Larry Hancock

Hi Gene, thanks for the kind words! I have to admit that wrestling with Hunt's reputation plus his true accomplishments is what caused me to add the appendix on he and Barnes to the book...and with a lot of help from Pat....evaluate his possible contact or at least knowledge of Oswald via his 1963 Domestic Operations assignment. I would agree with your assessment that his reputation far exceeded his skills (his tradecraft and security really were poor and his political fixation on the ultra right didn't help his Cuba project work at all, Phillips had to step in and take over for him). It appears that Barnes was his champion just as Dulles was Barne's. Both of them ended up sidelined after the Cuba project and it was likely Dulles influence that got Barnes the Domestic Operations position and Barnes brought in Hunt. And it was Hunt's personal connection to Artime and his history with Hecksher that got him at least a minor role in AMWORLD. Personally I suspect that Hunt was in some of the secret Artime meetings going on in DC the week of November 22 and that explains why he was not with his family (as Lane brought out to great advantage) but Hunt also was not going to talk about what he really had been doing....regardless of the consequence. Hunt simply would not betray the Agency in that manner, he might talk about what he considered screw ups (as he did in his first book on the Cuba project) but he would not disclose Agency secrets. Hunt was loyal to the "cadre", at least to the officers he respected and he was fervantly dedicated to the anti-Communist battle. I view him as less evil/mean than as dedicated/obsessive. I don't mean that in a good way, the same could be said for Phillips, Morales etc. However in comparison people like Morales were far more effective, efficient and deadly. And I don't see any sign that those officers had a lot of respect for Hunt's skills. The people who did support him were Dulles and Barnes, who respected his political position, his dedication and his ability to write...they really did feel that he brought some positives to the agencies (much as Phillips was supported for his writing later on). OK, that was a long winded answer....but as to the conspiracy, personally I think it unlikely that the real operators like Morales would involve Hunt any more than they would have brought in Sturgis or Barker (about whom Morales had little good to say). On the other hand Hunt was well embedded among both the old boys like Dulles and Barnes - and perhaps more importantly in the "far eastern" clique of Helliwell, Conein, Shackley etc to have heard the gossip that circulated about the conspiracy. I would love to hear the inside gossip that I'm sure Hunt heard; however, given Hunt's loyalty to the types of views that resulted in JFK being assassinated, I really don't think Hunt would ever pass on the truth. He might weave in elements of it into a good story, one that would at least sound credible. But I don't think he would betray the "cadre", ever. On the other hand I think he could have told us some very useful information about the agency and Oswald, possibly from first hand knowledge...but I don't think we are going to see that in print either. All just opinion of course; perhaps I'm being overly skeptical? -- Larry

Charles, I'm a big fan of Occams razor however I don't think that what happened in Dallas was a nice smooth package or that all the players had totally compatible agendas. As to why I think that I'd have to refer you to the book, I can discuss it with short posts but explaining it that way is beyond me. I think that Johnson was compromised by his connections to the Baker affair and that may well have served as the leverage to involve him ....but I don't think anyone trusted him and they requred him to make a commitment to ensure he didn't' double cross them. Nobody in their right mind would trust Johnson even when you had him in a headlock. Part of my thinking on this is explained in the white papers section of this forum, in the pieces I posted dealing with Wallace, Cliff Carter, et al. But I have to tell you if Glen Sample had never found Loy Factor and did the work that he has done I'd surely never even consider this all in a scenario if I were building it from "concept"...or for elegance. In regard to the prints, if Glen is correct and Factor telling the truth the prints were not a simple plant, they were part of Johnson having skin in the game by having people that could be tied to him at the scene of the crime. Leaving actual prints may well have been sheer bad luck for Wallace...but when you study Wallace you see that his MO was to leave tons of clues at the scenes of his crimes (only Johnsons clout kept him out of jail). -- sorry if all this is less than clear, its hard for me to get my hands around it in limited words... Larry try to deal Larry, "Sacrificial" -- Willing or otherwise? This seems to be a needless complication, the sort of additional component that offers far more liabilities than strengths. There were any number of safer and, arguably, more effective methods of compromising Johnson -- if he were not wholly self-compromised by real complicity before the fact. While Occam's Razor is a wholly ineffective tool for dissecting intelligence operations -- undertakings which by definition are protected by cover stories designed to satisfy the Occamites' yearnings -- it is a valid governing principle for the planning of black ops. The fewer components the better, if you follow. Acquire target. Kill target. E&E. Around this onion core, each additional layer increases vulnerability. So if Johnson, for example, could be tainted at a Murchison gabfest on 11/21, what need for the risks posed by this sacrificial team? Charles

