Richard Price

I am certainly no expert of the photography aspects of the case, but I agree with you on the "dodge and burn" procedure. I learned this in a college class on black & white photography years ago. I think I have seen evidence of this process on some of the other pictures in this case. It can be done to ehnance parts of a picture OR to decrease clarity, although this is seldom what the developer is trying for.

I also looked and found a clearer image on the internet and enlarged it on my computer screen. One thing strikes me on the package. There are many visual artifacts when doing this, but to me there appears to be some typewritten letters or words just above Irving Texas. The only thing I can make out is "Pal....", but it appears to be around a 6 or7 letter word with another word or more preceding it. The preceding word(s) are indecipherable and don't necessarily seem typed. On another note, I do seem to be able to read the postmark next to the "received in bad condition". It does appear to be IRVING, TEX. This marking along with the date on the postmark is the only thing indicating handling within the post office. The date, if legible would establish the count down to disposal, but there are no initials to designate who started the process. This could happen if the clerk were slipshod in their work as only the date and condition would have been absolutely necessary to start the countdown to disposal. There should still be additional markings for the prior handling, including a "postage due" stamp with an amount due.

In my experience, such a package would have a postmark, which this one does even though it is pretty much illegible. On this type of paper that is not uncommon. On this package if it followed normal mail handling, I would have expected to see an initial date stamped or written on it (to start the clock for sending it to dead letter since there was no return address). Then, if it was actually sorted to a carrier for delivery, I would expect his/her initials next to an endorsement either showing that it was attempted* or that there was no such number on the street shown/no such address within the delivery area (this would be done by a clerk). If a clerk had a street name with similar number sequences, normally the clerk who deciphered where the package should be attempted would write the assumed correct street name on the package so anyone later handling it would know the corrected address. The carrier receiving the package (already marked "postage due - with an amount due) would then attempt delivery and initial and date it. If the carrier knew there was no deliverable address at the clerk's deciphered guess, he would put his initials and an endorsement in order to return it to the clerk for disposition. This would be the end of handling at that office, unless the clerk handling the package was familiar with addresses in the local proximity. If they were, they might go above and beyond to try to get the package delivered by writing the city name where they think that particular street is located on the package. Normally that would mean putting a strikeout line through the city name it was being processed in (not making it illegible) and then writing the suspected city name below the original before sending it on to that city for attempted delivery. Now after all that, no I do not see any of the markings on this package that would reflect it having been through any of this process. Particularly, it should have been marked "Dead Letter" or something to that effect before being sent to that office/area. In order to move the mail efficiently, you cannot leave it to the next person along to figure out what you already know. You have to provide a road map for handling so that each person knows what has already happened to the package and avoid duplication of effort and needless reworking.

Michael, I agree with much of what you write. However, I think that RFK had strong suspicions and was trying to get to the bottom of what had happened. However he no longer had free reign to investigate and knew he was being watched by the very people (some of whom) he suspected of being behind the killing. He tamped down some of the initial (pardon the pun), rush to judgement because he, as a lawyer knew not to get out ahead of what he knew or could prove. Because of his well known animosity with both LBJ and Hoover (among others), he knew that overstepping in any way would be interpreted as part of this preexisting bad blood and deflected. He understood the axiom, cut the head off and the tail will not harm you. As Clint Eastwood would later say, "A man's got to know his limitations" and Robert Kennedy understood his limitations very well. He also understood the implications to national security, the operation of government and the implications on international policy and standing. Just my opinion, based on what I have read, watched and heard of his life.

With Irving and Dallas so close together, it would be hard to say. In the office in which I worked, there were at least four cities within approximately 10 miles. Mail from all would sometimes appear in our incoming mail (through local drop boxes or our office drop box). All the mail originating in our office was given a local postmark to show that it had originated in one of our depositories for mail. If it showed a destination of one of the four other localities, it would be sent to the nearest processing center and arrive at the destination post office the next day (normally). Once it had the origin postmark, it would not have received another, but would have been stamped with "postage due" or any other descriptive endorsement necessary, such as "NSN"- no such number, "NSA" - no such address and so on. Clerks would make these endorsements many times, as they/me had the street names and number range for those streets memorized for sortation purposes. Once the mail piece reached the carrier, they also could endorse the mail to show that the exact number was not valid for delivery, that the person named above the address was unknown, moved with no forwarding order, etc. All mail not delivered had to have an endorsement - it was a requirement for both clerks and carriers. They were not to allow undelivered mail to lie around without a marked reason for non delivery. It was a very serious thing in my days (1987-2017) and probably even more so in the older Post Office Dept. as it was far more militaristic in operation and in personnel.

