Ron Ecker

If Hunt was the tramp, what did he do with his ears? I know that Hunt was in disguise, but reducing the size of one's ears seems more like magic. Except for the ears, the tramp looks more like Hunt than Holt. I don't see the strong resemblance to Holt, except in a photo where Holt deliberately had his mouth hanging open to imitate the tramp. Holt was also younger-looking than the tramp, and would seem to have had no reason to disguise himself someway to look older as Hunt could have done. The fact that two of the three tramps remarkably resemble the known cohorts Hunt and Sturgis in disguise would seem to make it statistically imperative that that's who they were. But again there's the ears. Are we to assume that these photos also were tampered with, to get rid of Hunt's ears? On Gus Abrams, I have only seen a photo of him as a decrepit old man. Who is to say how closely the tramp resembles Abrams in 1963? A vintage photo please. Ron

Steve, Thanks for the source on that. As a principal source on the Zapruder film story I've been using Wrone's book The Zapruder Film. Zapruder's partner Erwin Schwartz was with them at Kodak, and told Wrone that Sorrels left to go to DPD while the film was still being processed, and that Sorrels told Zapruder as he was leaving, "If it comes out get me a copy" (p. 22). In addition, the Kodak lab production supervisor Philip Chamberlain told Wrone that those who viewed the film at Kodak in the small projection room were Zapruder, Schwartz, Harry McCormick, and Kodak staff. No Sorrels (and also no Willises) (p. 23). In a sworn affidavit Chamberlain even narrowed it down further (and falsely?), stating that the film "was not shown to any person other than employees of said laboratory" (p. 23). I'll have to revisit Sorrels's testimony, but while he said that he left to go to DPD and told Zapruder he would contact him later to get the pictures, he may not have actually stated whether he saw the film or not before leaving. So it's possible that Sorrels did see the film, as the Willises recall, and that Schwartz's memory is faulty and that Chamberlain was busy stretching the truth in general about the film viewing. According to Sorrels's testimony, he simply told Fritz upon arriving at Fritz's office, "Captain, I would like to talk to this man when I have an opportunity." Fritz said, "You can talk to him right now," and Fritz "just took him on back around to the side of Captain Fritz' office." Sorrels apparently did not ask to talk to Oswald alone, Fritz just took them somewhere out of courtesy or whatever. And Sorrels states that even then there were FBI agents and detectives all over the place. Sorrels was expressly guessing at the time he arrived at DPD from Kodak, and was off by more than an hour: Mr. SORRELS - I was informed that an FBI agent had called the office and said that Captain Fritz of the Homicide Bureau had been trying to get in touch with me, that he had a suspect in custody. Mr. STERN - About what time was that? Mr. SORRELS - That would be fairly close to 2 o'clock, I imagine. Mr. STERN - About an hour after you had returned---- Mr. SORRELS - Yes. I would say that it was at least that long--maybe a little bit longer. Sorrels spent part of the time between 3 and 6, when Hosty saw him, searching for Howard Brennan. Mr. STERN - Did anything else transpire between that time (his interrogation of Oswald after 3) and the Friday night showup? Mr. SORRELS - I did not talk to Oswald again, and I was around there. When I contacted Washington, I was informed that Inspector Kelley was being directed to be there, and he would be there later on that evening, that they had caught him out on the road, and he would come there to help out. I also got information to Captain Fritz that I had this witness, Brennan, that I had talked to, and that I would like very much for him to get a chance to see Oswald in a lineup. And Captain Fritz said that would be fine. So I instructed Special Agent Patterson, I believe it was, after I had located Brennan---had quite a difficult time to locate him, because he wasn't at home. And they finally prevailed upon his wife to try to help me locate him, and she, as I recall it, said that she would see if she could locate him by phone. I called her, I believe, the second time and finally got a phone number and called him and told him we would like for him to come down and arrange for him to meet one of our agents to pick him up at the place there. And when they came down there with him, I got ahold of Captain Fritz and told him that the witness was there, Mr. Brennan. He said, "I wish he would have been here a little sooner, we just got through with a lineup." Ron

Wim and John, I agree with you completely about the lack of outrage. This is a mysterious phenomenon not only with regard to the JFK assassination but to the lies and deceptions of 9/11. Part of it is no doubt the fact that America now basically has a state-controlled media. But I fail to see how Jennings, Rather, and Brokaw can suppress common sense. We have the Internet, but so-called CT sites appear to be marginalized, fringe groups talking to each other, i.e. preaching to the choir. One theory I read a while back about the the lack of outrage was offered by a columnist (unfortunately I forget which one) who said that the American people have simply grown tired of democracy, that is, they are tired of bearing the responsibilities that go with it. Thus the old adage, attributed to Thomas Jefferson, that "The price of liberty is eternal vigilance" no longer means anything to them. They want someone else, the government, to take care of things. Well, the government certainly is. And this is why, IMO, we are living in the decline and fall of the American democratic experiment. Ron

