Larry Hancock
-
Posts
4,087 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Store
Posts posted by Larry Hancock
-
-
I talked to him in person following his appearance at a Lancer conference several years ago, cannot give you the exact date from memory, and during at least one telephone call and several email exchanges for at least a year after that...best guess on the date pf the conference appearance would be the early 2000s but that is just a guess. I provided him with a copy of the SS service memo about his subversive remarks in person and think I mailed a copy later as well.
-
Steve, I recall from my 112th work that the regional Army command definitely had a strong relationship with police in major metro areas and that included Dallas, which is why we so the extended exchanges between them on Nov 22, with the 112th offering info in its files on Oswald (material forwarded to them earlier from the FBI in NO).
And on your second point, that is absolutely true - I had extensive talks with a DPD intelligence reserve officer who that day was assigned to surveillance on the Black Panther group, DPD was focused on groups, the Secret Service was so provincial that they could not even visualize a mobile threat against the president (even when warned by the FBI) and when they did the security PRS pull for Dallas found nothing in the file...sigh.
It seems at the time the security systems only envisioned direct, proximity attacks or protests by groups turning violent...now that seems like the good old days by comparison..
-
Actually I don't think that hour reference is at all true as far as the investigation by the DPD was concerned, they continued questioning people, picking up people like Molina and Frazier and examining evidence as long as they could before the FBI carted off much of it by midnight. Certainly officers I have talked to considered it a very real and live investigation into the weekend. We can argue that pieces disappears later and even that there might have been malfeasance within the force but we even have comments from individual officers that suggest some thought themselves under suspicion for some sort of involvement.
We should not get carried away thinking that all this was locked up and tied down as part of some master plan during the first day, the weekend etc...if it had been the hundreds of loose ends from Dallas to Bethesda would not have been left for us all to pick apart over the decades.
-
Could be Steve, but perhaps that was just a "pick up sheet" and he was actively working it...that would be interesting as well...in any event surely somebody here knows a DPD officer or has some solid experience to bring to the question. As to the notebook, well it certainly would not be the only item from the DPD that ultimately went missing and never entered the official record - the list of of patrons at the theater comes to mind.
-
If I'm not mistaken outstanding warrants, stolen cars etc are public information - of course the reason hot sheets would be on a clip board would be that the clip board can be concealed (just turn it over)..during breaks etc. I think the photo above pretty well confirms that you could expect to find "operational" info on a clipboard.
-
Someone here with law enforcement experience should comment but my understanding is that the patrol car clipboards contained hot items for each day, outstanding warrants related to the patrol area , stolen car tag numbers, recent robbery suspects, recent complaints from local residents that might server as something to watch for - basically prompts for the patrol officer to be watching for during the days duty. Having a mug shot of a suspect at the top of the clipboard would make perfect sense if the clipboards were used that way in Dallas.
-
Paul, others and I have both written at length about Hosty's remarks on Nov 23, later reported by the SS agent to the HSCA, you will find it in SWHT in some detail and probably with a search here as well. As with most remarks we have no idea exactly who was being referred to or where it occurred.
All I can tell you is that even when I provided a copy of the HSCA document describing his remarks as commented on by the SS agent, he simply refused to engage with it, turning exchanges in other directions.
As to my guesses, I think that the subversives were Cuban exiles engaged in weapons buys in Dallas and that the FBI was monitoring them and observed Oswald in contact with one or more of them , again you will find that discussed in SWHT - most recently David Boylan have speculated on exactly who they might have been in our Wheaton leads work and our recent presentations on the Red Bird leads - I don't want to make it sound like anything brand new although we have much more detail on exactly which activist exiles were traveling from the Miami area to both New Orleans and Dallas now than when I was doing the various editions of SWHT.
-
That was indeed one of the related incidents over material from MC that I recall David, but I also know that there also a separate chain of CIA communications expressing virtual panic over material that might expose their activities in MC - and of course it was the CIA who had an immense infrastructure and political connections to pretect in terms of doing espionage in Mexico, not in regard to just Mexico but all of Central America. There electronic and film and travel surveillance "takes" were routinely provided to multiple nations and were the backbone of monitoring Cuban covert activities throughout central and even south America.
As to reliability, personally I think JFK research in general sometimes goes over the edge in judging reliability based on whether sources are saying what we expect to hear, or want to hear. Probably better to admit that to a large extent we are simply left to make subjective calls on credibility and reliability.