Why not sweeten the pot with Jr., Eric and Giuliani.

I have not studied the "package" other than to read various comments in threads on the forum. If the address is taped onto the envelope, has this label ever been removed to reveal what is underneath? Once it was documented in its original condition, I would think this would be done to see if another address or information of any kind were under it. I definitely would have done this. I will also note that a package such as this would have had a date written on it when the carrier attempted delivery (absolutely standard procedure). This date establishes/starts the time clock for it being given a 2nd notice and establishes how long it will remain in the post office before being returned or in this case sent to the dead letter office. Handling of mail within the post office ALWAYS has a predetermined time frame for disposition unless delivered on the 1st attempt. As examples of this, when I worked at USPS, the following were the established protocols: 1) Express Mail (overnight service) - If not delivered on the 1st attempt, 2nd attempt the next day, return to sender on the 5th day after arrival if not picked up. 2) Certified mail/Registered mail - If not delivered on the 1st attempt, 2nd notice (not the mail piece) is delivered to the address, return to sender in 15 days (although earlier return can be requested through putting an endorsement on the piece prior to mailing). Other than Express Mail (which did not exist in 1963, these procedures were always followed. The actual mail piece remained filed in the post office after the 1s delivery attempt and was not removed other than to have a clerk write up the information on a notice which was delivered to the recipient. The carrier writes the initial date on the mail and starts the clock, a clerk pulls the mail requiring a 2nd notice based on this initial date. Once the clerk has written up the 2nd notice, they stamp/write the date of the 2nd notice and then the return date ON THE MAIL. At that point the mail stays in the file (by name or address) with other mail awaiting the return date. On the return date all the mail with the same return date are pulled by a clerk and it is then stamped "RETURN TO SENDER" and "unclaimed" is checked or if no stamp is available, written on the mail.

I will just add this, as additional information on the package. I cannot say for sure what the Post Office Dept. policies and procedures were in 1963 as I worked for the USPS after 1978. Most of the rules, regulations and policies remained the same or very similar, but some were updated or streamlined for more efficiency. During the time I worked at USPS, a package found in the mail without any postage was returned to the sender marked, "RETURNED FOR POSTAGE". If no return address was present, the package was marked "POSTAGE DUE" with the amount due written on the package. These markings were applied by an "accountable clerk" and then given to the carrier. All mail was sorted by clerks and then given to the carrier afterward. Any item sent to the accountable clerk was then assigned to the carrier to make delivery. This was done on a sign out sheet, thereby making the carrier "accountable" for either its delivery and collection of the fee(s) or its return and filing for later pick up by the customer to whom the carrier had left a notice giving the customer instructions as to how to obtain the referenced mail. Postal clerks were trained to watch particularly for mail bearing no, or too little postage as this could be a big revenue loser. This package exhibits none of the expected markings. People have noted the "received in damaged condition" stamp. This would be correct if the tear near the edge was present when the package was sorted. However, it was common practice to reseal/repair a damaged package in order that the contents would make it through delivery. The "damaged" stamp was to let the customer know that the package reached the post office already damaged. Since there is no "repair" in evidence, this makes me think that the package was opened by Inspector Holmes and the "damage" stamp was used afterward to cover the fact that he opened it. The fact that the other stamps are not present (RETURNED FOR POSTAGE/POSTAGE DUE) tells me that the package did not go through normal handling. As I said, mail handling was very meticulous and structured. Mail is sorted by clerks, any mail determined to be "accountable" was handled/marked and signed out to the responsible carrier. At the end of the carrier's day, they had to be cleared of accountable items by either having a delivery receipt (and any money required for postage due) or return the actual item to be filed by clerks for later pick up by the customer. A second notice was required to be made after 5 days (generally) so the customer knew the item was still available at the post office. Once the normal retention period for the type of mail was reached, the item was either return to sender, or bearing no return address, sent to the dead letter office for final disposition. In the dead letter branch the mail could then be opened and/or destroyed.

Not that my memory is that great, or that it is that big of a deal, but I think it was Roy Truly that may have mentioned the sweeping turn and something about maybe having to step back from his position.

Thank you, Joe.

