out with security at the airport. Therefore, we can know with 100% certainty that if Lawton is the "shrugging" agent who looks confused and bewildered just as JFK's motorcade is departing Love Field (and I now think that Lawton definitely is that Secret Service agent), then his actions cannot possibly have anything to do with any kind of "security stripping" at the airport. The conspiracy believers can, of course, continue to use their previous "stripping" argument when it comes to Rybka specifically, but not with Lawton. Chalk it up as just one more conspiracy myth knocked down--and it took almost 47 years to do it.

My photo comparison wasn't ONLY Hawaii. I provided FOUR different pictures from FOUR different motorcades. Why in the world do you think they ALL depict JFK in Hawaii? They don't. And I can provide several more examples from still more cities. And what difference does it make what CITY he's in? He was still going to receive the same SS protection in each city--whether it was Honolulu or Walla Walla. Do you think the SS was "standing down" in Hawaii, Jim? If not, then where are the SS agents on the back of the car that Palamara is always insisting should always be there?

The "all windows closed" junk is nonsense too. Just look at how many times THAT (supposed) rule was broken during JFK's administration--on every motorcade I've ever seen in pictures -- including that Hawaii picture, plus Ireland, plus Florida, etc. That's just one more example of the Dallas parade being no different whatsoever from other motorcades. And the "press buses were in the back" is another silly one, particularly when we know that a network TV cameraman (Dave Wiegman) DID film the scene of the murder before Kennedy's car even cleared the Underpass. SS-100-X is even visible in Wiegman's film! And Mal Couch filmed the scene too. So it's not like there were no cameras rolling on Elm Street. There were. Bottom Line -- Even with tighter SS security on Elm Street, nobody could have prevented Lee Harvey Oswald from shooting JFK -- unless Clint Hill and John Ready had decided to become a human shield and hover over Kennedy's body during those eight seconds in Dealey.

Oh, goodie! Now DiEugenio is adding the US Secret Service to his list of liars and cover-up operatives. Lovely. Next week -- Actors Gregory Peck and Richard Basehart are going to be part of DiEugenio's cover-up. After all, each man narrated an "Oswald Did It Alone" documentary within one year of the assassination. So they must be lying charlatans. No matter how many people have to be lying and part of the vast conspiracy--it's never enough for the DiEugenios of the world. They'll heap more liars onto the pile with each passing day. Good case in point (recently) -- DiEugenio's dragging Buell Wesley Frazier down into the mud. And Linnie Mae Randle goes with him. Was there anybody in the state of Texas who wasn't trying to nail poor schnook Oswald to the wall, Jimbo? Anybody at all? And DiEugenio's "cherry-picking" remark regarding the four photos I presented above is beyond laughable. Those pictures PROVE (for all time) that Palamara is wrong regarding the "agents riding the bumpers" rule he loves to prop up so much. But Jimbo calls it "cherry picking". Beautiful. And Jimbo's Hawaii remark is a bladder-buster too. I guess the SS should have stayed home altogether when Kennedy went to the Aloha state, huh Jim? Nobody owns a gun in that whole state, eh?

The whole Secret Service topic is total nonsense, mainly because we know (and can prove) that the security for President Kennedy's motorcade on November 22nd, 1963, in Dallas, Texas, was absolutely no different in any substantial way from other pre-11/22/63 motorcades that Mr. Kennedy rode in during his 1,037 days as the 35th U.S. Chief Executive. Vince Palamara is constantly making a huge deal out of the fact that the SS agents did not continuously ride on the back bumpers of JFK's limousine in Dallas (and particularly, of course, in Dealey Plaza). But the SS configuration in Dealey Plaza was no different than many other pre-Nov. 22 parades, as these photos amply demonstrate (and JFK is even STANDING UP in these first two examples--making himself an even bigger target in the limousine--and there's no SS agents riding the back bumpers at all; so much for the crap about the Dallas motorcade being completely different than other JFK caravans): Two more "No Agents On The Bumper" examples: http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc151/David_Von_Pein/MISCELLANEOUS%20JFK-RELATED%20PHOTOS/JFKMotorcade.jpg http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc151/David_Von_Pein/MISCELLANEOUS%20JFK-RELATED%20PHOTOS/JFKMotorcade3.jpg And I can dig up about half-a-dozen other examples of photos showing NO AGENTS AT ALL riding the bumper of JFK's car while Kennedy was riding in his open limousine. So, does Vince Palamara think that the plot was so sophisticated and elaborate so as to have the SS agents avoiding JFK's bumper in many PRE-Nov. 22 motorcades, just to make it SEEM like the security was no different at all in Dallas? Obviously, nobody can believe such a nonsensical thing. Therefore, the "Secret Service Was To Blame" argument goes absolutely nowhere, and proves nothing, just like all other speculative theories introduced by hundreds of conspiracy promoters worldwide since 1963. And, btw, the agent with the flailing arms at Love Field has got to be Henry Rybka, and not Donald Lawton. How can we know? Because of CE2554 and Rybka's OWN SIGNED STATEMENT regarding what he did at Love Field on 11/22/63. He specifically stated that it was HE (not Lawton or any other agent) who was positioned to the right-rear of JFK's limo just as the cars started to roll. So Palamara got that one right, and Gerald Blaine must be incorrect: http://history-matters.com/archive/jfk/wc/wcvols/wh25/html/WC_Vol25_0409a.htm And there is, of course, no reason under the sun for the U.S. Secret Service (or anyone else) to want to fake Rybka's signed report that appears above in Warren Commission volume 25. If some conspiracy theorist can come up with a good reason for someone to want to switch around the names of the agents (Rybka and Lawton) on those official Secret Service reports, I'd sure like to hear it. Because it makes no sense to want to fake such peripheral documents and start fiddling with the names of the agents on those reports. Therefore, logically, Henry Rybka is the shrugging agent seen here: http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc151/David_Von_Pein/MISCELLANEOUS%20JFK-RELATED%20PHOTOS/RybkaLoveField11-22-63.jpg

How could "reason" be a commodity in a place where a goodly number of people discussing the evidence in the JFK and J.D. Tippit murder cases believe that JFK's and Tippit's killer didn't even fire a single shot at either victim? That type of mindset is reserved for an unreasonable forum, not a reasonable one.