Charles, I'm a big fan of Occams razor however I don't think that what happened in Dallas was a nice smooth package or that all the players had totally compatible agendas. As to why I think that I'd have to refer you to the book, I can discuss it with short posts but explaining it that way is beyond me. I think that Johnson was compromised by his connections to the Baker affair and that may well have served as the leverage to involve him ....but I don't think anyone trusted him and they requred him to make a commitment to ensure he didn't' double cross them. Nobody in their right mind would trust Johnson even when you had him in a headlock. Part of my thinking on this is explained in the white papers section of this forum, in the pieces I posted dealing with Wallace, Cliff Carter, et al. But I have to tell you if Glen Sample had never found Loy Factor and did the work that he has done I'd surely never even consider this all in a scenario if I were building it from "concept"...or for elegance. In regard to the prints, if Glen is correct and Factor telling the truth the prints were not a simple plant, they were part of Johnson having skin in the game by having people that could be tied to him at the scene of the crime. Leaving actual prints may well have been sheer bad luck for Wallace...but when you study Wallace you see that his MO was to leave tons of clues at the scenes of his crimes (only Johnsons clout kept him out of jail). -- sorry if all this is less than clear, its hard for me to get my hands around it in limited words... Larry try to deal Larry, "Sacrificial" -- Willing or otherwise? This seems to be a needless complication, the sort of additional component that offers far more liabilities than strengths. There were any number of safer and, arguably, more effective methods of compromising Johnson -- if he were not wholly self-compromised by real complicity before the fact. While Occam's Razor is a wholly ineffective tool for dissecting intelligence operations -- undertakings which by definition are protected by cover stories designed to satisfy the Occamites' yearnings -- it is a valid governing principle for the planning of black ops. The fewer components the better, if you follow. Acquire target. Kill target. E&E. Around this onion core, each additional layer increases vulnerability. So if Johnson, for example, could be tainted at a Murchison gabfest on 11/21, what need for the risks posed by this sacrificial team? Charles

Ron, that's a question we really should get someone like Ian or Sherry to respond to, I'll try to catch Sherry on it. My impression though is that while it may be realitve easy to transfer prints on a very smooth material...say pick up a print with a piece of tape and transfer it to a glass....that placing prints on a cardboard box is not nearly that easy. In fact there was a lot of speculation about how easy it was for anyone to leave prints on the cardboard boxes unless there hands were sweaty or someting like that. Great question, will try to get a professional response. I have to say my own scenario is heavily influenced by Glen Samples work, Loy Factors information - which seems highly credible to me - and some additional work I've done which essentially places a "sacrificial" team in the TSBD - as hard as that is too swallow. Well it would be sacrificial unless the President/Johnson was being forced into it and then I suspect that even if caught he would have been able to come up with something to get them out of it and cover up the whole thing.. -- Larry

I'm going to jump into this one with Jack and Myra - whatever his loyalties to individuals within the Agency, Hunt was known as much for his ability to write fiction and make a buck on the side as his notoriously poor tradecraft and security (from Miami to Spain). Not many active Agency employees manage to make money on the side by promoting spy stories. Given Hunt's history of money problems, poor health late in life and his well known practice of "shopping" his name (after Watergate) along with purported secret knowledge about the Kennedy assassination (telling more than one interviewerer what he knew was worth a million bucks) I would tread very carefully in supposing this book was his effort to come clean with the world vs. a last effort to market his name and make some money for his kids. Not that he might not have heard some gossip, many did, but Hunt was a good fiction writer and I see no reason why he could not come up with the names to throw into a book that a publisher couldn't resist. -- Larry