Michael, this is all very far off the topic title, so I will comment only on the quoted section above. I believe that most on the forum are, like me, truth seekers. We have various political leanings and personal opinions on many things, but overall we seek truth by assessing ourselves of all available information and then digest it. We then try to the best of our abilities to sort out the mis-truths, half truths and garbage to find the underlying truth or as close as we can to it. I am afraid you have drank the kool-ade and it is you who is believing only one slant. Just remember, a good mathematician can make numbers say anything they want. It is all in the data set and how it is parsed. It is like the old question for which there is no correct answer other than silence: When did you stop beating your wife? Best of luck with your quandary. Don't be surprised when truth seekers reject a man who has no peers in non-truths and lies.

Perhaps, just perhaps, their god is filthy lucre. Money and the worship of it, no matter how it was gained.

I'll let it go at this, we have even more in common. My father was a truck driver/taxi driver for many years, loved driving and taught me much about safety on the roads. I, like you do not like driving (particularly long distances and unknown places) probably more so of late with my sight not being what it once was. Have a great time and enjoy every second! Hope to hear from you on the forum upon return. Take care, brother.

Jamey, we have much in common then. My wife uses a magnifying glass to read almost anything including her phone (which is one of the largest screens available). I wish you well on your trip and wish I could also find my way there. I am older (66 going on 67) than you and have been wanting to go for decades, but work, finances, family, etc. always got in the way. There is still a chance, but at least nowadays many visuals are available online to at least reference and feel like I'm there. Best of luck and I hope you get to see everything you can get access to.

Not to combative. I know I am in the extreme minority on this, but... If you have 20/20 vision or better (which unfortunately I do not anymore) look across at the 6th floor easternmost window of the Dal-Tex (the RED BRICK building where Brennan said he saw the gunman). In his deposition he said "standing" not "crouching".

I just read that the FBI has surveillance videos. I don't know if that is for the period of time they were conducting the raid or other time periods. I'm sure this will be spun to say they are now doctoring them to show what they want and deleting anything which would show FBI culpability (planting material). This is where the term "conspiracy theory" truly belongs. To those who will attribute anything which goes against their "team" to deep state agents who have it in for them/their team. It's the current Republican playbook. I and many others believe in a conspiracy in the murder of JFK and some, if not all the assassinated leaders in the 60's, but this belief is rooted in facts which do not fit the official narrative. This case is on it's face simple - It is illegal (ILLEGAL) for ANYONE to be in possession of classified information, particularly after they have been made aware of that fact.

Joe Biden. The Department of Justice is supposed to be independent unlike in the previous mis-administration. Ben, I'm sure you are aware that while they act as part of an administration and follow a broad direction espoused by the Executive branch, they would not, especially in this case involving the previous President want to involve the current President and present a "political" circus. They do not take day to day actions based on politics, though it can sometimes be shaded that way because of the overall attention and direction of the administration in power. This, along with their attempts to stay apolitical by not commenting on actions/prosecutions until they have been fleshed out leads to many assumptions (and you know the definition of assumption).

Thanks Steve. I can't seem to get around to all the available sites and retain/store information to cross reference. I think I had seen some of this before, but not compiled in one place. This is a good start on my study based on belief in what Howard Brennan wrote in his deposition on 11/22/63. The gunman Brennan saw would have been on the 6th floor which was (it appears) controlled by one man/company and could have been simply a shell or dummy corporation. The building appears according to this info to be possibly owned by Morris Jaffee, a man who had close ties to LBJ and what I didn't know before, the building could reasonably been called the Book Depository building (confusing witnesses and those searching records) if the recent move indeed occurred. I had always thought the other TSBD building was the warehouse somewhere around 2 blocks away.

You are correct on that! Nor does the "jet effect".

If I am not mistaken, that rifle view is from the roof.