I recently decided to spruce up some of my blogs on the Internet, and one of them that received an overhaul is my "Four Days In November" website/blog, at: Four-Days-In-November.blogspot.com At the website above, I've added 88 still images from the film. In my opinion, David L. Wolper's 1964 documentary film "Four Days In November" is easily the very best and most accurate movie (or TV documentary) ever produced about the events surrounding President Kennedy's assassination. Naturally, of course, all conspiracy theorists will vehemently disagree with that last statement (and then some). But it's true just the same. And what is even more remarkable, in my view, is the fact that Wolper and company made the film months BEFORE the Warren Commission even completed its investigation into JFK's death -- and yet Wolper, director Mel Stuart, and writer Theodore Strauss were still able to get virtually every fact correct in the movie. Each time I watch the film I'm always amazed by how accurate it is, right down to even some of the very small details, such as the exact amount of the cab fare for Lee Harvey Oswald's taxi drive to Oak Cliff on 11/22/63 -- 95 cents. Some of the details that appear in "Four Days" were undoubtedly gathered by Wolper and his team of researchers themselves, since several witnesses appear in the film and were (I assume) interviewed by the filmmakers about what they knew concerning the events of November 22nd, such as cab driver William Whaley. Whaley was one of the witnesses (along with Buell Wesley Frazier, Linnie Mae Randle, and Johnny Brewer) who provided a detailed re-enactment of his November 22 movements, taking the Wolper cameras along for the ride as he re-created the taxicab drive he and Oswald took to Oak Cliff. As far as I can recall, I think there is only one factual error in the movie (and even this error isn't a major one), and that's when narrator Richard Basehart says that Lee Oswald exited his roominghouse at 1026 North Beckley Avenue wearing "a different, lighter jacket", which implies, of course, that Oswald entered the roominghouse wearing a jacket. According to housekeeper Earlene Roberts, however, Oswald was in his shirt sleeves and was not wearing any jacket at all when he rushed into his rented room on 11/22/63. However, in fairness to David Wolper and his crew, it's quite likely that Wolper and company got the additional "jacket" information from William Whaley himself, because Whaley's Warren Commission testimony indicates that Whaley thought that Oswald was wearing "a work jacket that almost matched [his] pants". Therefore, it's very likely that Whaley would have told the "Four Days" filmmakers the very same story about Oswald wearing a jacket, with Wolper having no real reason for doubting Whaley's account. (And I assume the Wolper people did not interview Mary Bledsoe or Earlene Roberts during the making of the film. Had they done so, of course, a different story concerning Oswald's jackets would have emerged.) A side note concerning this subject --- I was recently discussing the "Four Days" movie via written correspondence with "Reclaiming History" author Vincent Bugliosi, and he told me something I had never heard before -- Vince said that in the early stages of writing his JFK book (when the book was still untitled), David Wolper told him that he wanted to make another documentary on the JFK assassination, which would be based on Bugliosi's book. Unfortunately, however, that documentary was never made. Mr. Wolper passed away at the age of 82, on August 10, 2010. He will be remembered for producing many excellent documentaries, mainly for television. And the Academy Award-nominated "Four Days In November", which was a United Artists theatrical release, is certainly one of his finest accomplishments. Two other first-rate documentaries from the Wolper film factory are "The Making Of The President 1960" (made in 1963) and "The Legend Of Marilyn Monroe" (1964): The Making Of The President 1960 The Legend Of Marilyn Monroe

Sorry, Bob, that's just simply not true. (No matter what your "JFK friends" say.) I have never made up a "fake profile" in my life. Nor will I ever do such a silly thing. I've always used my own name in my posts on the Internet, for everything--JFK-related and otherwise. At one point a few years ago, I was using only my initials [DVP] or the username David VP. But I've never seen the need to utilize an alias. Nor would I want to do so. Why would I want S.V. Anderson (or anyone else) to get credit for my writings? It's silly, IMO. Although at the same time, I can understand people not wanting to reveal their true names and identities on the Internet -- especially when dealing with some of the really off-the-wall conspiracy theorists the World Wide Web has to offer. I don't recall having any problem with conspiracy-happy weirdos, except for THIS ONE NUTCASE HERE, who threatened to blow up my house merely because I did something horrible and actually followed the evidence in the JFK murder case to where it leads [Lee Harvey Oswald and only him, of course]. BTW, I've talked to S.V. Anderson several times at Amazon (and via e-mail). He makes a lot of sense when he discusses the JFK case too. (No wonder Robert Morrow's JFK friends think Anderson and I are the same person.)

He wasn't, of course. That's your overactive CTer imagination hard at work.