Francesca, Harber was an Interpen associate and you will find a photo of him on the book web site - the photo page is "Shadow Warrors #2" As I recall he was one of the few associates without significant military experience, he did have some academic background though, hence the nick name. In 1963 he was engaged in a variety of minor projects including the preparation of a radio broadcast boat...you will find photos of he, Seymore, de Torres and another of the Interpen folks whose name escapes me at present (maybe Collins) - all working on that boat. He's mentioned a couple of times in the book and is in the index. ...I enjoyed the description Charles gave of the Hemming panel, I was there to observe that and certainly agree with his assessment. It was one of the things that convinced me Gerry was an extremely sharp fellow and would likely always be well in control of any interview. I do recall one comment of his that was most helpful, he suggested that researchers should look at what the national security agencies should have been doing in the first 24 - 48 hours and compare it to what we see in the record. Chapter 15 of the book draws a good bit on that suggestion. -- Larry

Francesca, I did a quick scan of The Last Investigation but could not locate anything on the Phillips indexed pages about Berlitz. Beyond that though, I would think it would be a matter of coincidence; when Phillips needed to have someone on call he had the resources to get them jobs as he did with Veciana. As I recall Verona's job with Berlitz came after he had moved to New York and following an earlier job selling used cars; clearly he was much better suited to the language teaching job. I think the real question in play is why Verona virtually abandoned the exile movement for a considerable period of time, not only abondoned it but left Miami where he obviously had a network and a lot of supporters. Not that there was not a very influential exile community (old school) in New York but Verona doesn't seem to have connected with them....and they were of a like conservative political orientation and could easily have found him a job in one of their businesses. Seems like there might be an interesting story there. ....and on Charles's mention of "The Professor"...seems to me like I've heard Dennis Harbor called that....but I think we can write him off as being a candidate for "windbreaker man"... -- Larry

Mike, I would say that to a large extent Jim's book along with the movie JFK launched the surge of work in the 90's - leading to the efforts of the ARRB, the JFK records act and the amazing amount of information we have now that was lacking before. On the other hand, I've chided Jim in person several times for taking away my last 16 or so years....he shows no sign of guilt that I've seen so far..grin. I would like to paraphrase another remark by Jim - made in opening a JFK Lancer conference a few years ago. The wording is not his, its my recollection but I think it is telling. .......................... ....people, we know Lee Oswald did not act alone, we know there was a conspiracy, when are we going to stop arguing over the details, get past that and move on to what needs to be done next? .......................... I think it was shortly after that when I stopped obsessing about the Plaza and batting my head against the cover up and started looking for a flanking maneuver. -- Larry

Francesca, there are some great posts on the fingerprint issue in Glen Samples book thread and by Richard Bartholemew (sp...sorry Richard, I know I get that spelling wrong way to frequently) on the forum...you might do a search for his posts. The issue with the prints is twofold (as I understand it). One is obtaining the originals of the prints which are on the boxes from the snipers nest. The other involves obtaining comparison prints of very good quality for Malcolm Wallace....that's where Houston PD comes into the picture. Again, as I understand it, the master prints used by Nathon Darby were obtained by Jaye Duncanson and are now in possession of Walt Brown, don't know what Walt is doing with the material left to him by Jaye. Dawn has asked Glen if he is doing something further with the prints...perhaps some more discussion will emerge on that thread. Also, you do need to find and read Richard B's great paper on the fingerprings, he posted a link to an updated version last year. -- Larry