Yes, I remember a topic which this was discussed pretty thoroughly. If I remember correctly the picture(s) were scrutinized as well as the angles and heights and I believe there was even a picture by the FBI/DPD or other agency taken simulating the view through a scope similar to what was done from the TSBD "sniper's lair". This was the first time I paid attention to the Dal-Tex other than reading about the various people arrested coming out of the building, which I thought was strange given that ALL attention seems to have been on the TSBD. This led me to start studying Howard Brennan and trying to follow his story from the very moments of the assassination on through. I know I am beating a dead horse here, but I believe Brennan, though even he did his best after the 1st day deposition to try to stick to the "official cover story". I am not trying to foist my gut feeling and reading of his personality and traits on anyone. I know I will not have people jumping on the bandwagon and that is fine. What I want to do is inform others with better skills than I, that Brennan's deposition on day one, within minutes to hours of the assassination showed that the shooting was professionally planned and executed. The shooter he saw and the building he saw him in are in the "dead" zone where no one has looked and meets the criteria of exactly what a professional sniper would use. It has a perfect view of the kill zone and any accomplices, it was in a virtually "invisible" location (why would anyone be looking well above and behind the Presidents limo). It would have created echoes which would have been difficult to locate and would have presented an easy get away. If you read his deposition while keeping in mind his profession, mechanical engineering (and I think he was very good at it), you will see how accurate he was with distances, directions and descriptions. Not embellishing, but very detailed while succinct. I will not go further with my analysis unless someone on the forum expresses interest.

Thanks to all for the posted answers. I was pretty sure it had been researched by some members, particularly Larry Hancock. Thanks to Joel Gruhn for the tip on Ancestry.com. I just ended a 6 month discounted membership with them, tracing my family back about 4 generations and plan on going back at some point to dig a little deeper and to finalize some sketchy info. I appreciate all of the researchers on the forum. I am like some of you, just clinging to my lower middle class status so I usually do everything I can in the "free" domains when my interest gets piqued in a particular area and then commit what funds I have available afterwards in order to flesh it out if possible. Thanks again. This will keep me going for a while, until life gets in the way again (or I get sidetracked by another topic on the forum).

I think at some point this question has been asked either here or formerly at JFK Lancer, but I can't remember the answer. Someone had posted that there was a city directory or something of that nature also available. I don't remember if that was online or only at the Dallas library or other local resource, but I thought I would try to round up any available information and try to file it away for reference. Thanks in advance for any leads or info.

I will make one quick comment and move on, as this topic seems to have derailed from the original post quite a bit. In my locality just north of Atlanta, GA, I think the stubbornness and "fixed" election claims come from the fact that 70% (or more) of the population other than in the CITY is either registered Republican or generally votes that way. These people can't seem to see how, with that kind of majority, the election could have went to Democrats without "the fix" being in. They do not comprehend how the man who only lies when his mouth is moving, who belittles/degrades/bullies anyone who does not agree with him and who is ONLY looking for personal benefits and subservience could not possibly have gotten 51% of the vote. They do not factor in that this is still part of the "bible belt" and a good majority of the residents, whether Democrat or Republican leaning, still expect a candidate to have limits on his amorality, greed and avarice. The erosion of these people from the Trumplicans is what spelled defeat here and in some of the other places he lost legitimately. These personal characteristics also motivated the number of Democrats to show up at the polls, I know because I and my wife were two of those. We do not always bother voting because in our area it generally is useless if you prefer the Democrat in local elections, we are outnumbered almost 4-1. In statewide races it is different as we can help narrow the margin of loss because every vote counts and the candidate does not win by county/voting district margins, but by the sum total of all votes.

Having read Howard Brennan's first day deposition, I believe he reported a man in this window. 6th floor, east, Dal-Tex. He described a man in the RED BRICK building. If you check, this window has an unobstructed view all the way to the triple underpass. That window is the next to the top on the right side of the Dal-Tex. It is basically at the same level as the supposed sniper's nest, but is in a location well behind where anyone would have been looking. It had absolutely nothing obscuring the Presidential limo all the way down Elm St. The building directly south (across the street) is where the man or men locked in the jail said they say a man with a rifle. That building is only shown in your first picture on the extreme left side. These men's stories were discounted because it would have been difficult to see down to the TSBD where the official sniper sat. They were on the 5th floor directly across the street and one floor lower from the man Brennan saw from his perch on the wall at the corner across from the TSBD. There would have been no issue with them seeing the real shooter, but they were easily dismissed because they were incarcerated and nobody EXCEPT Brennan who quickly toed the line out of fear for his family saw the man. Brennan even said the man was making no attempt to hide or avoid anyone seeing him. This is because he was in the perfect place, well behind the target. Virtually all eyes were looking at ground level and westward, southward or northward to follow the motorcade. Once the limo turned left, no one had any reason to be looking eastward and absolutely no reason to look upward. Brennan had seen the man before the parade got the the Elm St. turn and then heard the sound of gunfire (possibly saw smoke), that is the only reason he looked up. The men in the jail, trying to look westward would have inherently seen the man if any kind of commotion (smoke/gunshot) occurred.