Oh, for Pete sake. You've GOT to be kidding with this crap. LNers offer up nothing BUT "a decent array of facts" and "a coherent story". It's the conspiracy theorists who never (ever) do this. Conspiracists have never once weaved their scenarios together to form anything close to a "coherent story" regarding the vast conspiracy and cover-up that they think existed in JFK's murder. For example, take the current ultra-silly thread that is going on here about Buell Wesley Frazier: CTers here are saying that Frazier just invented the paper bag and curtain rod stories out of thin air. But those same CTers fail to ask: If that's so, then why on Earth would Wesley (and Linnie Mae) both say the size of the bag was TOO SMALL to hold the item that was supposed to be inside that bag (Oswald's rifle)? And if the cops had manufactured the bag on the afternoon of Nov. 22nd, then it's likely they would have placed it in the Sniper's Nest and photographed it, and then pretended it was there when the Nest was discovered. (Do the CTers believe that the cops were evil enough to fake a very important piece of evidence, but they wouldn't go so far as to take a picture of it?) If you ask me, the lack of a photo of the bag in the Nest probably leads more toward NO COVER-UP on the "bag" issue than it does toward one. It was merely incompetence or just a flat-out oversight on the DPD's part that the bag wasn't photographed in the Nest. Because, IMO, if the bag had truly been "manufactured" by the DPD, the cops would have made sure to go WHOLE HOG with this fabrication and they would have likely made sure they crossed their Ts and dotted every I regarding this "fake" bag; and, hence, we would have a photo of the "fake" bag on the floor in the Sniper's Nest as a result of such manipulation of the evidence. CTers don't think that way though. They grab for the "conspiracy" brass ring (always in piecemeal fashion) and never put the pieces back together in any coherent or sensible manner. It's been that was for decades. And it always will be. And that's because the theorists' piecemeal fantasies about conspiracy are just that -- fantasies -- with no semblance of credibility or coherence (or internal logic) whatsoever. Another very good example (IMO) is: Why on this Earth would J. Edgar Hoover -- of ALL people on the planet -- want to frame an INNOCENT Lee Harvey Oswald for both Kennedy's and Tippit's murders? It's ridiculous from the get-go. Why? Because Hoover was the Director of the ONE federal agency which KNEW LEE OSWALD WAS IN DALLAS PRIOR TO THE ASSASSINATION. To think that Hoover (of all people) would be trying to send Oswald to the gallows is beyond silly. It's hilarious. If anything, Hoover would have been bending over backwards to try and CLEAR Oswald of the two murder charges. Because by clearing him of the charges, it would also (in effect) be removing the big, ugly black eye that Hoover's Bureau had on its collective face after the assassination (with many people pointing a finger of blame at Hoover's boys--and James P. Hosty in particular--for not keeping better tabs on Mr. Oswald prior to November 22). Would you like another example of the total disarray (and incoherence) that the conspiracy world has been in for several decades? How about this one (it's my all-time favorite): I've never once heard a single conspiracy promoter ever ask this very logical question (and I certainly have never heard a logical, reasonable answer to explain it): If, as so many CTers believe, Lee Oswald was being framed as a lone patsy PRIOR to November 22, 1963, then why in the world did the team of assassins/conspirators decide it was a good idea to try and frame JUST OSWALD by shooting up Dealey Plaza with 2, 3, or 4 gunmen (as many conspiracists believe)? If just one conspiracy advocate can answer that last question in a reasonable, believable, and logical fashion, that person will be the first to do so. Of course, such a MULTI-GUN, ONE-PATSY plot is totally ridiculous right from the start. But many, many people believe the assassination was PLANNED in such a cockeyed, screwy manner months prior to November 22nd. I guess the plotters who dreamed up such crackpottery must all have been related to David Copperfield. For, lacking pure magic and bullet-vanishing wizardry, only an act of God Himself could have rescued such an inane and needlessly reckless assassination plot.

http://www.Case--Closed.blogspot.com

Don "11 SHOTS WERE FIRED" Adams is certainly making the radio rounds. He apparently loves spreading his bullxxxx to a wide audience. Adams, during a July 28, 2010, interview on WTAM-Radio in Cleveland, was telling all kinds of falsehoods, such as the howler about how Oswald would have had to criss-cross the Book Depository building a total of THREE different times in order to get from the sixth-floor Sniper's Nest to the lunch room on the second floor. Adams actually seems to think that Oswald had to cross the entire length of the building THREE times -- once to hide the rifle; then another criss-cross to get to the stairs (totally untrue); and then a third crossing of the building in order to reach the lunchroom (also a lie). Quoting Adams: "When we talk about Oswald doing the shooting, at the loft [the Sniper's Nest on the sixth floor of the TSBD], he would have ran from the loft after he did the shooting, he ran to the front of the building [it was actually the back of the building, further illustrating that Adams doesn't know what he's talking about] and he hid the weapon in a bunch of cardboard boxes. He then ran across the building and went down four flights of stairs, and then ran across the building to the break room." -- Donald A. Adams; July 28, 2010 Adams also said that he thinks there were "11 shots fired in Dallas" at President Kennedy. Now, if that statement isn't enough to make all reasonable and rational people roll their eyes, then I don't know what would be. This guy doesn't know the most basic facts about the assassination or Oswald's movements. More stuff that Adams has wrong (the list is almost endless): He thinks it was Rufus Youngblood who climbed aboard JFK's car right after the shooting in Dealey Plaza. [Adams, to his credit, did correct that error in a later radio interview.] He seemed to imply that the original motorcade route would have taken the car down Elm St. through Dallas, instead of Main (at least that's what he said). He implies that the back of JFK's head is missing in the existing autopsy pictures. Goofy. He claims that NONE of the Secret Service agents gave any statements to anyone in officialdom. He evidently isn't aware that every SS agent in Kennedy's detail wrote up an official report for the SS files, plus several agents appeared before the WC--e.g., Clint Hill, Roy Kellerman, and Bill Greer. Adams claims that nobody bothered to even check the bullets that came out of J.D. Tippit's body to see if they could be matched to Oswald's revolver. He thinks it wasn't done at all, despite the testimony of Joe Nicol and Bob Frazier...with Nicol even stating that one of the bullets could be matched to LHO's gun. He claims that somebody had to approach Jackie Kennedy and ask her to relinquish the piece of JFK's head that she carried to Parkland...instead of Jackie herself voluntarily giving the head piece to Dr. Pepper Jenkins (which, of course, is what happened). And, of course, we're treated to the usual CT excrement about how Oswald's shooting feat was absolutely impossible, and how it's never been duplicated by anybody on the mortal coil. And then we a goof who calls in the radio show to say that he and his Marine sniper team couldn't come anywhere near Oswald's feat, with the caller saying that he couldn't do it in less than SIXTEEN seconds. And the best his commanding officer could accomplish was TWELVE seconds (Great sniper team there. Irene Ryan of The Beverly Hillbillies could have done it in under ten seconds--easy.) And there's the usual stuff about how Oswald's rifle was a piece of junk. And the lie about how Oswald didn't kill Tippit either. Etc., etc. Don Adams, in effect, is clueless. I guess as long as there are breathing human beings walking the Earth, there will be people who are willing to promote total nonsense regarding the way JFK died, like Don "11 Shots" Adams has been promoting on various radio programs over the last few months. I will say, though, that Mr. Adams seems like a very nice (and likable) kind of guy. It's just too bad he wants to spread so much misinformation about JFK's murder. ------------------- A follow-up: http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/d4da38fc82fc6d21

http://dvp-video-audio-archive.blogspot.com/2012/03/suddenly-1954-movie.html Many/most people regard "Suddenly" as a B-grade film, but I think it's much better than that. It's really quite a good movie, with Sinatra putting in a very good performance as assassin Johnny Baron.