I found Hosty to be quite sincere, but also to only talk about what he was interested in, and to totally avoid certain direct questions - particularly in regard to FBI knowledge of Oswald in Dallas, and the FBI monitoring of Oswald in contact with "subversives", as reported in his very early remarks to Secret Service, remarks heard by DPD officers. Which also reinforces the issue that we have to accept that information from virtually any source can be "situational".
-
In that regard, and anecdotally, Host was told explicitly by his FBI contacts that it was Oswald himself who was photographed. However, based on only the document linked above its possible that photos were taken at the Russian embassy and misidentified as Oswald - and that just got translated into rumor and gossip that it was him.
Nothing ever seems definitive in these incidents - although it could have been resolved early on if the names had been provided and the individuals interviewed....which might cause one to think that it would have been confirmed as Oswald. On the other hand we have the perennial question of why an actual photo of Oswald in Mexico City would be concealed at all since it would simply support the official story of his activities?
The counter to that is that CIA was so ultra-sensitive to exposing the extent of its activities in MC, at all levels including photo surveillance, that it blocked the showing of anything that might become public and expose that. As I recall they went ballistic when a request was made to show a photo from Mexico in Dallas for identification purposes related to Jack Ruby.....there was a whole series of memos stonewalling it simply on the basis that under no circumstances must photo surveillance of any sort be shared if there was a potential that it might become public and expose sensitive national security activities in a foreign country (including the fact that it would jeopardize the political relationship that enabled that activity).
-- to quote Paul Simon in Slip Sliding Away - "the answer is unavailable... to the mortal man"
-
Jim, I was referring to a series of memorandum from over the weekend where he complains about DPD officers talking too much in front of the media including the TV appearance describing Oswald being picked up in a car. Its all part of the same issue he has with the Dallas Police talking about the case when he wants it under "control". And of course the FBI had it under control in an evidentiary since given that much of the crime scene material had been hustled out of town around midnight.
Given that the DPD was starting to do things like show the bag found in the TSBD to Frazier - with him denying it was what he had seen Oswald carrying, having DPD carry out its own investigation could indeed have created a lot of problems for what was going to emerge as the official story .
-
It certainly is interesting although we have seen a good bit of this before in terms of his complaining about the DPD talking and the fact that they needed to be shut up (which of course would cover their earlier interviews about a possible conspiracy related Oswald being picked up and driven away).
Of course it also classic Hoover scene stealing - take all the evidence away from DPD by midnight before they have a chance to work it and then claim you solved it all yourself, nice PR touch as usual.
-
Hosty said that he had been told directly by his friends who had been working in Mexico City at the time that Oswald had been photographed in Mexico City, that he had been observed making contact with Russian embassy staff and that pictures of him had been obtained.
They did not specify who had taken the pictures, but as far as I know the FBI itself did not maintain photo surveillance teams nor conduct photo surveillance of the diplomatic facilities, that was done by the CIA.
As I recall Hosty did not state who actually did the surveillance or photography, just that it had occurred. He may have said more but at this point in time I'm certain he made those specific remarks.
-
I think David and I will be offering an view of what was going on with Oswald during the fall of 1963, including how he was manipulated in Dallas (and by whom), however its an elaboration on our previous work, not some brand new revelation. For that matter I have no idea where a totally confirming revelation would come from at this point in time - wish I did.
As for myself, I have drafted a new and lengthy, albeit rather contrarian, view of Lee Harvey Oswald which may become available at some point. It is my personal assessment of how he has been put into boxes, and an effort to break him out into a more three dimensional character acting on his own agendas and against his own ideological world views. I anticipate that as the last piece of work I'll do on this topic.
-- Larry
-
That is what I heard as well Evan, plus their was extensive admiration for Rip Robertson....the guys he worked with trusted him to always back them up personally regardless of CIA practices or rules and he did so. That is also why it was so easy for him to recruit for the Congo. Its hard to overestimate the value of the "band of brothers" bond.
-
From the memo it appears the photo in question was taken of someone at the Soviet embassy...."thought to be Oswald".
On another note I can say that Hosty was quite clear during his talk at a Lancer conference and later with me personally that his FBI buddies in MC told him in no certain terms that they had heard Oswald was under surveillance in MC and had been photographed.
-
Thanks Evan, obviously I can't guarantee it but more and more things have lined up with that view over time (including things I had no idea of and was not even searching for, always a positive sign) - I've run into a number of folks from the Miami area who have described knowing a something about it, talking to guys that came back from Dallas, and maintained that it was fairly general knowledge among certain communities of interest there - but none were willing to go on record and in at least one instance we were unable to get someone who did know details to put it on record for release after their death.