Nathan Darby was indeed the extremely experienced fingerprint expert who did the Wallace match....and based on Glen Samples posts I belive that Glen made contact with Darby and became convinced by Darby's continued conviction and elaboration. At least one other print expert also give a positive match to Wallace, he was hired by Barr McClellan - however when he became aware of exactly what was involved in his match he backed off permission to use his ID and officially began to hedge. Of course the FBI responded that it was not a match to Wallace...but refused to provide any detail and of course they did not consult with Darby. And of course now the prints are being very closely held by Houston PD and it would require an official investigation to get another good set released. In regard to Harlandale, my understanding is that as in other locations, many DRE members also were active in Alpha 66 and both DRE and Alpha members frequented Harlandale. I don't know of any specific leads tieing "Ruth Ann" to DRE though....I would not be surprized if she had some connection to the Brigade though, perhaps a relative. Which could well have associated her with Alpha circa 1963. Actually the fact that Loy Factor would - out of the blue - associate to young Latino's Wallace and then specifically state that the young woman was effectively in charge and brought in both intelligence and directions to their planning meetings strikes me as something very unlikely to come from Factor's imagination.

Hi Anthony, glad you are enjoying the book so far. I also think that avoiding the whole subject in terms of issues with the RFK assassination is a bit hard to understand. Especially since he didn't have to turn it into a conspiracy film to do so. Clearly there were individuals in the pantry and individuals in the area that experienced things that are hard to explain with Sirhan as a lone nut. In making the film he could simply have picked one or more of those people and covered their experience without being judgemental...why not introduce a figure who sees something they cannot explain even to themselves with Sirhan as the single shooter...could have some interesting dialog or introspection. That would be a perfectly honest way to handle the controversy...and there surely was controversy. -- Larry

Another freightening thing about it is that those folks, like the current military and intelligence "contractors" in Iraq could well end up outside the Military Code of Justice and the military legal system. Which permits them to engage in behavior which would at least have some oversight within the military. It also puts them outside the chains of command. For some reasons the neocons seem to have a real passion for their own private armies....oh yeah, forgot, then you don't have to be accountable to the democratic system....you can just do what you feel is right. Much quicker to get things moving that way... ...Larry

Hi Francesca, actually as you noted, one of the big obstacles in RFK research is that aside from a very limited number of researchers mostly tied either to Sirhan's legal process or towards commercial book projects, there really is not a research base for RFK as there is for JFK. There are great collections of documents in archives in California, at Dartmouth etc but again nothing like what we enjoy for JFK. I've issued an open call for individuals who want to work on that process but still the response is very small, right now two people are slogging through film and photo records simply trying to locate known persons of interest like Cesar and Wayne in footage. Or to do even more basic things like build collections of people going in and out the service pantry access doors....just the basic slogging that was done by hundreds and thousands of people to establish basic reference data for DP. It's clear that LAPD never really considered the crime scene to involve more than a small area of the service pantry where Sirhan was (reminds one of the TSBD and DP) so there work is of limited help in studying movements of other people...heck, they never even prepared a consolidated illustration of all the witnesses reporting the movements of the polka dot dress girl and her companions (probably decided it would be better not to; much easier to difuse that if you considere everything separately). --- Larry Hi Larry, thanks for the info, I wasn't aware of that. It is a shame the film maker didn't have the guts to tackle the idea of conspiracy as I think it would bring about a bigger awareness of the RFK case as Oliver Stone did for JFK. Maybe one day! I look forward to reading your book on RFK for the future. Hoepfully in the near future, there will be more internet resources such as databases were to be made, particularly a photo database as has been done with JFK. It would be interesting to study photos of the ballroom etc to see if any other interesting or recognisable figures pop up as in the oneson Main and Houston street in JFK.