Jimmy DiEugenio will apparently forever ignore these words spoken by Jack Dougherty...which really are the KEY words regarding Dougherty being able to definitively state whether Oswald was carrying anything in his hands or not on the morning of 11/22/63: "I just caught him [Oswald] out of the corner of my eye." -- Jack Dougherty [6 H 377] I guess Jimbo thinks there's such a thing as perfect 20/20 peripheral vision. That's a new one on me. And, yes, Todd, you're right about Jack Dougherty. His freight elevator (whether it be the east one or the west) definitely didn't reach the Depository's seventh floor. Although, to tell you the truth, I hadn't realized that fact prior to writing up the article below on Dougherty in 2008. I found out about Dougherty's alleged mental handicap the following year after writing this up. So take that into account as I'm rolling on the floor laughing at Mr. Dougherty's WC testimony here: EXAMINING THE WARREN COMMISSION TESTIMONY OF JACK DOUGHERTY EXAMINING THE WARREN COMMISSION TESTIMONY OF JACK DOUGHERTY: ------------------------------------------------------------- If anyone wants several good-sized laughs, I'd like to recommend reading the official April 8, 1964, Warren Commission testimony of 40- year-old Jack Edwin Dougherty, who was one of the employees who was working at the Texas School Book Depository on November 22, 1963. In addition to the many laughs, Mr. Dougherty's above-linked testimony is bound to give anyone reading it a bit of a headache as well (anyone who is trying to use Dougherty's testimony as a vehicle to prop up anything "definitive" or "conspiratorial" in nature when it comes to the events that occurred inside the Book Depository Building on 11/22/63, that is). Dougherty's WC session is just one great-big mess. I can only imagine the thoughts that were going through the mind of WC questioner Joe Ball after he took Dougherty's testimony that spring day in 1964. Joe probably felt like rolling his eyes every few seconds while listening to Dougherty's hither-and-yon answers to the questions he was being asked. But, in Dougherty's defense, I'll have to add this -- Jack was probably very nervous when he gave his WC testimony; and possibly his answers didn't always come out just exactly as he meant them to come out. This same thing probably happened with a lot of the 552 witnesses who were questioned by the Warren Commission in relation to the JFK case. If it were me, I'd certainly have been scared to death. And when you're scared to death, your words might have a tendency to become unclear and maybe even incoherent at times. I think this occurred with several of the witnesses who appeared in front of the WC in '64. [JUNE 2010 EDIT --- Whether or not Jack Dougherty was mentally disabled in some way, I have not been able to confirm. But I have heard that he was a little "slow". If he did suffer from a mental handicap, it would certainly help explain some of the strange things Mr. Dougherty told the Warren Commission in 1964.] Let's examine a few of Mr. Dougherty's hilarious and semi-hilarious statements made to the Warren Commission: ===================== JOSEPH BALL - Did you ever leave the United States during the War? JACK E. DOUGHERTY - Oh, yes. Mr. BALL - Where did you go? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, I was stationed, oh, for about a year up in Indiana up there--Seymour, Indiana. [DVP: This is the first "LOL" moment in Jack's testimony. As a native of the great state of Indiana, I had no idea I was living outside the United States.] ===================== Mr. BALL - And how long do you take for lunch? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, from 12 to 12:45. Mr. BALL - Forty-five minutes? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Yes. Mr. BALL - Do you always take a full hour? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Yes, I usually do. [DVP: The above testimony had me doing TWO double-takes (due to the fact that the above words spoken by BOTH Dougherty and Joseph Ball are seemingly so incredibly silly). First, Dougherty confirms he takes only 45 minutes for his regular lunch break each day at the Depository. But then Ball feels compelled to ask the odd follow-up question, "Do you always take a full hour?" (even though Dougherty just one second earlier confirmed his lunch break was only 45 minutes long). And then Dougherty goes with the flow (evidently) and completely changes his lunch-break time to a "full hour" by answering "Yes, I usually do" to Ball's follow-up question. Perhaps the two men, when talking about a "full hour", were referring to the time it took to physically eat lunch plus some added time milling around the TSBD after lunch, playing dominoes, etc. ~shrug~ Anyway, the above exchange struck me as humorous (and not just Dougherty's part). ] ===================== Mr. BALL - Now, is that a very definite impression that you saw him [LHO] that morning when he came to work? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, oh--it's like this--I'll try to explain it to you this way--- you see, I was sitting on the wrapping table and when he came in the door, I just caught him out of the corner of my eye--- that's the reason why I said it that way. .... Mr. BALL - In other words, you would say positively he had nothing in his hands? Mr. DOUGHERTY - I would say that---yes, sir. Mr. BALL - Or, are you guessing? Mr. DOUGHERTY - I don't think so. [DVP: So, we have JD admitting to the WC that he only saw Oswald "out of the corner of my eye" as LHO entered the back door of the TSBD on November 22nd....and yet we also have Dougherty being certain that Oswald had nothing in his hands at all (even though he admitted just seconds earlier that he only saw LHO "out of the corner of my eye"; i.e., he saw LHO via his peripheral vision as Lee came in the back door). I'll leave it up to the individual readers of JD's testimony to decide whether or not Mr. Dougherty is entirely believable when he said he was not "guessing" when he claimed that Lee Oswald entered the Book Depository empty-handed on the morning of the assassination.] ===================== Mr. BALL - Did you know that the President was going to pass in a motorcade that noon? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, they said something about it. Mr. BALL - Did you intend to go out and watch him? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, I would have loved to have went out and watched him, but the steps were so crowded---there was no way in the world I could get out there. [DVP: So, per Jack, there were so many people clogging the entrance of the TSBD around 12:30, he was physically prohibited from exiting the Depository VIA ANY OF THE OTHER DOORS IN THE BUILDING at approximately the time when the President was driving by the building. Maybe I shouldn't be laughing at JD's above silly-sounding testimony after all, huh? Because by doing so, perhaps I'm playing right into the hands of the conspiracy-happy kooks who probably have a desire to paint Mr. Dougherty as one of the conspirators in the plot to kill JFK. After all, the above testimony about JD definitely WANTING to go outside to see the President, but not being able to do so because of the people blocking the entrance to the building is certainly testimony that could be looked at sideways and with a wary eye by the conspiracy kooks of the world (if it hasn't been looked at in that fashion heretofore). Evidently, it never occurred to Dougherty to go out the back door and then walk around the building in order to catch a glimpse of President Kennedy driving by. And apparently it also never occurred to Jack to simply go upstairs to the fifth or sixth floor (the warehouse floors) in order to get himself a great bird's-eye view of the President passing by from one of the many windows that he could have had all to himself on the upper floors of the building at 12:30 PM, just as some of his fellow employees did that day. Mr. Dougherty doesn't seem to be the brightest bulb in the chandelier, I must say. (Sorry, Jack, just an honest observation.) ~wink~] ===================== Mr. BALL - When you left your lunch, did you go to the fifth floor or the sixth floor to go back to work? Mr. DOUGHERTY - I went on the fifth floor when I was getting ready to go down to eat lunch. Mr. BALL - Yes; and then what happened? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, at that time--I was about 10 feet away--- Mr. BALL - Wait a minute---did you hear the shots before or after you had your lunch? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Before---before I ate my lunch. Mr. BALL - You heard shots before you ate your lunch? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Let's see---yes, I believe I did. [DVP: So, via the above testimony, Mr. Dougherty is, in effect, saying this: I HEARD THE SHOOTING BEFORE I ATE MY LUNCH, BUT THEN AFTER HEARING THE SHOOTING AND THE COMMOTION I WENT AHEAD AND ATE MY LUNCH ANYWAY AND THEN WENT *BACK* TO WORK AFTER FINISHING MY LUNCH, WHICH, AS MENTIONED, WAS EATEN *AFTER* THE SHOOTING TOOK PLACE AND *AFTER* THE BUILDING WAS BEING INUNDATED BY THE POLICE. I think only one other comment is really in order here, which is --- Huh??? EDIT --- Incredibly, another Depository employee, Buell Wesley Frazier, also said he ate his lunch almost immediately after the assassination. And Wesley went down into the BASEMENT of the Depository Building to consume his noontime meal on November 22! A little bit more on that can be found HERE, [in an article examining the WC testimony of Wesley Frazier].] ===================== Mr. BALL - And while you were on the fifth floor, you heard a loud noise? Mr. DOUGHERTY - That's right---it sounded like a car backfiring. Mr. BALL - And did you hear more than one loud explosion or noise? Mr. DOUGHERTY - No; that was the only one I heard. Mr. BALL - You only heard one? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Yes. Mr. BALL - And where did it sound like it came from? Mr. DOUGHERTY - It sounded like it came from overhead somewhere. Mr. BALL - From overhead? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Yes. Mr. BALL - How did you get to the fifth floor? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Elevator. Mr. BALL - You were on the fifth floor when you heard this, were you? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Yes. Mr. BALL - Which elevator did you take? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, you see, there's one on this side and one on this side the one on this side is the one I took. Mr. BALL - Well, now, "The one on this side and the one on this side," doesn't mean much when it's written down. Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, I know it. [DVP: Oh, my bladder! I wonder how Mr. Ball kept his own laughter in check during this session with Mr. Dougherty? It must have been a chore.] ===================== Mr. BALL - Then what did you do? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, when I got through getting stock off of the sixth floor, I came back down to the fifth floor. Mr. BALL - What did you do on the fifth floor? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, I got some stock. Mr. BALL - Then what happened then? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, then immediately I heard a loud noise---it sounded like a car backfiring, and I came back down to the first floor, and I asked Eddie Piper, I said, "Piper, what was that?" I says, "Has the President been shot?". He said, "Yes." Mr. BALL - You didn't say--did you say, "Has the President been shot?"---you told the FBI agent that you went down to the first floor and you saw a man named Eddie Piper and asked him if he heard a loud noise. Mr. DOUGHERTY - I asked him that too. Mr. BALL - And Piper said he had heard three loud noises and told you that somebody had just shot the President; is that right? Mr. DOUGHERTY - That's right. Mr. BALL - Who mentioned the fact that the President had been shot first -- you or Eddie Piper? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Eddie Piper. Mr. BALL - Did you say anything to Piper about the President being shot? Mr. DOUGHERTY - No, sir. ===================== Mr. BALL - On the day that this happened, on the 22nd of November, you told the FBI agents Ellington and Anderson that you heard "a loud explosion which sounded like a rifle shot coming from the next floor above me." Now, did you tell them that it sounded like a rifle shot, coming from the next floor above you, or didn't you? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, I believe I told them it sounded like a car backfiring. Mr. BALL - Well, did you tell them it sounded like it was from the floor above you, or didn't you tell them that? Mr. DOUGHERTY - No. Mr. BALL - You did not tell them that? Mr. DOUGHERTY - No. Mr. BALL - Did it sound like it came from the floor above you? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, at the time it did--yes. [DVP: I guess Dougherty must have thought there was a '62 Chevy Impala "backfiring" up on the sixth floor, huh? At this point in this incoherent mess, Joe Ball is probably desperately wanting to ask Dougherty how many hits off of that marijuana joint he had taken just prior to testifying on April 8th.] ===================== Mr. BALL - When you went up to the sixth floor, it was after they found the shotgun and shells? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Yes, sir. [DVP: So, Dougherty is now saying he was on the sixth floor AFTER 1:22 PM CST on November 22nd. Mr. Ball is now probably getting ready to put in a call for Nurse Ratched and the white-coated technicians from the nearest loony-bin.] ===================== Mr. BALL - Did you ever see Lee Oswald carry any sort of large package? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, I didn't, but some of the fellows said they did. Mr. BALL - Who said that? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, Bill Shelley, he told me that he thought he saw him carrying a fairly good-sized package. Mr. BALL - When did Shelley tell you that? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, it was--the day after it happened. [DVP: Although Dougherty, via the above testimony, didn't specifically claim that Shelley said he (Shelley) saw LHO carrying a "fairly good- sized package" ON NOVEMBER 22ND, I think that such an inference could be implied by Dougherty's above words. Which, of course, is total nonsense. Shelley didn't see any such thing. Perhaps Dougherty meant to say "Wes Frazier" instead of "Bill Shelley" above. If so, it would make much more sense...except for the fact that "the day after it happened" was a Saturday, i.e., a day when the regular stock workers of the TSBD didn't report to work. So, once again, it's a jumbled-up mess that JD's providing us here.] ===================== Mr. BALL - Are you sure you were on the fifth floor when you heard the shots? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Yes, I'm positive. Mr. BALL - Did you see any other employee on the fifth floor? Mr. DOUGHERTY - No, sir; I didn't see nobody. There wasn't nobody on the fifth floor at all. It was just myself. [DVP: The above quote isn't so much hilarious as it is just plain wrong. Norman, Jarman, and Williams, of course, were all on the south side of the 5th Floor at the time of the shooting. But, to be totally fair to Dougherty in this instance, it's quite possible (what with the obstructions of boxes and other things that might have blocked his view) that JD just simply couldn't see the south side of the building (by the windows) during the time he might have been on the fifth floor on November 22nd.] ===================== Mr. BALL - Now, did you hear this shot either before or after lunch? Mr. DOUGHERTY - It was before lunch; it was before lunch. Mr. BALL - You think it was before lunch you heard the shot? Mr. DOUGHERTY - I believe it was--yes, sir. Mr. BALL - And you were alone, were you? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Yes. [DVP: Here we have a replay of the previous humorous moment regarding JD's "before lunch" declaration. How could anyone POSSIBLY believe Dougherty's "Before Lunch" testimony above? Especially when we also find this exchange within the very same day's WC testimony: Mr. DOUGHERTY - I went back downstairs to eat lunch. Mr. BALL - What time? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Oh, it was 12 o'clock. I guess the assassination must have really taken place prior to 12:00 Noon then (per JD's morass of distorted lunch-eating timelines). So, in order for JD's "I heard a shot before lunch" testimony to be true (in conjunction with all of his other testimony, if we're to believe portions of it as well), Dougherty would have had to have heard the gunshot or "backfire" many minutes prior to 12:30 (unless JD waited a half-hour after his 45-minute lunch break started to begin eating his lunch that day)....and then after hearing the shot, he descends to the first floor to talk with Eddie Piper. And then, per JD, after being told by Piper that the President had just been shot right in front of the building, Dougherty went ahead and ate his lunch, as if it was an ordinary lunch break and as if nothing unusual had just occurred in front of the building on Elm Street. And then, sometime after eating his lunch and while searching for Roy Truly, Dougherty was allowed back up on the sixth floor at a time (per JD) which was AFTER the police had already discovered Oswald's rifle (which would have been 52 minutes after the shooting itself). Holy smoke, what a mess this testimony is!] ===================== Mr. BALL - That's all I have to ask you, and this will be written up and if you would like to come down and read it and sign it, you can, or you can waive your signature. What do you want to do? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, whatever you want to do---it doesn't make any difference. Mr. BALL - Would you like to come down and read it over and sign it? Mr. DOUGHERTY - Well, if you've got time, I'll sign it now. ===================== For some additional confusion, contradictions, and laughs, have a look at Jack Dougherty's November 22, 1963, affidavit. In [his] affidavit, JD claims to have seen several TSBD employees on the sixth floor AFTER the assassination took place (at least that's how it comes out via his affidavit; but he undoubtedly was actually talking about seeing the TSBD workers, including Oswald, on the sixth floor sometime BEFORE the actual shooting took place; but that's not how it appears on JD's very strangely-written affidavit). David Von Pein March 2008 June 2010