Al, Would you agree that anti-Castro Cubans (e.g. the Dark Complected Man) and Mafia figures (e.g. Jim Braden) were in Dealey Plaza that day, playing whatever minor roles they might have been assigned, basically to have them available as potential fall guys or "false sponsors"? If that's what happened, I would say that such use of them worked well, since they have provided false leads for 41 years. Ron

Steve, I don’t believe the 30-minute call was to Ruth Paine because of her description of the call (which she thought was around 9:30 pm): Mr. JENNER - What did he say and what did you say? Mrs. PAINE - He said, "Marina, please," in Russian. . . . And I would be fairly certain that I answered him in English. I said she was not there, that I had a notion about where she might be, but I wasn't at all certain. That I would try to find out. . . . He felt irritated at not having been able to reach her. And he wanted me to-- Mr. JENNER - Did he sound irritated? Mrs. PAINE - Yes; he sounded just a slight edge to his voice. And he wanted me to deliver a message to her that he thought she should be at my house. Mr. JENNER - And he so instructed you? Mrs. PAINE - Yes. Mr. JENNER - That is what he said? Mrs. PAINE - Yes. That was so far as I remember, the entire conversation. . . . Mr. JENNER - . . . Was there any conversation between you and Lee Oswald in the evening conversation to which you reported to him your inability to reach Mr. Abt? Mrs. PAINE - I do not specifically recall. Mr. JENNER - Or the subject of Mr. Abt at all? Mrs. PAINE - I don't want to get into rationalization. I can judge that something was said but I do not recall it specifically. Mr. JENNER - Now, have you given the full extent of that conversation? Mrs. PAINE - To the best of my recollection. . . . Mr. JENNER - Was the assassination mentioned at all? Mrs. PAINE - No; it was not. Mr. JENNER - Was the shooting or murder of Officer Tippit mentioned? Mrs. PAINE - No. Mr. JENNER - You have given everything that was said in that conversation as best you are able to recall it at the moment? Mrs. PAINE - That is right. I then tried the only thing I knew to do, to try to reach Marina. That certainly doesn’t sound like a 30-minute call. It’s possible, of course, that they talked about other things that Paine did not want to mention to the commission. Oswald might have told her, for example, that he now knew why she had helped get him that job at the TSBD. That could have led to a very long discussion. Or it’s possible that Oswald made more than one call, and the call to Paine was as short as she implies in her testimony. Ron

Steve, Sorrels simply had the time wrong, saying he thought he went to DPD around 2 pm but he said that it could have been later. In fact it must have been sometime after 3 when he left Kodak to go to DPD upon learning a suspect was in custody. He entered the Oswald interrogation while it was in progress, but given the vagueness of Fritz and the others about the SS agent present it could have in fact been Sorrels they were remembering. (Boyd says "I think there was a Secret Service man present," and Sims says, "Secret Service agents talked to Oswald some more," which could be an allusion to Sorrels' late arrival.) Willis had to be mistaken because Sorrels wasn't there when the film was ready to view at Kodak. Sorrels had left for DPD. Do you know where I can find Willis's statement about watching the Z film? I'm sure that he did watch it at Kodak because his wife testified to watching it there in the Shaw trial. But this means a false affidavit was signed by the Kodak lab production supervisor Philip Chamberlain, who stated in the affidavit that no one but lab employees viewed the film at Kodak. (Those who actually viewed it there, according to Wrone from a Chamberlain interview, were Zapruder, his partner Erwin Schwarz, newsman Harry McCormick, who had first informed Sorrels about Zapruder's film, and Kodak staff.) So I'm interested in exactly what Willis had to say and how he got to view the film. Sorrels said that he was "around there" (DPD) after talking to Oswald, but he testified "I don't recall talking to Mr. Hosty at all down there." Sorrels said that it was SA Patterson who talked to Hosty about Oswald. Ron

