Paul Trejo

Greg, I'd really like hear more of your digitized interviews of Gerry Patrick Hemming. The Hemming scenario reminds me of Larry Hancock's 2010 version of his book, Someone Would Have Talked, and especially its chapter, End Game. The profile of Hemming rises like a ghost on almost every page of that chapter. In 1963, a tiny group of Anti-Castro Cubans (and their fellow travelers, like Hemming) mobilized to murder JFK. A Free Cuba was the main objective. JFK was regarded as the main obstacle. The catastrophe of the Bay of Pigs was, by 1963, the symbol of their rage. Those CIA comrades were who directly involved in the Bay of Pigs became emotionally involved. Of all the people in the US Government as well as outside the Government in the extreme right-wing who openly hated JFK, these Cuban Exile radicals became the magnet -- because they had paramilitary training camps ready to swing into action at a moments notice. The Cuba Raid groups (like Interpen, La Sambra, Alpha 66 and so many others) who were supported by CIA entities like JM\Wave, were ready and itching to make a move. Training for months to kill Fidel with scientific precision -- their frustration drove them to a logical, fatal conclusion. Larry Hancock follows the trail of John Martino, one of their number who tracked the patsy, Lee Harvey Oswald, perhaps as closely as Richard Case Nagell had tracked him. (Both Martino and Nagell seemed confused about the true politics of Oswald -- was he on the left or the right?) It seems obvious to me, fifty years later, that Lee Oswald was a committed rightist pretending to be a leftist, so that he could penetrate more deeply into enemy territory. (The fake FPCC in NOLA with only one member, Oswald himself, with its address at the offices of racist rightist Guy Bannister, is ample evidence.) Far from a "loner," Lee Oswald had many friends -- unknown to his wife, Marina. Oswald's true friends tended to gather around his Marine background. (Note that Lee Harvery Oswald related to his leftist contacts mainly through the mail, where he could deliberately leave a "paper trail" to establish street credentials. He would take these bogus credentials to Mexico City with him.) Was Lee Harvey Oswald confusing? If so, then we make too little of the fact that Gerry Patrick Hemming and Loran Hall both fought alongside Fidel Castro himself to further the Cuban Revolution! The Cold War was truly a confusing time! Best regards, --Paul Trejo

Harry Dean, Wesley Swearingen and Don Adams have a lot in common. Both Wesley Swearingen and Don Adams are former FBI Agents. Harry Dean isn't. What do they have in common? All three men claim to have some personal experience that sheds light on the falsity of the Lone Gunman theory which blames Lee Harvey Oswald alone for the murder of JFK. But wait, there's more. It's just like the old HIndu tale of several blind men touching an elephant, and each one swearing that his understanding of the elephant was "tangibly correct," but each one had wildly different stories (e.g. one touched the tall, one touched a leg, one touched the trunk, one touched the ear, one touched a side). Former FBI Agent Don Adams is adamant -- based on what he personally witnessed -- that Joseph Milteer was a prime JFK conspirator. Former FBI Agent Wesley Swearingen swears -- based on what he personally witnessed -- that "Ramon" gave him the full list of names of the prime JFK conspirators. Harry Dean declares -- based on what he personally witnessed -- that Ex-General Edwin Walker, Congressman John Rousselot, Gabby Gabaldon, Loran Hall and Larry Howard were prime JFK conspirators. Now -- while some would only point out the differences between their accounts, and claim that they all disagree -- I take a novel approach and point out what they all have in common, and I claim that all three accounts can be unified. Ex-General Edwin Walker is the link with Joseph Milteer, because both were active in Southern extreme right-wing politics in 1963. Loran Hall is the link with "Ramon's" list of names, because they include CIA and Mafia types like E. Howard Hunt and Santos Traficante, and many Cuban Exile groups like Alpha 66 and so many others with whom Loran Hall was directly associated as a gun runner. With some careful study -- and an open mind-- one can show that all three men can be quite correct. With this same methodology I can validate the writings of Larry Hancock, Joan Mellen, Gaeton Fonzi, Edwin Lopez, Dick Russell, Mark Lane and Jim Garrison -- they all had a piece of the Truth -- but none of them could solve the JFK murder mystery, because nobody stepped back far enough to see the elephant as a whole. What's important is that the eye-witnesses -- and I openly name Harry Dean, Don Adams and Wes Swearingen along with Richard Case Nagell, John Martino, Silvia Odio, Robert D. Morrow, Fletcher Prouty and Edwin Lopez himself -- who directly witnessed one part of the "elephant" that is the JFK murder. Best regards, --Paul Trejo