Hi Francesca, actually as you noted, one of the big obstacles in RFK research is that aside from a very limited number of researchers mostly tied either to Sirhan's legal process or towards commercial book projects, there really is not a research base for RFK as there is for JFK. There are great collections of documents in archives in California, at Dartmouth etc but again nothing like what we enjoy for JFK. I've issued an open call for individuals who want to work on that process but still the response is very small, right now two people are slogging through film and photo records simply trying to locate known persons of interest like Cesar and Wayne in footage. Or to do even more basic things like build collections of people going in and out the service pantry access doors....just the basic slogging that was done by hundreds and thousands of people to establish basic reference data for DP. It's clear that LAPD never really considered the crime scene to involve more than a small area of the service pantry where Sirhan was (reminds one of the TSBD and DP) so there work is of limited help in studying movements of other people...heck, they never even prepared a consolidated illustration of all the witnesses reporting the movements of the polka dot dress girl and her companions (probably decided it would be better not to; much easier to difuse that if you considere everything separately). --- Larry Hi Larry, thanks for the info, I wasn't aware of that. It is a shame the film maker didn't have the guts to tackle the idea of conspiracy as I think it would bring about a bigger awareness of the RFK case as Oliver Stone did for JFK. Maybe one day! I look forward to reading your book on RFK for the future. Hoepfully in the near future, there will be more internet resources such as databases were to be made, particularly a photo database as has been done with JFK. It would be interesting to study photos of the ballroom etc to see if any other interesting or recognisable figures pop up as in the oneson Main and Houston street in JFK.

William, one of the things that does have to be addressed in discussing the tramps is that there seems to be a clear "time stamp" on the ones taken into custody in the yard behind the TSBDthem...as has often been discussed. The DPD tapes contain reference to a railroad employee notifying police about an individual being reported in a gondola car. \ It's pretty clear Bowers saw a tramp inside a gondola/hopper car, not a boxcar and notfied police. It's clear that Bowers stopped that train which was moving past his tower coming from downtown Dallas to the east and moving across the TSBD overpass...because the DPD tapes locate the engine of the train. Now I agree Bowers did not report seeing three tramps, only one, but that would mean four people taken into custody if three were in a boxcar. It also might mean he simply didn't see the other two down inside the gondola car. It's also clear from the tapes that other tramps were arrested in the second switching yard across the bridge and over in the area of the postal annex. If nothing else the references on the tape to tramps should be part of any discussion of the tramps. -- Larry

Thanks for the kid words Francesca. As to your question on Johnson - I'm still of a mixed mind. I certainly do think there is a case to be made that Johnson was forced into some level of participation in order to ensure that he took an offer he couldn't refuse. However proving that largely lies in the Wallace prints and Loy Factor. I can tell you that I am inclined towards that and have actually written six unpublished chapters that would lay that out in great detail....some of that is posted in the papers section of this forum. However, Estes has done so much in the last couple of years to compromise himself as a source that he really had contaminated the Johnson side of the story. If we are to stick with "beliefs" I do tend to belive the print matches, Glen Samples work and Jenkins statements. Which means Johnson was forced into contaminating himself and essentially leaving "fingerprints" which would likely have emerged in any real criminal investigation....ensuring that he preventing that from occuring. As it happens the timing of events fits perfectly to support that scenario. If we just had a few print experts with the guts to go on record it would be a done deal...or if only one law enforcement agency had the nerve to pursue that aspect of the case. Not sure that will ever happen though. -- Larry

Hi Francesca, you are correct, the RFK film does not address conspiracy and as I understand it that was a conscience decision on the film maker who has said something to the effect that he did not want to go through what Oliver Stone did. Apparently he is persuaded there was a conspiracy but he didn't want to tackle that with his film.... As to my book, well as it turns out it is going to be a work on both RFK and MLK (and that probably says something right there) so its going to take a bit longer than planned. The case for conspiracy in both is relatively easy to make and much of the work in that vein has been done, I've drafted several chapters on RFK already. However going to the next stage and dealing with the actual conspiracy is where the challenge lies. Much research is being done now and I owe thanks to a small group of researchers who are driving the effort on. As to a date, I might have a research level manuscript done this year but I don't see any actual book until sometime in 2008, when it is done it will be at the same level of detail as Someone Would Have Talked. l -- Larry Hi Larry, I would like to research this Sanchez Diaz further sounds interesting but as you say with the passage of time, these things get more and more difficult. I wish the HSCA had investigated more leads themselves but with someone like Blakey in charge that was never going to happen..... Do you have any idea of a date for your RFK book yet? I see over here that the film Bobby is going to be released in a few days but I understand it isn't a 'conspiracy' film, but part fictional?