LOL. Since Ian Griggs' experiment indicated signs of scratching at the front of the rifle, DiEugenio thinks this HAS to mean that Lee Oswald's dismantled rifle HAD to show the exact same wear/scratch pattern throughout the length of the weapon. Hilarious, Jimbo. BTW, how do you know that the front end of Oswald's rifle WASN'T scratched up too? It looks to me like the front portions of the wood on Oswald's gun just might be scratched up too: BTW #2 -- If Edward Shields is correct about Oswald being dropped off at the front of the TSBD building on 11/22/63, then why did Oswald enter the building that day via the BACK door? Was the front door locked prior to 8:00 AM CST? (It's quite possible that the front door was locked at that early hour of the morning, but I'm not certain about that.) Anyhow, either way you want to slice it, Jack Dougherty CORROBORATES Wesley Frazier in the sense that they both said that Oswald walked in the BACK door of the Depository a little before 8AM on Friday, Nov. 22nd. And I'll repeat this important point for Jim once again: "I was sitting on the wrapping table and when he [Lee Oswald] came in the door, I just caught him out of the corner of my eye." -- Jack E. Dougherty [6 H 376-377] (Emphasis added.)

Why would you expect anyone but Frazier to have seen this? And please don't bring up Dougherty, because he admitted he wasn't paying any attention to Oswald when LHO entered the building on 11/22. He said he only saw Oswald out of the corner of his eye. Hardly a perfect witness for your "No Bag At All" purposes, Jimmy. Mr. Shields is obviously wrong, Jimmy. But you want to believe Shields, vs. believing the person (Buell Frazier) who has always stuck to his story from Day 1 about all of the stuff he did on November 22nd, including the manner in which Oswald exited the car and picked up his package out of the back seat while Frazier was charging his battery in the distant employee parking lot. Just because Troy West didn't see Oswald take some paper and tape doesn't mean Oswald didn't take those items from West's work area. (I assume Troy had to go to the bathroom every now and then. That could very well be when Oswald stole the paper. It wouldn't have taken very long to swipe those items.) Probably because Lee was being careful and wasn't flaunting the paper for everyone to see. After all, he was going to use it to hide a rifle that he'd be using the next day in a Presidential assassination attempt. Stands to reason he wouldn't be waving the paper bag around for everybody to see. Let me throw this same reasoning back in Jimbo's face with this question: Why were there no bullets found from the various non-Oswald guns that you think were used to kill JFK? To answer your #5 hunk of chaff specifically -- "Remnants" of the paper bag trimmings could very well have been deposited by Oswald in a garage (or kitchen) trash can on the night of Nov. 21st, and Ruth Paine probably never would have noticed such snips of paper. I suppose you think the cops should have searched through Ruth Paine's trash for "paper trimmings/remnants", eh Jim? You're kidding with this hunk of silliness, aren't you Jimbo? Oswald's rifle WAS beat up and scratched and battered. Why do you think otherwise? Just look at the close-up color views of the rifle via the NARA photo below: You CAN see through the carport. The slats in the carport wall are far enough apart to let lots of light in, and hence a person on the other side can be partially seen. Just look: http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/servlet/PageImage?mode=getPage&fileName=nary-wcdocs-37_0018_0017&pageId=349643 Your desperation to take the rifle out of Lee Harvey Oswald's hands has reached fantastic and outrageous proportions, Jimbo. You've got to have the police making up lies (particularly people like J.C. Day and Bob Studebaker, who each said they saw the paper bag lying in the Sniper's Nest after the assassination); you need Buell Frazier to be a xxxx about a whole bunch of stuff that he said he did and saw on Nov. 22; you've got to have Linnie Mae Randle being a xxxx; and you've got to have both the Warren Commission and the HSCA being composed of a bunch of gullible goofs -- because BOTH of those official U.S. Government entities believed that Buell Wesley Frazier and Linnie Mae Randle were telling the truth when they said they saw Oswald carrying a bulky brown paper bag on the morning of 11/22. Now, who should I believe -- All of the above people/Govt. organizations or James "Oswald Never Fired A Shot At Either JFK Or Tippit" DiEugenio? Not exactly the toughest choice in the world, is it?