See, Ernie, it's just that I don't believe (as you evidently do) that Harry Dean wanted to create an impression that he was different than he was. You have shown a few FBI documents that clearly show that some FBI Agents held a very low opinion of Harry Dean. But that's not true of all the documents -- yet you seem to emphasize the negative ones. Further, we haven't even seen all of the FBI documents on Harry Dean -- so the jury is out on this single point -- how many FBI Agents held a low opinion of Harry Dean? I still expect to see some FBI documents relating a dialogue in 1964 between Harry Dean and Los Angeles FBI SAC Wesley Grapp. -- and I will give a lot of weight to that document when I finally see it. Still, what we've seen so far -- aside from a few negative remarks by FBI Agents -- is that there were hundreds of pages that the FBI at one time maintained on Harry Dean (and they even destroyed many of them in their Chicago office). You might presume that if the Chicago FBI destroyed those files, then they were probably meaningless -- but some on this thread would disagree with that presumption. I don't find your question relevant -- I don't presume that Harry Dean went about to create a false impression about himself. He really did serve Fidel Castro in 1959. He really was an FPCC officer in 1960. He really did try to tell the FBI about it -- to the best of his ability. This is all documented -- even by the FBI Agents themselves. Harrry really did join the JBS in 1962, and he really did try to tell the FBI about it -- to the best of his ability. That's my position, and until I see documented proof otherwise, it makes perfect sense to me. SIncerely, --Paul Trejo

Thanks, Tommy, for clearing that up for me. By the way, if you think Bernardo De Torres might have been "Leopoldo," then who do you think might have been "Angelo"? As for Bernardo De Torres, the fact that Silvia Odio said these men were total strangers would tend to cancel him, since he claimed he knew her in Cuba. Also -- "tall and thin" might merely mean "taller and thinner" as compared to, say, "Angelo." Also, Loran Hall was not always heavy -- he was always muscular, but sometimes he was quite slender compared to other times. The younger he was, the more slender he tended to be. Also, he developed something of an addiction to amphetemines, which are also used as diet or pep pills -- and often those who take them become too slender. In October 1963 (the month after the Silvia Odio incident) in Dallas, Loran Hall and William Seymour were on one of their gun running expeditions, and were arrested for possession of amphetemines. (According to Jim Garrison's transcripts, it was Ex-General Edwin Walker's lawyer, Robert Morris, who raised the bail bond to release Hall and Seymour.) It is remarked -- I believe in FBI records -- that the JBS in Southern California would supply Hall, Howard and Seymour (and Alba) with guns, ammunition and "medicines" to deliver to Cuba Raider mercenary training camps in Florida and points between. Those medicines turned out to be largely amphetemines -- which soldiers allegedly "needed" because it helped them "fight longer without food." Yes, amphetemines will do that. It is possible that Loran Hall took amphetimines habitually when on his gun-running trips. If so, then these would have been among his more "slender" times. He was 5'11" and nearly 6' tall -- and had a curly top of hair with *sharply* receding temples. https://www.google.com/#q=loran+hall Besides this, the FBI picked him up regarding Silvia Odio, and he confessed at first that he and Larry Howard were at her doorstep (only to recant his story later, under pressure). It's this whole FBI episode that convinces me, ultimately. And Loran Hall named Larry Howard as "Angelo" and aside from the exact height and weight (and who knows what his weight really was in September 1963, especially if Howard also took amphetemines) -- the evidence is weighty, IMHO. Best regards, --Paul Trejo

Tommy, I noticed on the Spartacus site, that there is speculation (inspired by Joan Mellen, evidently) that Bernardo De Torres was "Leopoldo" and Edwin Collins (whom you picture with Torres above) was "Angelo." I gather that you might favor that speculation, because Edwin Collins seems closer to the Height and Weight as the "Angelo" that Silvia Odio described. HOWEVER -- Silvia Odio also described Angelo as MEXICAN looking, stocky, with ruddy skin, with hair all over his body, and a hairy chest (perhaps his chest hair protruded from his undershirt). Edwin Collins does not look MEXICAN (at least to this Mexican-American he doesn't) he looks CUBAN. His skin is not ruddy. Also, he's not stocky. Also, he's not hairy all over. Also, his hair does not appear to be "shiny black" (like most Mexican hair) as Silvia described it. All these other descriptions match Larry Howard whose photo can be seen here: http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKhowardL.htm I think tThat's a late picture of him, so he's probably fatter there than in 1963. Comments? Best regards, --Paul Trejo

Well, Ernie, if Harry Dean had said, for example, that he was never an officer of the FPCC (while we have FBI evidence that he was) then that would be a MAJOR detail flaw. Or, if Harry Dean had said that he was a paid FBI agent; that would be a MAJOR detail flaw. Or, if Harry Dean had said that he was a paid CIA agent; that would be a MAJOR detail flaw. Or, if Harry Dean had said that he was in Dealey Plaza on 11/22/1963, so he knows from eye-witness evidence that Loran Hall and Larry Howard were the shooters at JFK that day, that would be a MAJOR detail flaw. Or, if Harry Dean had said that he personally met Lee Harvey Oswald at any time, in any situation, that would be a MAJOR detail flaw. Or, if Harry Dean had said that the FBI never kept any files on him, that would be a MAJOR detail flaw. Or, if Harry Dean had said that he never had anything to do with Fidel Castro and the Cuban Revolution, that would be a MAJOR detail flaw. Or, if Harry Dean had said that he never tried to report his experiences in the FPCC or JBS with the FBI, that would be a MAJOR detail flaw. From these examples, Ernie, I suppose you get the general idea. Sincerely, --Paul Trejo P.S. By the way, Ernie, your analysis of the relationship between the Minutemen and the JBS that you offered in reply to John Dolva was very accurate -- well stated and historically factual. I look forward to more writing like that from you.