I think Sanchez did function as Artime's actual case officer although I'm now awere of the exact dates. What is clear though is that in 1963, Hecksher assumed a senior officer role in the AM/WORLD project which was built around Artime. Whether or not you would consider him a case officer at that point or something else could be debated, you certainly find his name on a great number of memos dealing with Artime and you find Jenkins name on a lot of them as well, including routine travel, training and security memos. I do think Hecksher was well known within the agency in the 50's and 60's but I don't know that he became a semi-public figure until his assignment to Chile much later. He certainly was assigned to a lot of trouble spots from Laos to Chile and he had a high profile inside the agency as well as some high level sponsors like Dulles. AsI relate in Appendix B the ambassador in Laos tried to get him removed with no luck. I think its safe to say that he was never a favorite with his State Department counterparts. After his tour in Laos he was assigned to the transborder area down towards the Golden Triangle and there is no information at all on his role there; I also know of absolutely no details on his assignment to Japan. -- I think he is a very fertile area for more research....especially with both his Guatemala and SE Asian associations. Larry

John, I noticed the obit thing but its not uncommon for CIA officers obits to be a bit off the mark, note Morales. I do cover his career in some detail in Appendix B and my impression is that instead of the OSS he was in the regular Army and with Army CIC after the war. He went from Army CIC to CIA in Berlin, very similar to Morales actually. I did run into one reference that speculated that he might have been a deep cover double agent but I don't recall the source off the top of my head... there would always be the question of whether or not his strong anti-Communist views might have been a front - if he was deep cover. We tried to do some checking with his brother who was still living a year or so ago at least but he quickly made it clear he had no interest in discussing Harry or any of his activities. -- Larry

Francesca, nothing more on Sanchez Diaz from me. As in most cases anything I could find is in the book. I'm afraid the chance for a real investigation of many of these subjects has passed with this much time. I must say though that as I reread the HSCA report I'm impressed by how many times they chide the FBI for not really following leads...and for putting things aside without serious investigation. I probably should have mentioned that in the book. I am investigating some of the sources on the leads a bit further and may add end notes or points on the web site in regard to them as time permits. Thanks for the offer but the good news is that with my shift in focus to RFK/MLK I doubt that many of my sources are going to need translation...grin. -- Larry

Francesca, I think if you read Nagell really closely on the Cubans in NO, at least one of them was an individual he had known in MC and also in California....exact names is still guesswork of course although if you read closely you find a couple of guesses on that in my book. Clearly Nagell had to have done some favors for these guys on an ongoing basis to get the sort of introductions he got in Miami and in NO. However one of the folks appears to have been local from NO and that may have been what got Nagell turned e.g. someone obviously became suspicious of him and began training him, hence his run for the border. Whether or not he actually "took out" one of them on the way remains pure speculation although he implies somebody did get killed, mistakenly. Whose mistake it was... As to the Italian book, I had a good deal of correspondance with the author a few years ago and he actually provided the translated passages, as far as I know the book is only available in Italy and in Italian. -- Larry Hi Larry, thanks for your thoughts. I had not thought it likely but just wondered. As you say in the book seems like the 'blurb' written on Morales' tombstone was a cover for his real activities. You read my mind and answered my next question though about whether or not Nagell would have encountered Phillips in his 'work'. I always wonder about that story told by Nagell about Oswald meeting with cubans in a square in NO - Im not sure if I'm remebering it correctly but I think Nagell claimed to have a photo of it. If true, wonder who those Cubans might have been. So many interesting things to ponder! Also, I wanted to ask you where you found a book you refer to in Chapter 10 on DAP by Claudio Accogli called 'Kennedy e il centro-sinistra'. It sounds very interesting and I'd like to get hold of it if I can but an amazon search doesn't turn up anything. The book is in Italian I take it? Or has it been translated into English too? Thanks