Jack, Thanks. When I was looking for the info in his book, I completely forgot that it has a CD with it. I'll have to check it out to see what other goodies are on it. (I knew that the "Nov 22/23-55" was referring to something that I didn't understand. However, the 247 footnote still appears to be in error in citing the Sims testimony - see the reference to it on page 936 - as that testimony makes no reference to the call in question.) I might as well point out a more serious error that I've come across in using John's book as a reference (I don't know when I'll get the chance to actually read the whole tome). This is in reference to Steve Thomas's question in another thread about who the Secret Service agent was who was supposedly present at Oswald's first and second interrogations on 11/22. Armstrong states, "Captain Fritz, Sims, Boyd, and Secret Service Inspector (Thomas J.) Kelley were present during Oswald's 1st interrogation (p. 878) . . . Captain Fritz, SA Hosty, SA Bookhout, Secret Service Inspector Kelley, and Secret Service agent Forrest Sorrels were waiting for Oswald when DPD detectives returned him to Fritz's office after the (4:35 pm) lineup was over" (p. 892). It was impossible for SS Inspector Kelley to have been present. He testified that he was in Louisville, KY on 11/22, and arrived in Dallas that evening after being ordered there by Chief Rowley. Kelley states in his written report (WR p. 626) that he attended his first Oswald interrogation at 10:35 am on 11/23. BTW I like the way that Arlen Specter corrected SS Inspector Kelley during his testimony about JFK's wounds (Kelley had inspected the triple overpass and concluded that the throat wound could not have been caused by a shot from the overpass): Mr. KELLEY. From the evidence that has been shown previously, the wound in the throat was lower on the President's body than the wound in the shoulder, and---- Mr. SPECTER. By the wound in the shoulder do you mean the wound in the back of the President's neck, the base of his neck? Mr. KELLEY. Yes. Ron

Debra, Thanks. Wow, both figures are quite impressive, 50,500 pages of docs, for $400. I'd certainly be willing to chip in with others for the CD set (e.g., 20 people, $20 bucks apiece), if someone wanted to keep the set and take doc requests. (It's incompatible with Windows XP, so that would eliminate me as the set keeper.) Ron

To me the most interesting thing is the large hole in the back of JFK's head which several people including medical doctors saw but which wasn't there. This is one of the great paradoxes of all time, and perhaps the most remarkable mass hallucination ever to occur, particularly since the hallucination was not mass in the sense of a single occurrence observed by many, but rather occurred at different moments to different people, some of them halfway across the country from each other. This is truly baffling and would take a Peter Jennings to explain. Ron

Steve, This starts to boggle the mind. George Bouhe's address was 4740 Homer Street. According to the Mary Ferrell database, Bouhe lived across the street from Jack Ruby, who lived at 4727 Homer. When did Ruby live on Homer Street? Ron

I think it's safe to assume that as a result of this 30-minute call, ending about 8:30 pm and no doubt monitored, the authorities knew who Oswald would try to call later that night (the cut-out John Hurt in Raleigh). Apparently knowing what they needed to know, they accordingly instructed Mrs. Swinney not to complete the Raleigh call, which she didn't. BTW Oswald had at least two lists of numbers, since the two Hurt numbers were not on the list he was carrying when he died. Where was the other list? He wouldn't throw it away, he would have kept the Hurt numbers until he reached Hurt.

Steve, Thanks, I checked but the log shown is for 11/22. In any case, Popplewell basically admits in his affidavit that he didn't write Oswald down on the log for his 11/23 30-minute call, so the log wouldn't show us anything. If they were crossed out to the extent that only the CH-7 was legible, then obviously someone (either Oswald or the FBI, who wound up with the list) did not want anyone to know what or whose number it was. This would indicate that this was the party to whom Oswald spoke for 30 minutes, if we are to believe Abt who testified that he was out of town that weekend and did not receive any phone call from Oswald. And this party was in Dallas, as it had the same telephone exchange (CH-7) as TSBD employee L.R. Viles (CH-7-3854), who according to a list of TSBD employees on 11/22 (page 389 in LaFontaine) lived at 3210 St. Croix. Ron

I've read that theory about the Sinatra kidnapping and it may be true. But what Solon was apparently suggesting is that the Dallas newspaper was frantic to get the colonel's kidnapping reported at the same time as the assassination, with the odd notion that the kidnapping would be an even bigger Dallas headline that day than the U.S. president being shot down in our fair city. If the colonel's kidnapping was such a big story in its own right, why doesn't anyone remember it? It obviously happened, since the FBI report on Solon talks about it as though it were common knowledge. Ron

I didn't say that Marcello killed JFK. But until someone explains to me why Ruby made all those unusual phone calls to mobsters including Marcello men, and who gave him no choice but to shoot Oswald ("There are no alternatives to Mob directives" - Jim Marrs), and what Jim Braden was doing at Dealey Plaza and in LA on a certain night 5 years later, I will believe there was Mafia involvement in the plot, and that any investigation that would ignore this factor was less than a full and honest investigation, though we do owe Garrison a debt for uncovering as much as he did or was allowed to. Ron