Harry Dean and I have removed our eBook from Smashwords, pending our second edition. Best regards, --Paul Trejo

I have a new update for my theory -- I now believe that Interpen itself was the ground-crew for the murder of JFK. Now -- one might think that I've changed my mind, and no longer support the Harry Dean Memoirs -- but that would be wrong. What I've said from the beginning - is that despite some minor irregularities in the recollection of Harry Dean on this or that minor detail -- I believe Harry is telling the truth. Yes -- but Harry never said anything about Interpen. While that's true -- we must also remember that Interpen had direct dealings with Loran Hall, Larry Howard and Ex-General Edwin Walker. So -- my new theory makes Harry Dean's Memoirs into a PART of the bigger picture. The bigger picture will include MOST of the the research done by.Larry Hancock, Gaeton Fonzi, Dick Russell, Joan Mellen, Fletcher Prouty, Mark Lane, Jim Garrison, A.J. Weberman -- and even former FBI Agents Wesley Swearingen and Don Adams. But don't most of those folks emphasize the CIA in their theories? Yes -- but they never get down to the ground crew -- and what the more recent studies have done is to show that there were real ties between Interpen and the CIA. So -- this is exciting to me -- I'm putting together a synthesis of data to emcompass a Unified Field theory of the JFK murder. I just thought I'd mention it first on the Harry Dean thread, since Harry and I are still together in this uphill battle for the TRUTH, JUSTICE and AMERICAN FREEDOM. Best regards, --Paul Trejo

Larry, I didn't mean "challenging" as in an argument. I simply meant that you contradicted my sentence...and that's OK! You might think that I'm just beating the drum against Ex-General Walker and for Harry Dean -- but that's not quite accurate. I've been very much influenced by your writings -- I now give more weight to the CIA role in the JFK murder than I ever did before. At the same time, I still find gaps in data regarding Dallas Strategic Planning. Also, I note that Joan Mellen's book is full of unresolved contradictions. Gerry Patrick Hemming, e.g. handed over Loran Hall and Larry Howard to Jim Garrison, but later Hemming told Garrison that Howard was uninvolved. Joan Mellen didn't find a need to explain this. One gets the idea from Joan Mellen that the CIA was the puppet-master -- but she really doesn't get much higher than Gerry Patrick Hemming as a key information source (much like Jim Garrison). In other words, it's mainly Gerry Patrick Hemming's claims that the CIA was pulling strings -- but that could be another exaggeration and misdirection on the part of Hemming. She reports that Gary Hemming for months provided "disinformation" to Jim Garrison (much like Bernardo Torres spent three months feeding "disinformation" to Jim Garrison and taking money for it). This certainly suggests a CIA control. But it could also suggest a blaming of the CIA, even in cases where Hemming himself could have made decisions. While Jim Garrison was not interested in the ground-crew but in the planners, he was never able to solve the mystery. Perhaps if he had focused on the ground-crew more, he would have been killed quickly -- so perhaps he made the right choice. Anyway -- my point is that Gerry Patrick Hemming knew more than he would say -- and Loran Hall knew more than he would say -- AND BOTH WERE EXPERT LIARS. They both suggested, at various times, that the CIA pulled their strings. That could be a grosser exaggeration than we have so far seen. There may be plenty of evidence to suggest that they finally took one (or more) of the many bribes they were offered, and used Interpen to serve as the ground crew. They both knew General Walker very well -- who had control of many of the extreme rightists in the DPD (e.g. Roscoe White and J.D. Tippit). (We have in General Walker's personal papers some correspondence with Gary Patrick Hemming; and we have in Jim Garrison's papers Loran Hall's recollections of General Walker.) The names, fingerprints and associates of Gerry Hemming and Loran Hall keep cropping up all over the JFK murder! All right -- the CIA was clearly needed to send Fletcher Prouty to the South Pole. We cannot doubt the witness of Fletcher Prouty -- I firmly accept that. Below that level, hoever, we still don't have the ground-crew, IMHO, from all these new sources, I am updating my theory -- I now suspect that INTERPEN WAS THE GROUND-CREW OF THE JFK MURDER. . Best regards, --Paul Trejo <edit typos>