Unbelievable. DiEugenio gives new meaning to the word silly. Ask 1,000 conspiracy theorists if they think Lee Oswald took a large package into the TSBD on 11/22, and approximately 999 of them will say, "Yes, of course he did, but the bag was too short to hold LHO's rifle." DiEugenio, of course, will never explain why the police forced Wes Frazier to say that a MADE-UP bag had dimensions that were too short to house disassembled Mannlicher-Carcano Rifle C2766. You'd think that if the bag was non-existent from the get-go, the crooked cops and Frazier (and Randle) would have made sure to say the make-believe bag was at least big enough to hold the object that was supposed to be inside that non-existent bag. So, the cops were not only crooked beyond belief--they were also apparently dumber than dirt too. Go figure. Keep on going, Jimbo. Your delusions are perpetually entertaining. Not to mention more hilarious than Jack Benny.

Wrong. Wes Frazier did. In his 11/22 affidavit. Looks like Tom Scully wants to join DiEugenio in the "Paper Bag Never Existed" club. Weird.

To show how out of kilter Jim DiEugenio is regarding certain matters in the JFK case, he actually seems to think that Wesley Frazier's mother is a prime/key witness who should have been questioned in the same depth that Wesley and Linnie Mae were questioned. That is typical of a CTer, though -- i.e., always latching on to chaff and ignoring the wheat field. DiEugenio is a master at harvesting chaff. But we must also keep in mind that Jimbo is one of those rare and very strange CTers who has decided to believe that Lee Oswald had NO LARGE PACKAGE AT ALL with him on the morning of November the 22nd. Keep on truckin', Jimbo. Pretty soon I'm sure you'll find a way to pretend that LHO and Frazier didn't drive to the TSBD together AT ALL on 11/22/63. It was all made up by big fat xxxx Wesley--just like the paper bag. Right, Jimmy?

Continuation of October 2009 discussion re Essie, Linnie, LHO, etc.: >>> "Why do you assume that Essie saw Oswald out the window at a different time than LMR?" <<< Bud, Because Oswald was MOVING when Linnie Mae saw him. He wasn't stationary. Do you think that a MOVING Oswald would have been able to be seen by Linnie Mae and Essie...with then there being enough time before the moving Oswald left their field of vision for Essie to ask Wesley "Who is that?" and then for Wesley to look out the window and still see the moving Oswald as he headed for the carport area? I'm dubious about Essie and Wesley seeing a MOVING Oswald. I'd bet he was standing pretty much still when Essie and Wesley saw him out the window. Plus, there's the fact that Linnie Mae would have possibly been blocking out part of the view of Wesley and Essie because Linnie Mae was standing in front of the kitchen window (at the counter, preparing lunches; see photo below) when she saw Oswald crossing the street: http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=10897&relPageId=14 And it sure looks like a fairly small window to me. Hence, it seems likely to me that a MOVING Oswald would only appear in that window for a fleeting moment to anyone who wasn't standing right at the window. http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=10897&relPageId=16 >>> "Nor is there any reason for him [Oswald] to wander away from that important item back into view of the kitchen window." <<< Bud, you're talking as if the carport area and the street (Westbrook) are miles from each other. They're not. The carport is very close to the street itself (see photo below). If Oswald had walked just a few feet away from Wesley Frazier's car, he would have been in the street: http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=10897&relPageId=13 10/27/2010 Edit/Addendum: I can't figure out why Bud (a very logical LNer) thinks that Oswald would have needed to hover over the gun while it lay in Frazier's back seat for those few minutes before Buell came out of his house on Nov. 22. Was Oswald supposed to fear a burglar at 7:10 AM on 11/22? I kinda doubt that Frazier's carport was swarming with passersby and loiterers at that time. And even if someone else was around--Oswald was still right there--only a few feet away (as mentioned above). Plus, before LHO ever left for work on 11/22, he had to have known that he wouldn't be able to keep guard over his package/rifle every minute of the day....because he knew he'd have to stash it somewhere in the TSBD and then go to work throughout the building filling his book orders. So letting the gun out of his sight for a period of time was pretty much a foregone conclusion.