Dave, Thanks. The first thing I did was a Google search after I couldn't find the doc in the WC materials online. I found nothing on the web search. But I didn't know about Google Group search. I used that a few minutes ago and found the usenet post with the affidavit right away. One learns something new every day. Google Group search is good to know about. Ron

From FBI interview report on assassination earwitness John J. Solon: Mr. SOLON advised he also addressed a post card, dated December 17, 1963, to the Southwestern Bell Telephone Company. He said his comments on this post card were only his opinion that someone at the "Dallas Morning News" must have called Caracas, Venezuela, so that the kidnapping of the U.S. Army Colonel could have been reported at the same time of the assassination of President KENNEDY to push the news of his death off the front pages. Mr. SOLON said he felt that if such a call was made, the Southwestern Bell Telephone Company should report this to the FBI and that if this was not done, then this was "treason". http://jfkassassination.net/russ/exhibits/ce2105.htm Does anyone know the details about a U.S. Army colonel being kidnapped (in Venezuela?) on or about 11/22/63? It would be idiotic to think that any such story would push the assassination of a U.S. president off the front pages. But it would make sense that a U.S. Army colonel might be kidnapped (or worse) around 11/22/63 if he had foreknowledge of the assassination and might be a risk to act upon it. Ron

Dave, Thanks. As I asked also on Lancer, where or how did you find it? It's interesting that he says he failed to write Oswald down on the telephone log, and that the FBI was interested in knowing about a number found on Oswald when he died. Ron

Researchers are rightly curious about the “Raleigh call” that Oswald tried unsuccessfully to make from jail to a John Hurt in Raleigh, NC around 10:45 pm on Saturday, November 23, 1963. But there is a perhaps more significant call that Oswald made around 8 pm that evening, because that call apparently went through: Oswald talked to someone for about 30 minutes. Who did he talk to, and why have the records of this phone call been suppressed? On page 74 of Chief Curry’s book Retired Dallas Police Chief Jesse Curry Reveals His Personal JFK Assassination File, there is a notarized “Affidavit of Any Fact” signed by Thurber T. Lord and dated August 20, 1964. It reads as follows: “May (sic) name is Thurber T. Lord. I entered the Dallas Police Department on November 11, 1942. I was promoted to the rank of Lieutenant of Police and assigned to the Service Division as Jail Lieutenant on March 29, 1960. I was on duty in this capacity on November 22, and 23, 1963, working 2:30 p.m. to 10:30 p.m. About 4:00 p.m. on November 23, 1963, Detective M.G. Hall of Homicide and Robbery Bureau called me and stated that Lee Harvey Oswald had requested permission to use the telephone and told me it would be o.k. I called J.L. Popplewell who was on duty on the fifth floor and told him to put Oswald on the phone. Popplewell called back within twenty or thirty minutes and said that Oswald had not been able to complete his call. He said Oswald told him that his party would not be in until later in the evening. I relayed this information to Detective Hall, who asked that Oswald be allowed to use the phone again at that time. I went to the fifth floor about 8:00 o’clock and told Popplewell to let Oswald use the phone again if he wanted to use it. Popplewell put Oswald in the telephone booth and was standing near by. I called to Popplewell and told him that Oswald was entitled to make his call privately. Popplewell was advised to keep Oswald in view but to stay back a reasonable distance. Oswald was in the telephone booth about thirty minutes, making his call and then talking to his party. After Oswald completed his call he was returned to his cell by J.L. Popplewell.” I have been unable to find this Lord affidavit anywhere in the online Warren Commission volumes. I also did not find it in the DPD online JFK collection. On the Nook of Eclectic Inquiry website, there is a list (link below) entitled “Warren Commission, Dallas Police Department Documents,” which identifies the affidavit of Thereby (sic) T. Lord as CD No. 1444d. There is also a J.L. Popplewell affidavit identified as CD No. 1444g. Where are these documents? Also listed are affidavits by Arthur E. Eaves (CD 1444e) and Buel T. Beddingfield (CD 1444f). Both the Eaves and Beddingfield docs relate to phone calls that Oswald made or attempted to make earlier in the day, and both are found online in the WC materials. But what happened to the Lord and Popplewell docs relating to the 8:00 p.m. call? Also listed as CD 1444c is “Telephone sheets on prisoner’s telephone calls for November 22, 23, and 24, 1963.” Where is this document? Doc list: http://www.jmasland.com/cd-n.htm On page 930 of his book Harvey and Lee, John Armstrong states, “At 8:00 pm Oswald was again allowed to use the telephone. He spoke for about 30 minutes while officer J.L. Popplewell stood nearby. Curiously, there are no DPD telephone logs to identify the telephone number which Oswald called or the party with whom he spoke for 30 minutes.” Armstrong’s source on the 8:00 pm 30-minute phone call is cited (footnote 247) as the WC testimony of DPD officer Richard Sims. But there is no reference at all to such a call in the testimony of Sims, who did not see Oswald after 4:15 pm that day. Not only did Armstrong apparently make a mistake in his cite, but nowhere does he cite what must be the primary sources, the Lord and Popplewell affidavits. Did Armstrong not find them? And if he didn’t, what was his source? The copy of the Lord affidavit in Curry’s rare book? (Hopefully Jack White can find out Armstrong’s source if he doesn’t know, as he proofed Armstrong’s book.) Armstrong also states that “According to DPD telephone operators, two unidentified men were eavesdropping on Oswald’s conversation in the next room.” What is his source for that? I believe Armstrong is simply assuming this because the later “Raleigh call” was monitored by two unidentified men according to operator Treon. It may well be true about the 8:00 pm call as well, since the records of it have apparently been suppressed, but it’s an educated guess, not a known fact. In any case, Armstrong goes on to state the importance of the 8:00 pm call: “A 30 minute phone call by the accused assassin of the President of the United States could have been extremely important. It appears the people monitoring, and perhaps recording, Oswald’s phone call wanted the identity of the caller and the substance of the conversation kept secret. What happened to the police logs of this call, and who did Oswald talk to for 30 minutes?” I also wonder why Chief Curry chose to publish an apparently suppressed document in his 1969 book. (The caption says, “An affidavit indicating that Oswald was allowed to use the telephone several times at his request.”) I wonder if Curry was trying to tell us something. If so, the HSCA apparently did not pick up on it. I know of no interest that the HSCA showed in Oswald’s 30-minute phone conversation with a party or parties unknown. Ron