Well, Larry, I reviewed Joan Mellen's, FAREWELL TO JUSTICE (2005) again, and I think I can respond to your challenges here. (1) First, you want to claim that De Torres was lying about knowing Odio in Cuba so that you can make the case that he was "Leopoldo" (who was a total stranger to Odio). But one can only be certain that a person is lying when they actively contradict themselves. De Torres did not contradict himself -- your position is attributing a lie to him to fit your theory. (2) Secondly, De Torres never *claimed* to be Leonardo. According to Joan Mellen, it was only Angel Murgado, a Cuban and a friend of De Torress, who claimed that. Yet there are major problems with Angel Murgado's story -- he contradicted himself. We can see this on the Spartacus site. http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKmurgado.htm Murgado said that he and De Torres went to visit Silvia Odio, but that Lee Harvey Oswald as already there, sitting with Silvia in her living room. Nor did Murgado ever meet Oswald beore that moment (or after) or even shake hands with him (said his son, Amaury Murgado to John Simkin in 2005). This is the opposite of what Silvia testified about Angelo -- who drove up with Oswald in a car with Leopoldo. Also, Angelo was given as a war name -- not his real name. Also, Angelo was a Mexican, not a Cuban (and though Anglos can rarely tell the difference, Cubans can tell the difference immediately). Also, Lee Harvey Oswald never set foot inside her house, she said. So, Angel Murgado never actually met Lee Harvey Oswald, he said -- except at that moment. So, to be as generous as possible, then De Torres and Angelo visited Odio at some other time, and met some other person in her living room who might have looked like Oswald. Angelo said he never even spoke to whoever it was, because "his business was with Silvio Odio." (3) Thirdly, you say there was an immense social gulf between the De Torres family and the Odio family. This would not preclude the possibility of their seeing each other in Cuba -- but only the possibility of their dating in Cuba. And that is what De Torres said -- he could not get a date with her. (4) Fourthly, yes De Torres was a genuine Cuban counter-revolutionary, while Loran Hall was at best playing at that status. Further, Loran Hall was well-known for his lack of honesty. HOWEVER, we must remember that Silvia Odio testified that the "Leopoldo" she saw at her doorstep was a xxxx. He was not the real deal. So that would also disqualify De Torres. "Leopoldo" was a xxxx, and that is a key argument that he was also Loran Hall. Best regards, --Paul Trejo

Thanks, Larry, for this pointer. I have Joan Mellen's book, and I'll look further into that story. But on the surface of it -- since Torres said he knew Silvia Odio, then it stands to reason that Silvia Odio also knew Torres -- so this disqualifies him because Silvia claimed that the men at her doorstep were total strangers. That's important. These were not Cubans. Loran Hall was a Cuban-American (born in Kansas) and Larry Howard was a Mexican-American (born in East LA). They were mercenaries, and although they made money from the Anti-Castro crusade, and they claimed to have 'blood in the game,' their motivation could never compare with real Cubans, e.g. the members of JURE. Silvia was a member of JURE -- so she knew (or strongly suspected) Loran Hall was lying when he said they were members of JURE. So -- these were strangers who were lying to her. She was brave -- but she had limits. I'll review Joan Mellen again -- yet it seems to me that somebody with previous eye-contact with Silvia Odio should be disqualified -- presuming that we, like Gaeton Fonzi, find Silvia Odio 'eminently credible.' Best regards, --Paul Trejo

I believe that, Greg. Yet a "grain of salt" is exremely vague. Further, disinformation was part of the very TRAINING of people in Special Ops. So, it was second nature to Hemming. They key is to be able to decipher from the situation what can be accepted and what must be rejected. Why, for example, would Gerry Patrick Hemming tell Al Weberman what he (Hemming) called Lee Harvey Oswald on the day before the JFK murder, to offer Oswald double the market value of his rifle if he would bring it to the TSBD building the next morning to be picked up secretly by an agent of somebody who wished to remain anonymous? Why invent that sort of story unless there was at least some truth in it? That single claim speaks volumes. Best regards, --Paul Trejo

Tommy, you seem to be basing your choice of "Leopoldo" EXCLUSIVELY on the height and weight of the subject. There are just too many people who fit any given height-and-weight combo. You also underestimate the plain fact that some people are really not very good about guessing height and weight. Although Bernardo De Torres' hair seems to be receding at the temples, you must have OTHER criteria. Do you? OK, so Bernardo De Torres was the right height-and-weight. What ELSE have you got? I'm not talking about a car, but about LOCATION at the TIME of the SCENE. What is special about Loran Hall is that he was in the RIGHT LOCATION at the RIGHT TIME. (And so was LARRY HOWARD, come to think of it). Also -- you have not yet responded to the key criterion -- that Loran Hall CONFESSED when he was QUICKLY picked up by the FBI. That's the sort of criteria that is interesting. The face and hair, skin tone and ethnicity are, IMHO, more urgent than a mere guess at weight and height. Also, remember that Silvia Odio never left her door, and never let the visitors inside her home. She never stood on the same level that they stood -- so this would skew her estimates of height, and therefore of weight. Also, were any of these men wearing boots? That would be a factor in guessing height and weight. Best regards, --Paul Trejo