Essie didn't see Oswald carrying his paper bag because Essie only saw Oswald AFTER he had already placed his 38-inch brown bag in the back seat of Wesley Frazier's car. That fact couldn't be more obvious, because Oswald didn't look into the kitchen window until after he had gone to Wesley's car. This topic came up at another forum in October 2009. Here is a portion of what I had to say back then when discussing this matter with "Bud", a fellow LNer: [DVP said:] In the final analysis concerning this matter, I think Linnie Mae Randle's testimony settles the issue about when Lee Oswald went to Buell Wesley Frazier's car and put the rifle package in the back seat. Linnie Mae said that she saw Oswald AS HE CROSSED WESTBROOK STREET heading toward the Randle house. And right after crossing the street, Oswald headed straight for Frazier's car. To believe that Oswald still had the package with him when Frazier's mother (Essie Mae Williams) saw him through the kitchen window, we'd have to believe that Oswald crossed the street....went directly to Frazier's car....opened the back door of the car....and then walked back toward the Randle house (the kitchen side) with the bag still with him. That's just silly, because the only reason for Oswald to go to Frazier's car would be to put the bag inside the car. What other possible reason would he have for going to Frazier's car immediately after crossing the street? [bud asked:] >>> "Do you think it is possible for her [Linnie Mae Randle] to have seen this [LHO putting the package in the back seat of Frazier's 1953 Chevrolet sedan], David?" <<< [i answered:] I'm not sure. But I certainly think it's possible, given the amount of space between the slats in the carport (as seen in the photo below): http://www.maryferrell.org/mffweb/archive/viewer/showDoc.do?docId=10897&relPageId=17 I certainly don't think Linnie Mae was lying at all. She possibly HEARD more than she SAW. I.E., She peeks out the kitchen door and HEARS the person who she just saw walk toward her brother's car (Lee Oswald). It's obvious that the person at Frazier's car at that point in time was the person Randle just saw cross the street (Oswald). Randle then HEARS the door of Frazier's car being opened. It's also possible that she gets enough of a glimpse of Oswald through the slats of the carport to see at least a portion of Oswald as he places the bag in the car. So, the combination of HEARING what Oswald was doing at the car and very likely SEEING a little bit of Oswald through the slats was certainly enough information, IMO, for Mrs. Linnie Mae Randle to reasonably testify in the following manner: "He opened the right back door and I just saw that he was laying the package down, so I closed the door." [bud said:] >>> "One thing to consider, if Oswald put the rifle in the car, he wouldn`t be apt to be wandering where he could be seen from the kitchen window again." <<< [i said:] Why not? At that point, he wasn't still carrying the rifle package for everybody to see. So there's no real reason he should cower and hide in a corner someplace at that point in time. As I think about this situation some more, here are some of my additional thoughts on it (as I try to look at things from Oswald's point-of-view): Oswald was probably getting a little bit anxious as he waited outside Frazier's house on the morning of November 22nd. According to Frazier's testimony: "I just thought maybe, you know, he [Lee Oswald] just left a little bit earlier, but when I looked up and saw that the clock was...I knew I was the one who was running a little bit late because, as I say, I was talking, sitting there eating breakfast and talking to the little nieces, it was later than I thought it was." So, if Frazier is correct about running a little later than usual on 11/22/63, I can certainly envision Oswald possibly deliberately WANTING to make himself visible to people (Frazier particularly) inside the Randle house after LHO put the bag in the car. So it doesn't seem surprising to me that Oswald might want to move out in front of the kitchen window where he could reasonably assume Wes Frazier might see him. If it had gotten a little bit later, I can also envision Oswald knocking on the door to remind Wesley that it's time to leave for work. It's also quite possible that Oswald was anxious to get to work a little EARLIER than usual on November 22nd. Why? Because if he gets there early, he'd have a better chance to stash his rifle package somewhere without anybody seeing him with the package (or at the very least, fewer people than normal would be apt to see Oswald coming in the back door with a long bag if he got to work early), since most of the Depository workers would be coming in after Oswald arrives. This particular theory assumes that the doors to the Texas School Book Depository Building would be open to any employee prior to 8:00 AM (or possibly even prior to approximately 7:30 AM, given this "early arrival" theory). I would assume that an employee could arrive early if he wanted to, without having to wait for the doors to be unlocked, but I have no personal knowledge if this is true or not. Perhaps Gary Mack knows. (I wouldn't be surprised if he did have this tidbit of information, seeing as how Mr. Mack is "The Walking TSBD/Dealey Plaza Encyclopedia".) This is all pure speculation, of course. And in the long run, this type of nit-picking and conjecture about Oswald's movements don't amount to anything substantial at all. But it is fun to engage in this kind of guesswork from time to time. Heck, conspiracy theorists specialize in such speculative endeavors regarding things far more important than this topic. David V.P. October 21, 2009 Original Post/Thread: http://groups.google.com/group/alt.assassination.jfk/browse_thread/thread/7da5ce3a4ab08af3/ba4cb27149a7707c?#ba4cb27149a7707c ===================================== ADDITIONAL (FUN) SPECULATION --- A LEE HARVEY OSWALD "TIMELINE": http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/3a3d654f3c43ed16 http://groups.google.com/group/alt.conspiracy.jfk/msg/679eb16f02238b52