Is that pronounced "We cheat-a"? That does suggest some criminal activity.

John, Did Garrison realize this, as you say, or did he turn a blind eye to any organized crime involvement? I believe Hemming has implied that Carlos Marcello put Garrison up to the whole thing, the idea being to deflect attention away from Marcello and the Mafia. Not that I believe everything that Hemming says or implies, but the Garrison investigation indeed looks like a "limited hangout" (to borrow a Watergate term from John Ehrlichman), considering what Garrison himself had to say about Carlos Marcello. I looked up Marcello in the index of Garrison's book On the Trail of the Assassins. According to the index, Marcello is mentioned exactly once by Garrison in his book, in a footnote on page 337. (He is mentioned again in an afterword by Oglesby, not by Garrison.) Here is what Garrison says about Marcello: "I do not even know Carlos Marcello, the man with whom I am most frequently linked by my detractors. Nor, for that matter, did I ever in my years as district attorney come upon any evidence that he was the Mafia kingpin the Justice Department says he is." So is all that business about Carlos Marcello as a Mafia don just a myth? Clearly the New Orleans DA was of the "tomato salesman" school of thought on Marcello. Does this inspire your confidence in Garrison and his investigation? Ron

The plane crash in which Dorothy Hunt died is covered in detail in chapter 7 of the Yankee and Cowboy War by Charles Oglesby. It leaves little doubt that the plane was sabotaged. If anyone has refuted the evidence presented by Oglesby, I'd like to see it. The chapter also opens with an interesting quote from former Nixon White House aide Charles Colson (Time, July 8, 1974): "I don't say this to my people. They'd think I'm nuts. I think the CIA killed Dorothy Hunt."

According to Dean, Liddy volunteered to be murdered on a street corner. Unless your name was Dorothy Hunt, it looks like you couldn't get murdered over Watergate even if you wanted to. Ron

Wim, Thanks for the links. As best I can determine from them, Honest Joe was Rubin Goldstein (known to Forrest Sorrels as Ruby Goldstein, according to Sorrels' testimony), who ran Honest Joe's Pawn Shop. His brother Isaac "Rocky" Goldstein ran Rocky's Pawn Shop, which sold the gun to Hinckley. Two different pawn shops among several in the area. (A third brother Dave Goldstein apparently had a pawn shop too, Dave's Pawn Shop.) Ron

Wim, How do you know that Rocky's Pawn Shop and Honest Joe's are the same? Ron

Here's a link to a Lancer thread on Honest Joe. Apparently the crux of the matter is touched upon in Sorrels' testimony: Honest Joe took advantage of any opportunity to advertise. Driving his lettered truck around while people were waiting for a presidential motorcade was certainly a good way to get attention. http://www.jfklancerforum.com/dc/dcboard.p...ing_type=search