Over the past seven months I've found this thread to be enormously informative in my quest to identify the murderers of JFK. I especially appreciate the efforts of Paul Bancato and the scholarhip of Larry Hancock in this regard; they have made me re-think the priorities of the players involved in the murder of JFK. I'm now willing to grant the CIA a larger role in the JFK plot than I ever have before. Harry Dean's memoirs remain valuable in my evolving theory, which still emphasizes Ex-General Edwin Walker more than any other theory I've ever seen. Yet my opinion of Harry Dean's memoirs has also changed over these several months. Harry Dean's eBook, which we published six months ago on Smashwords, has been compromised by a key omission -- namely, the verifiable names of the Los Angeles FBI agents to whom Harry Dean first confessed. In my eBook notes, I wrote down the name of FBI SAC Wesley Grapp, and that is probably false for 1963, and still in doubt for 1964. Harry Dean and I are in the process of locating relevant FBI records. It may turn out that Harry Dean spoke with Wesley Grapp at a later in 1964 than my notes recorded. In any case, our eBook has been compromised by these factors -- which are central to the plot of our eBook. Therefore, our eBook must be re-written, and it is no longer for sale at Smashwords (because of these factual changes). The next version of our eBook will be nearly identical to the current version, with the exception of these factual identifications -- so central to the plot. It will also have a full Appendix of FBI records to confirm the dates, places and events in Harry Dean's actual story (which remains very different from the story told by W.R. Morris still in circulation today). Finally, when our new eBook is ready for publication, those who purchased our original eBook will receive, upon request, a special voucher for the price they originally paid towards our new eBook. Best regards, --Paul Trejo

OK, Tommy, I can see your point. But I must admit that this is a serious problem for the Loran Hall and Larry Howard theory. It is very clear that Larry Howard was not 5'7" and 170 pounds. So, given that data, we have a mismatch. This leaves us with the problem of Loran Hall. In other words, with this development, we must now posit that Loran Hall didn't take Larry Howard with him to Silvia Odio's apartment along with Lee Harvey Oswald -- instead, Loran Hall took a DIFFERENT person along, for whom we have no identification. This person looked Mexican, had shiny black hair, was hairy all over his body, spoke Spanish fluently, and some English, and was 5'7" and 170 pounds. This doesn't remind me of Quarito at this time. I am willing to guess that Loran Hall took a DIFFERENT person along with himself and Lee Harvey Oswald to visit Silvia Odio on the final week of September 1963. Yet it seems to me that Loran Hall is still a suspect for two solid reasons: (1) the FBI picked him up quickly in this case; and (2) Loran Hall confessed that he was at Silvia Odio's doorstep during the final week of September 1963. So, that would explain why Silvia Odio was unable to identify Larry Howard from any photos the FBI showed her -- but it would not explain why she failed to identify Loran Hall from photos. Either that, or Silvia Odio was lying to save her life. The combination of Hall and Howard was fitting, because they were so often seen together, and because (except for height and weight) Howard fit Odio's description well. The 'war names' that Hall and Howard used were 'Lorenzo' and 'Alonzo' respectively. This is also different from 'Leopoldo' and 'Angelo,' except for the initials. This also remains an issue. It also remains significant that the HSCA Deposition of Silvia Odio was not published with the HSCA 12 volumes. Best regards, --Paul Trejo

Regarding the opening point of the thread, Gerry Patrick Hemming offered yet another opinion on the JFK murder; this time to Greg Burnham. This time, Hemming claimed that E. Howard Hunt was not a central player in the JFK murder, because he was, as Hemming suggests, past his prime. This corresponds roughly with the findings of Larry Hancock (SWHT\2010) in which the planners and executors of the JFK murder were only the most capable paramilitary operators in the CIA, at the very peak of their skills and powers. Those persons whom Larry Hancock names in the JFK murder are roughly the same as those identified by former FBI Agent Wesley Swearingen in his 2013 whistle-blower book, To Kill a President. The CIA, the Bay of Pigs personnel -- their Mafia financiers -- those who failed so long to kill Fidel Castro -- finally turned their frustration upon JFK. Larry Hancock, further, still reserves an open spot for Gerry Patrick Hemming, who was still young enough to be a paramilitary operative. Insofar as Hemming claims to know who wasn't in the central planning of the JFK murder, he implies (without saying so) that he also knew who was in the central planning. Furthermore, Hemming admitted to A.J. Weberman that he did play an active role, i.e. he telephoned Lee Harvey Oswald on 11/21/1963 and offered to pay Oswald double the market price for his Mannlicher-Carcano rifle, if he would only bring it to the TSBD building the next morning, and leave it on the upper floor for the secret buyer. Given that Hemming told the truth to Weberman, then he was probably closer to the central planning of the JFK murder than E. Howard Hunt was -- and that is why Hemming felt justified to make these remarks about Hunt to Greg Burnham. Best regards, --Paul Trejo