At this point its a pretty solid working hypothesis but I'm not sure what could move it into certainty. At least I feel better about it after following a host of leads that didn't pan out over the last 30 plus years.
-- Larry
-
I should point out that this sort of action is almost standard practice in a national crisis. When MLK was shot both Hoover and the AG issued statements within hours that it had been a single shooter, and was not part of some ultra right racist conspiracy. The AG later admitted that it was simply damage control and they had no idea other than they needed to try and try and control the public reaction as much as possible.
The first response is always to seize control of the message and calm the public as as much as possible. You see it at all levels of government.
-
Rex will be speaking on this at the JFK Lancer conference in Dallas this November, if you find it interesting bring notes so you can catch him for one on one discussions.. For what its worth Mr. Boylan and I will also be revisiting the Red Bird leads study in our conference presentation so you can bring notes for us as well...you can catch David in the hallway or me in the bar...grin.
-
Without going too far afield I would highly recommend Bart's work in regard to conflicts in the witness statements and observations in regard to Baker/Truly and the encounter on the second floor. Especially since many of the witnesses made remarks counter to the official scenario quite early.
It would have been really interesting to see that play out in court.
I've run across a number of the contradictions Bart highlights over the years of my reading but he does an excellent job of capturing them all and putting them in a form where readers can make their own decisions - or at least become fully aware of the conflicts in testimony.
-
I wrote about their being outed and even reported by the press at their docking locations in Florida. However my impression was that they might have continued to support Commando Mambises and approved sabotage missions though the end of the year if not longer....David B may know but I didn't follow the mother ships past their initial exposure myself.
-
There are extensive discussions of physical surveillance and tracking of individuals in Mexico City, you can find them in the station history and in Bill Simpich's work State Secrets - which references the selection, training and operational activities of the field surveillance teams who were trained to conduct observations and photo surveillance. The Cuban Intelligence group (AMOTS) in Miami were also trained in and conducted both types of surveillance - in Miami and possibly elsewhere; they did training for the Mexico City personnel.
-
Joe, my comment was intended to convey how gun focused politics has become all over the country, I didn't say it made sense or was legal but it certainly reflects a level of paranoia over rights and a level of anti-government phobia that I've never seen in some 70 years of living even in deeply conservative regions where I heard conversations about burying guns to keep them away fromt he government when Eisenhower was president for heavens sake.
-
Jonathan is correct, unless you folks live in an open carry state you don't know how common its become...I see open carry pistols in the grocery store, restaurants, McDonalds etc. And at political events where is is very common for MAGA types to show up with hand guns and rifles to assert their rights. Especially at the few events where Democrats are having open meetings.
Not saying that is the case here but seeing weapons in public is quite common, when I was growing up rifles and shotguns were common in hunting seasons but that was just a way of life, this is all political, with statements being made.
-
Well we posted here about it, I blogged about it, it posted on the Lancer Facebook page, it was and is featured on the MFF Book listings but I'm not sure how it gets publicity unless folks talk about it? Unfortunately its not like there is a mainstream publisher with a PR Dept promoting it - although John's work work and findings deserve as much attention as the main topic of discussion on the forum at the moment IMHO - they include the suppression of evidence by both the LAPD criminologist and overt suppression and malfeasance in the treatment of the crime scene evidence.
Anyway, its on Amazon, by John Hunt and the title is Buried in Plain Site (which refers to the crime scene as the site)
Douglas Caddys 1975 dinner with E. Howard Hunt
in JFK Assassination Debate
Posted
Tom, I'm afraid some of the Cuban intelligence books - like Escalante's - actually contain a good bit of material that appears to have come out of JFK books and of course the Cuban books are constructed to make a case against the CIA and its evil actions against Cuba (not all that much of a challenge).
An associated problem is that as far as I know very virtually no real, verifiable Cuban intel files have been brought forward; Escalante says most were damaged or lost though bad storage practices and water damage. What we most often hear about are things people describe from memory based on there having seen in said files...
Having said that, we can verify that Castro actually visited the Brazilian embassy only weeks before the assassination and made a warning statement that the CIA efforts to assassinate him could blow back on the U.S. and on JFK; he actually said that the anti-Castro Cuban exiles were so volatile that they might turn on JFK himself.
I'm sure that Cuban G2 was picking up some of the same rumors and gossip the FBI was, with a lot of threats and volatile remarks coming out of the exile community for several months at that time. After all it was so bad the SS actually asked for CIA cooperation in regard to Cuban threats in Miami during the president's visit there.