Hi Francesca, actually I doubt that Nagell and Morales ever crossed paths. At least to this point, despite what his tombstone says, there is no direct evidence Morales served in Korea and his time seems pretty well accounted for elsewhere. I do suspect Nagell crossed paths with Phillips in Mexico City, he may have had no direct contact but given his CI role in MC it is very likely that Phillips would have been aware of anything Nagell was doing in that regard and certainly Nagell's rather strange pseudo defection looks like some sort of security test. My current thought is that Nagell worked with a variety of Domestic Ops folks, primarily in California as his notebook supports; that he had some CIA contact in MC but that Hecksher pulled him off to play some very deep games that may or may not have been fully reported inside the agency. I do imagine that CIA knew about some of his activities in MC and may have been aware that he had peripheral contact with Oswad - if not before the assassination they certainly knew about it afterwards and it appears that he used that efficently later on to negotiate some sort of quid pro quo with them. Something that would go into a soft file I'm sure....never to see the light of day elsewhere. -- Larry -- Larry

Thanks for the post John, yes, Simon was good enough to send me a copy and we have not linked his review and the interview into www.larry-hancock.com Also, I think all the document links are now working, we have been doing a lot of work on the site recently and everyone should be able to view some of the new documents that went up on the site in conjunction with the second edition. I would also encourage everyone to read Edward Martino's background statement which has been placed on the site. Ed has also consented so a couple of short interviews and as time permits those will also be posted. -- A very Happy New Year to you and all the forum members, Larry

Mark, my only point is that you should judge his remarks to the ARRB....some 30 years after the fact....in context of his very early interviews with the Secret Service, the FBI and his internal remarks to his MI supervisor. And its important to keep in mind that in 1963 his job was primarily doing background checks for military security clearances - that sort of investigation. You can also judge his remarks by the sort of language and descriptions used by his fellow MI personnel who were also interviewed by the ARRB. I just don't think the one interview should be judged in isolation and wanted everyone to know the other material that is available. -- Larry Larry, As I mentioned above, Powell's interview is strange -- his answers are cavalier and imprecise, his recollection seems sparse. So he either attached little importance to being an eye/earwitness to and recorder of one of the most shattering events of the 20th century, or he's lying about some/all of it. Is this macho swagger? Or an attempt to aw-shucks his way out of more intense scrutiny? If he's not lying, then he might have been a Barney Fife type of wannabe, injecting himself in the action of the day. If he is dissembling, his presence could indicate anything from mere surveillance to participation as a possible assassin of LHO. His actions, based on his testimony, aren't sufficiently explained, in my opinion. The story he tells doesn't hold water.

I'd suggest that anyone considering this subject needs to look at all the pieces - for example Powell gave statements to the Secret Service, the FBI and eventually was interviewed by the ARRB. He also filed a report on the incident with his military supervisor. A close read of all these will answer the question as to all his photos and will also show that he was quite consistent in his remarks. In addition the ARRB interviewed all the other members of the Dallas MIG unit they could locate as well as a senior office for the 112MIG (not Jones) and took testimony form Fletcher Prouty. You can obtain all these records from NARA or you will find them and my anaysis on a CD available from JFK Lancer on the subject of the 112th....all also contains an great deal of background material that the ARRB collected on the 112th, its duties, tasks and organization structure. Just to cut to the chase, I do find some very suspicious things associated with the 112th but they primarily have to do with Col Jones and his statements to the HSCA rather than Powell. I'd very much like to know who and why the HSCA selected Jones to testify as it was his testimony that essentially allowed them to cover up the issue of mysterious people with credentials in DP. -- Merry Christmas everyone, Larry