These are all excellent questions, Tommy, and of course the answer is unclear. I'll offer an amateur guess based on Spanish ESL psychology: In the Spanish culture, IMHO, the more important persons are regarded as "taller". This is a family oriented culture, and the Father is the most important and always the tallest (in the ideal and colloquial world). Then the mother (while the kids are young) until the oldest male is taller than she, The oldest sibling is often the next most important (after they surpass their mother in height). It may seem very ancient and agricultural, but I've seen these language patterns before. Size means importance. (We see this in ancient art, for example -- the Pharaoh or King is represented as enormous, and the people are represented as half-size. Size meant importance.) Remember, too, that the entire world was watching the LEE HARVEY OSWALD drama. Oswald was arguably the most important person of the whole year. So, it might be that Silvia Odio recollected Larry Howard as less important as the others: 1. Because Larry Howard hardly spoke 2. Because Larry Howard was not good-looking 3. Because Larry Howard was neither a Cuban nor an American 4. Because Larry Howard hardly spoke 5. Because Larry Howard was not LEE HARVEY OSWALD Silvia Odio's testimony also suggests -- "I don't pay attention to how many inches tall a person is!! I can give you my best recollection, but don't hold me to this." She wasn't measuring the men as they stood before her. She wasn't guessing their weight, either. Also, women lie about their own weight all the time, so it's harder to establish weight under those circumstances. What do Spanish women notice? i. They notice faces. ii. They notice clothes. iii. They notice race and ethnicity iv. They notice good-looking versus plain-looking v. They notice youth versus old age. One might argue that Spanish women would only notice height or weight if it was VERY noticable. I think that Silvia Odio casually tossed out heights and weights because they weren't precise to her (as she admitted) and she was pressured to say SOMETHING. I am more interested in her recollection of their faces, and the words they said. Now -- Gaeton Fonzi will not presume that Leopoldo was Loran Hall. That's fine. BUT WHY DID LORAN HALL CONFESS AT FIRST? AND WHY DID THE FBI PICK UP LORAN HALL ALMOST IMMEDIATELY? Best regards, --Paul Trejo

Douglas and Tommy, I don't suggest that E. Howard Hunt was washed-up as a CIA Agent for EVERYTHING, but only for paramilitary operations. As you correctly note, E.H. Hunt was now writing biographies of important people -- that's what one does when one is set out to pasture. E.H. Hunt was a fairly good GHOST WRITER -- so he was used for his strengths. I think that Gary Patrick Hemming's observation remains plausible -- for PARAMILITARY OPERATIONS, Hunt was no longer feasible. Also, Marita Lorenz only said that Hunt brought MONEY to support an illegal gun-running operation. There is no absolute proof that he was involved more deeply than that -- although he might have heard rumors. Hunt himself called himself a "bench warmer" in the JFK plot, and that can mean many things. Insofar as Paramilitary Planning is on a need-to-know basis, and many pawns in the game likely believed that they were still pursuing a new Raid on Cuba -- there is plausible reason to accept Gary Patrick Hemming's verdict on E.H. Hunt. Further, it's noted that Richard Helms placed E.H. Hunt in a CIA Front in 1969 -- but that is more of a DESK job. It requires the skill of spy, no doubt, but I would note that it isn't a direct part of PARAMILITARY OPERATIONS. So, I'm not saying that E.H. Hunt was washed up as an "Agent" generically, but regarding PARAMILITARY OPERATIONS, I think that Hemming probably makes a good point. This then tends to marginalize Hunt's "deathbed confession" because Hemming puts him farther away from the Center of the Planning than we often imagine. In other words, Hunt's "deathbed confession" probably contains more speculation than fact. Granted, his guesses were clearly "educated," but today perhaps we can see that they were also removed from the center of the activity. Best regards, --Paul Trejo <edit typos>

Tommy, all this is intriguing. By the way, to see a picture of Loran Hall with hair "receding at the temples" and also a "full Castro beard," you can see these by scanning through this YouTube audio of Loran Hall's 1963 speech, "Cuba Betrayed." Here is the URL: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6daWtQYlydQ] Silvia Odio was not going to volunteer this information to the FBI -- but she had already told it to two people (not counting her family) before the JFK murder, namely, her confidante, Lucille Connell, and her psychiatrist, Dr. Burton Einspruch. Connell was the one to alert the FBI on the day after the JFK murder, so Silvia Odio had no moral choice but to tell what she knew. The FBI and the HSCA also questioned Dr. Einspruch and generically concluded that Silvia Odio was credible. So did Gaeton Fonzi. But there was other evidence -- she had written to her father a few days later, who was in a Cuban prison. It was months before she received a reply -- because that is how Cuba prisons did business back then. Her father's reply (in December) confirmed her story. Gaeton Fonzi was satisfied that Silvia Odio told the truth; and also she is intelligent, educated, and level-headed (under her life circumstances). I don't doubt her. She SAW Lee Harvey Oswald at her doorstep during the final week of September 1963, accompanied by two Latinos -- Leopoldo and Angelo. The only real question is about the actual identity of Leopoldo and Angelo. I probably would not have guessed it was Loran Hall or Lawrence Howard -- Silvia Odio never said it was them. But the FBI picked up Loran Hall (for some bizarre reason) and Loran Hall confessed that he was at her doorstep around the time in question! That, to me, is rock-solid evidence. I'm convinced -- based on that alone. NOW -- the details also begin to fit in. The lies of Loran Hall and Larry Howard are predictable -- given that Silvia Odio's story is actually TRUE. With these extra pieces -- involving Celio Alba and William Seymour, the details come to light, and the pieces ACTUALLY FIT. As for the license plate -- One could easily use paint to make a "1" an "F" and to make a "7" look like a "1" from a distance. In any case, I agree with you that we have a match on the car and plates. As for the height of Larry Howard -- it is fairly easy for somebody to "fudge" about both his height and his weight, when it comes to sports or to the military. More evidence is needed. According to Harry Dean, Larry Howard was definitely shorter than Loran Hall. Also, in the Spanish ESL idiom, the word "short" can often be used to mean "shorter". Finally -- I've been trying like a madman to find this document that you cited: "Deposition of Silvia Odio, May 2, 1978, House Select Committee on Assassinations, p. 6 (J.F.K. Documents 009088)". I scoured all 12 HSCA volumes and realized that it is not contained in them! That floored me. Why is it missing from those volumes? It's cited in those volumes, but not included in them. "Got to be good-looking 'cause he's so hard to see!" Best regards, --Paul Trejo

Well Tommy, I have a problem with third-party summarizations of testimony, as I've seen too many errors in the "translation" so to speak. Gaeton Fonzi is generally superior in his summarization, yet there was also another clerk between Silvia and Fonzi, as I recall. So, I will make an effort to get Silvia's actual HSCA deposition/testimony. (I can't leave my desk this afternoon, as I'm on an Oracle support call; but I'll try to locate Odio's deposition this weekend.) I've seen "translation" errors especially in cases where English is a second language, and Silvia Odio was definitely on the defensive with her own ESL. It seems to me that "red" could also have the meaning of "sporty" or "hot rod" or "hot" or "rod" or other variants -- so, again, I really want to see Odio's actual wording in her deposition/testimony. I thoroughly agree that the "red versus blue" issue is a deal-breaker regarding Loran Hall's car -- and it seriously weakens the likelihood of Hall and Howard being the two Latinos at her door. Yet even if it was a red car -- it still doesn't ELIMINATE Hall and Howard as suspects in my mind -- because we still have a little information about their resources in Dallas. For example, Silvia saw no trailer, and Larry Howard and Celio Alba both said they had a trailer in Dallas. So -- there remains a chance that the Blue Oldsmobile was being serviced somewhere, and some rich John Bircher (like Lester Logue, Robert Morris or some friend of General Walker) let them use his car for their "fund-raising" jaunt to Silvia Odio's. In other words -- just because it wasn't Loran Hall's car, doesn't prove that it wasn't Loran Hall at Odio's doorstep. We know that Loran Hall had JBS contacts in Dallas, because he was quickly bailed out of jail in the following month when he and William Seymour were arrested for possession of pep pills in Dallas. Other names that also came up in Loran Hall's recollections of Dallas to Jim Garrison were: Lester Logue, Robert Morris, Gerry Patrick Hemming, Ex-General Edwin Walker and Warren Reynolds. Warren Reynolds, by the way, worked on a Used Car lot, and had many cars at his disposal, day and night. Reynolds was allegedly one of General Walker's boyfriends, according to Loran Hall. So, yes, I'll dig further into the linguistic aspect of Silvia Odio's claim to have seen a "red car" at her apartment during the final week of September 1963, when Lee Harvey Oswald appeared at her doorstep with two Latinos. Best regards, --Paul Trejo

I didn't get the impression that Hemming considered H.L. Hunt a "Hollywood type" for his entire career -- but only during the time of the JFK murder. As Hemming said, Hunt was already writing novels for years before the JFK murder. In other words, -- Hunt was a has-been, washed-up -- he had seen his best days in the cloak-and-dagger work of paramilitary operations. It was on that basis, Hemming suggests, that H.L.Hunt would never even have been invited to a planning meeting of any sort of paramilitary operations in 1963. Also, there's an exposure when people get income from writing novels -- they might want to blab more than is prudent (even if they change all the names to protect the innocent.) So, Hemming's opinion stands up well, IMHO. This is an important observation by Hemming -- because it directly challenges Hunt's so-called "deathbed confession" which is already famous. Best regards, --Paul Trejo

Well, Ernie, your prejudice gets in the way of clear thinking yet again. 1-2. You ask how Grapp would know about the existence of Harry Dean? For one thing, Wesley Grapp was once an FBI in Chicago, was he not? Further, he was an ambitious FBI agent -- and the big news in Chicago in 1960-1961 was the FPCC in Chicago. Now, even if Wesley Grapp wasn't officially assigned to the FPCC case, there was nothing to keep him from being personally involved, by reading the case files. We see this in the case of former FBI Agent Wesley Swearingen (who wrote two books on the topic) who admits that even though he was never assigned to the JFK murder investigation, he still took a personal interest and sought as many internal FBI records on the topic that he could obtain. Given that Wesley Grapp was at least as ambitious as Wesley Swearingen, then we have no problem considering that Grapp knew about the existence of Harry Dean in 1960-1961 when they both lived in Chicago. Not that they met in Chicago -- but it is at least possible that Wesley Grapp heard about Harry Dean in those days, and possibly read his case files (the ones that were recently destroyed by the Chicago FBI, by their own admission). So, that answers that question. 3. Now -- why would Grapp want to meet with Harry, even given the tremendous bias that Los Angeles FBI agents expressed about Harry? Simple -- if Wesley Grapp had previous knowledge about Harry Dean, from Chicago FBI files, then he knew more about Harry Dean than any Los Angeles FBI agent ever knew. 4. You ask if I "honestly believe that FBI Special Agents just willy-nilly traveled around the country and inserted themselves into local matters at any field office of their choosing." Well, Wesley Swearingen, a former FBI Agent, says in his book that he did exactly that. So, it's not hard to imagine at all. What you call "common sense," Ernie, really seems to be nothing more than a rigid, bureaucratic fixation. 5. When I say that local field offices were "decentralized," I'm referring to the writings of Wes Swearingen. I don't need to contact him (further than I have) to double-check what he clearly published in black and white. For example, contrary to your rigid, bureaucratic fixation in which an FBI agent would never give money to an FBI Informant without proper paperwork cleared with FBI Headquarters, Wesley Swearingen clearly stated that FBI Agents would reguarly give money to local Informers -- and as long as the amount was under $400 a month, they didn't need to even tell FBI Headquarters about it! So, that's a complete contradiction of your claim, Ernie, and that's from Wes Swearingen himself, in his book To Kill a President, chapter 39. Also, even though Wesley Swearingen said that FBI SAC's never performed field work, Wesley Grapp was not always a SAC! 6. Also, as for Empirical Evidence -- I base all my theories on Empirical Evidence -- yet I know that Empirical Evidence is generally much larger than most people presume that it is. (That's why I keep an open mind about my theories.) You like to say you use Empirical Evidence, Ernie, but you jump to conclusions with only a little bit of Empirical Evidence -- and you don't wait until you've see all the Empirical Evidence. That's the major flaw in your methodology. WIth utmost sincerity, --Paul Trejo

Ernie, you have a lot of nerve to call anybody else "snotty," You yourself are one of the most insulting writers I've ever seen on the Internet. Sincerely, --Paul Trejo

Actually, Tommy, I agree that fear was a motive of Silvia Odio, once she realized that the Warren Commission had no intention of protecting her -- and instead would prefer her to withdraw her claims as soon as possible. Loran Hall said he finally spoke to Jim Garrison in 1968 because of two assassination attempts he personally survived on his own life. Harry Dean says that Larry Howard told Harry that he wanted to kill Loran Hall, who was a "big mouth." It seems likely that both Larry Howard and William Seymour tried to kill Loran Hall for putting so much heat on them with regard to the Silvia Odio incident. These were violent men. They had young families to support, and their job was to be mercenary soldiers against Fidel -- at a time when the USA passed Laws (Neutrality Act) to protect Cuba from Raids. They were being pinched, and the last thing they wanted was light and publicity. It seems to me that insofar as Loran Hall called Silvia Odio out of the blue a few days after the "Odio Incident," then he clearly was able to get her phone number with no problem. Once it became clear that she was going to talk to the FBI about the two Latinos at her door with Lee Harvey Oswald, it seems likely that both Loran Hall and Larry Howard would call her up and threaten to kill her if she identified them. This -- to me -- is a viable explanation for the fact that Silvia Odio could identify no photographs the FBI showed her -- but within a couple of days the FBI had Loran Hall in the interview chair. (By the way, Loran Hall's hair was receding at the temples -- he had lots of hair, but it was beginning to recede at the temples in 1963. We have photographs.) So, yes, Silvia Odio would be frightened to quickly identify these men, and her memory would be reticent regarding various details, including the car. Also -- Gaeton Fonzi references Silvia Odio's HSCA deposition (Doc 009088, May 2, 1978) but I've never been able to find an online version -- not even at the Mary Ferrell site. I wonder if I can scan it in from hardcopy -- I'll look into that. Finally -- we need to consider the English/Spanish colloquial aspect of Silvia Odio's testimony. There are psychological factors, cultural one-upmanship, and so on, to consider when interviewing somebody whose second language is English. First-language idioms -- even figures of speech -- are often issues in such interviews. Best regards, --Paul Trejo

Well, Ernie, the PDF you provided was about an FBI agent named Leo Laughlin who started in 1935 with a salary of $3,200 and retired in 1962 with a salary of $19,500. That's not really relevant here. I think you're hoping to find a similar report about FBI agent Wesley Grapp, but you haven't found it yet. By the way, just because Wesley Grapp was an FBI SAC in Miami from about 2/1963 to 3/1964, that in no way makes it impossible for Harry Dean to have met with him in Los Angeles in early 1964, as he claims. Just because Grapp wasn't assigned to the Los Angeles FBI until March 1964, that in no way precludes the possibility of Grapp traveling to Los Angeles from Miami. You might object that this goes against FBI procedure -- but as former FBI agent Wesley Swearingen alluded, the field offices were more decentralized than one might imagine. Now -- you say you're looking for an FBI "Assignment History" belonging to Wesley Grapp, so we gather you haven't yet found it. When you find it, I hope it contains more detail than the mere locational salary history posted within the PDF you found on Leo Laughlin above. Sincerely, --Paul Trejo